William & Kate 2

[prayawaythefundie]

So Louis had his debut at yesterday‘s Christmas walkabout in Sandringham and, quite predictably, we got to see one weird upper-class tradition for young boys: he wore shorts.
Come on, it’s december! Let the boy wear actual full length trousers! Beatrice‘s step-son did. Can anyone explain why the Waleses won‘t ditch that?

Edited December 26, 2022 by prayawaythefundie

[Jackie3]

Why are they given military medals and appointments they haven't earned?

Why don't they feel embarrassed about wearing the medals?

How is this different from cosplay?

 

[viii]

I don’t understand why they don’t ditch that old custom. It’s ridiculous and outdated. They try so hard to be the relatable royal neighbour next door but then pull things like this that remind everyone how posh they are and how they have weird, archaic traditions they must follow. 

[Jackie3]

11 hours ago, prayawaythefundie said:

So Louis had his debut at yesterday‘s Christmas walkabout in Sandringham and, quite predictably, we got to see one weird upper-class tradition for young boys: he wore shorts.
Come on, it’s december! Let the boy wear actual full length trousers! Beatrice‘s step-son did. Can anyone explain why the Waleses won‘t ditch that?

I was wondering about that too. Everyone else was wearing warm outdoor clothing. The impression I got is that it's more important for Louis to look cute for the crowd than it is to keep his legs warm. 

Luckily he didn't seem cold.

Also why didn't George have an overcoat? Everyone else did. Maybe he didn't want one? 

Edited December 26, 2022 by Jackie3

[tabitha2]

Because it’s really trivial and not hurting anybody? A little boy in shorts! The horror! It’s not like they are making him dress like Little Lord Fauntleroy.  

[just_ordinary]

The boys in shorts is not that outdated though? And it wasn’t exactly freezing. It was around 6*C. Maybe my perspective is off, but after looking at British children bathing in the North Sea while I am wearing a fleece jacket, many wearing shorts at temperatures when I still wear a scarf, I just think it’s a habit. And after -12, I am wearing only a light jacket at 10 and find it quite warm. 

[Jackie3]

20 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

The boys in shorts is not that outdated though? And it wasn’t exactly freezing. It was around 6*C. Maybe my perspective is off, but after looking at British children bathing in the North Sea while I am wearing a fleece jacket, many wearing shorts at temperatures when I still wear a scarf, I just think it’s a habit. And after -12, I am wearing only a light jacket at 10 and find it quite warm. 

It's a strange idea for these reasons:

1. How many 4-year old British boys went to church this Xmas in shorts and knee socks?

If the royals want to appear relatable, why not dress Lous like other boys his age (pants, blazer, sweater, etc)?

2. Louis is at the age where he should be choosing his own clothes.  Ideally, he should be allowed to choose between  2-3 weather-appropriate outfits. If this happened, I doubt he'd choose shorts and knee socks. He'd probably choose something closer to what his dad and big brother were wearing. 

I also don't understand why George appears in a miniature suit and tie all the time. Even the media has noticed this. What ever happened to khakis and a blazer? Or a casual sweater and trousers. George is 9, but he looks like he's off to a business meeting. 

The royals need to look around and see what most little boys wear in Britain.

[prayawaythefundie]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

Because it’s really trivial and not hurting anybody? A little boy in shorts! The horror! It’s not like they are making him dress like Little Lord Fauntleroy.  

I think it does hurt the little boy. I wouldn‘t want to have bare knees in december.

I have a soft spot for Little Lord Fauntleroy‘s apparel btw. So cute. *hides*

[tabitha2]

Hurt is a very strong word for short brisk walk into I am sure a well heated church  

[prayawaythefundie]

9 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

Hurt is a very strong word for short brisk walk into I am sure a well heated church  

If British churches are anything like continental European ones, they are damn cold. 😉 And I‘m talking pre energy crisis.

But yeah, he‘ll live. It still seems unnecessary.

[Jackie3]

11 minutes ago, prayawaythefundie said:

It still seems unnecessary.

But it is necessary for him to look as cute as possible. The Royal Family is depending on Louis and his siblings to steal the show. Especially Louis, since he is too young to hide his feelings.

He's the only one who shows any real emotion--surprise, delight, disgust. The papers are falling all over themselves about him. 

Unfortunately for the royals, in a few years he'll be as guarded and stiff as his older sibs.

I feel sorry for those kids. That's a lot of pressure on them. As disillusionment with the monarchy grows stronger, the public's fondness for the Cambridge kids becomes more and more important. Charles sounded totally tone deaf in his speech--"I'm really sorry about the economic crisis and that so many are relying on food banks. Now I'd like you to pay for a really extravagant coronation for me."

They need the Cambridge kids, to keep their popularity ratings up. It's a shame they didn't support Harry and Meghan, because then they'd have two more little children to add to the "cute royal children" pictures. 

[viii]

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

He's the only one who shows any real emotion--surprise, delight, disgust. The papers are falling all over themselves about him. 

Unfortunately for the royals, in a few years he'll be as guarded and stiff as his older sibs.

I’m not so sure about this. I think the media has already given him a “role” that he will be expected to fill. George is the serious, solemn heir that was close to Gan Gan and strives to be like his father. Charlotte is the dutiful sister that is going to stand beside her brother and help him along the way. We have already seen this in action - at the jubilee she was encouraging his behaviour and at the funeral she was reminding him to bow. Louis has been given the “silly” job. He is the new Harry. He is there to provide comedic relief. We have seen enough of this in 2022 to understand how the media is presenting the Wales children. 

(This is not a reflection of how William and Kate think of their children but rather how the media has already set expectations for them.) 

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, viii said:

I’m not so sure about this. I think the media has already given him a “role” that he will be expected to fill. \

Well, you may be right. As the youngest child, he probably will feel more freedom to be silly and play to the crowd. I hope he retains his playfulness and childishness as long as possible.

Charlotte seems to have lost hers at a young age. At 7, she is so concerned about doing the right thing--wave now, bow now, stop waving now. . . she's the opposite of relaxed and happy. Plus, she's so concerned about what her brothers are doing--someone should tell her that is not her responsibility. She's a second-grader, for goodness sakes.

[Jackie3]

The Cambridge kids were given lots of toys and flowers during the walkabout with the public.

These are three of the most privileged children in the world. It's unlikely they need more toys or flowers. Probably theses gifts will just be donated.

Why is this family taking, once again, instead of giving? This would be a great opportunity for the children to learn to give. Imagine how happy those grannies would have been, if George or Charlotte handled them some flowers.

That would teach the kids something valuable, instead of reinforcing the unhealthy idea that they are special and above others.

That is, if they HAD to do the walkabout at all.  I think it would've been best to have the children driven quietly to the church, and to continue this till they were about 16. At that point, they could "learn" to shake hands and wave to the public. It shouldn't take. long to learn such a thing.

 

[Jackie3]

6 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Hurt is a very strong word for short brisk walk into I am sure a well heated church  

I'm not so sure if it was well-heated. Charlotte wore her coat throughout the service.😄 Buttoned up, too.  

He was probably fine, though.

 

 

[prayawaythefundie]

@Jackie3 That‘s a different church service. I would guess that Westminster Abbey & St Mary Magdalene‘s church aren‘t that different in temperature though. Coats were probably kept on in SMM as well.

While I do agree that it is unnecessry to bring any christmas presents for the royal family, I don‘t see how this is their fault again. Those „grannies“ weren‘t forced to bring flowers and they would be disappointed if their gifts weren‘t accepted. It is well known that the royals won‘t keep them (which makes bringing them even more absurd) but do we expect the Waleses to have a discussion with everyone there about why they will refuse their present?

ETA: Old people in their neighbourhood have been given homemade gifts by the Cambidge children in the past (reported in 2020).

Edited December 27, 2022 by prayawaythefundie

[just_ordinary]

I think most churches refrain from heating to save on the energy bill this winter. I find old churches are pretty cold in winter in the UK and on the continent. Not much difference to be honest. While most people have been wearing their coat in church this winter, that’s actually not that unusual. Most churches don’t heat a lot anyway, if they even have heating and definitely not in summer when those churches are still much cooler if not chilly compared to the outside. 
Some parishes offer blankets to put on your legs and put an extra cushion on the pews. Or people bring them themselves.
I think that will be most definitely true for SMM. If they didn’t choose to, the BRF was most definitely not freezing.

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, prayawaythefundie said:

@Jackie3 That‘s a different church service. I would guess that Westminster Abbey & St Mary Magdalene‘s church aren‘t that different in temperature though. Coats were probably kept on in SMM as well.

While I do agree that it is unnecessry to bring any christmas presents for the royal family, I don‘t see how this is their fault again. Those „grannies“ weren‘t forced to bring flowers and they would be disappointed if their gifts weren‘t accepted. It is well known that the royals won‘t keep them (which makes bringing them even more absurd) but do we expect the Waleses to have a discussion with everyone there about why they will refuse their present?

ETA: Old people in their neighbourhood have been given homemade gifts by the Cambidge children in the past (reported in 2020).

I stand corrected. Thanks.

I think it's safe to say that the church was probably on the cold side,  but that Louis will survive.  I can see why he might be cold, though, look at those bare legs.

 

Also, if the royals want to be relatable they should dress him like other little boys. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with taking gifts from onlookers. (Though the Palace could easily end the practice by simply making an announcement that no gifts were going to be accepted this year.)

It was, however, a missed opportunity to teach the children about giving at Christmas. If the children gave--instead of took-- it might help them to grow up to be better, kinder royals than the ones who came before them. 

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Jackie3

[anjulibai]

They made George wear shorts in cold weather for a very long time. I really don't get it. What is wrong with pants on little boys? I have two boys and I can't imagine letting them wear shorts outside this time of year, jacket or no. 

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, anjulibai said:

They made George wear shorts in cold weather for a very long time. I really don't get it. What is wrong with pants on little boys? I have two boys and I can't imagine letting them wear shorts outside this time of year, jacket or no. 

I think they are going for a certain look. Its about the optics.

[Coconut Flan]

2 hours ago, anjulibai said:

They made George wear shorts in cold weather for a very long time. I really don't get it. What is wrong with pants on little boys? I have two boys and I can't imagine letting them wear shorts outside this time of year, jacket or no. 

I've read it's a British upper class cultural thing.  Long pants on little boys is supposedly middle class.  Just a stodgy custom it seems.

[tabitha2]

It comes from the days where boys were skirts till they were breeched. Shorts just replaced the    Little skirts. 

[viii]

It’s a class thing and it deserves to be called out. It’s ridiculous in 2022. 

[MamaJunebug]

Nipping in to speak my piece and then duck & paddle back to shore: I see Louie’s bare knees, not bare legs. Big difference. His little bum is well covered as is his torso and arms, and his knee socks look to be wool and his shoes leather, so pretty well insulating for the walkabout and/or an hour in church.  Hard to imagine a cute little heir to mi££ions being allowed to shiver into pneumonia while surrounded by his wonderfully bossy big sister, loving parents and a host of family. 
 

Here in the mid-continental U.S., kids wear shorts and jackets  to walk half a mile to school or stand waiting for the school bus in 30°F temperatures.
 

I myself have been known to wear sandals until there’s snow on the pavement.  My dad told how boys in his day wore only short pants or below-the-knee “knickers”(*) til they were either a certain young age or confirmed in church. What I’m saying is, li’l shorts on an otherwise appropriately seasonally dressed healthy little boy don’t bother me a bit 

(*) I know knickers has a separate meaning X the pond. But that’s what my dad (born 1918) called the mid-calf-ish pants he eventually wore. 

[Jackie3]

16 minutes ago, MamaJunebug said:

Nipping in to speak my piece and then duck & paddle back to shore: I see Louie’s bare knees, not bare legs. Big difference. His little bum is well covered as is his torso and arms, and his knee socks look to be wool and his shoes leather, so pretty well insulating for the walkabout and/or an hour in church.  Hard to imagine a cute little heir to mi££ions being allowed to shiver into pneumonia while surrounded by his wonderfully bossy big sister, loving parents and a host of family. 
 

Here in the mid-continental U.S., kids wear shorts and jackets  to walk half a mile to school or stand waiting for the school bus in 30°F temperatures.
 

I myself have been known to wear sandals until there’s snow on the pavement.  My dad told how boys in his day wore only short pants or below-the-knee “knickers”(*) til they were either a certain young age or confirmed in church. What I’m saying is, li’l shorts on an otherwise appropriately seasonally dressed healthy little boy don’t bother me a bit 

(*) I know knickers has a separate meaning X the pond. But that’s what my dad (born 1918) called the mid-calf-ish pants he eventually wore. 

I'm not sure how you can tell those socks are wool. Sometimes people see what they want to see.

Royal watchers are saying they are probably these socks, which George has worn before. They are lycra.

https://www.papouelli.com/shop/ribbed_knee_sock/

Or else these, which are cotton

https://www.amaiakids.co.uk/collections/accessories-socks/products/ribbed-knee-high-socks-white

Edited December 28, 2022 by Jackie3