I think Kate is bland because she has never pursued anything meaningful. Nothing to do with her social media output.
I’m a pretty reserved, quiet person. No doubt lots of people would find me bland, too. Except I have a lot of interests and passions that I feel strongly about. I’ve had an interesting and varied career. I’ve travelled widely. I’ve volunteered and done actual work (not just gotten a briefing in a limo, shook some hands, cut a ribbon and gone home “work”.) I’ve mixed with people from all walks of life.
if someone asks me how I spent my 20s, I could say all of that.
if someone asked Kate how she spent her 20s?
it was mostly getting blow outs and shopping on the kings road, with the occasional luxury holiday and of course, following Prince William around. A Part time lip-service job so she can work around his schedule. He moved to remote Anglesey then so does she, and so on.
---
Tbh, we have no idea what she is doing with her time when not at public engagements. For all we know she could be working 9-5 having meetings etc. I’d argue that getting her hair done, beauty regimes, working out to maintain her look etc are all part of her job too.
I don’t think they’re anything like me, nor do I want them to be. All I want the Royal Family to be is a group of people that other world leaders have an intrigue about so they want to meet them, so they hold a sort of soft power for the UK on a world stage.
As bad as this may sound, I really don’t care if they aren’t out and about every single day. I just don’t want to have someone like Boris Johnson, or Donald Trump, as my head of state.
And I’m glad they are political neutral. I literally could not give less of a tit what Kate’s opinions on the Tories or Labour are. That’s not the job. Her job is to represent the UK on a world stage, and to support charities at home. If she also wants to spend time with her children when they’re young I don’t begrudge that. If she’s in a position where she can then fair play to her tbh
I feel there’s a better middle ground rather than it must be royalty or we get trump as a president.
for one, the American presidential system is partisan and not one we’d strictly be bound to. It wouldn’t fit neatly into our parliamentary system anyway. The states model of governance is entirely different to the UK’s and there’s no reason why we’d ever adopt the US system.
a more likely model would be the Irish one - whereby we’d have a prime minister (they have a Taoiseach) and a directly elected president who fulfilled ceremonial roles. The Irish system has a president who basically does all the things the monarch in the U.K. does (appoints government, passes bills, etc).
---
because women have been conditioned to be bland, palatable, quiet and demure for centuries. And if a certain public role demands a woman to forgo any sort of personality then maybe that public role isn’t fit for purpose anymore?
Because we need female public figures who inspire young girls and women to be braver in speaking out. Not saying Kate should have strong political opinions or court controversy, but there’s a happier middle ground. Women who speak out on matters that are important to them. Women who lead the way. Women who care about other women.
Last edited:
), people will always feel they have a right to scrutinise them and because their child will be the next monarch, they can be scrutinised too (unlike children of presidents who can have a much stronger argument for privacy). It’s not healthy for the family at all and it wouldn’t be my first choice for how to have a head of state. But if the alternative would be Trump, Johnson, Blair etc then it feels like it’s the least worst option. As long as they are scrutinised carefully and have limited power.
