Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

George's exams

918 replies

everetting · 02/10/2023 14:52

Kate is not going with william to Singapore as George has important exams. What exams would a 10 year old be sitting in November?
I know nothing about private school systems so hoping someone here does.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 09:25

Why do they need to silence people with a ‘non disparagement clause’

They are still silencing voices unless they just say how great the Sussex’s are

What little people they are to require that

skullbabe · 11/10/2023 09:30

Seriously - Toya did not force everyone to sign the releases under duress and the whole school did not have to sign releases. Therefore there will be ample opportunity for many to find the people in the school who will talk about how terrible they all were 2 years ago when this happened.

themessygarden · 11/10/2023 09:40

Whatever their reason for putting restrictions on the school, it still is a pretty distasteful insight into how they play the PR game in any circumstance and highlights the efforts they go to massage their heavily curated image.

Maybe I am wrong, but I just cannot see them attempting to put the same restrictions if they were to visit some expensive fee paying NYC or LA private school.

themessygarden · 11/10/2023 09:45

I don't know if this is true or a complete fabrication, but apparently one of the parents from the school did a video rant about being asked by the school to donate $5 to charity in return for one of Meghan's books, which they then realised was a donation to H & M's charity, the video was subsequently removed.

Iwantcakeeveryday · 11/10/2023 10:01

royalwatchewr · 11/10/2023 09:12

It does seem a bit telling that all the posters expressing concerns about George's privacy on this thread:

A) Have no concerns about the privacy of the dc at Meghan's book promotion
B) Have no concerns about the privacy of the Harry & Meghan's dc in their Netflix show (including of private moments and bathtime)
C) appear to be anti-royalists or supportive of Harry and Meghan (with a large overlap there)

Privacy of children at a book promotion? this kind of thing happens every day with authors, celebrities and royals. Nobody is writing articles on the children at these events and discussing their exams, which is what this thread is about.
As has been addressed by posters, sharing photos and images of our children is something almost the entire world is doing, they're no different. As I said, sharing an image is not a big deal and is not comparable to the thread topic.
As for c, yes some people here are opposed to monarchy. And? You've said it several times.

You're not comparing similar things, you're engaging in whataboutery. That's why nobody is addressing your 'points' too much.

Samcro · 11/10/2023 10:06

Iwantcakeeveryday · 11/10/2023 09:01

No I heard she kidnapped them and made them do it...

again, isn't this thread about George? Why is everyone talking about Meghan, again.

Show quote history

because certain posters can't take any criticism of Kate how ever small. so derail the thread. yet when Kate gets mentioned on a Meghan bash, they throw their toys out of the pram.

Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 10:15

i’m guessing that means that posters can’t find a way to make non disparagement clauses a good thing, despite good efforts

So we’re back to a ‘don’t make this about H&M defence’ 😀

Samcro · 11/10/2023 10:17

but the thread is not about H&M it has been derailed.
why not start a thread about the book thing that happened years ago?

Mylovelygreendress · 11/10/2023 10:18

Iwantcakeeveryday · 11/10/2023 10:01

Privacy of children at a book promotion? this kind of thing happens every day with authors, celebrities and royals. Nobody is writing articles on the children at these events and discussing their exams, which is what this thread is about.
As has been addressed by posters, sharing photos and images of our children is something almost the entire world is doing, they're no different. As I said, sharing an image is not a big deal and is not comparable to the thread topic.
As for c, yes some people here are opposed to monarchy. And? You've said it several times.

You're not comparing similar things, you're engaging in whataboutery. That's why nobody is addressing your 'points' too much.

Show quote history

So it WAS a book promo ? Not a community event ? Thanks for clarifying .

royalwatchewr · 11/10/2023 10:32

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Samcro · 11/10/2023 11:05

when did this book thing happen? last week?

Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 11:12

Why don’t you google if you don’t know ?

Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 11:20

Apologies - I just reread that and it sounded rude. There are lots of different sources so perhaps find some that are comfortable to yoi

there is the original visit and the later emails under covered due to a FOI request

Iwasafool · 11/10/2023 11:22

Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 08:53

There is a very big difference between a release and a NDA.

I don't know and maybe you don't but I assume the parent would sign the NDA not the child? If that's so is the child bound by it? I mean if a 9 year old is stopped outside school by an interviewer and asked about the reading and he discloses what happened behind the scenes is there any comeback? I can't see how there is.

Irrelevant really but just made me wonder if the NDA would be worth the paper it's written on.

royalwatchewr · 11/10/2023 11:22

Samcro · 11/10/2023 11:05

when did this book thing happen? last week?

I think we all know the book thing happened ages ago.

Personally, I don't have an issue with the children at the book launch being photographed if their parents consented and were happy about it. The kids were probably thrilled to be involved & appear online. It's none of my business.

Equally, I don't have any issue with Kate mentioning George's exams (it's well known that these exams take place anyway, so pretending this information is in any way 'private' is a huge stretch.) We know almost nothing about George's private life - which is as it should be. What are his favorite foods? Who are his best friends? What sports is he best at? What books does he like to read?

I seem to recall these sorts of things being written about HMQ and other royal children in the past, but apart from the odd public appearance or photo, George's privacy is intact.

The odd photograph or public appearance is just part and parcel of his role as heir.

But the determination (by some) to make Kate and Will 'wrong' at every turn just turns up lots of contradictory and illogical arguments IMO,

Mylovelygreendress · 11/10/2023 11:32

I love the way some posters love to point out that events such as the OW “ interview” and now this book promo happened years ago yet still drag up the Diana, Charles and Sarah interviews from the 90s !

themessygarden · 11/10/2023 11:36

but the thread is not about H&M it has been derailed.
why not start a thread about the book thing that happened years ago?

why not tell the same to the posters who also derailed the thread by waxing lyrically about their relationship with their own children.

This is how these threads meander, it's par for the course on RF threads, its not such a big deal.

Roussette · 11/10/2023 12:08

why not tell the same to the posters who also derailed the thread by waxing lyrically about their relationship with their own children.

That's a bit mean isn't it? Can't we put stuff aside at times and be just a bit friendly? We are on a Mums forum and just made a couple of posts between me and one other. It must've really irritated you to come out with a comment like that.

Hardly 'derailing', you obviously want everyone at each others throats all the time.

themessygarden · 11/10/2023 12:16

No that did not irritate me in the slightest, and my comments were not directed at those who mentioned their kids.

It was to the other poster who complained on this thread about derailment and suggested someone set up a separate post, yet overlooked another derailment that was totally and completely irrelevant to this thread.

Roussette · 11/10/2023 12:27

I just wouldn't call a couple of posters being nice to each other in very few posts... derailment.
It just seems we can't be human and pleasant with each other any more... or we get accused of derailing. Our posts were hardly going to alter the course of the thread... which is what I consider derailing is...

Daisyislazy · 11/10/2023 12:41

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Daisyislazy · 11/10/2023 12:45

" relationship with their own children". How is that not mentioning posters who talked about their children? 😳🤣

smilesy · 11/10/2023 12:45

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I don’t think the poster is critical of posters “waxing lyrical”, just pointing out that it happens and is meandering from the subject of the thread. That was how I read it anyway 🤷‍♀️

Daisyislazy · 11/10/2023 12:52

The terminology is fairly passive aggressive

Howsimplywonderful · 11/10/2023 12:52

Based on the reaction and reasoning here, i can’t imagine the future thread if Kate mentions that George is doing O-level and A-levels 🤣🤯🤯