Why are you making fun of someone's appearance with your logo change

[Reasonableadjustments]

Can I ask why you've changed the logo to be big ears to poke fun at King Charles?

I'm not a royalist but I don't think making fun of someone like this for their appearance is really fair.

This^

Absolutely disgusting, making fun of someone's appearance.
Very unprofessional also.

What’s with the ‘snarling’ references people understandably are reacting from their own perspective. No one is ott just saying why they think it’s off.

Does it not being a disability make things fair game?

Does that extend to hair colour or type, skin colour, facial features, body type

Plenty of people get mockery on a range of things it’s not good though

🤣

It certainly is.

At what point should mocking characteristics be a step too far then? Where does it become NITS?

Awful decision from mumsnet. Just awful.

I think they were trying to be all things to all posters, so a crown for those who like the royals, but poking fun with big ears for those who don't.

The trouble is, they seem to have forgotten about the majority (in my opinion) who are pretty indifferent or mildly anti/pro.

I think doing nothing to the logo would have been appropriate. Not celebrating the coronation, but also not being unpleasant.

I was quite surprised to notice there was a change - never noticed changes before. On the small screen of my phone, initially thought the crown was sitting on a beige cushion.

Was it ok for me to shouted at in the street for my hair colour then? It’s not a disability, after all.

How about the kids who tried to put chewing gum in it at school. Was that just hilarious japes?

Bet I'm not wrong though.

Some people on this thread should probably turn off the internet for a bit tbh.

Surprised it hasn’t been picked up by the media, actually. Guess they are too focused on the coronation itself.

Having big ears isn't a disability, it's a feature he is easily and affectionately recognised by. If he was so bothered by it he could have had the op at any point of his life and been home for tea.

You making a big deal of it is showing YOU think it's a negative he has.

So, all of you who think it's fine would be OK with your children being mocked for their physical appearance?

it's just plain nasty.

SunnyEgg

What’s with the ‘snarling’ references

It's a change from "frothing", I suppose.

This

Bollocks is it "affectionate".

And why we're at it why do Mumsnet have skeleton staff over bank holiday weekends and volunteers overnight? It's all so unprofessional.

So if it was an image of Stephen Hawking, they wouldn't be able to put his glasses as a distinguishing feature because it's a "disability" and something he might have been mocked for growing up?

I didn't notice it. Until I saw all the frothing rage about it. 😁

Totally oversensitive, I hope mumsnet keep it.

It was sarcasm, as denoted by the ‘/s’, and the exaggeration of the words.
I was in fact parodying the response of the cunts who respond like this for real. Based on my own personal experience of being bullied for my appearance.

I very much hope that the op got that reference.

Add threads entitled 'get rid of the ears' to chat.

maybe we can will chat and active with the message?

I really hope the bullying defenders on this thread have features which make them ripe for the picking.

Maybe they’re fat, maybe they talk funny, they’re certainly not pleasant people, so maybe we can all have a good laugh at those traits, after all, it’s just satire and not harmful at all, innit?

The lengths which people are going to to defend the mocking of someone’s physical features says more about them than anything else.

Would you be ok if it was your child whose physical features were being pointed out?

People are essentially thinking that because this is Charles he is fair game. If this was a thread about someone’s child nobody who is a decent human being would be agreeing that it was ok.

Aww, you're attacking eachother now. That's not nice. 😢

Fair enough :-)