Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Alice E. Vincent

GET UPDATES FROM Alice E. Vincent
 

Kate Middleton's Womb Shouldn't Be Up for Public Discussion

Posted: 04/12/2012 00:00

While there are many scenes from Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette I would like to re-enact, never did I imagine ones I'd be encountering -- albeit thankfully from a distance -- were those postulating on Antoinette's womb, and what was going on inside it.

And yet, some 24 decades later, people are still making 'Guess What's Gestating' their favourite game when it comes to the Royal family.

Of course, it was inevitable. Wills 'n' Kate are our postercouple of patriotism, as shiny as Kate's hair (and Will's pate). I'm pleased they're having a baby, as I would be for any young couple in love. But I'm feeling distinctly queasy at the fact that a woman's body has become an object of public discussion for the next half year.

If it didn't feel so wrong, it would almost be right that Catherine's fertility would be the crowning lady news of 2012. This has been a year where I have seen the words "Get Your Hands Off My Womb" plastered onto a man's back as he performed a 'feminist burlesque', as well as on placards. The year when Northern Ireland saw their first abortion clinic open, as well as a woman dying as the Republic of Ireland's health service refused to terminate her pregnancy. A year when a woman's right to abortion has been at the centre of the US Presidential election, and where our own ministry of health, and minister for women, has wanted to reduce the time limit for terminating a pregnancy.

So it's a conflict I feel over the mass dissection over the Duchess of Cambridge, "Our Princess's", womb. For the last 12 months, talking about women's bodies has been a good thing. An exciting, and sometimes worrying, thing. But now that I'm looking into a future of novelty royal babygros, Middleton maternity wear and royal baby name generators, I want all the fertility talk to stop.

Fertility rights are hugely important. But what's happening in (nee) Middleton's middle shouldn't be up for public discussion. It's fantastic that another royal is on the way (who knows, I may yet see a Queen crowned in my lifetime!) but it would be even better if the press could stop the speculation on how it's gestating for the next half year.

Believe it or not, the Duchess Of Cambridge is more than just a pair of ovaries. And, as this poll shows, not many women would want to take her place as favourite British baby maker. I can see why: the Duchess has signed over her life to one at the heart of press speculation.

We rarely hear about Catherine's art history degree, or her job as a buyer for a high street chain (an enviable role in the industry), or what her thoughts are on current affairs. Like the majority of intelligent women in the public eye, we hear only about her never-ending collection of L.K Bennett shoes, her new fringe (now forever associated with the pregnancy announcement) or, depending on what you Google, her sunbathing habits.

Because this is what women in the public eye are reduced to. And now, Catherine's merely the sum of her biology, and after that, her mothering skills. Heaven forbid the column inches that will be racked up if she continues to wear her heels into full-term.

"It's her duty", many would argue. It's what she signed up to by marrying the heir to the throne. But isn't it time we re-evaluated such 'duty'? If the Duchess's duty is to be a role model in the public eye, and it's one I believe she carries out well, why are we insistent on framing her with such old-fashioned ideas?

Here's hoping the new royal is a happy, healthy child. But if it is a baby girl, I hope she is raised in a society which looks at her as more than just her sex. A little girl, and perhaps future Queen, recognised not for her shoes, or her dresses, but her achievements.

Aside from that, I don't want to hear anything about the Royal foetus until it comes into the world -- and I don't see why anybody else should either.

Readers respond to the blog:

Loading Slideshow...

 

Follow Alice E. Vincent on Twitter: www.twitter.com/alice_emily

FOLLOW CANADA LIVING
While there are many scenes from Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette I would like to re-enact, never did I imagine ones I'd be encountering -- albeit thankfully from a distance -- were those postulating ...
While there are many scenes from Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette I would like to re-enact, never did I imagine ones I'd be encountering -- albeit thankfully from a distance -- were those postulating ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 289
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (13 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
thomasina 1
The Truth; and all that it en-Tails.
05:03 AM on 12/08/2012
The fact of the matter is, that if she was an older woman, previously married and divorced, William would not not have been able to marry her. If she was sterile, or fertility challenged in any way, William would not have been allowed to mary her. I am sure that William and Kate love each other, but the fact remains, that Kate's suitability for marriage in this case, solely rests on her ability to produce a healthy heir to the throne of England.
State Marriages, and this is one, are public matters. The tax payers finance their existence, and have a right to know, with in reason, if they are getting results for the money taken out of their wages every week. Kate's marriage is a JOB, and she is beholden to those who finance her keep. It is reciprocal, and this is the way it is for Monarchs. The Respect is due to the people of England, And Privacy is something that Kate and William already possess, if they choose to stay out of the public eye.
Remember, any publicity they get, they have displayed themselves for. They also are masters at manipulating that publicity for the benefit and perpetuation of the Monarchy. It is an aspect of their survival.
09:24 AM on 12/07/2012
Have the media not learned from Diana'S unfortunate life as a royal. Leave the royal couple alone! let them be a normal mother and father to be and let them enjoy their pregnancy together. People should have more sense, the country will get regular updates of how the pregnancy is progressing
02:11 PM on 12/06/2012
You're right. Thanks for the public discussion.
photo
packerfans
Well behaved women seldom make history...
04:07 AM on 12/06/2012
If she wanted to live a life a privacy, she should have married "Joe Middle-Class". Sorry... this is the life, both good and bad, that she signed up for.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nora Shafer
10:02 PM on 12/05/2012
I know she is a "Royal".....but if I had morning sickness........I would be dealing with it and not in a hospital....sorry....Queenie..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biggerjake
Religion poisons everything...
05:03 PM on 12/05/2012
Sorry...scandal...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biggerjake
Religion poisons everything...
05:01 PM on 12/05/2012
More to the point... Who cares what is going on with the British royal family?

Certainly not me.

In fact, I resent space being taken up in the Huffington Post to cover this whole royal baby thing. I resent having to watch it as part of every American news broadcast on TV. I don't care if Kate is having a baby or giving birth to a gila monster.

So please....stop covering it....don't mention it....just drop it.

We barely hear anything about important issues going on in the UK. When was the last time there was an article on what Cameron is doing that didn't involve the Rupert Murdock scandle? I can't even remember...

It is not news...it is gossip. Please spare us.
03:29 PM on 12/05/2012
I absolutely agree. Just because she married into a famous family does not automatically eradicate her right to the privacy of her body and medical history. The fact that the reason for her hospital stay was made public is quite concerning and I personally feel that she may have been forced into announcing this pregnancy before she was ready to do so. For the papers to state that she is in the very early stages, means that she probably hasn't passed her 1st trimester which is usually a very fickle time in most pregnancies. Wishing them the best.
photo
Bienville
Make levees, not war
02:07 PM on 12/05/2012
As a Franco-American, descended from a legacy of tossing off two monarchies, I must observe that the bennies of carrying the womb that carries a monarch seem to outpace the burdens. Surely, it was explained to nee Middleton that she is a vehicle whose well-being is necessary and valued.

As a man, I have to feel sympathy for the male consort of the monarch (i.e. Philip Mountbatten, nee Battenberg), whose ability to "perform" was much observed and speculated upon.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Judi Sutherland
01:52 PM on 12/05/2012
...and it's not up for discussion and you're... discussing it?
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
01:30 PM on 12/05/2012
As a Brit myself, I am if anything pro-royalist. having said that, I am already sick of hearing about The Duchess of Cambridge's pregnancy.

My own wife had severe morning sickness during her pregnancies. It didn't make the papers though. Women have been having babies, and suffering all the complications of it for thousands of years. The house of Windsor didn't invent the process. I wish her no harm, and I hope she successfully delivers a healthy baby, but I don't want to hear a minute by minute account of it.
12:30 PM on 12/05/2012
"Fertility rights are hugely important". Could someone (perhaps the author herself) tell me what this phrase means.
11:35 AM on 12/05/2012
This reminds me of something Joanne Rowling once said... she bumped into a friend of hers whom she hadn't seen for a while and the first thing the friend did was comment on her weight. Not the fact that she'd had two or more books published since they'd last seen each other, but her weight.
Also, I feel sorry for any celebrity who's expecting or with children. It must be such a strain to be questioned by complete strangers at every turn. Like the footage of Britney Spears nearly dropping her child... she didn't actually drop them, and it only happened because she was literally surrounded by press at the time. Hope kate doesn't have to put up with too much BS about this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jessjesskk
Benevolent Zombie Power
08:24 AM on 12/05/2012
Her job is to be a tourist attraction through media exposure. If she wanted privacy and less money she would have chosen another job.
08:33 AM on 12/05/2012
I could not agree more with these sentiments. The function of the Duchess is to produce an heir, and then a spare, nothing more, and nothing less. If people object to this, then perhaps they should consider ending the monarchy, which is in the twenty first century simply out of date, and not required.
01:10 PM on 12/05/2012
I agree, and those that want to keep it, then let them pay the taxes for it.
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
01:31 PM on 12/05/2012
You're right, she knew what would happen when she married into the Royal family
03:46 PM on 12/05/2012
I'm sure she expected there to be an intrusion into her privacy, however, this is one of the first UK royals to be pregnant during this pap-centric, tech-infused era and this is regarding her health. You would think they would show a modicum of respect.
07:04 AM on 12/05/2012
I first heard about it on The Onion.
The usual sources are not half as interesting.