Hugh Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster, married his wife Olivia last year, in what was called (by the British press) the “wedding of the year,” if not the wedding of the decade. They hyped the wedding so much, I was really expecting something very grand. It… did not turn out that way. Hugh and Olivia got married at a local Chester cathedral, and the wedding planners (??) decided to lay down beige-carpeted plywood as a sort of “platform” for the wedding party. The whole thing looked extremely budget. I wasn’t a fan of Olivia’s bridal look either, but others thought she looked nice. Part of the reason why the British press hyped the wedding so much was because Prince William wanted everyone to know that Hugh invited him and NOT HARRY. As it turned out, Hugh did invite Harry, and Harry declined the invitation.

Another reason why the Grosvenor/Westminster wedding was so hyped was because the family is stinking rich. The Grosvenors own a wide swath of prime London real estate and a grand country estate (which basically supports a whole county). When Hugh and Olivia married, they promised to recommit themselves to the country estate and start a family. Well, not even one year later and Olivia is expecting!

Congratulations are in order for the Duke and Duchess of Westminster, Hugh and Olivia Grosvenor, who are expecting their first child.

A spokesperson for the couple said in a statement released on March 12: “The Duke and Duchess of Westminster are very pleased to share that the Duchess is expecting a baby in the summer. The couple are delighted with the news and are very much looking forward to starting a family together.”

The child has some royal ties even before its birth, as Hugh is close friends with Prince William and Prince Harry. The Duke of Westminster is also a godfather to both of their first sons: Prince George and Prince Archie.

The Duke and Duchess tied the knot on June 7, 2024, with Prince William serving as an usher for the ceremony at Chester Cathedral. Princess Eugenie was also a guest at the high society wedding. While Prince Harry declined an invitation to the wedding, a source told PEOPLE at the time that his absence from Hugh’s wedding was an “understanding between the two friends.”

Hugh and Olivia met through friends, and he proposed to her at Eaton Hall, his family’s ancestral seat on the outskirts of Chester. The couple gave back to his hometown before their big day, visiting the children’s programs that the Westminster Foundation puts on at Chester Castle.

Hugh’s ties to the royal family trace back generations. He is a godson of King Charles and his mother, Natalia, is a godmother to Prince William.

[From People]

Congrats to them! I’m glad they were able to start their family so quickly. They honestly seem like a pretty lowkey couple – when I wrote about them last year, I could not find any photos of them attending society events or even charity fundraisers. It’s a different thing when you’re British and you inherit that kind of money, I guess. Which is why it was so tacky that William was briefing about Hugh’s wedding to the Times of London – Hugh and Olivia clearly wanted no part of William’s childishness and look-at-me-Harry antics. Whenever this child is born, I predict that William will go on another briefing spree about how Hugh asked him AND NOT HARRY to be the godfather to this next-gen Grosvenor.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

For years, Prince William was actually the honorary patron of the Irish Guards, but it was always expected that his wife would turn up on St. Patrick’s Day. It’s the tradition for the Irish Guards, to have a female royal come to their barracks every March 17th to pass out shamrocks to the guards and pin shamrocks on their Irish Wolfhound. In 2023, William had to step back from the Irish Guards patronage – he was given his father’s old Welsh Guards patronage, because he cannot have both apparently – and so that was when Kate was officially made the honorary Colonel of the Irish Guards. Her first St. Patrick’s Day as the stand-alone honorary colonel was last year, and she did not show up. Obviously, she was ill and in hiding. But she will make her grand return on Monday. No mention if William will join her.

Kate Middleton is set to toast with a pint of Guinness this St. Patrick’s Day! On March 11, Kensington Palace confirmed that the Princess of Wales will visit the Irish Guards at the St. Patrick’s Day parade in Wellington Barracks on the holiday. Kate, 43, was named the honorary Colonel of the Irish Guards in 2022 but was a regular at the annual March 17 event even before that, often accompanying her husband, Prince William, who held the position before her.

Monday’s appearance will mark a return to the event for Princess Kate, who missed last year’s parade amid her health battles. The royal was recovering from a January 2024 abdominal surgery, and she revealed later in March 2024 that she had been diagnosed with cancer.

The Irish Guards kept the Princess of Wales in their thoughts, giving her three cheers at the end of their celebratory parade.

At Monday’s parade, Princess Kate will take part in various traditions. She’ll award long service and good conduct medals to soldiers within the regiment before joining the parade to present sprigs of shamrock to the officers and guardsmen. Their Irish Wolf Hound regimental mascot also usually receives some shamrocks as well as a sweet pat from the royal. The parade will conclude with a royal salute and march past where Kate will take the salute as colonel.

[From People]

I’ve always wondered why Kate didn’t embrace this more, or take on more military patronages before she was forced to when QEII died. It’s a pretty easy gig for a female royal – stand around in a dress or some kind of military cosplay and flirt with men in uniform. Diana used to love all of her military patronages, but she had a thing for men in uniform. Anyway, I hope Kate has a good time. They’ll expect her to have a pint of Guinness too.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Cate Blanchett wore Louis Vuitton to the London premiere of Black Bag. I’m not feeling this look whatsoever. It’s like she’s lost her style mojo? [RCFA]
Tiger Woods ruptured his Achilles tendon & he’s already had a “successful” surgery on it. He will miss the Masters. [Just Jared]
Riley Keough & so many celebs went to the Chanel show. [LaineyGossip]
Chappell Roan’s makeup is so bad, omg. [Socialite Life]
Gene Hackman & the “celebrity death industrial complex.” [Pajiba]
Nicole Kidman went to SXSW. [Go Fug Yourself]
Lady Gaga has learned a lot from Taylor Swift. [OMG Blog]
Rick Astley sang some AC/DC. [Seriously OMG]
The Duggars “reunited” in Hawaii. Poor Hawaii. [Starcasm]
They’re turning Sudiksha Konanki, the student mysteriously missing in the Dominican Republic, into the next Natalee Holloway. [Hollywood Life]
Can you name all 21 EGOTers? [Buzzfeed]

Brain worm-addled Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made many incorrect and half baked claims. Jr’s belief that “seed oils” are unhealthy is lower stakes than the misinformation he spreads about vaccines. It’s still wrong-headed and could contribute to poorer health, however. The Associated Press reviewed the research and spoke to a nutrition science professor who said research shows that plant-based oils are actually better for us, in certain contexts, than beef tallow or butter. When “seed oil” is part of a diet high in ultraprocessed food it can of course be bad for us, but when used as part of a balanced diet vegetable oil can be a better choice than butter or lard.

I read that AP article and was still a bit confused about the differences between “seed” oil and beef tallow so I’d also like to quote an article by The Cleveland Clinic, which breaks down why these types of oils have been demonized.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new health secretary, has said Americans are being “unknowingly poisoned” by seed oils and has called for fast-food restaurants to return to using beef tallow, or rendered animal fat, in their fryers instead.

In response to consumer concerns, some food-makers have stripped seed oils from their products. Restaurants like the salad chain Sweetgreen have removed them from their menus…

The seed oil discussion has exasperated nutrition scientists, who say decades of research confirms the health benefits of consuming such oils, especially in place of alternatives such as butter or lard.

“I don’t know where it came from that seed oils are bad,” said Martha Belury, an Ohio State University food science professor…

Simply put, they are oils extracted from plant seeds. They include eight commonly targeted by critics: canola, corn, cottonseed, grapeseed, soybean, sunflower, safflower and rice bran.

Seed oils are typically made by pressing or crushing the seeds and then processing them further with chemicals and heat to remove elements that can leave the oil cloudy or with an unpleasant taste or odor.

The result of such refining is a neutral-tasting oil that is inexpensive, shelf-stable and able to be heated at a high temperature without smoking, said Eric Decker, a food science professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst…

“Scientists who study omega-6 and omega-3 think we need both,” Belury said. “Seed oils do not increase acute or chronic inflammation markers.”

In addition, research from the American Heart Association and others has consistently shown that plant-based oils reduce so-called bad cholesterol, lowering the risk of heart disease and stroke, especially compared with sources high in saturated fat…

That’s found in new research from Brigham and Women’s Hospital scientists as well. A study of more than 200,000 adults over more than 30 years released Thursday found that people who ate the highest amounts of butter had a 15% higher risk of dying than those who ate the least. People who ate the most plant-based oils — including seed oils — had a 16% lower risk than those who ate the least.

Dr. Daniel Wang, who led the research, said new modeling data suggests that swapping less than a tablespoon a day of butter for equal calories of plant-based oils could lower premature deaths from cancer and overall mortality by 17%. Such a small daily change could result in “a substantial benefit,” Wang said. – From AP

---

Seed oils aren’t necessarily good for you. But the real reason they’re considered so bad for you is related to how they’re most often used: in processed foods and ultra-processed foods.

“Most seed oils are utilized in the form of packaged foods, fast foods and eating out,” Zumpano says, “and that’s where most of the danger lies.”

But you’re most likely to consume seed oils when you’re eating something that’s already pretty bad for your health — something that’s also full of fat, sugar and sodium…

Occasionally frying your breakfast potatoes in a little bit of sunflower oil isn’t going to throw your body into disarray. But there are some caveats.

“It’s important to note that these oils shouldn’t be cooked at high temperatures or reused,” Zumpano cautions. “That really worsens their negative effects.”

And if you want to stop consuming seed oils entirely, she says there are no downsides to doing so.

“When people say they’re cutting seed oils from their diet, what they really end up doing is cutting out many processed foods,” she continues. “I think that’s why we often hear about seed oils as being so bad for your health. But the reality is that it’s less about the seed oils themselves and more about the fact that they’re so often found in ultra-processed foods.” – From The Cleveland Clini

[From AP and The Cleveland Clinic]

I learned some things from The Cleveland Clinic article particularly and am going to try to cook with avocado oil. I think this quote sums it up “the reality is that it’s less about the seed oils themselves and more about the fact that they’re so often found in ultra-processed foods.” (This article, from MassGeneral hospital, has a very concise summary if you’re looking for just the highlights.) Most of us could benefit from eating less highly processed foods and less fried foods, but that’s not what this debate is about. What’s more is that using beef tallow to fry fast food isn’t the answer for so many reasons. There’s no proof that it’s “healthier,” as the AP’s expert noted, it doesn’t accommodate people who follow a plant-based diet, people who don’t eat meat for religious reasons, or the growing number of us who are allergic to beef and pork. It’s also much more taxing on the environment to use animal-based fats.

I hate that these people fixate on one thing, don’t examine the context, and then decide something is “bad” or “good.” We’re living in the Idiocracy era, except the dumbasses in charge of everything aren’t just stupid, they’re evil.

Photos credit: Max Avans, Athena Sandrini and Bulat Khamitov on Pexels

Have you noticed that a lot of men are really in their feelings about Gisele Bundchen divorcing Tom Brady and moving on quickly with Joaquim Valente? To make matters worse for those dudes, Gisele got pregnant with Joaquim and welcomed a healthy baby boy in her 40s. I think dudes are upset because Gisele wasn’t happy being “Tom Brady’s wife” and they wanted her post-divorce life to be one of desperation and sadness rather than joy. They didn’t want her to move on so thoroughly from the man they consider the GOAT. Nevermind that if Tom had simply kept his word to Gisele about retirement and been a better partner to her, she probably never would have left him. In any case, sources close to Gisele insist that she’s happier and freer than ever. Like a giant Botoxed weight has been lifted!

Gisele Bündchen feels “freer” since she began dating Joaquim Valente, a source exclusively tells Page Six. The supermodel “felt like she lived in Tom [Brady’s] shadow for a long time,” the insider says.

The former couple — who called it quits on their 13-year marriage in 2022 — share son Benjamin, 15, and daughter Vivian, 12. The Super Bowl champion is also dad to son Jack, 17, whom he shares with ex Bridget Moynahan.

Bündchen and Valente began dating in June 2023 and have kept a low profile since welcoming their first child together in early February. The Brazilian model is “grateful for what she had” with the former New England Patriots quarterback, 47, and “is blessed for their children.”

But Gisele, 44, “feels freer” with her jiu-jitsu trainer boyfriend, 37, and is “absolutely loving this new chapter,” according to the source.

Reps for Brady and Bündchen did not immediately respond to Page Six’s requests for comment. As Page Six previously reported, Brady was “stunned” when he learned Bündchen was having a baby with Valente.

“Tom knew that things were serious between Gisele and Joaquim, but he never imagined they would be having a child together,” our source said at the time. “It just wasn’t something that was on his radar. So when Gisele broke the news to him, he was stunned, to say the least.”

However, the Fox Sports NFL broadcaster reached out to congratulate his ex-wife when news broke that she and Valente had welcomed their child. A source close to the NFL legend told us that he’s happy for Bündchen and wishes her nothing but the best.

[From Page Six]

I’ll give Tom some credit – I genuinely don’t believe he has any ill-will towards Gisele, and he probably does wish her the best. But Tom’s fans? Yeah, their projection has skyrocketed. Anyway, I hope Gisele really is feeling free, and more than that, I hope she’s found a partner who will really support her in every way.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Instagram.

I swear I pay attention to industry gossip, and I knew that Disney’s live-action remake of Snow White was beset with various controversies, but I didn’t know that it had gotten THIS bad. How bad? Disney can’t even host a real premiere in Los Angeles, and they can’t have an open red carpet with wide press coverage. Instead, the March 15th premiere will be limited to still photographers, no TV/media outlets and an in-house Disney team trying to put a bow on this catastrophic exercise. Variety listed all of the issues which are plaguing this movie and it’s a lot. This makes Karla Sofia Gascon’s social-media mess look quaint.

Disney is hosting a Hollywood premiere of “Snow White” on March 15, but the studio won’t be rolling out a robust red carpet like it usually does. The afternoon festivities will include a pre-party and screening at the El Capitan Theatre with titular star Rachel Zegler and Gal Gadot, who plays the Evil Queen, expected to attend. However, the red carpet will not include the dozens of media outlets usually invited by Disney to interview the cast and creatives at its premieres. Instead, coverage will be limited to photographers and a house crew.

The studio did not comment for this story, but the scaled back plans come amid controversies surrounding the Marc Webb-directed film, which hits theaters March 21. Some toxic Disney fans questioned Snow White being played by Zegler when her casting was announced because she is a Latina actor. The “West Side Story” star also faced backlash when she called the 1937 original “dated” because the prince “literally stalks Snow White.”

Peter Dinklage spoke out about the movie’s portrayal of little people for perpetuating negative stereotypes. “Literally no offense to anything, but I was sort of taken aback,” he said on the “WTF With Mark Maron” podcast in January 2024. “They were very proud to cast a Latino actress as Snow White, but you’re still telling the story of ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.’ Take a step back and look at what you’re doing there.” Shortly following Dinklage’s remarks, Disney said in a statement to “Good Morning America,” “To avoid reinforcing stereotypes from the original animated film, we are taking a different approach with these seven characters and have been consulting with members of the dwarfism community.”

World politics have also come into play. Zegler has promoted “free Palestine” on social media. At the same time, Gadot, who is Israeli, has become an outspoken supporter of Israel on social media as well as in a passionate speech she delivered on March 4 when she was honored at the Anti-Defamation League’s annual summit in New York City. “Never did I imagine that on the streets of the United States, and different cities around the world, we would see people not condemning Hamas, but celebrating, justifying and cheering on a massacre of Jews,” she said, in part. Gadot has stayed away from politics in the past, but has said she felt she needed to speak up after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack.

In February, several dozen pro-Palestine protesters gathered outside the Hollywood premiere of “Captain America: Brave New World” and called for a boycott of the film over its inclusion of the Israeli superhero Ruth Bat-Seraph, aka Sabra, played by Israeli actress Shira Haas.

MAGA supporters also blasted Zegler for her reaction to Donald Trump’s reelection when she posted on Instagram, in part, “May Trump supporters and Trump voters and Trump himself never know peace.” She apologized for her remarks two days later.

[From Variety]

I knew most of the Zegler stuff – white supremacists are mad that a Latina was cast as Snow White, and those same white supremacists are unsurprisingly also pissed that Zegler thinks Donald Trump and his supporters are trash. I also knew about Peter Dinklage’s criticism and I still don’t really understand how Disney thought they could avoid a complete sh-tstorm by making this live-action adaptation and “keeping” those seven characters. As for a political beef between Gadot and Zegler… Disney made them present together at the Oscars, so both women can make the effort to play nice when it suits them (or when it suits Disney). I strongly suspect that it’s not about the alleged Zegler-Gadot beef – I think Disney is limiting the premiere access simply because they don’t want protesters out in force against Gadot specifically, like what happened at the Captain America premiere.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

It really does not look like the Princess of Wales will ever travel for work again. No more royal tours, no more overseas visits, no more day-trips to Denmark. Kate will travel, but only for pleasure. Only for vacations. Meanwhile, Prince William’s next solo overseas trip has just been announced. He’ll head to Estonia this month for a mostly military-themed visit.

The Prince of Wales will carry out a solo overseas trip to Estonia this month, in his role as Colonel-in-Chief of the Mercian Regiment. Prince William, 42, will travel to the country in northeastern Europe from Thursday 20 March to Friday 21 March to learn about how the regiment is bolstering NATO’s eastern flank as part of Operation Cabrit.

During the two-day visit, the future King will also carry out engagements in Tallinn to learn more about how the country has responded to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and how Estonia is innovating in renewable energy and technology.

William will begin the first day of his trip by meeting Alar Karis, President of Estonia – which has been prominent among those giving military equipment and political support to Ukraine.

He will also visit a school founded by the Ministry of Education and Research of Estonia in May 2022 to respond to the war in Ukraine, and the Prince will meet teachers from Ukraine to hear about their experiences at the school, and how they have helped students settle in Tallinn and looked after their mental wellbeing. William founded his Earthshot Prize to help recognise and scale-up solutions to repair the planet, and he will also attend an event to learn about renewable energy start-ups.

The following day will be spent at Tapa Army Base where William, a former Army officer, will meet Estonian soldiers and attend a handover ceremony as The Mercian Regiment takeover from The Royal Dragoon Guards.

[From Hello]

I would imagine that this was something William was asked to do as part of the British concerns that Donald Trump is going to blow up the situation in Ukraine and leave Europe vulnerable to all kinds of Russian aggression. Plus, William simply doesn’t do enough with his military patronages, and he does look for any excuse to wear any uniform at any given time (take that, Harry!). Anyway, it sounds like a perfectly normal two-day tour. I wonder why no one expected Kate to go? If she can go to Mustique, surely she can go to Estonia.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

My theory: I think the British press is cold-calling various celebrities and chefs and asking them to either provide disparaging comments on the Duchess of Sussex and With Love, Meghan, or these celebrities and chefs are just being asked to sign off on/perform prewritten scripts. Because there’s a growing industry of “white chefs/celebrities commenting about WLM out of nowhere.” I guess the Daily Mail was sick of just getting the same old “royal commentators” to bloviate about Meghan, so this is their new thing. because why the f–k is some completely random, British-based comedian giving detailed commentary on why she hates Meghan and WLM and why does she sound like she’s reading off the Mail’s talking points?

Comedian Katherine Ryan has publicly laid into Meghan Markle, who she previously defended, in the wake of her much-derided Netflix series, With Love, Meghan.

‘I liked Meghan Markle. I was rooting for Meghan Markle… though she is very Hollywood – even for me – and I don’t like that in people,’ admitted Katherine, 41. ‘I see now, and maybe it’s just the projects she’s choosing, it does feel like she has lied about whether she knew who Prince Harry was, and these details about her childhood change and don’t add up.’

Katherine defended the former actress in 2022, commenting on her position in the Royal Family: ‘I love Meghan Markle’s voice and her confidence to challenge the norm and what’s expected of her in that role.’

However, speaking yesterday on the latest episode of her podcast, Telling Everybody Everything, Katherine added: ‘She said on her new Netflix show that they ate TV dinners growing up. But then in an old interview, she was like, “we would eat farm fresh”. Her whole act just seems very manicured and very forced. I’ve known a lot of Hollywood people – they’re not bad people. I don’t think she’s a bad person, but I think she likes cosying up to celebrities and she wants the hundred million dollar deal and she likes the fact that she’s married to a prince. Of course. But I would rather someone lean into that and be like, oh my God, I used to be on Suits and now I’m married to a prince! I would rather that than this act of: Oh, I’m just so humble.’

Canadian-born Katherine, who lives in London with her three children and civil partner Bobby Kootstra, said she found Meghan’s ‘flower sprinkles’ particularly galling.

‘I have seen this, I have seen it from chefs – they like to put wild flowers on a meal. And I’m not about it. I also don’t think it constitutes an entire cooking show.’

She added: ‘People are hate-watching it though. Who knows what Netflix are doing? They are smart – whether they love something or hate something, whatever keeps them watching more episodes. If this was Netflix’s intention, to be like, let’s throw Meghan under the bus where even people who really liked her are turning… not against her, but… she just doesn’t seem to be the kind of gal I would want to be friends with. It’s too manicured, it’s too beige.’

Katherine adds of Meghan’s decision to change her surname to Sussex: ‘I think less of women who change their name anyway, to match their husband’s name – unless you have had a chat about it and unless you have approached that decision with equality. Let’s be honest about why you’re choosing Sussex. It’s a way to hang on to the Duchess of Sussex.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Do you want me to even start with this? As I said, it has the feel of someone performing a script. That’s what I thought of Jameson Stocks’ comments too – it had the sound of something cooked up by a Daily Mail writer. Unless that’s how every British person sounds, and that’s how you have to talk if you enter the UK. In the case of this white woman…we’ve seen, over the years, the way certain white gals just can’t stand that Meghan married the good prince and dipped out of that salty island. Those same gals cannot get over the fact that Meghan actually won, that she’s living a soft life, that she was not robbed of her joy, her marriage or her children.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Netflix.

Many economists and historians have remarked that the past few years or so have felt like the “Roaring ‘20s” in the 20th century. The Roaring ‘20s preceded the Great Depression, so we’re on track for that, probably this year under Donald Trump. I bring this up because Vogue’s April cover is with Gigi Hadid, and the theme of the editorial is “the Roaring ‘20s.” The aesthetic is lovely, but the message behind it is pretty… on the nose. Anyway, it’s been a minute since Gigi has done a major magazine interview, and she even talked about her boyfriend Bradley Cooper in this piece. They’ve been dating for about a year and a half. They’re both single parents, but obviously… there’s an age gap and experience-gap given the 20-year age difference. Gigi also talks about coparenting with her ex, Zayn Malik. Some highlights from Vogue:

Her early-model days were stressful: “It got to a place where I would have three days off, and I would stay inside for three days. And that’s very intense. I felt like, even when I was just trying to put on something casual and go get coffee or go to the pharmacy, to get outside, someone had a comment: Why is she dressed like that? She looks like a slob. She looks overworked, whatever. I’ve been called every name in the book.”

Coparenting with Zayn: “Zayn and I do our custody schedules months in advance,” Hadid says, planning everything around the weeks they have Khai. “That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t change here and there, but we help each other out and have each other’s backs.” She and Malik have entered this new phase of their partnership with “love, and a feeling of camaraderie,” she says, accepting—more or less—that their relationship will likely forever be under some kind of microscope. “There is the hard part of the world knowing this much, and thinking they know everything. And at the end of the day, we’re not interested in giving everyone our whole story. What we are interested in is raising our daughter together, with so much respect for each other, and not just as co-­parents, but what we’ve been through together.”

On social media: “I don’t think it would be fully genuine to post nothing of Khai but I also don’t want to put anything up that would take away from her privacy and her peace.” I ask her if she’s ever tempted to give up on social media entirely, but it is clearly not in her nature. “I’ll go to Paris, and there’s people in front of shows that have been fans of mine for 10 years. And I love that. I love connecting with people.… I am grateful for social media, and the ways that it has connected me to the world. I wouldn’t have the same career without it…[but] My Instagram is like snail mail, if you follow me, you have to be patient, life has to load.… It’s different from how socials felt when I was younger. It doesn’t come as naturally to me as it did when Instagram started.”

On Bradley Cooper: “Bradley has opened me up to going to the theater more, and that’s something that’s so nice to bring back into my life. You want to give yourself a normal experience of dating and even for my friends who aren’t public figures, that’s hard. Where do you go? And, what? You just start talking to people? And then there’s another added layer of privacy and security. You want to believe that people are going to have your back and not call TMZ or go on Deuxmoi or whatever, but you just don’t know.”

She’s keeping her relationship to herself: Whatever strange dance dating as a supermodel might require, she describes her relationship now as “very romantic and happy,” though there are parts of it she wants to keep to herself, not because there is anything especially secretive about it, but because “it’s just not part of our relationship to share for whatever reason.” She’s aware that people—those unnamed “sources” upon which an entire ecosystem of clickbait headlines rests—will provide information “that’s kind of right and kind of wrong,” she says. But “you just have to let it go; you can’t always correct everything.”

She probably wouldn’t have dated Bradley if she met him when she was younger: “I think just getting to the point where knowing what you want and deserve in a relationship is essential and then to find someone that is in a place in their life where they know what they want and deserve…and you both do work separately to come together and be the best partner that you can be. I just feel really lucky. Yeah, lucky’s the word. I respect him so much as a creative and I feel that he gives so much to me: encouragement and, just, belief. For those people you admire to encourage you, it can create so much belief in yourself. Like, what’s the worst thing if I auditioned for this? You jump and take the leap.”

[From Vogue]

This sort of made me a convert on B-Coop and Gigi. I’ve always side-eyed their relationship and wondered if it was all some PR conspiracy, a convenient showmance. But hearing Gigi describe it… I get it. He likes that she’s much younger and she absorbs what he teaches her, and she likes being with someone older, more mature, someone who isn’t playing a lot of games with her. At least I hope that’s how it is. As for Zayn… I think their relationship was always pretty toxic, but I guess they’re making the best out of it and both trying to be good parents to Khai.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Vogue (@voguemagazine)

Cover & IG courtesy of Vogue.

Here are some photos of King Charles last week, visiting the HMS Prince of Wales. The Royal Navy is preparing for a “major global deployment to the Indo-Pacific this spring.” Charles made a point of wearing his Canadian military honours with his uniform. Canadians noticed that and they were reportedly pleased that Charles made the choice to subtly show his alliance to Canada. He is, after all, king of Canada too. This too is all part of Charles’s delicate diplomatic dance with Britain’s North American allies. Just as Donald Trump was calling for America to “annex” Canada, Charles sent Trump a hand-written letter, inviting Trump to come to the UK for a de facto second state visit. That invitation was received by Trump one day before Trump and JD Vance went apesh-t on President Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, childishly berating the Ukrainian president. All of which to say, there are now widespread calls for Charles to rescind the invitation and publicly distance himself from all things Trump. An excerpt from Simon Heffer’s latest piece in the Telegraph:

The day after Donald Trump and JD Vance ambushed Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office, an American friend (who is no fan of the US president) railed at me by text message about what she considered the King’s poor judgment in asking Trump to pay a state visit – and an unprecedented second one at that. Why was His Majesty bestowing this honour on a head of state who had publicly humiliated a supposed ally in this way?

I explained that the King acts in all political matters (which include the diplomatic decision about a state visit), only on the advice of his ministers. This convention exists to keep the Crown above politics. That the King had written to President Trump – a letter the president joyfully flaunted during his meeting last week with Sir Keir Starmer – inviting him to Britain was, I told her, not because His Majesty wanted it, but because his Prime Minister thought an invitation was in the national interest.

Once Starmer had told the King his ministers’ wishes, His Majesty had to comply. “The King will not be dragged into politics. He will follow the advice of his Prime Minister. State visits are a vital part of soft power. And soft power is all we have left,” says one senior politician.

It might, of course, be the case that the King accepted the pragmatic argument for a state visit, which will doubtless help Starmer’s efforts to court Trump as America’s relationship with the rest of the world becomes increasingly uncertain. If the King did object, however, refusing would have precipitated a constitutional crisis – the resignation of the Prime Minister and the Government, and a general election on the issue. If, after such an election, Starmer remained in office and the King still refused, it could force an abdication.

After the Zelensky incident, politicians from various parties said the invitation should be rescinded. The Scottish National Party leader, John Swinney, said it was “hard to believe” it could stand; Alicia Kearns, a Tory MP, wanted it cancelled. There are rumours of disquiet in Labour’s ranks, whose considerable cohort of Trump-haters have so far kept quiet. Calls to reconsider the invitation also came from Canada, which Trump believes should become America’s 51st state. “I don’t think Trump realises the King is Canada’s Head of State too,” says a former minister. “If he persists in trying to annex Canada, that would change everything.” In an interview with The Telegraph this week, Danielle Smith, the premier of Alberta, Canada’s wealthiest province, publicly urged the King to stand up to Trump over his threat to annexe the Commonwealth nation.

Starmer refuses to withdraw the invitation. An unpleasant tone emerged from Washington, with hints of consequences for the UK/US relationship if the visit were stopped. Public feeling appears strong against the visit. A poll published five days after the Zelensky ambush showed 42 per cent of Britons opposed to it, and 51 per cent saying Trump should never have been asked in the first place. Two petitions demanding the visit be cancelled quickly attracted 280,000 signatures. A petition against his 2019 state visit garnered 1.8 million signatures, when the provocation was less.

The poll was conducted before the president’s decision to “pause” military aid to Ukraine. As it becomes clear that the Trump administration no longer shares the same stance on Ukraine and Nato as Britain or much of Europe, opposition to a visit meant to reinforce a shared commitment could increase. This shift could have significant constitutional implications, which the Prime Minister will need to address, with the King remaining vigilant.

Serious public disquiet, or even civil disobedience, arising from the visit or even just from its imminence, could well drag the King into politics – the very thing the constitutional monarchy was designed to avoid. In 2019 a demonstration of an estimated 75,000 people filled central London for Trump’s first visit; the public perception that Trump had bullied and abandoned Ukraine could provoke a far larger one. His Majesty, however unfairly, might be identified with the presence and the actions of the unpopular president. That might not merely damage the King’s reputation; it could damage the institution of monarchy, something the constitution has evolved to avoid. These are delicate issues, as they always are when trying to renew relations with a head of state whose behaviour leaves much to be desired. The Government will have to decide whether more damage might be done by Trump’s coming, or by his not coming. It could be one of the most important decisions Starmer ever has to make.

[From The Telegraph]

Yeah, it’s as I’ve said all along – it’s not Charles’s call to send OR rescind the invitation to Trump. He’s doing what Keir Starmer wants, and Starmer is trying to maintain the European alliances along with the American alliance. Can I just say? All of this hand-wringing over dinner invitations a year in advance is SO British. It’s actually what British commentators do with everything involving the monarchy and the Windsors, and it’s wild to see this kind of thing extend to the world of politics. There was no timeline offered in Charles’s invitation to Trump, not even a general “let’s see if we can make this happen next year.” By all accounts, it would take a year or longer for Buckingham Palace to even plan a state visit like this. Do British people know how much can change in a year?

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.