Happy Saturday! Today I am catching up on work over at Kate's Clothes, (most ensembles I was behind on have been updated) and filling you in on stories I didn't have time to cover this week. As you all recall, two weeks ago Kate, William, and Harry stopped by a training session for the London Marathon runners who are competing for Heads Together.
A little over a week later, on Monday the 13th, Wills and Kate (with our fave sidekick Harry) were out and about with a film crew working on a show for the BBC called Mind Over Marathon. The show will air in April and will feature presenter Nick Knowles following different runners who are competing for mental health awareness.
The trio filmed at St. Mary's University in Twickenham and despite the chilly weather, they looked in high spirits. Kate wore the exact same ensemble she did on the 5th, all the way down to those Asprey London Button earrings, while the boys both switched it up. Harry went a little more formal in khakis and William swerved toward sporty in a puffer jacket and new athletic trainers. Life is full of surprises, kids, what can I say.
|via Daily Mail Online|
I wondered if Kate wore the same outfit to fit seamlessly with her appearance on the 5th, but the boys changed, so it can't be they are trying to pass this footage off for video from the 5th. I think part of the reason might be that women have far greater latitude when it comes to dressing than men. For example, we can dress jeans up or down in ways men cannot. I haven't made a study of Harry's and William's ensembles, but I don't think that either really wears jeans for many official events. They tend to go in khakis or they go in athletic apparel, but I think the only time I have seen William or Harry in jeans is on private occasions, date nights with Kate or Meghan or other off-duty events where we are but spectators, and not invited participants. It seems for William and Harry, jeans just aren't part of work wear. See all the photos at the DM here.
I am looking forward to the segment with the Cambridges; it looks like it will be cute! The DM also shared a fun little video which serves as an amuse-bouche. I can't actually embed it, because Blogger doesn't like it, but you can view it here. And because I can't stop myself from sharing my opinion, the light jogging in jeans looks awkward, but I enjoyed it regardless.
Now for a little controversial debate...Yesterday was the 60th day that Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden has not been seen. That's right, she hasn't been out in public since before Christmas and she doesn't have anything on her agenda until mid-March. According to the Swedish Palace, she is on an extended vacation with her children, because she wants to spend quality time with them while they are still young, and before they have to begin their formal schooling. This really surprised me, not because I think a mother should not be able to make this choice, but because I follow a lot of varied royal news sources and I hadn't heard a word about this!
If Kate disappears for even a few weeks there is public outcry, in fact even when she is actively out and about we still hear a lot of complaints that it isn't enough. The Duchess of Cambridge is the wife of the heir apparent to the heir apparent, while Victoria is the heir apparent to the king. She is next up to bat. I think it is interesting that there is barely a whisper regarding her very long absence, while Kate is often maligned even while she is actively working.
I posed this discussion on Instagram last night and got some interesting responses that I want to share. (By the way, if you don't follow in Instagram, you can find my profile here. I just signed up a few weeks ago!) @the _mbr said:
I've always believed a large part of the outcry over Kate's workload or appearances is driven by the publics hunger to see her and what she is wearing and the press need to sell papers or get clicks. People use the "she's in a publicly funded position and must earn her keep" justification and compare her to CPM Mary, Victoria and Sophie Wessex. The fact that Mary and Victoria are first in line (Victoria a direct comparison to Charles as future monarch) and that Sophie's 2016 engagement load was only around 30 more than Kate's gets glossed over. For some reason Kate seems to attract people's resentment and I don't think she can win.
Katie C. who writes our Charlene of Monaco blog, which if you haven't seen it, you need to check that out here, said:
In addition to what you've said above, with which I fully agree!, I've heard that the Swedes can be less gruelling with regards to work vs family dynamics - though that certainly doesn't account for the rest of the world! It would, at least, explain why she would make this choice without hesitation. Applause indeed! :)
@Jazzudee compared the workloads of the two women:
The Crown Princess seems to have worked much more than the Duchess in previous years so I don't think it's fair to compare the 2. I feel like Kate takes much more criticism because she works less. Not that Kate doesn't deserve the time with her kids, because all parents do, but she just hasn't worked enough overall. I wish she worked more because I love seeing her!
There were other interesting responses, but I don't think any really fully accounted for the double standard that seems to be operating here. If we can understand that a mother would want to prioritize her children in this special time, why can't we extend that to Kate? In fact, if Victoria takes three months off to spend concentrated time with her children, is that better than Kate's approach, which is to spread her engagements out, but make sure her overall workload is such that she can give her children steady attention rather than time in spurts? Is one better than the other? We don't usually have this kind of discussion on the blog, but today I am opening the comment section for your thoughts. Please keep it civil, of course, but I welcome vigorous debate.