logo-cropped

Kate Middleton's genes talk on dour Prince George's birthday

Written by  // Sunday, 20 July 2014 15:24 //

kate-babyKate Middleton and Prince William’s son, George, has just turned one year old.

But he’s not smiling about it.  http://time.com/3006166/prince-george-birthday-photo-kate-middleton-william/

At least, not in any photographs released by  “the Cambridges,” as the couple popularly known as “Willy and Waity” now call themselves, having ditched William’s proper legal surname of “Mountbatten-Windsor.”  Or just plain “Windsor,” as in the Queen’s technically legal surname. 

 

The photographs that have been released, apart from the early ones in which Baby George so completely swaddled as to be barely even visible, show that George Windsor or George Mountbatten-Windsor or George Cambridge or whatever is a frownie-face kid.

He doesn’t smile.

He looks fatty and dour and depressed.  His eyes look puffy and circled by large bags, as though he cries a lot.  He looks confused and unegaged with Kate, his mother.

Nobody has commented upon why this may be so.

Instead, chats indicate that many people find George’s frownie faces and overall sullen demeanor and fatty arms and legs “adorable.”

Is it?  How so?

George looks to be overly fed, a fatty kind of child, an infant golem with a dour, puzzled kind of look on his face most of the time.  Kate, on the rare occasions when she is seen actually physically interacting with him, seems to hold him not tenderly, but grips him in some kind of vise.

George doesn’t smile.

Where does his perennially dour frownie face come from?

Is George unhappy because his parents keep dying his brown hair blonde?

Or Is George’s perpetual petulance from Kate’s side of the family?

Early childhood photos of Prince William show a fairly smiley baby, one often bemused by photographers, but a baby who also clearly related to his mother, who smiled delightedly and enchantingly in her presence and she in his.  

But this smiley face has not been inherited by Kate and William’s own son.

George is a frowner.  And Kate appears to be more of a gripper than a cuddler, like the late Princess Diana was with her son, William.

Newspaper informants identified as “friends of the couple” and “royal insiders” (who many think is none other than meddling mother-in-law Carole Middleton and her minions) have an answer for almost everything.

Is Baby Boy George walking a bit too early for his official birth date?

The always-ready anonymous source “close to the Royals” has a ready answer: Oh, it’s because SOME children have “excellent genes” and are just born to be extraordinary babies who naturally transform into extraordinary toddlers.

Did Kate Middleton never appear to be physically pregnant in her official pregnancy period?

Oh, it’s because SOME “young women” like Kate, heading into middle age thirties, have “excellent genes” and are just “naturally slender” and their bodies therefore do not show the normal signs of pregnancy.

Did Kate Middleton never have a story to tell of a long labor, a difficult labor, a crisis moment?  Did she not just miraculously bounce back into form from her hospitalization for uhm, what exactly was she hospitalized for?  That hideous constant vomiting disorder that some women get in pregnancy that can prove fatal if not treated?

Ordinary mortal pregnant women can suffer for months and even throughout their pregnancies, requiring constant medical monitoring.

But not Kate Middleton, who, the “anonymous royal sources” claim, has “excellent genes.”

Once the nurse at the hospital attending her was found hanged in her closet, Kate Middleton’s “excellent genes” kicked in, and poof!  She became un-ill!  Just like that!  No more relentless vomiting!

Ah, those Middleton “excellent genes.”  Or are they Carole Goldsmith “excellent genes?”  the ones that also produced cocaine chopping, ecstacy dropping, international hooker, big-gut Uncle Gary?

With such a powerhouse of “excellent” genetic material just lying around London and the Berkshires, it is amazing that nobody shopping around for a set of “excellent genes” with which to sire offspring has snatched up either of Kate’s siblings, Pippa and James.  How can anyone seriously looking to have exceptional children just overlook the rah-rah pool of “excellent genes” the Middleton offspring offer to the rest of the British royal world?

It’s so odd that nobody admittedly on the search for “excellent genes” is jumping to acquire more Middleton genetic material and incorporate it into their ancient family lines.

I mean, British people have been invading and have been invaded, all in the search for “excellent genetic material,” for many thousands of years.  You’d think that people obsessed with horse racing lines and polo pony breeds and even finding the best Jersey cows would jump at the chance to incorporate the Middletons’ “excellent genes” into their own.

When such a dynamite pile of “excellent genes” is simply biding its time writing ridiculous cook books nobody reads and making marshmellows with painted faces on them, it’s a wonder that Viking raiders have not yet carried off the rest of the Middleton’s pool of “excellent genes” and set them up on some Nordic throne.

But not even people who just LOOK like Vikings, like Donna Air and whassisname lankyman, are jumping very high or fast to acquire access to the Middleton pool of “excellent genes.”  Donna Air already has her own child, and whassisname lankyman doesn’t seem to be in any hurry to buy a Jersey cow when he’s getting his milk for free.

But the hard sell of that anonymous source close to the Royals is relentless in selling the “excellent genes” of the Middleton line to all who will listen.  And that source always has a lot to say.

When Kate Middleton loses weight dramatically, looks stick-thin and her waist disappears and her bones stick out through her skin, the secret source close to the Royals sputters indignantly that anyone who utters a fear that Kate is anorexic is merely jealous of Kate’s “excellent genes,” which render her thin and bony no matter what she eats.

So, a bony, waistless, wasty-looking woman materializes a child who doesn’t smile and toddles remarkably early, and the “official” explanation is that this is all the result of “excellent genes.”

Really?

As in “real?”

Who believes this anonymous prattle about “good genes?”

Ever since Kate Middleton and her meddling family and their millions of minions arrived on the royal scene, we have been treated to their “close family sources” sharing all kinds of prattle involving “coincidences” of Kate’s selection of St. Andrew’s college (where William was going); Kate’s selection of studies (art history, in which William indicated he had an interest); Kate’s selection of “gap year” activities (Chile, where Prince William was going); and on and on.

Who believes this anonymous prattle about “coincidence?”

One would think that with the powerful forces of “complete coincidence” and “excellent genes” at work, British aristocrats would be racing to the Middletons and positively raiding their Bucklebury mansion and Chelsey apartment to carry off Pippa and James, the available sources of all these “excellent genes.”

But instead, the aristos are locking down their sons and daughters, praying that the Middleton genes  now allegedly in line for the British throne will find another noble house to haunt.

Just not theirs.

Real nobility would like some smiley faces on their offspring.

Not ones that are just painted on marshmellows.

Why is Baby Boy George not smiling?  Why is he walking so terribly early?  Is he some kind of petulant super baby?

Only the anonymous source, close to the Royals, knows.

And all that person will ever say is, “Excellent genes!”

The genes that produce that petulant, constant frownie face.

Something’s amiss.

Sarah Whalen

sarahwSarah Whalen is an attorney and a journalist.  She has taught journalism at various universities. 

Bayoubuzz Great Links

advertise2

 

 
Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Share Bayoubuzz

Powered By JFBConnect