The Duchess of Cambridge's Daytime Fashion Part 25: January 2019 - May 2019

[Countessmeout]

Great dress. While its her usual cut, the fantastic fabric gives it a more professional look IMO. great choice. The belt adds to it

She looks much better without the hat. Her hair even looks lovely. ?

If she was going to wear that hat (wish she didn't) she needed an updo to work with it.

 

[MARG]

The duchess looked lovely I'm in the minority and prefer it with the hat.

There are a few of us it seems. Personally, I find it gives the dress a more "grown-up" look and, having said that, yes I would have preferred her hair up too.

The black and white tweed with velvet accents is a classic look except that the belt seems a little north of centre. Without the hat the dress is reduced to a little girl look with its a pretty colour and velvet accents. It is not the image I would expect from a 37-year-old woman let alone a Duchess working at the Queen's side.

Taking her hat off and fluffing her long blowout of glossy curls is a very vain thing to do IMO. Yes, she has beautiful hair and I regret that when my hair was that colour I never bothered to grow it out. But, and to me, this is a biggie, today was all about accompanying HM the Queen!

Don't get me wrong, if she had started the day without a hat I would have been fine with that, however, I just wouldn't have thought the ensemble suitable for a mature woman.

 

[Mirabel]

I also love the hat. It has a sassy air that makes the outfit a bit less somber.
That said, I think it was a clever touch to remove the hat for the museum visit.

 

[soapstar]

I like the outfit (with and without the hat) and find it quite suitable for a "mature" woman. But then again, I'm always fascinated when I see women being criticized for supposedly not dressing their age (whatever that means). I mean, at what age does a woman need to stop dressing "girly" and when is it suitable for a woman to dress matronly? We have all of these rules about how a woman is supposed to dress and all of this criticism when a woman doesn't stick within those confines, yet very few rules for how men dress.

Taking her hat off and fluffing her long blowout of glossy curls is a very vain thing to do IMO. Yes, she has beautiful hair and I regret that when my hair was that colour I never bothered to grow it out. But, and to me, this is a biggie, today was all about accompanying HM the Queen!

I don't understand why it would be considered vain if she took her hat, or how that has anything to do with her accompanying the Queen.

 

[Ista]

I like the outfit (with and without the hat) and find it quite suitable for a "mature" woman. But then again, I'm always fascinated when I see women being criticized for supposedly not dressing their age (whatever that means). I mean, at what age does a woman need to stop dressing "girly" and when is it suitable for a woman to dress matronly? We have all of these rules about how a woman is supposed to dress and all of this criticism when a woman doesn't stick within those confines, yet very few rules for how men dress.




I don't understand why it would be considered vain if she took her hat, or how that has anything to do with her accompanying the Queen.

I'm fascinated, too, since "too girly," "matronly," and "frumpy" are such inexact terms, and usually seem to boil down to the poster just doesn't like the outfit, for whatever reason. The whole concept of dressing your age is essentially meaningless, except in a few really egregious cases. There are well dressed women their 70's and 80's who can (and probably do) wear exactly the same things that Meghan and Catherine wear; that doesn't mean that they are dressing "too young" it just means that well-cut clothing can be worn by any age.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

This is a very cute outfit from Catherine and I like it a lot. She also manages to make the look seem elegant and professional despite it retaining a cutsey feel. I'm also one of the few that like her hat as it adds to the elegance of her outfit for me.

 

[MARG]

. . . . . I don't understand why it would be considered vain if she took her hat, or how that has anything to do with her accompanying the Queen.

If you are wearing a hat and your hair is dressed for that hat I can fathom no reason to take it off before she got home.

It's like wearing a tiara and jewels for pre-dinner drinks and then whipping it off for the dinner itself . . . it makes no sense. Catherine's pride in her beautiful hair is not vain but taking it off halfway through an engagement was inexplicable and vanity was the only reason I could think of which probably wasn't the case at all.

 

[Princess Larisa]

If you are wearing a hat and your hair is dressed for that hat I can fathom no reason to take it off before she got home.

It's like wearing a tiara and jewels for pre-dinner drinks and then whipping it off for the dinner itself . . . it makes no sense. Catherine's pride in her beautiful hair is not vain but taking it off halfway through an engagement was inexplicable and vanity was the only reason I could think of which probably wasn't the case at all.

What are you talking about?
Kate wore a hat for her engagement with the Queen, I assume because the Queen always wears a hat at these things.
Kate then had a different solo engagement later and took the hat off for that one and I assume combed her hair.
How in the world does this make her vain?
Perhaps we could google and get actual facts before posting and insulting people we have never met.

 

[MARG]

As I qualified "it probably wasn't the case".

 

[Princess Larisa]

As I qualified "it probably wasn't the case".

I’m confused. Then why did you write it and post it on the forum if you thought it wasn’t true?

 

[MARG]

I posited a theory in the absence of any logical reason.

 

[soapstar]

If you are wearing a hat and your hair is dressed for that hat I can fathom no reason to take it off before she got home.

It's like wearing a tiara and jewels for pre-dinner drinks and then whipping it off for the dinner itself . . . it makes no sense. Catherine's pride in her beautiful hair is not vain but taking it off halfway through an engagement was inexplicable and vanity was the only reason I could think of which probably wasn't the case at all.

Kate wasn’t halfway through an engagement. She had finished her engagement with the Queen and was on her second engagement of the day.

She obviously took the hat off because she was no longer with the Queen and didn’t need (or want) to wear it. We’ve seen plenty of royals take off their hats and even change their clothes/shoes when they have more than one engagement in a day, so I’m not sure why it’s considered puzzling for Kate to do it, or why the immediate thought is to assume she’s vain.

I'm fascinated, too, since "too girly," "matronly," and "frumpy" are such inexact terms, and usually seem to boil down to the poster just doesn't like the outfit, for whatever reason. The whole concept of dressing your age is essentially meaningless, except in a few really egregious cases. There are well dressed women their 70's and 80's who can (and probably do) wear exactly the same things that Meghan and Catherine wear; that doesn't mean that they are dressing "too young" it just means that well-cut clothing can be worn by any age.

Yep. Totally agree.

 

[camelot23ca]

I thought she looked really good on the outing with the Queen. I love the dress and think the hat pulls the look together nicely.

Regarding people dressing their age, I think there are some styles that are best left to the very young. I also think once someone reaches their 30s they should have a sense of what looks good on them and how to pull an outfit together to suit a particular occasion with regard to formality, etc. That goes double for someone in Kate’s position and I think she usually hits the mark, although I think she could take things to a whole new level if she’d wear her hair back or up more often.

 

[IloveCP]

Duchess of Cambridge very elegant at the St Patricks Day Parade this morning!

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/0...onal_day_Kate_donned_t-a-42_1552821241148.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D12yZ6iXcAEUwex.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D120nM2X0AA84GR.jpg

I love the green look. Very beautiful and elegant.

.

The Duchess of Cambridge in Catherine Walker at the opening of Bush House, King's College London today, March 19:


** Full view ** Full view 2 ** Side view **

A beautiful grey look. She looks fantastic.

 

[iceflower]

.

The Duchess of Cambridge visiting the Scouts' headquarters at Gilwell Park, Essex, today, March 28, wearing her Barbour jacket, J.Crew jumper and Chloe boots again:



** Full view ** Upper part **

 

[evolvingdoors]

.

The Duchess of Cambridge visiting the Scouts' headquarters at Gilwell Park, Essex, today, March 28, wearing her Barbour jacket, J.Crew jumper and Chloe boots again:



** Full view ** Upper part **

A very engagement appropriate outfit.
Loving the boots! May look into them myself.

I do want to bring out the same worry I had a couple weeks ago: it seems to me a lot of Catherine’s outfits recently have been non British brands and it worries me, she’s always been a great ambassador for British fashion, IMO, so i do hope this weird increase is a temporary hiccup. Any ID on the jeans?

 

[Countessmeout]

Her jacket is British even if her boots and sweater are not.

Kate has always worn foreign designers, just like Sophie. Seems people are just noticing more. But there has been a lot more luxury foreign brands like Gucci lately. These pieces are all recycled though.

I always prefer her casual looks. She looks young and yet appropriate. Great style for the event

 

[Lady Marlboro]

Once again she looks good from the waist up. From the waist down, she looks like she is wearing tights and no trousers. Vulgar Kate again.

 

[Ista]

It's a nice look for Catherine, even though I'm not a huge fan of the skinny trousers. It's a nice blend of foreign and domestic brands, which I think Kate usually manages to pull off.

 

[duchessrachel]

I love everything about this outfit!! I want some boots like that.

 

[muriel]

I do want to bring out the same worry I had a couple weeks ago: it seems to me a lot of Catherine’s outfits recently have been non British brands and it worries me, she’s always been a great ambassador for British fashion, IMO, so i do hope this weird increase is a temporary hiccup. Any ID on the jeans?

It's a nice look for Catherine, even though I'm not a huge fan of the skinny trousers. It's a nice blend of foreign and domestic brands, which I think Kate usually manages to pull off.

I agree Catherine has worn a fair amount of foreign luxury labels recently, and iI too hope the trend does not continue. So far, she manages to maintain the right balance between largely domestic brands with some foreign, but I would not like to see that change.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Vulgar Kate again.

Could you please clarify for me how wearing a pair of "jeggings" which is what Kate is wearing is vulgar?

She's wearing a pair of jeans, that cover her legs, that are designed to be tight fitting and stretchy therefore perfect for moving around with kids. Which was exactly her engagement today?

Skinny Jeans or Jeggings have been around for ages and they aren't going anywhere because they're so easy to wear.

 

[Elenath]

Could you please clarify for me how wearing a pair of "jeggings" which is what Kate is wearing is vulgar?



She's wearing a pair of jeans, that cover her legs, that are designed to be tight fitting and stretchy therefore perfect for moving around with kids. Which was exactly her engagement today?



Skinny Jeans or Jeggings have been around for ages and they aren't going anywhere because they're so easy to wear.

I agree. If there’s one person in any royal family who’s not vulgar it’s Kate.

 

[Emmily]

I love this look on Catherine!

 

[Osipi]

Its the truth that these kind of pants are so comfortable to wear especially if you're moving around a lot with kids. Actually, I find them quite attractive and Kate has the shape to pull them off beautifully.

Perhaps vulgarity is in the eye of the beholder in this case. My mother, if she was still alive would think so and my grandmother would have thought a woman wearing *any* kind of pants or trousers vulgar.

 

[SLV]

Its the truth that these kind of pants are so comfortable to wear especially if you're moving around a lot with kids. Actually, I find them quite attractive and Kate has the shape to pull them off beautifully.

Perhaps vulgarity is in the eye of the beholder in this case. My mother, if she was still alive would think so and my grandmother would have thought a woman wearing *any* kind of pants or trousers vulgar. [emoji3]

True. My grandmother only started to wear trousers after she had turned 75-80 or so.
Never saw her wearing skirts much after that.
I don't like such skinny jeans on myself, but the Dutchess has the figure for it. Not vulgar at all.

 

[Lady Marlboro]

I realize that most people today think "jeggings" are comfortable and appropriate. I respect your opinions. My personal opinion is they are totally inappropriate for work unless you teach an exercise class. She is on an official engagement representing a charity of which she is patron, it wouldn't kill her to have a regular pair of jeans for these situations. What she is wearing is too tight for official work. I don't care if she were to wear this to go for a run or to take the kids to the park but for work she does look vulgar and cheap.

 

[Erin9]

The Duchess of Cambridge's Daytime Fashion Part 25: January 2019 -

I realize that most people today think "jeggings" are comfortable and appropriate. I respect your opinions. My personal opinion is they are totally inappropriate for work unless you teach an exercise class. She is on an official engagement representing a charity of which she is patron, it wouldn't kill her to have a regular pair of jeans for these situations. What she is wearing is too tight for official work. I don't care if she were to wear this to go for a run or to take the kids to the park but for work she does look vulgar and cheap.

Well, I’ve worn jeggings to work on casual Friday, and it’s totally acceptable. I wouldn’t classify my attire as vulgar. And I work in a conservative industry. Like men wear suits and ties other days of the week. Considering what Kate was doing yesterday- it was basically casual Friday for her.

So, imo, she was fine. And she looks good in them. She has the figure for it.

 

[duchessrachel]

Its the truth that these kind of pants are so comfortable to wear especially if you're moving around a lot with kids. Actually, I find them quite attractive and Kate has the shape to pull them off beautifully.

Perhaps vulgarity is in the eye of the beholder in this case. My mother, if she was still alive would think so and my grandmother would have thought a woman wearing *any* kind of pants or trousers vulgar.

So true!! I love these kinds of pants and I wear them some. I have a sister, 16 years older than me, who would think they were vulgar if I wore them around her. I just be sure when I see her I look appropriate in her view, or I will hear about it Funnily enough, my mother mother would have thought they were cute.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

The skinny jeans and jeggings Kate wears are stretch denim. They are not a thin, knit fabric that shows everything and look like hosiery.

IMO she was appropriately attired for a 30 something year old at an outdoor, in the dirt, event. Dress slacks would have looked silly.