Hiding children

Magenta8

Does that make William and Catherine bad parents then Luminance?

Oh please ! It’s part of their job ! I am sure if they could they would prefer not to be in the public eye , analyzed and gauked at … it’s more a pain but they have no choice . My son doesn’t want my grandson on social media either as people can do weird and ugly things with AI imagery like pornography !

Princess Anne was the first Royal to stand outside the hospital after giving birth to her two and she refused titles for both and never felt the need to hide them from public view either.

Harry could’ve learned a lot from her as second born having to move further down the line (without the whinging) as the older brother produced offspring to supersede!

Pantglas2

Princess Anne was the first Royal to stand outside the hospital after giving birth to her two and she refused titles for both and never felt the need to hide them from public view either.

Harry could’ve learned a lot from her as second born having to move further down the line (without the whinging) as the older brother produced offspring to supersede!

Agree with this. Zara and Peter went on to lead private lives.
Even more of a parallel were Prince Andrew and Fergie who allowed Beatrice and Eugenie to be photographed when they were young children. It is odd that B and E have followed the Harry and Meghan style of back of the head photos, but I appreciate social media are a menace which didn’t exist back in the 80s.

Irismarle

Pantglas2

Princess Anne was the first Royal to stand outside the hospital after giving birth to her two and she refused titles for both and never felt the need to hide them from public view either.

Harry could’ve learned a lot from her as second born having to move further down the line (without the whinging) as the older brother produced offspring to supersede!

Agree with this. Zara and Peter went on to lead private lives.
Even more of a parallel were Prince Andrew and Fergie who allowed Beatrice and Eugenie to be photographed when they were young children. It is odd that B and E have followed the Harry and Meghan style of back of the head photos, but I appreciate social media are a menace which didn’t exist back in the 80s.

Harry could’ve learned a lot from her as second born having to move further down the line (without the whinging) as the older brother produced offspring to supersede!

Just for accuracy Anne fell down the tree when her parents had more sons.

Many photographs of Eugenie with her children

Yes Old frill, that was 2 steps, the first when she was 10 and still a child at 13 for the second.

No one heard her moaning then or since when those who overtook her came thick and fast with her brothers children above her in the pecking order!

Harry (supposedly) was an adult when his turn to fall from spare to nowhere came and it’s going to get worse over the next 20 years as William’s offspring reproduce - will the poor me never shut up?

Pantglas2

Yes Old frill, that was 2 steps, the first when she was 10 and still a child at 13 for the second.

No one heard her moaning then or since when those who overtook her came thick and fast with her brothers children above her in the pecking order!

Harry (supposedly) was an adult when his turn to fall from spare to nowhere came and it’s going to get worse over the next 20 years as William’s offspring reproduce - will the poor me never shut up?

Anne is pro-,monarchy (l presume), I'm not sure Harry is. Certainly Charles is slimming it down, William maybe more so, perhaps George will be able to get a proper job.

How bizarre that the royal who refused titles for her own children is perceived pro monarchy and the one who allowed his wife to whinge in public about their son not being given the title Prince at birth is the one you’re unsure about!

The Royal Family are quite adept at changing with each generation and wishing well those who wish to leave and plough their own furrow (even though they want all the trappings).

No doubt George VII reign will look very different to his great grandfathers George x 6 though I doubt he’ll have a ‘proper’ job - whatever proper means…

When our grandson was born his dad sent us a photo of his foot. My husband was concerned something was wrong with the baby. Of course he was fine but I'll never understood the photo of his foot.

I think it’s great safe guarding. No one should really have strong feelings about not seeing the faces of children who are not even remotely related to them, no matter who they are. And absolutely no one should be “teased” or “titillated” by anything even remotely concerning the image of any child. The language used surrounding this non-issue is disturbing.

Pantglas2

How bizarre that the royal who refused titles for her own children is perceived pro monarchy and the one who allowed his wife to whinge in public about their son not being given the title Prince at birth is the one you’re unsure about!

The Royal Family are quite adept at changing with each generation and wishing well those who wish to leave and plough their own furrow (even though they want all the trappings).

No doubt George VII reign will look very different to his great grandfathers George x 6 though I doubt he’ll have a ‘proper’ job - whatever proper means…

Unfortunately you don't have to have titled children to be pro-monarchy or we'd maybe have got rid of them by now.
I don't see much evidence that they are adept at changing per generation, just maybe slightly per new monarch.
Proper jobs entail working for a living.
Happy days.

BlessedArt

I think it’s great safe guarding. No one should really have strong feelings about not seeing the faces of children who are not even remotely related to them, no matter who they are. And absolutely no one should be “teased” or “titillated” by anything even remotely concerning the image of any child. The language used surrounding this non-issue is disturbing.

Absolutely, the judgements being made are very ill informed too.

“Unfortunately you don't have to have titled children to be pro-monarchy or we'd maybe have got rid of them by now.
I don't see much evidence that they are adept at changing per generation, just maybe slightly per new monarch.
Proper jobs entail working for a living.
Happy days.” OldFrill

You’ll never be rid of them while the likes of the Sussexes insist their kids are special while they drop further down the line - how irritating for you!

And you really should brush up on the changes in Royalty since GeorgeI and VI and possibly you could elaborate on “proper jobs” and “working for a living”? PAYE or entrepreneur? Philosophers or Farmers? Builders or brain surgeons?

Pantglas2

“Unfortunately you don't have to have titled children to be pro-monarchy or we'd maybe have got rid of them by now.
I don't see much evidence that they are adept at changing per generation, just maybe slightly per new monarch.
Proper jobs entail working for a living.
Happy days.” OldFrill

You’ll never be rid of them while the likes of the Sussexes insist their kids are special while they drop further down the line - how irritating for you!

And you really should brush up on the changes in Royalty since GeorgeI and VI and possibly you could elaborate on “proper jobs” and “working for a living”? PAYE or entrepreneur? Philosophers or Farmers? Builders or brain surgeons?

I'm not easily irritated or l wouldn't hang around here, find most common irritants joyously amusing. It's all a mind set - positivity, humour and casual distraction.
As for the rest - condescension (word check wanted condensation haha) and sarcasm don't provoke me.
Keep smiling though.

Try the Good Morning thread for the happy, smiling people OldFrill - I’m there most mornings 😊 - there might even be some condensation that early 🤣

I read the Good Morning Thread every morning,no sarcasm,
it’s a good way to start the day

A regular poster has found the Good Morning thread rather depressing as all those fulfilled people left her feeling sadly bereft, and so another thread was started in an attempt at counterbalance. All seems rather convoluted, complicated and not much fun! The morning thread best read at night - if an insomniac!
Carpe diem!

Luminance. You are right the child can’t consent, but parents are acting on their behalf until they are of age as in a normal family. What they are saying we are famous so we can tantalise and tease you. Some ‘celebs’ think more of themselves than the public actually care.

But have all the adults in every picture you see in the media, famous or not, given consent. What about the photographs of children suffering in Gaza, or indeed in any war zone. Have their parents given consent?

It seems to me, within limits that all this fuzzing of childrens faces is a vanity, 'aren't I famous' affectation by media celebrities. If you do not want your children in the papers, then do not take them places where they will be photographed, or else control the release of their images to keep unapproved photos out of the media, as the Prince and Princess of Wales do.

Anyway, if you aim to keep your family private, and jsut the occasional photo leaks out. Who is going to remember what a child looks like. They change so fast and who a child's parents are will be known to their school friends, teachers, other people from the gardener to the Prime delivery driver.

Monica 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Knittypamela

When our grandson was born his dad sent us a photo of his foot. My husband was concerned something was wrong with the baby. Of course he was fine but I'll never understood the photo of his foot.

You must have been worried as to what the rest of the baby looked like!
It was just the new Dad copying the celebs😖

It seems to me, within limits that all this fuzzing of childrens faces is a vanity, 'aren't I famous

Meghan Markle has recently posted more pictures of her children (from behind) than she has ever done.
It seems to me she’s saying, ‘Don’t forget I’m STILL famous!’ 😂

Megan even used her daughter in the kitchen, not face but voice

Or maybe 'don't forget I want to be famous' merlotgran

Don’t forget her comparing herself and Harry with Super Mario, how Mario saved the princess ! ! ! !