Celebrities daughters in their underwear

[StoneofDestiny]

AIBU to think it's sadly pathetic that so many daughters of celebrities think it's a necessary step in life to raise their 'fame' by posing in their underwear - Jonathan Ross's daughter Honey being the latest.

claiming their teaching their kids about positive body image.

This is what bothers me about it - all the claims of positive body image/empowerment. Bullshit. Actresses, pop stars, college girls et all on Instagram. They are just selling their body for gain be it power/profit/attention - as if that's new and modern

I don't think honey herself has ever confirmed she does or doesn't have autism? it's only JR has said that he thinks one of his unnamed daughters has autism, so the armchair diagnosis's seem a bit off if that's the case.

She has confirmed herself, in writing (an article?) that she isn’t neurotypical, that she has learning needs of some sort and that she received specialised education of some kind that involved moving school. JR has made his remarks entirely separately about the possibility that one of his DDs is autistic and the informal advice he received on that subject.

So no armchair diagnoses needed. She has a degree of vulnerability and deserves as much protection and consideration as is practicable.

@Blubellsarebells

Nobody is saying its always nepotism. That would be stupid. Just that it sometimes is. I feel like nepotism has failed if all Honey Ross can do is get her arse out. She must have some talent or interest that her parents could smooth the way for. Or even she could persue off her own back. Ive got no talents. Im a hard worker and ive got friends, if any of them can help my kid get on I'll take the opportunity.

@SebastianTheCrab said “ I will say this though - almost everyone who is famous, even those who apparently have a discernible talent, got there via nepotism. Dig a little and they'll turn out to have a famous mum/dad/aunt/sibling.“

So that is who @PishFood is replying to.

I suppose its nepotism because shes in the papers regardless the fact of no talent and thousands of other pretty fat girls not being in the papers.
Nepotism has smoothed the way.
Im not sure why I feel like nepotism should have better ambitions than getting your big arse out.
What I'm wondering is, with aĺl the opportunities she's been given, why this is the best she can come up with?

Yes, we have a right to comment on it and for the press to right about it

Absolutely. Isn't this the entire point of the celebrity class? That we have a shifting band of ciphers onto which we can project our preoccupations and mores? I mean, their entire purpose is to generate interest and discussion.

The mistake comes from thinking it's any more than that, that we have any true personal connection to them. This becomes abundantly clear when you get to the 'icon' (where does that word come from again?) stage of celebrity, where they surround themselves with a 100 strong bubble of people and only ever interact through that. This state of absolute divorce from society is the ultimate goal and most perfect state of celebrity.

I am constantly confused by people calling on the general public to be nice to people who have put themselves in the limelight. I don’t think anyone has ever made a comment about how I look in my underwear and there has certainly never been a mumsnet thread on it. Want to know the secret to avoiding it? Not posting a public picture in underwear.

Honey Ross wants this attention. She’s getting exactly what she wanted.

For me it’s somewhat less about Honey in particular as famous kids on the whole. Maybe we tend to hear more about the ones with perfectly average looks who end up modeling (Theodora Richards, daughter of Keith and Patti, Brooklyn Beckham, Pierce Brosnan’s sons, etc). A few, like the Jagger/Hall daughters actually look like models, but most don’t. And I tend to think “really? Do some of them become doctors or academics or plumbers or bakers? Why so many models?” Hats off to Sam Springsteen, son of Bruce and Patti, who is a New Jersey fireman. Now that impresses me. Nothing to do with his parents, and doing a job that’s of real service. More of that would be amazing.

I've posted naked pictures of myself online. I wasn't in a good place mentally when I did that. The comments and validation made me feel better at the time, but looking back, it was just desperate and sad. Just thankful that I'm not famous.

@Ritascornershop

For me it’s somewhat less about Honey in particular as famous kids on the whole. Maybe we tend to hear more about the ones with perfectly average looks who end up modeling (Theodora Richards, daughter of Keith and Patti, Brooklyn Beckham, Pierce Brosnan’s sons, etc). A few, like the Jagger/Hall daughters actually look like models, but most don’t. And I tend to think “really? Do some of them become doctors or academics or plumbers or bakers? Why so many models?” Hats off to Sam Springsteen, son of Bruce and Patti, who is a New Jersey fireman. Now that impresses me. Nothing to do with his parents, and doing a job that’s of real service. More of that would be amazing.

Agreed, Gordon ramsay's son recently became a marine, very impressive vs the crappy photographers and models.

Did he?! I didn’t know that. I think we’d all be thinking “good on you” if one of the Royals or a musician or presenter’s kid became a nurse or X-ray technician chemist or librarian or biologist or something. If you don’t have to make a living why not give back and do a job that’s useful? Or follow a passion you can do for decades? But a decade or so as a model and then what? It just seems a bit directionless (not for models in general, more for the ordinary looking ones whose parents are famous as it smacks of nepotism and “I have no idea what to do with my 20’s”.

Don’t know how relevant it’ll be to this discussion but I’m looking forward to watching this: www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000qsk1

Chloe Madeley is another one I don't understand. Nothing interesting about her nor is she a stunning beauty yet she appears fairly regularly in the press in her underwear. I'm not sure what she's representing. Or why the media promote her.

Chloe Madeley is another one I don't understand

If you want a laugh, read about her awful rugby playing husband who thinks that he should pay less tax than everyone else because (1) he earns more and (2) his achievements have brought glory to Britain.

Birds of a feather, eh?

@cherryunripe

Chloe Madeley is another one I don't understand. Nothing interesting about her nor is she a stunning beauty yet she appears fairly regularly in the press in her underwear. I'm not sure what she's representing. Or why the media promote her.

She is a personal trainer and runs many fitness programs as well as podcasts, written books, has her own fitness apps etc. She doesn’t appear in her underwear to be sexy she does it to promote what she can to do her body with the right programs, be it fat loss or muscle building. Thr media take her pics from her social media and post them. However it’s a positive for her to gain a client base.

She’s actually very very good, I follow her and have used her weight lifting app.

Chloe is a very different animal. I think you need to be into fitness to understand. Her body is simply her tool and she personally demonstrates what can be done and how and is very aspirational with it. She also explains diet and fitness in a way people can understand.

"So no armchair diagnoses needed. She has a degree of vulnerability and deserves as much protection and consideration as is practicable"

But she is an adult who has the mental capacity to make her own decisions. By posting on social media in her underwear or naked she is inviting comment. If you are going to present yourself as a body positive activist and you body is not representative of a healthy body, then that will result in a degree of negativity or push back. A significantly overweight body is not physically healthy and can negatively effect all systems of the body. The purpose of feminism isnt so that women can take their clothes off and feel liberated or sell their bodies for entertainment or sex to have an income. Can you 'liberal feminists' not see how twisted that logic is. I would say that thrme majority of women and girls who end up having their bodies bought by men would not agree there is anything liberating about it. All women need to make better choices to the stop the cycle of objectification, men will not do it for us.

@Flapjak

"So no armchair diagnoses needed. She has a degree of vulnerability and deserves as much protection and consideration as is practicable"

But she is an adult who has the mental capacity to make her own decisions. By posting on social media in her underwear or naked she is inviting comment. If you are going to present yourself as a body positive activist and you body is not representative of a healthy body, then that will result in a degree of negativity or push back. A significantly overweight body is not physically healthy and can negatively effect all systems of the body. The purpose of feminism isnt so that women can take their clothes off and feel liberated or sell their bodies for entertainment or sex to have an income. Can you 'liberal feminists' not see how twisted that logic is. I would say that thrme majority of women and girls who end up having their bodies bought by men would not agree there is anything liberating about it. All women need to make better choices to the stop the cycle of objectification, men will not do it for us.

Having full mental capacity doesn’t mean posters are obliged to be rude about her. There’s critique and there’s perjorative critique and the two things are not the same.

Also; You seem to be replying to my remarks but then you say something about “you liberal feminists”, which I’m most definitely not, so you’re a bit muddled about who is who in this debate.

You make sense about false empowerment but then I lost you.

I don’t quite have the energy to unpick your confusion. Is it that you think those of us supporting politeness must therefore also support the porn culture?

@Flapjak

"So no armchair diagnoses needed. She has a degree of vulnerability and deserves as much protection and consideration as is practicable"

But she is an adult who has the mental capacity to make her own decisions. By posting on social media in her underwear or naked she is inviting comment. If you are going to present yourself as a body positive activist and you body is not representative of a healthy body, then that will result in a degree of negativity or push back. A significantly overweight body is not physically healthy and can negatively effect all systems of the body. The purpose of feminism isnt so that women can take their clothes off and feel liberated or sell their bodies for entertainment or sex to have an income. Can you 'liberal feminists' not see how twisted that logic is. I would say that thrme majority of women and girls who end up having their bodies bought by men would not agree there is anything liberating about it. All women need to make better choices to the stop the cycle of objectification, men will not do it for us.

Feminism is the right to choose. And not be judged for it. Your comment is as mysogynistic as it gets. You deem their choices unacceptable and you judge them for it. That’s not ok.

Feminism is the right to choose.

No that’s not what feminism is. That’s more like a bumper sticker,

This was an interesting thread until the diversion into the damp-eyed ‘be kind’ credulity vacuum in the middle. Looks like it’s regaining some momentum now.

The problem with choosing to make a living by putting yourself in the public eye is that it has downsides and one of those is that people are entitled to comment / react, and you might not always like that. Another problem with it is that - particularly in this day and age where everyone is instantly googleable - decisions you make as a teenager or young 20something will follow you for the rest of your life. So if you hit your late 20s or early 30s and decide to settle down and become an accountant / solicitor / teacher / something else that’s actually productive in society, your prospective employers will very easily be able to find a massive archive of pics of you with your kit off. Which could prove to be a bit of a hindrance to being taken seriously.

I don’t know who’s advising these girls, I really don’t, but I feel very sorry for them. Firstly for the potential future careers they are destroying with this behaviour and secondly for what it says about how they view themselves, that this is something they derive gratification from. I am also rather sorry for them that they have clearly not developed a proper understanding of feminism, given that they seem to think their actions constitute ‘empowerment’ and that is some kind of vindication.

All in all it makes me feel rather sad. If I was their parent I would consider that I had failed in how I had brought them up. If I was one of their teachers I would be very frustrated to see them wasting their lives like this. It’s a great shame.

"Feminism is the right to choose. And not be judged for it. Your comment is as mysogynistic as it gets. You deem their choices unacceptable and you judge them for it. That’s not ok."

Feminism isnt about the right to choose. That is a pseudo feminist slogan, ie liberal / intersectional.
Feminism exists to remove the systems that perpetuate the myth that it is empowering for women and girls to sell their bodies for mens use and that as long as it is a choice it is feminist.

If you put yourself out there posing nearly naked you are inviting some type of comment, whether it is going to be a positive or negative comment is out of the poser's hands. If they are too fragile to read the negative comments they should not be doing it. We have regressed to the 70s, it's the Dolly bird era all over again. All the advances we have made in women's rights, all the choices available (particularly if you are the progeny of celebrity or rich parents) and posing in their underwear is their ideal. Women are their own worse enemy. We got rid of Benny Hill but turns out he wasn't the problem, women want to behave like this.

This is not empowerment. This is attention seeking and look at me - and it is time limited because females (in societies eyes) become mutton very quickly so when you see the Cundy's, Katie Price and Amanda Holden trying to grab attention by randomly posing nearly naked, for every comment about she's fit (for her age), there are 10 eww, put it away grandma. How is that empowering. When you age surely you know that seeking validation like this is pointless and demeaning, even more so than when you are younger.

Exactly Melange, if it was empowering then it wouldnt depreciate with age. This is not about celebrating womens bodies , this is about ogling, masturbating over, and judging young womens bodies for their sexual appeal which is time limited. There is ansolutely nothing empowering about that. Cosmetic surgery is contribting to a lot of rhis, women are feeling internalised pressure to have fake lips and boobs that nake them look like a sex doll. Some of it is 'fashion' but i feel a large part of it is girls feeling they still need to modify themselves to attract males.

Women are their own worse enemy. We got rid of Benny Hill but turns out he wasn't the problem, women want to behave like this.

No. This will never be true. Men are women's worst enemy. Always have been, always will be.

They're earning money. Many of the celebrities encourage this as they see it as being financially astute. Its an income and some claim it to be the embodiment of Feminism. I think KB actually takes the photos of her daughter.

It's bizarre. A desire for constant attention? Pathetic really because they're in an amazing position to do anything they want and this is what they come up with? I loathe celebrity culture, It's so vacuous.

I wonder how many celebrities are narcissists/sociopaths and have screwed up their children to the extent that they do this.