Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Kate is much prettier than Diana

There, I said it.

by Anonymousreply 17907/30/2014

Vastly. She reminds me of a prettier Shania or classier Megan Fox.

by Anonymousreply 104/29/2011

Diana and Wayne Gretzky were twins.

by Anonymousreply 204/29/2011

I beg to differ.

There is a loss of innocence in Kate. A tremendous and highly detectable loss.

by Anonymousreply 304/29/2011

I totally agree, OP. Had Diana been alive today she'd be so botoxed, nipped, tucked and irrigated, you wouldn't have recognised her.

by Anonymousreply 404/29/2011

Absolutely. Diana looked just like a raging bitch.

by Anonymousreply 504/29/2011

"There is a loss of innocence in Kate. A tremendous and highly detectable loss." Did you finger test her?

by Anonymousreply 604/29/2011

Blows her out of the water.

by Anonymousreply 704/29/2011

The only thing unsightly about Diana was her big nose. If she'd had that thing shaved down before she came into the public light she would have legitimately been regarded as a major beauty rather than being called that simply because she was Diana.

by Anonymousreply 804/29/2011

[quote]There is a loss of innocence in Kate. A tremendous and highly detectable loss.

And obviously there is a loss of intelligence in you, sir. A tremendous and highly detectable loss.

by Anonymousreply 904/29/2011

I don't know, I find Kate's beauty a bit hard-looking...

by Anonymousreply 1004/29/2011

Kate is almost 30 at the time of her wedding while Diana was 20...%0D %0D I think Diana was beautiful not just in the phyiscal sense something some will never understand...

by Anonymousreply 1104/29/2011

If she didn't have that hair, no one would be clucking much about her.

by Anonymousreply 1204/29/2011

"loss of innocence"? You read a lot of Barbara Cartland,don't you...

by Anonymousreply 1304/29/2011

Ditto [R9]

by Anonymousreply 1404/29/2011

[R6] Is that how your mind works? Apparently lack of class.

by Anonymousreply 1504/29/2011

Kate isn't beautiful, although she does look very adorable when she smiles.%0D %0D Diana was like a lot of movie stars in that for some reason, she looked good in still photographs, but radiantly beautiful on film. I don't understand it at all, her features were far from perfect.

by Anonymousreply 1604/29/2011

Agree [R11].

by Anonymousreply 1704/29/2011

Diana was a lot softer looking.

by Anonymousreply 1804/29/2011

Diana was really unattractive. I don't know if anyone advised her to do that "looking "shyly" up with her head held down" but it just made the whole thing worse. Kate is much prettier and much more sophisticated.

by Anonymousreply 1904/29/2011

Kate is gorgeous -- I wear I could see her nipples under that wedding dress! -- but Diana was the most beautiful. %0D %0D %0D The reason I say that is because Diana had an innocence and vulnerability that Kate doesn't have... Diana had an aura about her that made you want to care for her and protect her and keep her from harm -- which, to me, is the essense of true femininity. It's a shame Charles didn't love her for those qualities -- I did. And I believe the British people did as well.%0D %0D %0D It is obvious that Kate doesn't need protecting -- she's a 21st century fox, that's for sure. %0D %0D %0D Here's a musical link for you young'ns.

by Anonymousreply 2004/29/2011

I'm on Team Pippa

by Anonymousreply 2104/29/2011

Kate has little titties.

by Anonymousreply 2204/29/2011

What [R16] and [R20] said. Very insightful.

by Anonymousreply 2304/29/2011

Diana may have been beautiful, but Kate is quite gorgeous.

by Anonymousreply 2404/29/2011

I agree OP. WAY more beautiful than Diana.

by Anonymousreply 2504/29/2011

Kate would be beautiful with just a little bit of Restylane in her top lip.

by Anonymousreply 2604/29/2011

I think she is beautiful and knows how to smile, but she needs to trim up those eyebrows a bit, very Groucho Marx.

by Anonymousreply 2704/29/2011

Bert Stern wrote, "%E2%80%9CMarilyn Monroe's beauty was totally the opposite of Elizabeth Taylor. Liz Taylor%E2%80%99s already %E2%80%98there%E2%80%99. All she has to do is turn exactly straight and be still. Her beauty is formal. Liz is the fact of beauty. Marilyn was the fantasy. If Marilyn were still for an instant, her beauty would evaporate. With her it was like photographing light itself.%E2%80%9D

In this case, Kate is the fact of beauty and Diana is the fantasy.

by Anonymousreply 2804/29/2011

Haters gonna hate:

by Anonymousreply 2904/29/2011

"In this case, Kate is the fact of beauty and Diana is the fantasy."%0D %0D I couldn't have said it better, so I'll just agree with r28. %0D %0D Kate is really a natural beauty. Her confidence and easy smile make her more attractive.%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 3004/29/2011

Uh, R30? R28 was saying that Diana was more beautiful. Maybe you missed it.

by Anonymousreply 3104/29/2011

Why does Kate look 40, though? Sure, she's beautiful, but she looks old.

by Anonymousreply 3204/29/2011

Diana looked like a frigid roll of dough. She had as much sex appeal as Margaret Thatcher.

Middleton is elegant and fuckable.

by Anonymousreply 3304/29/2011

Leave this house

by Anonymousreply 3404/29/2011

This one is great.

by Anonymousreply 3504/29/2011

Diana was much prettier because her facial features are larger. Rat-faced Middleton, especially with her emotionless self-presentation, is either retarded or a serial killer. She is absolutely average on the looks scale. Diana did not look like Prince William. Prince William got some bad features from Charles.

by Anonymousreply 3604/29/2011

amazing body

by Anonymousreply 3704/29/2011

these crack me up

by Anonymousreply 3804/29/2011

"The only thing unsightly about Diana was her big nose."

Around the time of Diana's death, my brother did a parody of Elton John's "Candle in the Wind," which he rewrote especially for Diana. We both were pretty upset at this 'cause it was Marilyn's song; we thought he should've written something new for the occasion.

Anyway, the revised edition starts with "Goodbye England's Rose," but my brother's version was "Goodbye you big nose." LOL! I wish I Could remember the rest 'cause it was damn hilarious.

Incidentally, at the end of 1999 Time magazine (I think) did a poll of the most beautiful woman of the 20th Century and Diana made the top of the list. Please! She wasn't even the most beautiful princess. That honor goes to Grace Kelly, IMO.

by Anonymousreply 3904/29/2011

Maybe conventionally prettier, but Di had an inner glow that Kate just does not have.

by Anonymousreply 4004/29/2011

Di was 19, she was a virgin, she never went to college. She had not really "lived"..

by Anonymousreply 4104/29/2011

Kate is 29. By the time Diana was 29, she had become a beauty...and by the tmie she was in her mid 30s, she was stunning, sh e simply radiated beauty. %0D %0D Kate is attractive, well-groomed. Yeah, she's pretty sometimes. But she doesn't radiate anything.

by Anonymousreply 4204/29/2011

Neither of those two bitches can hold a candle to ME!

by Anonymousreply 4304/29/2011

Kate is pretty, but a 'hard' pretty. She'll always look her age, if not older. Diana was unique looking, which is why she'll never be forgotten. Kate is like the Queen Mum - nice and all, but perfectly forgettable.

by Anonymousreply 4404/29/2011

My favorite picture of Diana. I think Kate is as beautiful as Diana was. I hope that clusterfuck of inbred psychos doesn't ruin another woman's life.

Diana said as she was walking down the aisle she felt like a lamb to slaughter and she hated the dress. I sure wish she could have seen her son today.

by Anonymousreply 4504/29/2011

When Diana was at her thinnest her face looked too hard and pointy-- nothing but nose and chin. I thought she looked much more attractive with a bit of weight on and the fuller face she had before the eating disorder(s) took over.%0D %0D Kate is a rather hard looking 29. I fear she will not age well. Yet another case of a woman choosing her ass over her face.

by Anonymousreply 4604/29/2011

Another vote for Diana-even her name radiates beauty.%0D %0D Kate on the other hand looks great-for a middle aged bride taking her 3rd trip down the aisle. If I hadn't known that both the bride and groom are 29,I would have sworn they were celebrating their 25th wedding anniversary.%0D %0D Kate will age like Brooke Shields-her already sharp features will become even more pronounced and people will wonder what all the fuss was about.

by Anonymousreply 4704/29/2011

Grace, if you keep making that grumpy face, it's going to freeze like that forever. You're a hard-looking three. Too many wedding receptions. Too many hokey pokeys. Too many bunny hops.%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 4804/29/2011

Where does Prince Bill fall on the chart of beautiful royals? Has Beautiful People dot com weighed in on this?

by Anonymousreply 4904/29/2011

What's this bullshit about Diana being "stunning" or "radiant"? She wasn't. She was a plain Jane with no sense of style.

by Anonymousreply 5004/30/2011

They are equally beautiful in very different ways. They're very different "types."

by Anonymousreply 5104/30/2011

Ruh-roh ! Second to last picture at the bottom of the page. Harry is getting a bald spot !

by Anonymousreply 5204/30/2011

I agree that Kate is hard looking. I think she would have been happier at Michfest than at the wedding.%0D %0D Diana was stunning. She was not a classic beauty but she had a good figure, height and beautiful, expressive eyes. She looked the way most of the public imagined a princess should look. Kate is like Princess Mary of Denmark. A tough looking brunette with a good body but no charisma.

by Anonymousreply 5304/30/2011

R37's pic is intriguing - it appears that Kate doesn't have a Brazilian wax but rather a normal bush!

by Anonymousreply 5404/30/2011

Why do people deify the dead?

Diana was a pretty girl who got stylized by the Royal glam squad. In the beginning she was terribly dumpy but she slowly evolved into a fashion plate.

One thing she had going for her was that she came into her sense of style during the 80s and early 90s when women looked far more glamorous and chic than now.

Shoulder pads and feathered hair worked wonders on ordinary girls! I call it the "Dynasty effect".

by Anonymousreply 5504/30/2011

What [R55] said.

by Anonymousreply 5604/30/2011

Agree R56

by Anonymousreply 5704/30/2011

[quote]Kate is almost 30 at the time of her wedding while Diana was 20...%0D %0D %0D Exactly, so what is R3 bleeting about?

by Anonymousreply 5804/30/2011


Dimwit. Exactly what [R3] said.

by Anonymousreply 5904/30/2011

"That honor goes to Grace Kelly."%0D %0D Meanwhile, no one under fifty knows who she is. And she was a poor man's Ingrid Bergman to boot. %0D %0D Kate would be prettier if she gained ten, fifteen pounds. She's too thin. %0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 6004/30/2011

I think you had to see Diana in person to understand fully what her appeal was. She had a glow about her, a radiance.%0D %0D The poster who used the term "rat faced" regarding Kate is pretty much spot on. Kate looks like she drinks too much, and it's showing on her face. She has no lips, bad skin and a crooked smile. She has pretty eyes and good hair, and she's tall and slim.Kate will look harder as time goes on, and if she keeps drinking, she will start looking really bad really soon.%0D %0D Diana was striking. Very very tall, and despite the "shy Di" moniker, when she looked at you, she looked straight into your eyes, like she was reading your mind. Her skin was flawless. She had a beauty that radiated out from inside of her as well as how she looked.%0D %0D Kate looks at people like she could give a royal fuck about them. Watch her, she never looks people in the eye. She never looked at William for longer than a couple of seconds during the ceremony. She couldn't even look at him when she was saying her vows. Watch the two wedding ceremonies when each is saying her vows and it's very telling about the two women.%0D %0D There was something disturbing to me about Kate and William's wedding. It seemed lonely somehow. Half-baked. I found it sad when she got out of the carriage and the footman was trying to get her gown up on the curb and there was no one there to help her. How awful.Badly done. There should have at least been someone from the household to meet them and get the back of that dress off the ground.%0D %0D I didn't think that wedding was fit for a future king of England, and I think it may be William who ultimately kills off the monarchy because he doesn't believe in it himself, and THAT will be Diana's ULTIMATE revenge.

by Anonymousreply 6104/30/2011

Great post R61. I felt a lot of what you describe but couldn't quite put my finger on it. The wedding was a very stiff choreographed performance. The kisses were little pecks, and you are so right that Kate never looked at Will at all. They do not appear to be in love. It seemed more like a merger or partnership than a love match to me.

by Anonymousreply 6204/30/2011

No, she ain't.

And, Kate has no pizazz.

by Anonymousreply 6304/30/2011

The fairy tale of the teenaged virgin bride (Diana) is antiquated nonsense. No one could relate to it in the 80's let alone now. Kate is a more realistic, modern role model for young women.%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 6404/30/2011

No one would notice either if they weren't involved with the royal family. Neither is or was a stunning beauty. You spend a lot of money fixing something up and it looks better.

by Anonymousreply 6504/30/2011

R61 drinks too much. He also sounds like his old whore of a mother.

Btw, r61, Wills cock is huge.

by Anonymousreply 6604/30/2011

"A more realistic, modern role model for young women."%0D %0D Yeah, chase a prince until you catch him and then don't let go. %0D %0D That will work out well for a lot of young women.%0D %0D This wedding has caused more brain farts than anything else.

by Anonymousreply 6704/30/2011

[quote]Kate is a more realistic, modern role model for young women.

For the smart young homemaker, no doubt.

by Anonymousreply 6804/30/2011

Diana was a tool.

by Anonymousreply 6904/30/2011

[quote]Kate is a more realistic, modern role model for young women.

No, most of us have real jobs.

I would say Chelsy is, except she looks like trash. She's going to law school and seems to have a life outside of Harry.

by Anonymousreply 7004/30/2011

Not so fast, R70. Kate is 29 years old. That's long enough to have established herself in a career. Did she ever work? In what field? What did she study in college? %0D %0D Sorry, too lazy to google it.

by Anonymousreply 7104/30/2011

If you're too lazy to Google it, then I'm too lazy to tell you.

by Anonymousreply 7204/30/2011

"Diana was much prettier because her facial features are larger. Rat-faced Middleton, especially with her emotionless self-presentation, is either retarded or a serial killer. She is absolutely average on the looks scale. Diana did not look like Prince William. Prince William got some bad features from Charles."%0D %0D Kate Middleton is by no stretch of the imagination "rat-faced." And she's "retarded" or "a serial killer?" Boy are YOU one psychotic, fucked up, idiotic cunt. %0D %0D "I hope that clusterfuck of inbred psychos doesn't ruin another woman's life."%0D %0D Oh drop dead, you insane Diane-queen. You and the above poster ought to hook up. You could beat each other off while gazing at your scrapbooks of photos of your slutty, dimwith heroine Di. %0D

by Anonymousreply 7304/30/2011

"I didn't think that wedding was fit for a future king of England, and I think it may be William who ultimately kills off the monarchy because he doesn't believe in it himself, and THAT will be Diana's ULTIMATE revenge."%0D %0D Diane is DEAD, you nutjob. She can't get "revenge" on anybody, much less "ULTIMATE revenge. %0D %0D These Diana queens are so psycho it's scary.

by Anonymousreply 7404/30/2011

"Meanwhile, no one under fifty knows who she is. And she was a poor man's Ingrid Bergman to boot." %0D %0D A LOT of people "under fifty" know who she is, you stupid twat. %0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 7504/30/2011

"A LOT of people "under fifty" know who she is"

And you know this because you are A LOT OF PEOPLE?

schizophrenic much?

by Anonymousreply 7604/30/2011

Kate is plain looking.

by Anonymousreply 7704/30/2011

"She had a beauty that radiated out from inside of her as well as how she looked."

Are you high? Diana as a great beauty is a the emperor has no clothes kind of situation.

by Anonymousreply 7804/30/2011

When you see Kate standing next to a regular person, the difference is staggering. She is a beauty.

by Anonymousreply 7904/30/2011

I think Kate took her diet a bit too far. She looked beautiful in her gown but a few more pounds would've taken the sharpness out of her face.

by Anonymousreply 8004/30/2011

There is nothing like the subject of the royal family to bring out the "queen" in the queens here. Beyond real. Kate is a future alcoholic...She is in an arrangement with Wills...There is no love...%0D %0D Oy vey. Lol. Imagine what we read have read here 30 years ago if there was a DL.%0D %0D "Di is bearding for Charles, who had lots of homosex at boarding school. His real love is his butler yada, yada, yada."%0D %0D The wedding was beautiful, the couple was lovely, and may they live the rest of their lives happily and in peace.%0D %0D Unlike the sad old queens here who kvetch. And by the way, Di was beautiful. Not in the traditional sense, but in a way that was haunting and vunerable.

by Anonymousreply 8104/30/2011

Maybe she'll gain a few pounds now that the wedding is over.

by Anonymousreply 8204/30/2011

My worst nightmare would be to get stuck in a lift with R61.

by Anonymousreply 8304/30/2011

"Kate herself is caught up in a complex web of double standards. She's criticised for being boringly demure. But we know what would happen if she fell out of a nightclub looking as dishevelled as her brother-in-law. Her art history degree is slyly derided. Her intellect questioned, although it's difficult to know on what basis ("I'd say 'conscientious' rather than clever," says one observer). Her clothes, her shoes, her hair, her legs, her eyebrows, her weight %E2%80%93 are all constantly evaluated, and all too frequently by female commentators who should know better."

by Anonymousreply 8404/30/2011

Diana was much prettier.

by Anonymousreply 8504/30/2011

Both radiate health.

by Anonymousreply 8604/30/2011

R86... MARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Anonymousreply 8704/30/2011

Kate is a pretty woman. Diana was a handsome woman.

by Anonymousreply 8804/30/2011


by Anonymousreply 8905/01/2011

[quote]Oy vey. Lol. Imagine what we read have read here 30 years ago if there was a DL.%0D %0D It always makes me laugh how certain DL gay males rip straight or gay females to shreds for liking/writing slash (basically fantasy scenarios) but then go and concoct some of the most outrageous fantasy scenarios about a person based on a sideways glance or that they didn't like Camilla's hat today, etc. Then it ends up becoming 'fact' on here and semi out-there too. %0D

by Anonymousreply 9005/01/2011

Kate is a hag.

by Anonymousreply 9105/01/2011

Kate is a much more beautiful woman. Diana was a rather unfortunate-looking woman (she looked somewhat inbred).

by Anonymousreply 9205/01/2011

Yes, she is. Diana was not very attractive.

by Anonymousreply 9305/01/2011

R29, thank you for sharing that site. It's hilarious.

R52, that's not Prince Harry, it's Guy Pelley.

by Anonymousreply 9405/01/2011

It's funny how William and Kate are held up as examples of "the new royals" when they're really no different from the old. He's committed to a life in the military until he takes over the duchy of Cornwall and starts raking it in. She's a former accessories buyer (in other words, has never held a real job) who's the daughter of multi-millionaires.

by Anonymousreply 9505/01/2011

What a way to start the morning. But I must.%0D %0D Neither of these women are or were beautiful. Both, however, are very attractive and have/had the potential for more.%0D %0D The fact that they are/were both tall and trim disguises a lot of flaws. Diana's youth contributed to her initial appeal. I much prefer Kate's more mature (not old) appearance. That little girl look was always annoying to me.%0D %0D In the beginning Diana had no style whatsoever. Her clothes bordered on the ludicrous even allowing for the awful 1980s styles. Obviously in her position she was able to evolve into a woman of much better style and outward grace. And, yes, she looked stunning at times.%0D %0D Kate at 29 has developed a decent style of her own. It will be interesting to compare her to Diana after she has had the same access to the world's best stylists, photographers, etc. over the course of a decade. %0D %0D I think William was very smart to wait this long to decide and let Kate decide if she was sure this was the life she wanted. No matter what anyone thinks about the monarchy or the privileges, it is a demanding job and life. I think they will probably be very good at it in whatever form it takes in the future.%0D %0D The most interesting and attractive members of this generation are the Phillips - Peter and Zara. Amazing since they are the children of the daughter everyone ridiculed as ugly.

by Anonymousreply 9605/01/2011

Thats not very nice for the boys Kate is pretty but in a different way diana who is stunning

by Anonymousreply 9705/11/2011

I agree Kate is much better looking than Diana. Diana was pretty in the early 80s but by the late 80s and 90s she was no longer pretty and started to look masculine. Neither of them can compete with Grace Kelly; but I find Kate's looks much more appealing. Plus Kate has sexiness, sophistication and confidence.

by Anonymousreply 9805/20/2011

This is crazy. Diana was an elegant, beautiful woman that can't be compared to Kate. While Kate is beautiful, Diana was majestic in her own right.

by Anonymousreply 9907/20/2013

I see young women better looking than Kate every day in Manhattan.

I don't think Diana was a great beauty, either, but she did reinvent herself in a way that Kate never will. That reinvention is what resonates with people.

by Anonymousreply 10007/21/2013

Diana was an aristocratic English Rose and was of that generation where 20-somethings dressed in frumpy or overly frilled clothes. (Large shoulder pads, long hemlines, bulky suits and sweaters, etc). But with her gorgeous thick head of hair, deep blue eyes and peaches and cream complexion she was a beauty during the time of Dynasty and Laura Ashley frilly blouses.

The video of her below was from her tour of Wales in 1981 when she was 20 yrs old. Her skin and hair are glowing. She may not have had classic features but she glowed from within. (Meg Ryan also had that inner glow in her earlier work but she lost it.) In this video Diana is endearingly awkward, a shy 20 yr old that was married to a buttoned-up older man who was 32 but acted like he was 20 yrs older.

Kate is very attractive and has that outdoorsy J Crew/'yummy mummy' look down. She dresses in a classic minimalist style (like Jackie O and Audrey H). She has a trim and 'pretty girl next door' look that will age well.

She'll likely continue on stylistically exactly as she is now, i.e. classic simple clothing that is beautifully tailored as well as mixing and matching inexpensive pieces with high end pieces.

by Anonymousreply 10107/21/2013

[quote]Kate is 29. By the time Diana was 29, she had become a beauty...and by the time she was in her mid 30s, she was stunning, she simply radiated beauty. Kate is attractive, well-groomed. Yeah, she's pretty sometimes. But she doesn't radiate anything.

R42 says it all. The last few years of Diana's life she was stunning; she glowed. You were drawn to her. There was a magnetism and charisma that was addictive. Kate's look is a dime a dozen. She may do everything "right," but Diana paved the way and far outshines Kate by light years. Kate leaves me cold.

I couldn't care less if I ever see Kate. Diana on the other hand--you just couldn't get enough of, which unfortunately is why she's no longer with us and not here glowing and outshining her daughter-in-law, but more importantly, to see her son and her grandchild.

by Anonymousreply 10207/21/2013

Kate is prettier, but in a generic sort of way. She looks aged far beyond ber years. She is overall less interesting and doesn't seem like a royal.

by Anonymousreply 10307/21/2013

Kate could change her name to Plain Jane, who looks attractive made up and in her proper outfits.

But dressed up, dressed down, Diana was a beauty. She looked royal; she glowed. Her smile lit up the room. There was no one like Diana. Kate doesn't even come close.

by Anonymousreply 10407/21/2013

OP, you sure better hope that Elton John and the Gay Mafia don't get ahold of you and push your face into the fishes.

by Anonymousreply 10507/21/2013

R104 nailed it!

by Anonymousreply 10607/21/2013

Yes she is OP, she is much more beautiful and doesn't have that inbred look. Diana-Fans you realize Charles was related to her & so was Camilla Shand? And Diana's mother was also a Shand? It's sickening. Thank GOODNESS Prince William married OUT & away from anyone he's related to.

by Anonymousreply 10707/21/2013

Kate is pretty in a nice modern way.

But while Diana didn't have perfect features, they combined together to make something quite stunning. She was the beautiful princess. She glowed more & more as she got older. She's the woman you couldn't take your eyes from. Diana was a classic beauty.

by Anonymousreply 10807/21/2013

I remember in 1999 there were lots of lists marking the end of the millenium/century and Diana inexplicably placed #1 in "The Most Beautiful Women of the 20th Century" category. I was like please! She wasn't even the most beautiful princess (i.e. Grace Kelly).

A&E Biography also did a list, "The 100 Most Influential People of the Millennium," going all the way back to the year 1000 AD. For some reason, Diana placed at #73. Biography's reason was that she forever changed the destiny of the British royal family and they even had the gall to surmise that the monarchy was dead without her and wouldn't last long, but many pundits felt she shouldn't have been on it at all and only made the list 'cause she'd died two years earlier and was still fresh in people's minds.

I agree. Had Diana not died, no way would she have topped the first list nor made Biography's list. Had those lists been conducted today, when Diana is but a distant memory except for the die-hard fans, nobody would even think of placing her on them. 16 years after her death, the royal family is still going strong. I mean, even by 2005 people didn't care anymore when Charles finally married Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 10907/21/2013

I can't believe ANYONE would think Kate is more beautiful than this woman...

by Anonymousreply 11007/21/2013

r96 Anne's children got their good looks from her incredibly cute husband.

by Anonymousreply 11107/21/2013

Is this a parody thread? Kate is completely dog faced. She has giant pores, huge eyebrows, wrinkles, ugly features and no discernible personality whatsoever. Do you people have facial blindness. She also looks like the kind of chick who probably has to pluck out chin hair on a daily basis.

by Anonymousreply 11207/21/2013

R110, Kate is classically beautiful, i.e. symmetrical features. She photographs well from every angle, and I bet she's stunning in person.

Diana had exaggerated features, e.g. doe eyes, aqualine nose. She looked good in professional photographs (as in your example) because they could adjust the lightning and pose in flattering angles, but she was not so pretty in interviews or paparazzi photos.

by Anonymousreply 11307/21/2013


by Anonymousreply 11407/21/2013

I barely remember what Kate looks like. She's just ordinary. So much so that her sister Pippa stole the spotlight from her at her own wedding. That would never have happened with Diana. Diana walked into a room and all eyes are on her. There are many iconic pictures of Diana like the one in that black dress dancing with John Travolta or in her wedding dress where no one outshone her. Plus she had kind of an inner beauty as well where you really believed she cared about her causes like about landmines. Diana was also extremely loved by the people.

I don't recall any picture of Kate that's iconic or special in any way and I don't recall any causes that she supports.

by Anonymousreply 11507/21/2013

Kate's face has become a bit softer since she's pregnant. If only she would ditch the harsh eyeliner.

by Anonymousreply 11607/21/2013

I think Kate has too much sun damage now. She's very close to that "rode hard and put up wet" look.

by Anonymousreply 11707/21/2013

Kate is very attractive but she is missing Diana's inner glow that radiated out for all to see. I don't think it's fair to compare the two, Kate's facial features are proportionate and classically pretty whereas Diana had a large chin and nose that would not be considered attractive but she still managed to look beautiful I her own right.

by Anonymousreply 11807/21/2013

Diana always reminded me a bit of Larry Bird.

by Anonymousreply 11907/21/2013

Diana had star quality. She had the mysterious "it" - a glow that lit up the whole world. Of course, she was complicated and flawed. Despite that, she was magnetic. We couldn't take our eyes off her.

She was publicly visiting and comforting AIDS patients, while Thatcher and Reagan wouldn't even acknowledge that the disease existed.

She seemed fun. I love the story about Diana going with Freddie Mercury to a gay bar dressed as a man.

I noticed though, in the weeks before her death, that it seemed like her "glow" was diminished. And in the final footage of her leaving the hotel, she looked different. Serious. Like her light was switched off. I wonder if she knew her days were numbered.

by Anonymousreply 12007/21/2013

[quote]she was not so pretty in interviews or paparazzi photos.

R113, I think Diana looked her best in "real life" photographs. She was really very pretty.

Kate is pretty too, but she doesn't exude the charisma Diana did.

by Anonymousreply 12107/21/2013

Another vote for Diana. Kate does nothing for me.

by Anonymousreply 12207/21/2013

While I love and admire Diana, I believe her anorexia/bulimia got the best of her in her final years. So sad.

Was she a cutter as well?

Diana looked like many attractive, athletic lesbians I have met through the years. Was this a source of her self-abuse?

Kate to me is very beautiful, and retains that college-girl who loves to have fun vibe.

I love her. She also seems very bi. Is this why she drinks?

My choice for most beautiful: Kate Middleton!

by Anonymousreply 12307/21/2013

I would like to see Kate if she allowed her look to be softened. She really needs her hair styled and the makeup needs to be less obvious. I read that she did her own makeup for the wedding. She must not be open to changes at this point.

by Anonymousreply 12407/21/2013

This royal tot will grow up to be one hell of a knock out!

I'm sure it's a girl, a future queen!

A hottie queen, for the UK!

Congrats to the Brits! xoxoxoxo

by Anonymousreply 12507/21/2013

I think that Kate will be a GREAT mom!

She will raise her daughter to be a warrior princess. Modern, courageous, compassionate.

I have read that they will not spoil the baby too much, and want her to grow up in a down-to-earth manner.


by Anonymousreply 12607/21/2013

While Diana is certainly an icon to many gays and lesbians, Kate will become quite the favorite in the 'community' as well.

You can tell that Kate has knocked down a few glasses of wine and made out with a chick when she was young. You can tell. I can.

I have Bi-dar.

Kate's a trip!

Congrats, Brits!

by Anonymousreply 12707/21/2013

My suggestion for the royal baby's name---





by Anonymousreply 12807/21/2013

R127, who do you think has been giving Kate "company" when her husband is away? None other than Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 12907/21/2013

LOL R129!

All kidding aside, many girls will develop mashes on Kate!

She's a sexy rock star. I know that many women fantasize about her already.

So-called straight women yeah right LOL!

by Anonymousreply 13007/21/2013

Please, people. Neither one is a beauty in any sense of the word. They are attractive women and did the best with what they had. Look at them. Diana had style, and she was a celebrity who was glamorous, but she was not even pretty. She was plain and horsey and Kate is plain.

by Anonymousreply 13107/21/2013

Beautiful and sexy Kate pining away for her gentleman husband who is away saving lives--that is so romantic and HAWT!

I'd say Wuthering Heights-ish except William is a nice guy who pays his bills.

Yeah Brits! xoxoxo

by Anonymousreply 13207/21/2013

Kate has a naughty sparkle in her eyes that says, "Oh yeah, I know about that!"

Diana had a doe-eyed look that shouted "please protect me, I am fragile."

Both are great, but different.

by Anonymousreply 13307/21/2013

If Diana was so fucking gorgeous then why did Charles dump her ass for horse face Camilla?

Kate rocks plus she isn't as fat as Diana was. Diana definitely needed Jenny Craig.

by Anonymousreply 13407/21/2013

Not to off-topic here, but have you seen the Spanish princesses?

They dress all goth with black combat boots and nail polish!

They're very cool chicks!

by Anonymousreply 13507/21/2013

You can say anything you want OP. I would disagree - think they're BOTH pretty. One blonde, one brunette - I think they're different enough that there isn't much basis for comparison. Chacun a son gout.

by Anonymousreply 13607/21/2013

no way close to Princess Diana in looks, personality, or charisma.

People in the US will not give one shit when Kate comes over here.

by Anonymousreply 13707/21/2013

r137 that's why when Kate & William were here in the USA there were zillions of fans waiting for them?

by Anonymousreply 13807/21/2013

I love Kate!!!

Oh and I believe she's having a boy not a girl based on buying that blue pram.

by Anonymousreply 13907/21/2013

Diana was chosen; Catherine chased.

I can't look at Kate without "seeing" her bold sister, feckless brother, social-climbing mother, and cipher father.

Her beauty, fair or unfair, thus carried with it an air of artifice, not alleviated by her hair extensions, extra-dark eyeliner, and "Scouse" eyebrows. Diana's physical beauty may also have been as much beautician as nature, but she had an aura of genuineness, of selflessness, that came from within.

The Duchess of Cambridge has no "within." She has even seemed determined not to show any "pregnancy glow," appearing to care more about staying slender.

Diana wins, hands down.

by Anonymousreply 14007/21/2013

I love her too. Seems much more grounded than Di. I don't think I've ever seen a bad picture of her. The dimples are adorable.

Oh, and to R3 who said:

[quote]There is a loss of innocence in Kate. A tremendous and highly detectable loss.

WTF, I should hope a 30 year old woman isn't "innocent" unless she's "special" or a nun. What an odd thing to say --such an archaic view of women.

by Anonymousreply 14107/21/2013

r140 = really really old queen bound who no longer works & is retired.

by Anonymousreply 14207/21/2013

Oh R138... that's why I, and almost every body else, heard nothing about it.


by Anonymousreply 14307/21/2013

R139 oh my god where did you hear this? if it's the Daily Mail it could be a ruse...

I lurve her too!


by Anonymousreply 14407/21/2013

r144 I forget where I heard it, let me google. BRB.

by Anonymousreply 14507/21/2013

Yes r144 the DM said it but it's a BLUE BUGGABOO, very expensive. Agree that it could be BS from the DM but I still think it's going to be a boy, probably going to name him GEORGE don't you think? That also seems to be the consensus on the name too.

by Anonymousreply 14607/21/2013

Everyone except a few very very ancient Queens born in the Victorian era loves Kate.

by Anonymousreply 14707/21/2013

Thank you R145/R146,

Well, another King George. Hmm.mmm..

They'll raise him right, no doubt. How wonderful for us all.

I'm assuming that all of the pubs named the King George will have quite the parties!

xoxoxo from America!

by Anonymousreply 14807/21/2013

They both vagina-holders EWWWW!!!

by Anonymousreply 14907/21/2013

I like Kate, but she's no Princess Diana.

One of a kind is one of a kind.

by Anonymousreply 15007/21/2013

Not on-topic, but I disagree about "George." None of the Georges were to write home about.

I'm betting on "Arthur," so England will finally have a real King Arthur.

Arthur Charles William Michael.

by Anonymousreply 15107/21/2013

Kate will look like her mother in 20 years -- a woman with a great figure and a face chiseled by years of opportunism.

by Anonymousreply 15207/21/2013

they are both ugly and jealous bitches

by Anonymousreply 15307/21/2013

r151 I LOVE your idea. And King Arthur in Merlin was one of the best looking guys I've ever seen in the world. Bradley James. Sigh.

by Anonymousreply 15407/21/2013

[quote]I barely remember what Kate looks like. She's just ordinary. So much so that her sister Pippa stole the spotlight from her at her own wedding. That would never have happened with Diana. Diana walked into a room and all eyes are on her. There are many iconic pictures of Diana like the one in that black dress dancing with John Travolta or in her wedding dress where no one outshone her. Plus she had kind of an inner beauty as well where you really believed she cared about her causes like about landmines. Diana was also extremely loved by the people.

I don't recall any picture of Kate that's iconic or special in any way and I don't recall any causes that she supports.

R115 deserved repeating. Diana hands down.

by Anonymousreply 15507/21/2013

Diana's beauty and glow was both external and internal. You couldn't take your eyes off Diana.

Kate is ordinary. Besides she seems to have no 'within.'

And R140 wrapped it aptly: Kate has even seemed determined not to show any "pregnancy glow," appearing to care more about staying slender.

by Anonymousreply 15607/21/2013

Who is this crazed "xoxoxo" troll?

by Anonymousreply 15707/21/2013

OP: This question isn't even worthy of discussion.

Thank you R150...


Kate: Could you get any more ordinary?

by Anonymousreply 15807/21/2013

You don't compare the Hope Diamond to something you bought at Zales.

Diana is light years ahead.

by Anonymousreply 15907/21/2013

Trolldar r159 & see that he's the only ancient Diana queen on this thread!

by Anonymousreply 16007/21/2013

What is probability of Kate ever becoming queen???

Most likely they will divorce before, William ever becomes King.

by Anonymousreply 16107/21/2013

r161 IDTS Kate & William seem to be truly in love & it's a lovematch. Not a relative, not arranged, not bullied. Different situation than many before.

by Anonymousreply 16207/21/2013

[quote]Most likely they will divorce before, William ever becomes King.

NOOOOO!!!!!!!!! Never! And if that happens I'm going to do everything in my power to get Pippa married to him.

by Anonymousreply 16307/21/2013

William and Kate will not divorce. She followed him to college and chased him down and in the process, fell in love. She's got a good thing. But who the hell cares about Will & Kate? They're totally forgettable.

Diana remains far and away the beauty, the one who transformed the royal family and brought it into the 21st century. Her beauty, spirit and glow shines way beyond the current crop of bores. Diana was one of a kind.

by Anonymousreply 16407/21/2013


by Anonymousreply 16507/21/2013

r164 / r149 etc, you're the only Dianalover on this thread. Give it up. Kate is LOVED by many, just not by you. You're hilarious. We get it you hate Kate.

WE don't.

by Anonymousreply 16607/21/2013

A British royal reporter said William is known to be quite a bore. He and Kate seem to suit each other. Kate seems quite vacuous - I can't imagine she spends her time talking about world politics.

by Anonymousreply 16707/21/2013

The color of the pram really has nothing to do with the babies gender because most high end prams are either blue or black, so I wouldn't really consider that a clue.

I think she's having a girl.

by Anonymousreply 16807/21/2013

I'll bet it's a boy. She's carrying really high and in front.

by Anonymousreply 16907/21/2013

By the time Diana was in her early 30s, she was meeting with world leaders and experts in their field. She was discussing AIDS, poverty and land mines.

Granted, Kate got married later than Diana, but has Kate shown any interest in some substantive causes, something that makes a difference other than maybe lend her name to something in which she has no real affiliation?

Other the obvious physical beauty, Diana's spirit came through in many other causes. That's why Diana still has a hold on people and why she's remembered.

People don't hate Kate. But there's not much to like either. She's thoroughly forgettable.

by Anonymousreply 17007/21/2013

Comparing Diana to Kate is like comparing Grace Kelly or Audrey Hepburn to a nondescript, ordinary girl.

Some women like Diana, Grace and Audrey are rare and few and far between. They tend to make their mark and change the world. And they're remembered. They beautiful, but they also capture the public's attention in many other ways.

Kate, a plain, ordinary girl, has had all sorts of opportunities to make some kind of mark, to show us a little personality. She's more cautious and doesn't want to make the mistakes Diana supposedly made, so instead, she appears to do nothing, to show us nothing.

There's no hate toward Kate, but there's no there there. Diana just charged forward on many fronts. And that's how you show your beauty and worth.

by Anonymousreply 17107/21/2013

Kate is plain and quite common looking.

Diana was not a great beauty, but she had an aristocratic bearing and appearance that Kate lacks.

by Anonymousreply 17207/21/2013

Diana had glamour - Kate is quite dreary.

by Anonymousreply 17307/21/2013

I'd like to make another comparison, an American one:

Caroline was a child of six, and John, Jr., turned three right after his father's death. They were in the White House less than three years. Yet we elders remember MUCH more of them---the pony Macaroni; running to the presidential helicopter; hiding under the O.O. desk; etc.---than we do now of the five years of Malia and Sasha Obama.

The Obama girls have been (kept) quiet.

Similarly, Kate kept her head down in her solitary pursuit of marriage to William. No "causes" to take her away from him or to possibly antagonize anyone.

It wasn't that she is "shy Kate"; her reckless (planned?) topless/bottomless sunbathing photos and her wind-blown skirts proved otherwise.

No; it's that she focused for ten years on her future only. Now that she is secure, expect to see even less of her, as she dutifully takes care of her royal charge.

by Anonymousreply 17407/25/2013

It will be interesting to see what happens when Kate gets bored with her ceremonial life. She's barely started it because she and Wills had the "first year of marriage" hideout in Wales. Then the pregnancy. But soon she'll be expected to pick up the pace. I reckon she'll have 20 years of opening supermarkets before William ascends to the throne.

by Anonymousreply 17507/25/2013

[quote]By the time Diana was in her early 30s, she was meeting with world leaders and experts in their field. She was discussing AIDS, poverty and land mines.

By this time, Diana had been married to Charles for about 10 years. Kate and William have been married for only a year or so. Give Kate a chance.

I also think that William has been a part of sheltering Kate this past year. He saw what happened to his mother.

And to compare the Obama girls to the Kennedys? Oh come on! If Facebook & Twitter were around during the Kennedy era, the parents would have hid the kids away too. Don't think that every picture we saw of John & Caroline wasn't planned.

by Anonymousreply 17607/25/2013

LOL, this is funny...DL thinks that Kate Middleton is pretty???

I actually think she is very unattractive, for a common gal.

Diana was descended from English royalty, so she had an excuse.

And she was till more striking and exotic-looking than Kate.

by Anonymousreply 17707/30/2014

The royalty Diana was from was very minor. I always thought her nose looked like a pickle. She always seemed a little, slow. Average looking at best. I get tired of people putting her on a pedestal when she was whoring around too--but then who among us hasn't/still does?

Kate is naturally pretty and fresh looking; she has class and seems to have adapted quite well to being a Royal. I like Kate's athleticism without being diesel dykey, I like her hair, her clothes, her style.

Diana seemed like she wanted to be a star, like she loved the tabloid spotlight but whined about it.

by Anonymousreply 17807/30/2014

Come on r178, there"|��K�6�h���H���>��!���� �!6/���:/i�X-����s������ 4�#���S�yke an average 38.

She's plain, if not unattractive. Nobody could ever call her beautiful, although a lot of people think she's pretty.

Diana was more fortunate---a lot of people thought that she was horsey, mousy, whatever, but a lot of people also thought she was beautiful. She was somewhat dramatic-looking, and definitely charismatic.

by Anonymousreply 17907/30/2014
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!