Hiding children

Pantglas2

She’s only has one walking child, a daughter, of her own, Luminance! The older boy is her stepson and she maybe under orders from his mother regarding photography!

Besides, she doesn’t run with the fox and the hounds by opting for titles for her children…

Beatrice's children have Italian titles, they aren't automatically entitled to British titles so can't "opt" for them. She could ask.....

I just can't see the difference if I am being fair. No matter how much we might dislike someone, to not be able to see what they might do right or do well... I do not quite know how to describe that. To the point of it causing issues with other commenters in a discussion... I do not feel comfortable with that either. I am rather sure disliking someone is not worth that.

She’s only has one walking child, a daughter, of her own, Luminance! The older boy is her stepson and she maybe under orders from his mother regarding photography!

Besides, she doesn’t run with the fox and the hounds by opting for titles for her children…

Well, none of her pictures appear in my news sources.

M0nica

But Princess Beatrice does not seek publicity so that she can tell us how important her privacy is. She leads a private life and as a result we do not really notice whether she or her children are photographed or how.

I have seen plenty of photographs she has released, including the backs of children walking.

I too am puzzled- actually alarmed. The tech exists to take a face and create a body doing anything you want it to. To think of what sick people might do with the faces of my loved ones is distressing. Add to that- those sicko's often can learn the birthdate, school, pet names, etc- precisely the info one would need to make a child believe, "I am Mommy's friend and she asked me to pick you up." ...My problem is I don't dare advise the young adults in my life....

There's a new BOTH for Archie's 6th positioned against a sunset which illuminates it a little, other than that the BOTH looking much the same as the last time we saw it.

Let’s face it there’s no pointing having a royal family who can’t be seen, that’s their role to pose for photos and wave at their adoring public.

Didn’t take long to turn into a Meghan bitchfest.

Franski

Facial recognition technology is a real concern, and will only become more problematic. As others have said big public figures such as PoW children have security in place and tbh little choice.
My pet peeve is ultrasound photos on social media. ..! Poor baby doesnt even have skin and still forming in mother's womb. Keep it private and in the family please!!

Then there’s the naked pregnant abdomen exposed today at the Met Gala - another special moment for us all to share.

But Princess Beatrice does not seek publicity so that she can tell us how important her privacy is. She leads a private life and as a result we do not really notice whether she or her children are photographed or how.

Just saying - We have never seen a photograph of Princess Beatrice's daughters with their faces visible.

Oh that is a terrifying insight. I will never share an image of a child after reading that.

This may be upsetting for some but the main reason for not including faces of children in photos publicly shared is because of how they may be used in this sad, perverted world we now live in.
Photos of children shared on the internet may be misused in all sorts of ways, here are a couple of links explaining:

www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/children-photos-and-online-safety

childrescuecoalition.org/kids-privacy-campaign/

I think a lot of people are not aware of these rules that are really quite sensible.

Parents are free to share photos of their children in any way they choose- hidden or otherwise. We may not approve but that's the way it is,

What no one, including parents, can do is share images of children who are not yours, without their parents' permission. For example, if your child is photographed with another child, then you should obtain permission from the other child's parents before posting it in a public forum.

The same applies to public spaces, so if a child accidently wanders into the shot do not take the photograph.

These rules are there to protect images of children being used for malicious reasons...and not to cause problems for others who might be inconvenienced by it.

Facial recognition technology is a real concern, and will only become more problematic. As others have said big public figures such as PoW children have security in place and tbh little choice.
My pet peeve is ultrasound photos on social media. ..! Poor baby doesnt even have skin and still forming in mother's womb. Keep it private and in the family please!!

Quote Ilovecheese Mon 05-May-25 10:13:24
Luminance
Well I had not realised this was a Megan and Harry thread at first so that changes things entirely I suppose in the current setting.
If you had been on Gransnet as long as I have, you would have known that from the off. Any excuse to have a dig at them.

An excuse to have a dig at posters who dislike those you admire

Let’s just have one thread not bashing anyone! H&M can choose to post and say what they like, and deal with the consequences, personally H would do well to just keep quiet, also if H&M bashing isn’t happening its almost certain it’ll be Labour bashing!

It’s all a bit boring now tbh!

Luminance

Well I had not realised this was a Megan and Harry thread at first so that changes things entirely I suppose in the current setting.

If you had been on Gransnet as long as I have, you would have known that from the off. Any excuse to have a dig at them.

Isn’t it funny that in the olden days, when we had to take our photos to be developed, there would be huge disappointment if a child was out of focus or had their back turned at the wrong moment.

Now they’re carefully staged to look just like that. As I said on another thread, it’s a passive aggressive response to a possibly genuine desire from some people to see delightful images of royal children. History would be much the poorer without those grainy photos of Victoria’s brood for example.

As the late Queen said, ‘We have to be seen to be believed’ and the Wales, Edinburghs and Princess Anne’s family have the good sense to realise that.

I think it’s entirely up to parents how and when they publish photos of their beloved children.

It doesn’t bother me one way or another.

There’s a massive difference between any one indiscriminately taking photos of a family and publishing it and a family publishing photos they’ve taken and chosen to share

Grantanow

It's a waste of GN space discussing the Sussexes.

Not necessarily. They offer a tangible example.

I think maybe too much is being read into this! Perhaps it's just a fad. If we look back at Art, (which is a bit like photography), over time we notice the different ways of portraying children. In medieval times they were shown as ugly adults, in the Renaissance era they were painted as angelic cherubs, it wasn't really until Impressionism that children started to look realistic and normal. Now, in photos they are either just backs of heads or wrinkly feet. Hopefully just a short-lived phase in the bigger picture (!) of artistry. Each generation has its crazes to fit with the ideas of the times.

It's a waste of GN space discussing the Sussexes.

M0nica

Luminance

I'm afraid that comes back to the point that people are indeed buying those photos. What should be a beautiful moment without violating privacy is lost in others entitlement.

If people want privacy, then they do not post pictures of these special moment for the whole world to see they post them on private closed friends and family groups.

By definition if you publish on a public source, you are putting yourself and your immediate family in the public domain.

Look at what the Prince and Princess of Wales do, who are far more in the public arena than Prince Harry. On Princess Charlottes recent birthday, a picture of her was released formally through a Royal public web site. it was a picture taken several months ago.

Nothing has been said or published about private celebrations for her birthday . Was their a party? Did they have an outing instead? What did she wear? No pictures of her enjoying the day itself, with or without her parents. That is all private.

Exactly.