Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Kate Joins Pippa's Hen Party Skiing in Méribel

Monday, April 3, 2017

Last month when news of Prince William's boozy day on the ski slopes broke, the story was that Kate was in Bucklebury with her parents. It turns out that was not quite the case. Her kids were, I think, which is probably why the story circulated she was there, too. In reality, Kate joined Pippa and a few close friends on a ski weekend in the run-up to Pippa's wedding. That's right, the Hen Party (for my UK fans), aka Bachelorette Party (for all you Yanks) was the same weekend that William had his guys' weekend. 

Kate in Klosters in 2008


In a sweet exclusive, Emily Andrews of the Sun has broken the story of the wedding weekend getaway. Apparently, the Middletons paid for the private jet that ferried Kate, Pippa, and her girlfriends, and William, and his pals, to France. Once they landed, the group split, with the boys heading to Verbier and the ladies trekking south to Méribel.


The Middleton family has traveled to a number of exclusive ski resorts, and Méribel is particularly notable for the year after William and Kate's marriage when the couple joined the Middletons on a ski holiday there.  That was certainly a popular Hello! spread:


Kate wore the same ski ensemble for the Hen Party trip that she has worn on multiple occasions. She was snapped in her red ski pants and white E+O ski coat she has been sporting for years and her red ski pants that are also favorites. This is the same get-up she wore in 2016 for the little family's first holiday together. 


According to Emily Andrews, the girls stayed at a very exclusive establishment where they were absolutely pampered by maids and a private chef, as you'd expect. They were even gifted lots of goodies by the owners, who were doubtless pretty jazzed to score the Middleton party:
“They were given Swatch watches, Ugg slippers, leather-bound notebooks and bespoke fragrances. It was a very small, private party and they had an amazing time.”
Andrews also revealed that William had enough to drink at his boozy slope-side lunch that he was not permitted to ski, but was escorted down the mountain instead. I don't think we have to leap to the conclusion he was entirely trashed. Skiing the Alps can be a dangerous game at the best of times. I will say that there have been times when I have gotten off the lift and surveyed the striking and beautiful expanse of white snow sloping down in front of me and thought, "dear God, is there some alternative way you can get me down this hill?"  So now I know, find a little watering hole and preclude yourself from the pleasure. :)  


There has been chatter that this news "absolves" William of his lunch date with the 24-year old. If you held all along that a guys weekend wasn't the problem, but the luncheon was, then this news doesn't change the facts. I do think that is throws the boys weekend into a more sympathetic light. Even though everyone said they didn't have a problem with William taking a weekend away, somewhere deep down many were probably feeling it was odd that William got a vacay while Kate watched the kids. Of course, there was no reason to think at the time that Kate doesn't have the occasional girls weekend, but, well...we certainly haven't heard of any. So, discovering that both spouses were enjoying some downtime with their respective pals does shift the balance toward a more equal playing field. Happily, I think the Verbier incident is in the rear-view, so we don't have to over think it. 



I didn't report all of the details that Emily provided, so you'll have the pleasure of reading for yourself. You can pop over and read the article here

131 comments:

  1. The pictures in the article are old. There are no pictures from the weekend as per Emily Andrews on twitter. Also odd that Middletons would pay for a private jet when James Matthews owns a jet. Maybe they paid for the expense of flight crew and fuel.
    Hope the girls had an awesome weekend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing odd about the Middleton's paying for this since it involved Pippa's hen party. Consider the expenses they covered when Kate got married. Bottom line...they're able to do it so good for them! 👍☺

      Delete
    2. Good point about James's jet, but I'll say that maybe it was in use and the Middletons probably want to seem independent and not happy to have such a rich son-in-law. I'm sure James would have offered if his was available, and perhaps they covered the expenses, like Royalfan has suggested.
      ~ A

      Delete
  2. Must say I was surprised that William and his friends went to Verbier: very unlike the Prince to go anywhere there are paps on every corner.
    Seems the boys kept the reporters happy whilst the girls got their private party.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Women have always been cleverer...!!

      Delete
    2. Maybe that was done on purpose. William and his friends were the decoy for Kate and Pippa since if they had been spotted that would have been bigger news.

      Delete
    3. I can see William and his friends being a decoy so the girls could have a private weekend. I don't think he needed to pickle himself and make errors in judgement along the way but, had Kate really been upset with him, she was just down the road.

      Delete
    4. I guess I don't travel enough Robin. A hundred miles away to me isn't "right down the road" :) I'm also not sure why a "decoy" would be needed. Wasn't the hen party in the area where the entire Cambridge family went last and encountered no photographers (except the one they brought with them)?

      Delete
    5. Lizzie, 100 miles IS right down the road when you compare it to the "he left his poor wife at home and went partying" version. ;-)

      Delete
    6. I'm sure he shared video of himself so his wife "just down the road" would know when to come running

      Delete
    7. I can see why they may think a decoy was needed...they must live in constant fear and paranoia of the press. I am sure there are paps that are just waiting to get anything related to Pippa's wedding. I can also see Pippa trying to be as under the radar as possible as to not negatively effect her sister as some choices she has made has done that in the past. She isn't a public figure but is treated like one and that has to be beyond difficult.

      Delete
    8. Ellen, I agree with you and sympathize with Pippa for the reasons you expressed.

      Delete
  3. Ahhh, so while some folks were jumping to conclusions regard William, Kate was doing some jumping of her own...on skis. ☺ 😉 ⛷

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Him being so drunk that he needed to be carried off, certainly helps to improve his image! Well done!:)

      Also, I can imagine how happy Kate must have been, when she saw the pictures of 20 somethings joined the party. Well played William!

      Delete
    2. Poor William!!, if some of our husbands have been shot 'in franganti' , I doubt any marriage would endure...ha!!

      Delete
    3. I don't think most of us are married to the heir to the British throne aon.

      Delete
    4. All the Kings in Europe have done worse things, however it has not been allowed to publish it...

      Juan Carlos of Spain and Carl Gustaf of Sweden have had plenty of lovers and used to drink even the water into the vases...You don't know the Monarchies at all..ha!!

      Anon2

      Delete
    5. It does not matter where the King sleep or what he drinks...Only he/she must be a good monarch for the people..We have been taught like that..

      Dated?? Monarchy is an ancient and dated thing and you have to assume it if you tried to modernise it, you will ruin it....

      Anon2

      Delete
    6. Anon 2 that's another generation. Name me one of the present crown princes who have been caught with this kind of behavior. Other than Prince Frederick after the twins birth I can't think of any.

      Delete
    7. Anon 2 in this day and age with all the problems in the world and the poor economy, no one will put up with a hedonistic heir. Those days are long gone.

      Delete
    8. The clue is "have been caught" silly boy!!...and the point he didn't attend the Commonwealth Service...

      Delete
    9. Well, in France they ended up badly...due to the excesses...

      Delete
    10. Ha! They got carried away and lost their heads, anon 2:33.-------The excesses were more of the days-long banquets and flaunting of wealth variety, combined with oppressive taxes. There was no National Health plan. The churches bore the brunt of caring for the poor-who became too numerous to adequately assist. The poor lived in fear, with the penalty for stealing a loaf of bread the loss of a hand-or worse. The French Revolution wasn't the result of a ski weekend. The mini vacation and hen party were not flaunting wealth until the tabloids got hold of it and proceeded to embellish. The current republicans do their best to blow the situations out of proportion and make inferences, but there is really no comparison to what the republicans of the late eighteenth century were up against. Queen Elizabeth is no Marie Antoinette and her family are no comparison to the French court at the time.

      Delete
  4. This story doesn't change my mind at all. The idea that Kate was left with her children for a weekend without Will never seemed like a big deal to me. I thought all along the problems were the lunch, the extreme public drunkenness, and Will missing the CW service *especially given Brexit.* When the info about Will's trip broke, some folks insisted the Queen "approved of" Will's absence from the service. We don't really know that. I think it is just as possible he said he and Kate couldn't make it without saying he planned to go skiing "with the lads" and she didn't insist he attend or ask why he could not. That falls short of *approval* in my book. And the fact that Kate and the other women thought Will's drunkenness was funny doesn't really make it funny to me. I also find it sort of odd they chose to both be away the same weekend especially since they were scheduled to be in Paris the following weekend. Maybe the kids are old enough it isn't such a big deal for both W&K to be away at the same time although I seem to remember there have been lots of comments on the blog stating the belief they always try to have one parent at home in the evening except for unavoidable obligations. (I'm sure though PG & PC were well cared for during both of these absences but Will's absence was hardly unavoidable.) Finally, Kate's smiles and Will's frowns in Paris make a bit more sense now!

    Assuming it's true, I do wonder who gave the story to Andrews. Sounds like it came from a Will sympathizer or someone who wanted to "even the score."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree with all your points lizzie. Just because Kate had a fun weekend too doesn't mean William's shenanigans were
      ok. At the very least, they need better PR. Would have been much better had this news come out right after that weekend.... and of course, just because "a friend" talked to the media doesn't make it true either.

      Delete
    2. He could have still snagged headlines without the dancing and boozy socializing with random women. And I'm not sold his antics were all part of some plan to distract from the mere possibility that paps would realize Kate and Pippa were ensconced in an ultra exclusive resort.

      Delete
    3. I agree Lizzie- in my opinion, the main problem continues to be that William (and Kate) skipped the CW Service- ski weekends could easily have been scheduled for a different weekend.

      Delete
    4. I don't buy the decoy idea at all. Are we supposed to assume if we don't see Will in the news Kate must be partying in France? I do think they both go away more often for trips than we know but I don't buy the distraction idea at all.

      Delete
    5. I couldn't care less that they skipped the CW service. It's not mandatory attendance and Pippa should not be required to adjust her wedding events around the royal family. I don't mind that they left the kids with the grandparents for a weekend either. My husband and I always tried to have one of us at home in the evenings as well but that doesn't mean we never took a vacation. My only complaint about this weekend still stands. William's lack of self control with the booze and his subsequent behavior. Get a grip Wills, you're not a 20-something party boy any longer. If Kate and your kids are the most important thing in the world to you - act like it. I love William and do not think him the evil person so many make him out to be but that weekend is hard to excuse. Hopefully Kate said to him "Don't let it happen again!"

      Delete
    6. It seems we don't have to believe the decoy plan---whatever, it worked. I just think there was a bit of over-acting, prat-falling, grandstanding on William's part, but his wife and sister-in-law celebrated in peace. Maybe there was even a deal..." let Pippa have her party without the paps and we'll have an exclusive or two for you." That sort of bartering has been done before. Eugenie,Beatrice , Zara, Anne's son, and Edward's two, who were old enough to do the church walk, were absent, too. Why aren't the other grandchildren of the Queen being castigated? The argument that William is the heir to the heir is ridiculous since the actual heir doesn't seem to think yearly attendance is necessary. There are a large number of variables in arranging such a weekend, considering the number of people involved. Are we saying their plans should be scrapped to accommodate TRH? If the CW service was 100% a required activity as the Queen's official birthday is, the Cambridges, Sophie, Anne , and all the grandchildren would have been there. Meanwhile, I am fairly certain that William and Catherine will attend every year when they are king and queen and most years when William is the heir, as is Charles's habit now.

      Delete
    7. You only have speculation on the fact he was drunk or the details of the lunch. All you have are pictures in which people/reporters have been able to fabricate stories to support their desired view of William. You also have no knowledge of what the queen and William have discussed in regards to them attending the Commonwealth Service, so why speculate except to try to prove the point you want to disparage William.

      Delete
    8. William wasnt prat-falling, he was just drunk and awkwardly dancing.

      Delete
  5. And of course we know that Emily Andrews has not embellished some parts of the story for salacious value ;). We have had Charles and Camilla caught on tape, Harry naked in Vegas, William dancing in Verbier and other Royals involved in various things. They are human, with human faults. Time to move on as there are more pressing things around us at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Like Lizzie, this doesn't change my mind on William's Verbier weekend. Although we could muse it was all plotted to distract from Pippa's hen party ;-) LOL. He should be very ashamed that he embarassed his wife and family partially on the Middleton's dime - that was VERY selfish of him. And to waste a ski weekend getting drunk at lunch? All ski trips I know involve drinking, but you're always there to maximize your skiing - a drink or two at lunch, then your apres ski drinks and into the evening.

    Moving on, I'm glad Kate had a girls' weekend away! Great bonding for the grandparents and George/Charlotte, and an opportunity for Kate to have some time aside from being a mom/wife/royal. I'm getting really excited for Pippa's wedding, I hope we have lots of great pics!! Since she's kind of a media personality for her career, I wonder if they would sell any photos to a publication (minus photos that would include the BRF). More to help boost her career than to make money, is where I'm coming from. I could actually then see her donating the money to a charity. Time will tell!

    ~ A

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If I were Pips & James I would release (not sell) a few photos to the media and make it known in advance to stem the tide of frenzy. I hope the Cambridges slip out to Bucklebury under cover of darkness several days in advance so the paps leave them alone. I'm sure Kate is all too aware that her sister's wedding could turn into the Kate Media Circus and will do everything to avoid it.

      Delete
    2. Were you present, do have first hand knowledge that Wiliam was "drunk at lunch" or is this just another chance to jump on the "find anything you can to be negative on Williamand Kate" band wagon.

      Delete
    3. RobinfromCA - I believe if they "sell" the photos they retain (and can at least negotiate) certain legal rights to the photos. They would have more control over a licensing arrangement than if they outright gifted the images to a particular photographer. They might elect to donate the profits since they don't appear the need the income but the difference between "sell" and "give away" can have legal consequences

      Delete
    4. I highly doubt Pippa would sell the photos. They don't need the money and even if they donated to one of their mutual charities they are very supportive of, that would be overshadowed by the fact that they did it. I know Peter Phillips did it and Zara did with baby photos but they are held to a different standard than people so closely associated to William and Kate. It is also harder when you aren't in the firm just close to people that are.

      To the original Anonymous poster, I think it is a personal thing if one choose to "waste" a ski trip drinking. YOU may rather ski but others may rather drink and socialize. Who knows how drunk, if at all William was, but I am sure that his royal protection officers wouldn't let him ski at all even if he had a bit since he is 2nd in line to the throne. He may not have been overserved at all. Just overcautios.

      Delete
    5. I appreciate your comment Ellen. I won't comment on the social intricacies of the skiing world as the closest I've ever come to skiing is taking care of two Winter Olympians who were laid up in hospital with broken limbs-one from Spain and one from Italy. I won't share which one tried to pinch me. Let's just say that I am grateful for the traction apparatus tying them down.

      Delete
    6. There is no way they are selling any photos of the wedding. I'm sure they will release some for free.

      Otherwise, it would be sooooo tacky.

      Delete
    7. Ellen you want to judge me for judging William? Pot calling the kettle...

      Also, I live one hour from the Rocky Mountains...and have traveled to other resorts/mountain chains...so I have a decent understanding of what tends to be common practice and etiquette.

      ~ A

      Delete
    8. Anonymous I wasn't judging you. Just stating my opinion. I still personally believe that people want different things out of vacations. Some people may prioritize the sport when on a ski trip and some may prioritize socializing. I joe many a person that go to hang out in a lodge with a good book. Just saying that to him not skiing may not be a "waste".

      Delete
    9. Anon 1, I hope you gave the two gentlemen an appropriate HA!! ;-)

      Delete
    10. THAT was well before my HA!! days, royalfan.

      Delete
  7. Hope the ladies had a wonderful weekend. I am one who never had any issues with Williams' weekend or lunch or anything else including drinking. To me it was all just a non issue. Glad they all had a lovely ski weekend with friends. Looks gorgeous in the mountains.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Orange County GrandmaApril 3, 2017 at 9:28 AM

    I agree with what was said in the above comments. Just because Kate was skiing that same weekend does not make it ok for William to be flirting, dirty dancing and going off and having drinks with a topless model. We all know if Williams cheating during their dating years and the weekend he spent with Jecca Craig right after George was born.
    You did not see or hear that Kate was with other men dancing and drinking.
    So I too am not happy with Williams actions and have lost some respect for William. I sure would have loved to be a fly on the wall when they met up on their return flight. I hope Kate give it too William in front of everyone and embrass him like he embrassed her with his actions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh my, OCG!
      Talking does not equate to flirting
      Dad dancing does not equate to dirty dancing
      Lunch with friends does not equate to going off with a topless model!

      But I do wonder which weekend away was planned first; I'm betting Pippa the Party Planner had it on her calendar before the lads joined in.

      Delete
    2. Orange County GrandmaApril 3, 2017 at 11:25 AM

      KayeUSA. I guess you have not seen the videos of William grinding away with the topless model. And her slut dancing with William. All this is caught on video. And putting his hands on her waist. Those things are not ok. Talking does not equal flirting I agree. Nor giving a high five. I would not call these women friends. They were picked up on the ski slope.
      The models mom even said that they went and had a few drinks together would you like your husband to go and have drinks with another woman. I sure wouldn't.

      Delete
    3. Does anyone else wonder that the coincidence of the dinner story, including James's brother Spencer, and the news flash from The Sun came practically simultaneously? Someone may have heard stories of Pippa's party at the dinner and shared with the tabs. Someone who apparently is not known for maintaining confidentiality. Since there are no pictures of the party to be sold, I doubt the information came via the the unknown by-stander, social-media-sharer route. Or perhaps it is all a smoke and mirrors effort. What is coming next that we will learn after the fact? A wedding?

      Delete
    4. Kate, I back OCG. William was having a good laugh and high-fiving two hot female strangers who were invited to join men (who are not single) for a lunch with alcohol = guilty of flirting. Video surfaced of William dancing with one woman, and footage of him dirty dancing with at least one blonde was successfully blocked by the palace = guilty of dirty dancing.

      As for the topless comments, we don't know if she told him or if she showed him (topless photos or herself topless). On this I will reserve judgment as I don't have enough information.

      ~ A

      Delete
    5. I'm sure Spencer is someone they are very careful of. However, it does seem odd that all this information came on the heels of that dinner. An exclusive by one reporter to one newspaper - definitely not something that has hit the rumor mill all of a sudden. Very astute, anon 1.

      Delete
    6. I think you're spot on anon1.
      Things might start getting a little leaky in Cambridge world.

      Delete
    7. Both those girls also were not single, her boyfriend was there at night partying. He was not dancing in that video he put his hand on her waist and there was no video blocked by the palace and that's the way rumors start because of commenters like you who state something as truth.

      Delete
    8. Do we really have to hash through all this speculation again? No one can prove his point and no one seems to be changing his mind, This is first class wheel-spinning and it plays into the tabloids' hands. They will laugh all the way to the bank while we end up with a sour taste in our mouths and an unpleasant vibe on the blog. It has been reported that at least one of the women was known to at least one of the men and that the dancer was an employee of the club and/or of one of the men. Not strangers, not pick-ups. Their boyfriend/husbands were along. The scandalous slant on this story borders on titillation, or at least a them versus us whine. The have nots versus the haves.

      Delete
    9. OCG, please remember pictures and videos are only a very short shot in time and from only one angle. unless you are there I find it difficult for one to judge what actually happened. Especially to use terms such as "grinding away" flirting, or dirty dancing.

      Delete
    10. I was tempted to call the Spanish Inquisition!!
      Am I in the XXI century?? really??

      Anon2

      Delete
    11. I look forward to seeing the dance card as it were since anon 1 is so convinced that everyone was present and accounted for with no hint of a Jane Austen-Esque scandal at whom one is dancing with

      Delete
    12. Then again the leaker could actually be someone from KP eager to debunk rumors that Kate was all alone with the kids while Will had fun. With no confirmed source are we sure Kate have a care in the world because she was in a chalet? Could just as easily be spin to tilt the narrative in Kate's favor.

      Delete
    13. Anon 1, your timing theory is interesting. It is possible! OR someone was tired of William being roasted like a marshmallow at a campfire. 😔

      Delete
    14. Royalfan- I'll go along with a theory you have expressed: the attempt to promote one set of future monarchs at the expense of another. The charm offensive currently promoting one couple, combined with the negative press for the other, along with the remarkable and simultaneous unveiling of a creative view of past events...interesting timing, indeed. It is a bit heavy-handed and the public never did like being obviously told what to think. Their PR people need to let up on the sugar-coating and the fact-skewing. It's not going to make a future unpopular monarchy become the flavor of the month and it feeds the rhetoric of those who wish to do away with the very crown so desperately desired. A bit self-defeating.

      Delete
    15. Hmmmm... Valid point here, Anon 1. After all, how could William miss the service?

      Delete
  9. I'm growing weary and tired of the word "boozy". I have never heard it used so much in my 35 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's not the only word that is over-used, Sarah. I am beginning to think some people just like controversy and are bored when things get too kind and friendly on a blog. I am getting whip-lash from following another blog that loves to boast of its kindness one day and rips into William, Catherine, and whichever available royal the next. It is easy to tell who the conflict-lovers are.

      Delete
    2. Charlotte runs a wonderful blog anon 1. One can criticize the royals and still be a fan. They aren't deities after all.

      Jane posted on this subject. Of course there will be conflict. It isn't a conflict free subject.

      Delete
    3. What a non sequiter anon 1! Can't say I share your aversion to "boozy" Sarah from US - always seems a bit more playful than "alcohol induced" or "liquor-soaked"....

      Delete
    4. Anon 12:05, I do not believe Anon1 identified the blogging site she was referring, so if you can identify it by what she said then it must mean you also recognise the actions she was referring on that blog. There is no way I will ever believe those who CONSTANTLY find something to criticise about William or Kate are "fans" no matter on WHAT site they are posting. I guess these posters think we are clueless when they deny being republicans, but constantly, constantly find the least little thing to tear them down.

      Delete
    5. Anon1 has been Anon 1 on the other site also. There will always be a small number of people who will criticize but they are present on all blogs. I don't know why any one pays them any attention. They don't bring down the entire blog.

      Delete
    6. Well Anon 4:41 as an American I believe I must certainly fall into the "repibican" camp, however I do admire Kate and appreciate her historical role
      And quite enjoy seeing her sartorial contributions. However as much as I may admire her I do not holding out either herself nor her family or the royal family as demigods for never set a foot amiss. Perhaps I am not a "fan" by your definition but I would consider myself I ardent supporter.

      Delete
    7. Of course they are not deities, and neither are we. For the most part they seem like kind and positive people. There are a lot of "stone throwers" on some of these blogs.

      Delete
    8. 4.41, I do agree with your reference to the "constant" examples of it.

      Also, the Republican argument keeps popping up and while I'm not dismissing it, I also believe that this explanation may give more credit than the situation warrants; there is such a thing as making oneself feel better by knocking others.

      Delete
    9. Royalfan, I agree that there may be more sour grapes than republican zeal in many of the constant critical comments. I do think their comments end up supporting the republican cause, regardless of motivation, and I should have explained that. I also think a royal-themed blog is a perfect vehicle for republican rhetoric. In another comment I contrasted the republican movement of the late eighteenth century to the current one targeting the BRF. I can understand some of the arguments, but I think their cause may be a bit over-blown.

      Delete
    10. I don't understand how critiques of fashion on a fashion blog somehow morph into "constant criticism" with republican/seditious undercurrents.

      Delete
    11. No argument about the impact, Anon 1. I just think that some people follow the royals like they would Hollywood celebrities and expect 24/7 entertainment via actions and fashion without a true understanding of the history involved here...both recent and not so...

      Delete
    12. Entertainment news, royalfan? Definitely agree. Their comments reflect this, but just about any subject qualifies for "entertainment" these days. This blog certainly entertains me. I also think sometimes people forget to check their mean-girl pants at the door when they move from celebrity sites to other sites. Some of the tabloid stories I have seen reflected in the tag lines for those cele sites end up being the subject of controversy here. The impulse to elevate the perceived odd-man-out while putting down those perceived on top can lead to a knee-jerk type of reaction and acceptance of any story that supports one's concepts. It is a bad habit and one that I think is spreading. I have caught the fever at times and have regretted it.

      Delete
    13. Once again, no argument from me, Anon 1. Entertainment is a good thing as long as it isn't enjoyed at someone else's expense. This blog has interest in and respect for the subject at the core. On the other hand, check out Royal Foibles if you have the time. A twist on royal coverage to say the least.

      Delete
    14. I'm confused, royalfan--are we disagreeing? It is all so civilized somehow. HA! Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm still trying to cleanse my memory after reading one of those sites. To me, it seems motive-dependent. Sometimes it is obvious a person truly objects to something and sometimes it seems like a cruel game, as though people in the spotlight have no feelings or aren't present and that makes it ok to ridicule and refuse compassion. As I have said, I haven't been immune; it is a habit that can sneak up on one and possess one's spirit as much as any drug. I am convinced there are neurotransmitters involved. :-[

      Delete
    15. Not disagreeing, Anon 1. ☺ Understood...

      Delete
  10. I wonder if Kate started wearing a ski helmet after becoming HRH and not before.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Honestly this does change my opinion, but not in a good way. To me this reeks a bit of W throwing a fit that Kate couldn't have a weekend away to "play" and got him and his friends invited as well. No reason they couldn't have swapped weekends and he could have gotten some alone time with G&C.

    Granted, its great that the Middleton's seem to be fully supportive and quite generous and it more or less "worked out" for everyone - but it also would have been perfectly acceptable for Kate to be with her sister and have a little fun while W stayed home - certainly seems its more often the opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have given it most of the day. I read the linked article. I doesn't change my opinion of William. Yes I know men, especially royal men, are prone to affairs/flings. But William supposedly shoved toilet paper under a locked bathroom door while Diana was crying over Charles. For most of us, that type of experience etches itself in us. I guess it didn't for William. I gave him a gentle pass on Jecca Craig, but not any more. I also ache fore Kate. Not just for his childishness, but the effort to catch an unfaithful prince. I really believed the Middleton's would save the failing monarchy. Help it make a nice u-turn. A million special girls trips away won't do it. I appreciate all the attempts to smooth it over. George, Charlotte, Kate and the British people deserve better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What proof has there ever been that William has been unfaithful to his wife. It really is everyone feeding into the frenzy of tabloids and their own imagination. How else would tabloids remain in business. William and Kate have been together for so many years and are obviously comfortable and secure in their relationship.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous...thank you. Those are my thoughts exactly. There is no proof that William has been unfaithful to his wife. There is no proof that Kate wore a certain outfit skiing that weekend, because there were no actual pictures of her from the trip. There is no proof that anyone knows exactly what Kate, Pippa, and the other women discussed during that weekend. There is no proof that Kate was angry with William when they got home. And there is no proof for many other insinuations and judgments being made here. These tabloids and press outlets have a tendency to slant everything in a direction they believe will sell copy. While I respect and believe in the freedom of the press, it is very important for consumers of the free press to read and listen with critical eyes and focus on what is factual and true.

      Delete
    3. Agree agree agree. But does make for lovely tabloid reading. As someone on another blog mentioned, how do we even know there was a ski weekend? There might have been but no pictures, no confirmation from the owner of the "chalet" etc. So much ado about "none of our business" stuff.

      Delete
    4. I will consider Anonymous and Sarah your points. However, if it is tabloid slant, William knows better in that arena, too. Don't feed them. When you are out with the guys, check your drinking. Don't go dancing without your wife. Even if it's weird dated, dad dancing. This also means maybe there was no Hen Party either. Maybe Kate was home with the kids while the boys went out to play. Time will tell.

      Delete
    5. Well said anon 7:07 and Sarah-especially your last sentence. Read, listen, focus, and above all---DON'T QUOTE NEGATIVE, UNCONFIRMED STORIES AS THOUGH THEY ARE FACT. This applies to uncredited
      sources-An insider, sources close, those close to...could be the butler or a disgruntled employee. Or it could actually be a person in the inner circle; that person will not likely remain a trusted member for long and will be frozen out, deservedly so. -----Each person who continues with the mantra of someone "missing" an event not scheduled to attend and other such tabloid click magnets is just a free employee of the tabloids. That whole shamrock/expectations charade was built from a tabloid writer's anger at embargos and the Cambridges releasing their own children's photographs. Most recently, the conflicting accounts of what happened on William's ski trip proved that there was no credible basis for gossip. Just because the tabloids have a financial need to get there fast and get there first doesn't mean we must accept the half-truths and spin. Wait for the dust to settle. William was judged from day one for multiple issues that simply were not true. If this had been the only instance ...but it wasn't. It happens over and over. Judgement before all the facts are known and acceptance of hype for journalism.

      Delete
    6. anon 1 I will never understand your criteria for "legitimate" sources or your apparent inside source in the tabloids who can tell you what exactly got them all riled up to print certain headlines. Can't wait for the details...

      Delete
    7. @Anon 1:

      But wouldn't then the same be true for *positive*, unconfirmed stories? I can understand not trusting stories with quotes from "an insider", "a source", etc, but then we must not trust *any* stories with quotes like these, not just the negative ones. Distrusting just the negative ones and trusting the positive ones is dangerous, too.

      Delete
    8. I agree with Leslie. And I don't believe everything I read, positive or negative. News are generally negative,though. I love " Scoop" by Evelyn Waugh...

      Delete
    9. A great percentage of the general public was dismayed that Kate wasn't at the Irish Guards event last year, anon 1. The tabloids didn't rile people up about that. The people were already riled up.

      Delete
    10. Good point, Leslie. You are absolutely correct. However, if I had to fact-skew, I'd rather it be of the building up rather than the tearing down variety. Those royal writers can say lovely things in their role as a journalist and avoid some trouble for their employers; but if one wants to know what a writer really thinks, I understand social media is the route to go.

      Delete
    11. Actually not the general public. The general public could not care two hoots. It's so called royal watchers who get in a tizz about everything.

      Delete
    12. No, not royal watchers. Supporters of the monarchy wthout whom there might not be a monarchy. Opinions count!

      Delete
    13. Leslie-I enjoyed your comment and replied earlier. Hopefully, my comment will appear at some point. If not, I'll try again, but it might be longer this time. ;=]

      Delete
  13. I think anon 1 may have touched on something in one of the above threads. I believe Spencer probably blabbed the details of the hen's party. (I personally don't think he is the most discreet individual). I also think this could all be a ruse & the 'pre-wedding' getaway to Eden Rock resort will be the actual wedding. The press got George's choice of school wrong, maybe they got Pippa's wedding details incorrect too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought I was spitting in the wind, Kiwi. Maybe they have hired a mystery writer to create some smoke and mirrors...a few dead ends and red herrings.. Force the tabloids to spread out their resources. I would advise Buckleberry and May 20 as a decoy----was this date ever a part of an official announcement? Were the Buckleberry plans anything but speculation based on "sources close" ----and Eden Rock as a bluff with an actual wedding in Scotland while the paps are paddling around in their boats around Eden Rock. Ha! I think the royals and family have been forced to use creative tactics to maintain their privacy. Good on them.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I wondered if the May 20 Bucklebury plans were part of an official announcement too. Scotland could be a possibility, I can just imagine the paps circling around Eden Rock :) You never know with the royals & their associates. The lengths they have to go to keep the paps second-guessing...

      Delete
    3. I might be wrong, however tradition is very important for a middle class girl, her church, her priest, her town, her house to get married...
      A get away may be considered as gaudy..
      Anon2

      Delete
    4. Ladies, as much as I would love to see photos from the happy day, I hope they enjoy as much privacy and sanity as possible.

      Delete
    5. I agree with anon2. I am sure the wedding in her house, the bride's house is what she wants. And why should she ruse and hide?

      Delete
    6. Also correct, Anon2.But do James and Pippa consider themselves middle-class? And how many simple middle-class girls have a future queen for a sister? The media and others like the Buckleberry scenario exactly for that reason: it places Pippa and family squarely in the middle-class. It is also a popular wedding locale for the younger old-money upper class set who go in for reverse-snobbery. Look at us. Just simple country folk. You are likely correct that Eden Rock wedding might be considered gauche. That's why I am again favoring the private Scottish estate route.----NOTE: there may possibly be a public hat-eating scheduled for May 21, 2017, on the village green AKA FBTB. HA!

      Delete
    7. English middle class..bourgeoisie??? Not royalty but wealthy...

      Anon2

      Delete
    8. Now we're just quibbling, Anon2. ;+) If the middle class is wealthy, the upper is very wealthy? And the shop-owner,teacher,artisan group-lower? And then the lowest for the unskilled labor and somewhere fit in destitute...My impression of class in GB is it is not based on income alone but whether it is inherited or earned. Some members of the aristocracy and great families who have been wiped out by inheritance taxes and daily provide the auction houses with jewels would be welcome at an upper class gathering before the very wealthy earned income families. It must be difficult for families of the non-royal spouses to find a place in society. No matter where you try to fit in, you may not be welcomed.

      Delete
    9. I bet, midlle-class have a different meaning in US, where there is no aristocracy...the upper-class....The bourgeoisie appeared in the XI century in Europe, the old money and new rich...Moliere wrote about it....
      In Europe we call, middle-class, the families who work but have amassed money, aristocracy didn't work and had properties....
      As you said, most of them tried to marry one child with a royal, without a penny to link by marriage with the upper-class, titles as duke, marchese..etc...

      Anon2


      Delete
    10. I have just read that Prince William must be cosidered as middle -class, due to he is not the heir and also, he is a junior Army officer but not a General...

      Anon2

      Delete
    11. Yes, different meanings. By my saying earned versus inherited wealth, we are basically saying the same thing."'Nouveau riche," whatever the spelling. However, except in the oldest of families, earned wealth eventually becomes inherited, if finances are managed well. When Joseph P. K Kennedy was Ambassador to the Court of St. James I believe they were shunned by some aristocrats-including Kathleen's husband's family. They also had problems with acceptance in some circles of Boston society. Very new money then and from questionable sources. I doubt few would dispute their acceptance in society now, however.

      Delete
  14. How do you know what Catherine wore for the 2017 trip? The photos used in the Sun article are from 2012. There are no photos of this supposed 2017 trip.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm with the camp that hasn't changed it's mind as a result of this latest story. If anything, it makes William's behaviour look even more stupid in my opinion. The paparazzi has been lying in wait for any hint of Pippa's hen do - nonetheless, the girls managed to evade the cameras and have a totally private ski weekend, just a few miles away from where William chose to go and where he faced what appears to have been fairly relentless paparazzi attention. I don't think that's just his bad luck - I think he and his friends chose a location where they were exposed, the girls didn't, and William's poor judgement now clearly centers not just around the choices he made that weekend but his choice of location.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally agree, Georgia Rose.

      Anon2

      Delete
    2. A little too convenient, though, wasn't it. The choice of locale. Not something one comes up with on the spur of the moment in a jealous fit. The mental picture of the parent bird hopping, fluttering, and squawking to draw attention away from the nest just won't leave my mind. At any rate, it seemed to do the trick. Desperate times... And No need to change one's opinion when new information becomes available.---- Meanwhile, another engagement today and yet another one tomorrow. Perhaps we can leave a few of these well-worn subjects behind. Of course, the tabloids usually have a negative counter-story ready at hand.. Wonder what it will be this time?

      Delete
    3. I really doubt the decoy story. I can't imagine William making an a** of himself during CW weekend (the 40th anniversary nonetheless) and grabbing the headlines away from his grandmother, all to throw the press off the scent of Pippa's bachelorette party. If it is true, they all need to reexamine their decision making processes.

      Delete
    4. Please correct me if my information is not correct, Faith-and I know at least you will, lizzie , I'm counting on it. :=] It seemed to me that this 40th anniversary hype only came up after William's adventure was publicised, although it Was known that he was not scheduled to attend. (I got that information from the official Commonwealth service site. It was interesting and included the order of service and information on the history and speakers and royal family members expected to attend. Princess Alexandra and the Duke of Kent had health issues, although they may have been listed. William and Catherine were Not listed as expected attendees.) I am also concerned that If it was in fact an important anniversary, why then Anne, Sophie and the rest of the family who were absent did not include it in their schedules? I think we have some revisionist-history going on somewhere
      with the intent to discredit William. -----We can't blame the headlines on William. I am pretty sure he could have done without them. There is real news and then there is "entertainment news." This definitely falls in the later category, while the CW service and the Queen is squarely in the real news group. Each publication makes a choice which stories to feature.

      Delete
    5. Hi anon 1. I can only speak for myself but I knew it was the 40th anniversary from another site I frequent that did make a big deal out of it as well as a couple of my mother's friends who are British and ardent monarchists. I don't read any tabloids so I can not be accused of regurgitating sensationalism in an effort to take William down. Maybe the tabloids have an agenda. I don't know. I suspect they are only trying to sell as many papers and get as many clicks as possible. Anything I stated on this subject is my own opinion. I'd have to go back and do the research but Im positive that the senior royals other than W & K not in attendence were working. Specifically, my issue was that it looked bad to be skiing during this weekend and that if he was not to attend, it would have been better to stay out of the spotlight. William knows he is a big media draw and whatever he does in public will be published. It may not be hard news but it is news.

      Delete
  16. Hi Jane. Are all the pics old?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The pics are definitely old - Emily said so herself on twitter. There weren't any pics from the alleged Hen weekend scoop. It may be true - but no new pictures and it was misleading that the article included old pictures.

      Delete
  17. Sorry but this does not (IMHO) make the situation any better. William and Kate should have been present with the other royals doing their jobs. That's right it's a job. I don't normally fuss over such things (actually I normally defend them), but I have to say this was quite tacky and irresponsible. They knew their schedule and the hen party could have planned out accordingly. Surprised the Middletons (who normally miss a beat) made this choice.

    ReplyDelete
  18. As a British commenter, I read the above with some confusion. The British tabloid press is well known for making up stories with the minimum of facts and pulling down anyone that they can. The British Monarchy is perfectly secure - Kate and William were not scheduled to appear at the Commonwealth service - no one was in the slightest concerned. As for the stories, we are well used to the press and treat it with a pinch of salt. So what if he was dancing, so what if he had a meal and a few drinks? I dont know a single person that gives a hoot. As I said, few people - except it would seem those who comment on here - believe a word they read anyway. William is held in similar esteem to his mother as is Harry and people are generally protective of him. I hope they both had a great time, let their hair down and enjoyed themselves - and shame on the people that felt it acceptable to film them doing so. There was little fact in those articles, no proof - just gossip. I hope I am never judged by this standard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said. I completely agree.

      Delete
    2. I deeply appreciate your comment, Deb. Please don't count me among those who are wiling to believe any story in the tabloids. From my past comments, it should be clear I am not among them. This Is, however, an American blog written about a British royal, international readers notwithstanding.I'm not sure of Jane's heritage because I thought I detected a lovely BBC accent during her delightful Paris coffee-table-book tour. (which I would like very much to continue with other subjects) At any rate, I am also American and have a very British dear friend who helps keep my head on straight regarding the BRF. I also have a very dear European friend who balances the equation somewhat. Not all the commenters have personal contact with GB. Those who have made numerous visits there tend to take an attitude closer to yours, Deb.

      Delete
    3. Deb you are a breath of fresh air 👏👏👏 I concur 100%

      Delete
    4. AMEN, Deb. AMEN. I'm glad you chimed in.

      Delete
    5. Thank you - I usually just read and rarely comment, but felt that maybe a British perspective might be useful! It is difficult to judge from a distance when you dont realise how imaginatively they spin a story from a few isolated facts. I am sure I would be similarly guilty in some of my perceptions of American life!

      Delete
    6. Deb. very gracious of you, but somehow I doubt you are in the habit of forming opinions based upon unsubstantiated tabloid stories. Hopefully you don't base your perception of us on our "reality" shows. ;+)

      Delete
    7. Anon 1, think you are selling your fellow readers short. Im sure a great deal of folks out there base their opinions on tabloid fodder but this is a smart group of people here who usually give well thought out opinions and aren't jumping on the sensationalism bandwagon. In general, I think that the majority of Jane's readers like the Cambridges and want them to suceed. Respectful criticism of how things are handled on occaision does not preclude that.

      Delete
  19. Might the "luxury hen party" story have come out because of work by Pippa’s new “run-up to the wedding “publicist? (Assuming those stories are true)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yes, Lizzie, I was thinking the same thing.

    I'd wager that the recent pap shots of Kate and William outside Pippa's house and article they were included in were the work of the new PR "guru."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If those photos were approved by Pippa I doubt they would have been long-lens and fuzzy.

      Delete

The rules for commenting are simple: be polite. Please be respectful of the BRF/Middletons, even in criticism; please be respectful of your fellow readers, even in disagreement. Vulgarity will disqualify a comment.

Debate is welcome, direct and personal insults are not. Topics we tend to avoid here: "does Kate work enough?" and "Is Kate too skinny?" Everything is subject to approval.

I (Jane Barr) moderate all comments. If a comment is live, I approved it. If you find something offensive, or think my approval was an error, please email me at princesskateblog(at)gmail.com.

At times, an acceptable comment just goes missing. If you felt your comment should have been approved, but did not show up within five hours, again, pop an email to the above address.

Happy chatting!