Page 13 of 53 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 1046
  1. #241

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Petaluma, CA
    Posts
    5,612
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    7222
    Quote Originally Posted by Fergus View Post
    ...........and HMQ gave the Duchess a FABULOUS birthday present!

    *HUGE NEWS!!!!*

    It appears that HMQ has issued letters patent that ALL children born to William & Catherine will be given the title and style of His/Her Royal Highness Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland!!!

    Under George V's letters patent of 1917, their daughters would only be known as "The Lady So-and-So" (like daughters of a duke).

    However, since the Commonwealth realms have accepted a change in the succession laws, ALL of William and Kate's progeny will be TRULY royal!!!!!

    I'm plotzing so hard right now..........
    Although that is lovely....and about time.........but they already know the gender........or could know if they wanted. So, it was either a safe bet (cause it is a boy) or a big deal (knowing it is a girl)
    DH - and that's just my opinion

  2. #242
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    fall, glorious fall
    Posts
    1,650
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I am saying now it will be a girl. Just a feeling I've had since the beginning...we'll see if I"m right!!

  3. #243
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In the place 4 hours due East of where George Spiteri has his workshop
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,028
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I'm also thinking that she's carrying a girl.

  4. #244

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    11,436
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    4286
    I think it's time for a girl too - but that has nothing to do with this legislation, which had actually been proposed well before the pregnancy was announced They pushed through similar reforms in Denmark and then Prince Christian turned out to be a boy!

    But...there are odd coincidences and patterns in my family regarding gender, so I'm using the pattern for the royals. The Queen had a sister - two girls. She had 3 boys and a girl. Charles had 2 boys. It's time for some girls!
    One day your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it's worth watching.

  5. #245
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,747
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AxelAnnie View Post
    Although that is lovely....and about time.........but they already know the gender........or could know if they wanted. So, it was either a safe bet (cause it is a boy) or a big deal (knowing it is a girl)
    William and Kate may know, but that doesn't mean the Queen or anyone else has been told. Just saying.

  6. #246

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    11,436
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    4286
    I doubt they already know the gender. She was well under 12 weeks when the pregnancy was announced and the baby is rumoured to be due June/July, putting her at 12 weeks now. I don't think you can know so early?

    And anyway, like I said, this change was proposed long before the pregnancy was announced.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it's worth watching.

  7. #247
    From the Bloc
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    California, I wish
    Posts
    17,324
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10728
    So what does everyone think of Kate's first official portrait?

  8. #248
    snarking for AZE
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    katbert greenhouse
    Posts
    30,164
    vCash
    2068
    Rep Power
    50005
    Quote Originally Posted by Jenny View Post
    So what does everyone think of Kate's first official portrait?
    i dont like it at all. it looks like someone did an age progression to show what she will look like in 30 years after an all night bender.
    I feel like I'm in a dream. But it can't be a dream because there are no boy dancers!

  9. #249
    From the Bloc
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    California, I wish
    Posts
    17,324
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10728
    Quote Originally Posted by my little pony View Post
    i dont like it at all. it looks like someone did an age progression to show what she will look like in 30 years after an all night bender.
    That's what a lot of comments are saying on Facebook - perhaps in an effort to make it timeless, they made her look older, and slightly plumper. Maybe it's better in person, but her most important attribute - her natural radiance - is sadly missing.

  10. #250

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,483
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    41400
    That portrait doesn't capture "her" in any way.
    How in the world could the artist make her look "matronly" - at 30!
    She is a beautiful, charming young woman.

    Better to have enlarged and displayed one of the very fine photographs which have been made instead.

    The worse thing is that "smirk".
    Who thought that was a good idea?

  11. #251
    From the Bloc
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    California, I wish
    Posts
    17,324
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10728
    Quote Originally Posted by skatesindreams View Post
    The worse thing is that "smirk".
    Who thought that was a good idea?
    Some have compared it to Mona Lisa's smile, but I think it does look like a smirk, which is uncharacteristic for her. She usually smiles with her mouth open, much more engaging.

  12. #252

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    10,724
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33043
    I'm afraid the portrait doesn't seem to capture any of Kate's vibrant personality and does make her look older than her 31 years -- although I certainly wouldn't mind looking like that at age 60! The "Mona Lisa smile" is indeed much more like a smirk. When I saw a brief glimpse of it on TV, I thought why is Kate doing the "McKayla is not amused" face?!? Oh well, this is only the first official portrait -- one can hope that future ones are more flattering.
    Last edited by skatingfan5; 01-11-2013 at 04:15 PM.
    Lady 2: there isn't anything about me on goooogle, I mean, I must take it off if there is.....
    Lady 3: The google is a terrible thing, I mean I don't want anything on there! (Overheard by millyskate on a London train.)

  13. #253

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    In Canuck Land, hey!
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,819
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    2416
    I absolutely HATE the portrait. It just isn't the Kate we have come to know/admire/love. It's just one big whopping UGH!
    Crazy about sports!

  14. #254
    Corgi Wrangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Not Wearing Enough Sparkles
    Posts
    6,454
    vCash
    510
    Rep Power
    5546
    Question: If the Commonwealth has agreed to the change in succession rules, have they also agreed to Cameron's proposal to rescind the Settlement Act provision that bars the heir from marrying a Catholic? Considering the heir is free to marry anyone else of any other religion or lack thereof, that one is as outdated as the male primogeniture laws.

    And of the subject of multiple titles and ranks, besides William using a lesser title, there's always that third rail of titles--Camilla is really entitled to be known as Princess of Wales and the only reason they don't use that one is the Diana-fanatics flip out over it.

  15. #255
    engaged to dupa
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Heaven for climate, Hell for company.
    Posts
    18,917
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1084
    Quote Originally Posted by danceronice View Post
    Question: If the Commonwealth has agreed to the change in succession rules, have they also agreed to Cameron's proposal to rescind the Settlement Act provision that bars the heir from marrying a Catholic?
    Apparently so.

    http://www.catholicculture.org/news/...?storyid=12211
    3539 and counting.

    Slightly Wounding Banana list cont: MacMadame.

  16. #256
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,747
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jenny View Post
    So what does everyone think of Kate's first official portrait?
    Why does she have bags/dark circles under her eyes???? Did the artist hate her????

  17. #257
    Tranquillo
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    behind the gruppetto
    Posts
    24,957
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    35429
    Quote Originally Posted by PDilemma View Post
    Why does she have bags/dark circles under her eyes???? Did the artist hate her????
    That's what struck me too. I'd say the artist was trying to be "realistic" except I've never seen pics of her that look that bad.
    "The Devil is joining in, and that's never a good sign." Phil Liggett

  18. #258
    From the Bloc
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    California, I wish
    Posts
    17,324
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10728
    Exactly. I've never seen her look anything but flawless, in a nice, natural and approachable way. If the artist wanted her to look "real" he should have worked harder on her smile, because that's what does it. In one squib I read that he changed the colour of her eyes to match her blouse, which is all fine and dandy if you are doing an interpretive image, but not if it's supposed to be a realistic portrait. The very idea that he thought he might improve her look! Centuries from now scholars will argue that this portrait was done when she was much older - although my bet is that she ages a lot more gracefully than this.

    Every time I look at that portrait, I hate it even more.

  19. #259
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,012
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I don't like the portrait. She looks like she is smirking, not smiling, and her eyes look like she is glaring- as if she is plotting something, or mad. It just doesn't fit her personality at all.

  20. #260

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,483
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    41400
    This "official" portrait painter hardly seems an "artist" to me.
    He certainly didn't "serve" his subject.

    Is this person the best the UK has to offer?

Page 13 of 53 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •