Kate's hair hides a secret childhood scar

Kate scar

The Duchess of Cambridge showed more than charm in her first solo royal engagement this week.

A close inspection of the side of her head reveals a large scar on her left temple, which St. James’s Palace reveals is the result of “a childhood operation.”

The scar was can clearly be seen in photos taken at the charity event and first thought to be the outline of a hair extension for her swept up-do. The Daily Mail reports that their sources said the surgery was “a very serious operation,” but provided no details. One doctor suggested it may have been the removal of a birthmark.

Will scarSo, Kate’s not so perfect after all, but she can claim to have matching scars with her husband Prince William. He has a mark on his left temple as well, courtesy of being hit with a golf club when he was 13. He calls it his “Harry Potter scar.”

“I call it that because it glows sometimes and some people notice it - other times they don't notice it at all,” he said in 2009.

The royal couple, scars and all, will be on the road again next week, travelling to Denmark on Wednesday to visit UNICEF’s emergency supply centre in Copenhagen. They will be joined there by the Crown Prince and Crown Princess of Denmark.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sure glad it isn't in a more 'private' spot! How superficial and phony can a society get? Who cares about her scar.

I think this is ridiculous. You're saying that she's not "perfect" because she has a scar. Of course she's not perfect - She's human. And oh, shocking! Prince William has a scar too. Funny how that happens to us mere mortals.

What message are you trying to send to people? It's articles (and blogs, and media in general) like this that perpetuates the unfortunately growing trend of young women striving to achieve something that's not even possible: perfection.

Princess Kate is a gorgeous and seemingly genuine person (albeit a little on the thin side) - why is it necessary to "closely inspect" and analyze her image. So what if it was the outline of a hair extension? Or a scar from a birth mark? What difference does any of that make? Is she not a person before a princess? and where does it state that the prerequisite for being a princess is physical "perfection"?

The old adage "beauty is only skin deep" comes to mind; unfortunately some who read your blog will take away a very different message.

What? Kate is not perfect? OMG, stop the presses. This is headline news....


The comments to this entry are closed.

The Royals Watch

Royals on Twitter

Royals on Facebook