William & Kate 3

[Jackie3]

7 hours ago, viii said:

I hate hate hate these looks. I hate the pussy-blouse look on Kate, I hate the unflattering ruffle on Sophie, and the matching hats are terrible. Fail all around BUT I do think it's incredibly smart that they both wore complete rewears with not a single new items in sight. 

The outfits are awful. The women look gloomy. But why is it great that they re-wore an outfit? People know these women have enormous wardrobes, with ball gowns and fancy hats and multiple, multiple dresses of all sorts. People know they wear expensive designer brands, and that some of their outfits cost thousands.

Re-wearing one outfit won't convince people otherwise. We know they have plenty of new outfits at home, even if none are in sight on this one day. I can't understand why this is "terribly smart." 

Edited May 10, 2023 by Jackie3

[viii]

9 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

I can't understand why this is "terribly smart." 

I’m not surprised. 

[Loveday]

1 hour ago, viii said:

I’m not surprised. 

Ba-dum tish!

It used to be quite rare for a Royal, especially QEII, to wear an outfit more than once. In private, yes, of course; we often saw her wearing the same tartan skirts and twinsets as she wandered round Balmoral or Sandringham. But for public events, if she wore a dress she'd worn before, it would have been altered in some way to look 'new,' or so differently accessorised that you might not realise it wasn't the first time she'd worn it. Same with other senior women in the Firm. And of course until recently there was no internet full of photos for people to pore over and point out that 'Gasp! She's wearing the same dress she wore to X Event!' 

But we see Catherine wearing the same clothes at public functions quite often. Sometimes she pulls out something she hasn't worn in seven or eight years, which a lot of women in her circles wouldn't do for a public event. And she definitely wears the same coats over and over again. No, it's not remarkable for the rest of us, but for someone in her position, it just wasn't done until recently. 

[viii]

Yes, a lot of things were done differently back then. In today's economy, though, I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Kate has over 30 blue coat dresses that all look the same and it blows my mind the lengths some people will go to to justify her wardrobe. 

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, Loveday said:

But we see Catherine wearing the same clothes at public functions quite often. Sometimes she pulls out something she hasn't worn in seven or eight years, which a lot of women in her circles wouldn't do for a public event. And she definitely wears the same coats over and over again. No, it's not remarkable for the rest of us, but for someone in her position, it just wasn't done until recently. 

People in her country are struggling to pay rent. She should avoid flaunting her wealth whether it is "done" or not.

I sometimes try to imagine her closets. They must be enormous and require at least 1-2 full time people to manage, when you think of the cleaning, mending and organization required when you own hundreds of items. 

[just_ordinary]

2 hours ago, viii said:

Yes, a lot of things were done differently back then. In today's economy, though, I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Kate has over 30 blue coat dresses that all look the same and it blows my mind the lengths some people will go to to justify her wardrobe. 

I agree. I don’t necessarily mind the number itself but having the same piece in several colours or having pieces so similar they look nearly identical is not justifiable in my opinion. 
 

I like the Eli Saab even though I find this buttoned up to your chin look a big much. Having a high neck doesn’t automatically make something elegant and sophisticated. There really is no need for that- especially because I don’t think it doesn’t suit her well. Sophie and Kate twinning was a bit much- especially because of the hats.

Edited May 10, 2023 by just_ordinary

[prayawaythefundie]

On 5/9/2023 at 4:14 PM, Jackie3 said:

For the kids sake, I hope William and Kate are happy.  But when they arrived at the coronation, it looked like there'd been an argument in the carriage. Kate, in particular, looked angry.

Just to calm your nerves a bit: 

Spoiler

 

[viii]

I mean, I don't think anything is going on between William and Kate beyond their normal relationship, but that's not really a good example. Plenty of people know how to perform, especially in public. 

[prayawaythefundie]

9 minutes ago, viii said:

I mean, I don't think anything is going on between William and Kate beyond their normal relationship, but that's not really a good example. Plenty of people know how to perform, especially in public. 

So they knew how to perform for the garden party but not for the coronation? I agree that you can‘t really make conclusions about their relationship from public appearances but that has to go both ways then. If looking happy doesn‘t make them happy, looking tense doesn‘t make them unhappy.

Edited May 10, 2023 by prayawaythefundie

[Destiny]

Apparently there was some timing fuckery of some nature at the coronation. Somehow they were either late or charles was early or something of that nature. I’m not 100% clear on the details ‘cause I really don’t care but that could account for them looking stressed, if in fact they did ‘cause I didn’t notice anything, at the coronation.

disclaimer: I was more interested in what tiara she was wearing than her face so I didn’t really look. I’m still disappointed that we didn’t get coronets and tiaras and the coronation robes!

Edited May 10, 2023 by Destiny

[viii]

Charles and Camilla arrived ahead of schedule, so William and Kate were technically late. They were never supposed to walk in behind them but really, if nobody had said anything, I doubt majority of people would have even noticed. 

38 minutes ago, prayawaythefundie said:

So they knew how to perform for the garden party but not for the coronation? I agree that you can‘t really make conclusions about their relationship from public appearances but that has to go both ways then. If looking happy doesn‘t make them happy, looking tense doesn‘t make them unhappy.

I'm not saying they were performing for the garden party, I'm just saying that an affectionate picture taken of them in public doesn't confirm a happy marriage. I'm also not saying that looking tense makes them unhappy, because there are so many times people are caught mid-look in a photograph and it's spun to be something negative. I don't think you can really determine one way or the other how someone's marriage is, based off photos alone. 

Edited May 10, 2023 by viii

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Just to calm your nerves a bit: 

  Hide contents

 

Thanks, but you can't even see their faces in that picture.  Plus, she's not even touching him.

"He put his hand on her back! Their marriage must be blissful!" 

Let's compare that picture to this one.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

@viii I think you and I know all this but Trolletta doesn‘t and I was teasing her. I know I shouldn‘t but sometimes it‘s just so hard to resist!

Edited May 11, 2023 by prayawaythefundie

[prayawaythefundie]

16 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Let's compare that picture to this one.

No, let‘s not because we aren‘t twelve and we have some self-respect left, right?

[Jackie3]

I think the RF is a bit tone deaf, in terms of optics.

In the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, they put Charlotte in a cashmere sweater that cost almost $400. Then they allow her to paint in that sweater, like it's no big deal if it is ruined.

They did this on a day of volunteering where they were supposed to be helping the less fortunate.

 

 

10 hours ago, Loveday said:

Not to mention she looks very much in actor mode here as she's fully aware the camera is on her in her 'private' moment with her husband.

You could say the same about the royals. Their whole life is posing for the camera. And the best William could do was still a hand on her back. 

Two couples, both posing for the camera, trying to appear close. One couple can tolerate snuggling together. The other couple is barely touching.

[viii]

18 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Obvious games are obvious but that's a terrible photo to use, lol. He looks so annoyed with her. TROUBLE IN PARADISE!! 

[Loveday]

12 minutes ago, viii said:

Obvious games are obvious but that's a terrible photo to use, lol. He looks so annoyed with her. TROUBLE IN PARADISE!! 

Not to mention she looks very much in actor mode here as she's fully aware the camera is on her in her 'private' moment with her husband.

[just_ordinary]

I know it’s mean but the stark difference of his hair between edited pictures and snaps or videos where he hasn’t a say, always distracts me from what else could be going on. He really is the pot calling the kettle black. If he would cut his remaining hair shorter he is just as bald as his brother. Wiliam has lighter hair and that’s why his remaining short hair blends in with  his skin sometimes. But if you look closely, they are pretty much at the same stage.

And while both is fine, being sensitive about it and trying to hide or rocking it, if you start pointing fingers it looks extra desperate and stupid.

Edited May 12, 2023 by just_ordinary

[viii]

It’s just so petty. I’m sure there are a hundred other things to criticize William for than his hair loss, which he can’t even help. 

[nelliebelle1197]

23 minutes ago, viii said:

It’s just so petty. I’m sure there are a hundred other things to criticize William for than his hair loss, which he can’t even help. 

Especially when Harry’s is the exact same male pattern baldness minus a couple years.

[Coconut Flan]

It just goes to show how not smart or immature Harry is.  Reality is going to be a real slap to him if he ever faces it.  

[AmazonGrace]

The quote that said William's hair loss was "alarming" was just so weird. It's, like 1 in 2 Caucasian males that have male pattern baldness and they aren't all dead.

Diana's father:

 

[Jackie3]

8 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

The quote that said William's hair loss was "alarming" was just so weird.

I agree it was a mean thing to say. I think he meant that William's hair loss transformed him from a handsome man to a far less handsome man. It really is a rather striking change.

Nonetheless, it was mean. He must be pretty angry at his family. Judging from the recent news, they clearly sold him out to the tabloids. Even the tabloids have admitted this!

Edited May 12, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

Maybe it was „alarming“ to Harry because he figured out there‘s a 50% chance of him having inherited the same X-chromosome from Diana as William. And now it looks like he has.

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

Losing your hair is alarming.  The problem is writing a book making fun of your brother over something nobody has control over. it's hard to like Harry. At least nothing shocking happened at the coronation to add to the drama because surely at some level his family would want to communicate with him.