My concern remains that the child clearly could not have any input into this given their age. The parent(s) are equally responsible for (what my personal feeling) is poor judgment
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
NOOOO! Eurgh Olivia Coleman and HBC have RUINED it for me.
Even watching Cinderella yesterday, when HBC came on screen I gave her the side eye
I agree - it’s tacky and quite embarrassing for the Cambs and the parents to have allowed this. Is the child also urinating? It’s taken away any autonomy from the child, I would be mortified if my parents had done this when I was younger.
I am very conflicted about the photo. I am generally against flushing the internet with photos of children, that haven’t consented/are not old enough to give consent and understanding the implications. Internet strangers don’t need to see a photo of your child. Period. If you share publicly, you do that completely for yourself. Just own it. There are enough options to only share in private settings. I am also very much against sharing photos that could be seen as embarrassing. Those parents showed poor judgment. That is one for the analog album, only to be brought out at the 18th birthday.
On the other hand, this is a very real life moment that most parents know all too well. Also, I will never understand the hyper sexualised culture that creeps over from the US. That is really creeping me out and I find it very harming. In my country naked people are in many places. The beaches, their own property (balcony, house, garden), sauna, nudist compounds, no cloth swimming times..... so there are many public places with naked children. But it’s not as if we have a bigger problem with sexualised violence against children than other countries.
But, the internet opens up the audience for this. That has to be taken in regards.
For me, the urinating factor is much worse than anything else. From the artistic view point it is a composition that fits the aesthetic of the artistic movement that Kate emulates in her own artistic attempts, and it portrays on layer of the reality of being stuck at home, day in day out, in summer with a child quite well. Even though, I personally think it’s a boring photo. I am pretty sure there were better pictures in the mix.
I get why one would choose it, but I also understand why one wouldn’t.
On the other hand, this is a very real life moment that most parents know all too well. Also, I will never understand the hyper sexualised culture that creeps over from the US. That is really creeping me out and I find it very harming. In my country naked people are in many places. The beaches, their own property (balcony, house, garden), sauna, nudist compounds, no cloth swimming times..... so there are many public places with naked children. But it’s not as if we have a bigger problem with sexualised violence against children than other countries.
But, the internet opens up the audience for this. That has to be taken in regards.
For me, the urinating factor is much worse than anything else. From the artistic view point it is a composition that fits the aesthetic of the artistic movement that Kate emulates in her own artistic attempts, and it portrays on layer of the reality of being stuck at home, day in day out, in summer with a child quite well. Even though, I personally think it’s a boring photo. I am pretty sure there were better pictures in the mix.
I get why one would choose it, but I also understand why one wouldn’t.
Yes I saw that photo and thought it was an odd one to put out there. It wasnt flattering or that interesting.
I think you do have a point there. We have sexualised nakedness too much. Especially in children. The problems we have with people breastfeeding in public stems from the same issue. Breasts arent sexual objects when they are feeding a baby.
However I do think there is a difference between a live child being naked on the beach under adult supervision and putting a picture out there of a naked child urinating. Once you put the photo into the public domain, you lose control of it and of who sees it. Its also permanent in a way a child running around is not.
Last edited:
Posted in the secret celeb gossip before I remembered we have a Royal thread! So does anyone think Princess Eugénie is pregnant?
Attachments
I wouldn’t be surprised but the size of the bump you could imagine in the pictures is pretty big. We would have had an announcement already. If she is before the announcement mark, you probably couldn’t detect anything with those clothes from that distance. Those jackets can create a wider silhouette, especially if it’s one that doesn’t goes in at the waist (true for many more sturdy outdoor clothes for women).
So either no pregnancy, or still early, or-and that would be interesting- already in her second trimester with no announcement. With all the talks of a more streamlined monarchy under Charles and Wiliam, the cousins might feel it right to treat their children like private people from the start.
Could be. Shes always had a small waist. Although if she is pregnant, she'd be quite far gone. Why not say anything? Were there any pictures off her at Bea's wedding?
No pictures apart from the ones of Bea and Edo coming out the church, a few couple shots and the one with the Queen and Phil.
I think they purposely didn’t release a big family portrait due to Andrew’a involvement with Epstein.
Given Zara announced a pregnancy then lost it well into what was considered ‘safe’ and Eugenie has documented medical issues like scoliosis I wouldn’t announce a pregnancy until as far in as possible if I were her. Plus the BRF members are often forced to announce a pregnancy quite early due to been unable to hide it in the public eye. With how little we see of Eugenie with Covid restrictions it’s a perfect time to have a low key pregnancy.
Loving the old school Royal discussion, Anne Boleyn must have been quite the woman. Although I wonder at her trying to poison Catherine of Aragon all the time, given it was the ex wife’s presence that stopped Henry been able to ‘put Anne aside’, as they say. A smarter play would have been assuring Catherine’s long health.
I’ve read Alison Weirs book The Six Wives of Henry VIII, and quite enjoyed it. When I have time I’d love to read the individual ones she’s done on each wife as well. If anyone has recommendations for similar books on the wives or any another historical royal I’m all ears.
Loving the old school Royal discussion, Anne Boleyn must have been quite the woman. Although I wonder at her trying to poison Catherine of Aragon all the time, given it was the ex wife’s presence that stopped Henry been able to ‘put Anne aside’, as they say. A smarter play would have been assuring Catherine’s long health.
I’ve read Alison Weirs book The Six Wives of Henry VIII, and quite enjoyed it. When I have time I’d love to read the individual ones she’s done on each wife as well. If anyone has recommendations for similar books on the wives or any another historical royal I’m all ears.
Has anyone got a recommendation for a book like Anne Boleyn: 500 Years of Lies? The reviews aren’t the greatest but I guess that it’s hard to get gossip from over 500 years ago! Another reviewer suggested Divorced, Beheaded, Survived: A Feminist Reinterpretation Of The Wives Of Henry VIII by Karen Lindsey so maybe I should try for that.
Antonia Fraser’s Book, The Wives of Henry VIII, is good. She goes large on the theory that Arthur, Henry’s elder brother who died young, picked up syphilis through ‘youthful misadventures’ and passed it on to Catherine of Aragon when he was married to her. Then she suggests that Catherine passed it to Henry, that Mary I and Edward VI were hereditary syphilitics (explaining their chronic health problems), that Henry himself was driven mad by syphilis attacking his central nervous system, explaining his later behaviour, and that Elizabeth somehow escaped contracting it from her parents. Crikey!
Something like that would make sense, considering the amount of wives Henry had and the number of dead babies. I think it may be more likely Henry had syphilis, considering how many 'youthful misadventures' he had. Also, didnt Catherine deny consumating the marriage to Edward when Henry wanted to divorce her?
She did deny it. Its a tricky one as why wouldn't they have consummated the wedding, but at the same time KofA was so devout would she lie?! History is so tricky though and has painted KofA to be a Saint and AB a sinner.
The evidence to the contrary that I’ve seen appears to centre around Arthur having made some remarks to his companions about having “been IN Spain fnar fnar”. Teenage boys don’t change much over the centuries!
Maybe because He was quite young and sickly, I dont know. Poor AB was used by her horrible family and got the worst possible deal
God I wish we knew!! For me that's what makes history so interesting.
I think AB was a remarkable woman. Her family were trash... They thrust all the young girls in front of the king. I'd love to know more about Mary Boleyn. Her family line, where she is buried, who the father of her eldest two children was. It's fascinating stuff.
Some books on Mary.http://alisonweir.org.uk/books/bookpages/more-mary-boleyn.php
Yes youd think the Howards would be a little more cautious after Annes death, but no. They engineered the marriage of a teenage Kathryn Howard and she ended up dead too.
I've read the great bleep one but it seen the mistress one. Thank you so much.
The Katherine Howard story always makes me feel sad. Poor child
I can’t make up my mind.
I think it’s a pity that repeated requests for forensic access to their remains have been denied.
- Status