The marching of the Kings californian grandkids

[Thedom]

Wish I could go back and find all those posters who predicted a Kardashian-esqe social media blitz at some point in H&M's future, wonder where are all the posters who we're so affronted by the very idea of that.

People magazine and all, the uber celeb magazine.

I guess needs must with the downfall of her business efforts, \oh look, here are my kids whose privacy we have decided to forego for the greater good of taking the heat off what a crap business woman I am'.

What’s the issue? There are no faces visible.

What a depressing thread to read.

A film about two children taken to Disneyland framed within such hateful parameters.

I can’t see the children’s faces in the video and couldn’t identify either of them from what M and H have posted.

Unfortunately, someone has posted a photo of what presumably was a private card not intended for sharing, so now we can see their faces. Everyone on Mumsnet should leave the children out of their comments.

It’s really off to speculate about them favouring one child over another. On a parenting website! Which the dc will be old enough to Google in future! None of you can know that for sure or what their parenting is like. Those are simply your impressions skewed by disapproval. It can hardly be classed as objective opinion can it?

Finally, I don’t have a problem with what M wrote in Tig. She is at least admitting to
something that is problematic; going from one world to another.

At least she has raised the issue and not skirted over it like the RF! You don’t hear William referring to the eighteen estates or so he will inherit when he starts giving a speech to a homeless charity do you?

When Harry and Meghan choose to share personal moments involving their kids, it invites scrutiny. It’s not about being hateful; it’s just the reality of public life.

If they don’t want their children in the conversation, maybe they should stop putting them on social media, discussing their medical history on podcasts and using them to promote products.

It can be done. Zara and Mike don’t monetise their kids, and Catherine and William manage to prepare theirs for a public role while keeping their private lives separate.

And just to point out, there was a comment on a photo of the Wales children climbing on logs, with people highlighting how easily it could have ended in an accident.

No one is immune from parenting critique, public figures or not.

Unfortunately, as we have seen, time and again, some people believe the Sussexes to be above criticism. Plus they always criticise either or both William and Kate in the very same post. Every time.

IUnfortunately, someone has posted a photo of what presumably was a private card not intended for sharing, so now we can see their faces. Everyone on Mumsnet should leave the children out of their comments.

Meghan and Harry showed Archie and Lili’s faces plenty of times in their Netflix documentary too - their own choice. So their images are out there with their parents consent.

And both Harry and Meghan have criticised Harry’s own parenting, and the impact of perceived favouritism, plus criticised the parenting of William and Kate. They have also spoken many times of the dangers of social media, particularly in relation to children. I think people are entitled to call out examples of public hypocrisy when they see it.

Has the evening shift clocked on ?

You mean people who work for a living?

It’s Sunday

There are people who work at the weekend like emergency services, retail etc

Of course. But the implication was that everyone else on here doesn’t. Given it is Sunday that is unlikely to be true

On a parenting website!

This should be added to the bingo card.

Don’t make me bring the bingo card out!

I may get called a saddo by a stranger again and I don’t know how I will ever get over it 🫣🤭🤣

The reason they’re sharing pictures of their kids with their faces obscured is to give people a tantalising hint of what they could see, to show just enough, just a glimpse to keep the audience hooked and wanting more.

It’s the same technique that is used with raunchy photoshoots where fruit or props are strategically placed so that you know they’re naked but they also couldn’t be accused of getting their bits out in a shot. Where just enough skin is shown for it to pique the interest of those who would want to see more. A classic hint to throw a bone to people who desperately want any pic of something. Here’s a little scrap for you to salivate over, but I won’t show you all.

If you didn’t want to show your children on social media, then you wouldn’t.

I've asked this before and never got an answer, so I'll ask it again.

What material difference does partially obscuring the kids' faces make? The kids aren't going to have any public role, so there is absolutely no reason for their parents to post photos of them publicly at all. They could, like the majority of celebrities, keep their children entirely private. But they choose not to. How does slapping on a slightly creepy looking heart emoji change all that? And if they ever do show the kids' entire faces, will you consider that a bad thing?

I'm not being goady. I'm genuinely curious.

I agree. This whole 'not showing the faces' thing is a fig leaf in more ways than one. Firstly, as you describe above. Secondly, it allows them to have their cake and eat it, so to speak. Get attention from putting photos of the children in the public domain, but being able to claim they're not exploiting the kids because of the lame 'but they're not showing their faces!' excuse.

Presumably when the Sussexes do post full pictures of the children's faces - and I think that's a 'when' and not an 'if' - those praising them for not doing so now will be singing a different tune?

There is a photo on TwiX showing A and L without their faces obscured.
I am not posting it in case it’s not genuine ( but it looks real).

@IcedPurple I wonder what the excuses will be when they do fully show the children's faces?

Because it will happen, and likely before the end of the year. Meghan still hasn't gotten to 4M followers on IG, As ever isnt even at 1M. She'll need to do a lot more twerking and releasing private details to get bigger numbers to get anywhere near double figures. Why does that matter? Because that's when you can actually earn decent money.

“Pay attention to me and everything I’m doing”
followed by
”don’t criticize me and the things I do”
followed by
”why can’t I have privacy”
followed by
”look at me again!”

its absurd and pathetic

I agree. It's only a matter of (not very much) time before we see the children's faces.

Meghan will be waiting for some 'opportunity' to do so and in the meantime will continue to cultivate interest with these back of the head photos. I think the days of magazines paying big money for celebrity children photos are long gone and these children are too old now anyway, So the big reveal will be on her sm or maybe a NF 'reality' show of sorts.

And yes, 3.5 million followers is pretty piddling in the scheme of things. She got a follower boost over the past few days with the twerking video and the Disney outing, so expect more of the same. The law of diminishing returns will soon kick in however, and that's probably when we get the 'big reveal'. It will happen.

Yup, it’s to keep the audience coming back in the hopes of more glimpses of the children. And they aren’t covered by emojis in all the shots. Most but not all.

Their children are being used to gain and keep followers and fame. It works, which is why they can’t bring themselves to actually keep their children off social media.

Be brave. Get a takeaway and elevate it with dried flowers 😂

How do I find it?

Well, I'm a 24/7, 365 days a year carer, have been for years. Am I officially working? Am I officially not?

It is an existential struggle to answer this. Must ask Harry, who doesn't appear to do what one would call an awful lot.

I think the clue may be that facial recognition technology focuses on facial recognition.

I don't understand the relevance.