Wilfred Johnson

I think they are all Michael Gove

I've had a bit of a look at the thread and I can't find any negative remarks about the baby.
Why are people pretending that there are?

I always wonder why people are quick to defend a man they don't know or aren't speaking to whilst being nasty to a woman they are (online or not) There is something quite ingrained in that sort of response and I don't understand it. I always think I have more in common with women (inc Carrie) wrt a lived experience than I do to men, especially powerful ones

I've just read the whole thread again and not one person has made any negative remark about the baby.

A couple of jibes about Johnson Senior's hair and one rather uncalled for comment about his love life. People wondering if it is the right thing to use your children as a publicity tool

Then a short barrage about how we are all bitches and unworthy mothers.

One might suspect a plot.

Horrible comments, not worthy of mother’s or grandmother’s or in fact anyone.

I think the inevitable horrible comments about this family are why some people simply don't post anymore. The constant barrage of hatred for this little boys father and up to a point his mother is depressing and miserable. Deeda, that was a horrid thing to say, but sadly not unexpected in any discussion about the Johnston's.

I have to say I love his golden curls.

What are people talking about I was working by the time my oldest was 6 month old, of course I left him with someone. Maternity leave usually lasts maximum of a year of course babies are left with others than their mothers.

The bitchfest about a baby is more creepy.

Totally agree Callistemon

Alegrias1

Couple of posts criticising the Johnsons and the support network swoops.

Its quite creepy.

The bitchfest about a baby is more creepy.

Couple of posts criticising the Johnsons and the support network swoops.

Its quite creepy.

Why does every thread where Boris appears turn into a grump of grans criticising either him or Carrie? What's with the constant judgement of every single thing they do? Is this just a group of older women having a bitch-fest? ?

Yes my comment was necessary Sparklefizz. I expect all Johnson's other children had lovely mops of blonde curls. Didn't stop him leaving did it?

MaizieD although, once weaned (if BF) , most mothers seem to have no problem leaving them with a relative for a day or two.

Really? A day or two?? I didn't leave my children with anyone for more than a couple of hours before they started school, and I don't think that's unusual, let alone a 1 year old.

I wondered if they'd taken the baby to show they were hard working parents too!

Well you can tell who his dad is. The same with Boris and his dad.

I think Wilfred should be leading the summit.
Afterall he probably has more sense than all the others!!

Perhaps we can all note that Wilfred’s face is not allowed to be photographed. Very sensible I think.
I don’t see any reason why Carrie couldn’t take the baby down to meet the other guests for a while. It’s not doing any harm and people do like to see a baby. He was probably whisked away by the nanny soon after the photos were taken in order to go to bed.

Sparklefizz

halfpint1

There are so many things for these heads of Governments to be discussing , I can't help wondering why the baby is there
at all. He seems to be used as a prop.

Maybe because his mother didn't want to leave him behind?

I would certainly hope that no mother would want to leave their baby behind, (although, once weaned (if BF) , most mothers seem to have no problem leaving them with a relative for a day or two. )

Take him by all means but why include him in a photo op? The nanny could have looked after him and kept him out of the spotlight.

MaizieD

I'm rather at a barely 1 year old being used as part of a publicity stunt. Until now politicians have usually been very careful about keeping their children out of the limelight.

I was about to post something similar. What does Wilfred’s cute presence add to the G7 ? What does his mother gain from putting him in the public eye like that? I hope it all calms down and the child is allowed to grow up in peace.

halfpint1

There are so many things for these heads of Governments to be discussing , I can't help wondering why the baby is there
at all. He seems to be used as a prop.

Maybe because his mother didn't want to leave him behind?

There are so many things for these heads of Governments to be discussing , I can't help wondering why the baby is there
at all. He seems to be used as a prop.

MaizieD

I'm rather at a barely 1 year old being used as part of a publicity stunt. Until now politicians have usually been very careful about keeping their children out of the limelight.

What makes you think it's a stunt MaizieD?

Please forgive this highjack of the thread, as we are supposed to be talking about Wilfred.

My phone wont let me quote a quoted post, so bear with me FannyCornforth!
I wasnt passing judgement on your comments, suffice to say I thought I was clarifying a pragmatic reason too!

If you look back at Boris younger days his hair has always been the wrong side of tidy.

His clothing and car also.

Using this as a 'signifier' is no different to say Kim Kardashian using her figure to attract attention.

Loosing his trade mark thatch might have made him combe it differently.
But as I said that is determined by his age.

Sorry everyone I dont want to highjack this thread. I didn't want to leave FannyCornforth without a reply.

Back to lovely hair

I'm rather at a barely 1 year old being used as part of a publicity stunt. Until now politicians have usually been very careful about keeping their children out of the limelight.