1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Royal Children

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Crystalsecrets, Feb 13, 2011.

  1. Crystalsecrets

    Crystalsecrets New commenter

  2. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    I had heard she has an eye condition but it seems odd they didn't want her in the christening photos. If it's becasue her eye looks 'funny' in some way then I think it's wrong not to include her in the photos. Maybe the royals should watch Channle 4's 'Beauty and the Beast'.........not all royal princesses or ladies are drop dead gorgeous. In fact, until Diana arrived the British royals were all rather ordinary.
     
  3. I'm a bit shocked that modern-day parents would, effectively, hide this and potentially make their little girl feel as though she shouldn't be seen in public.
    I really don't understand the exclusion of her from the Christening photos. It's almost as though the "defect" means she isn't acceptable. A very unenlightened view for these modern times.
     
  4. lilachardy

    lilachardy Star commenter

    I would think they keep her out of the public eye AND she has a squint, rather than keeping her out of the public eye BECAUSE of the squing.

    It's not like we see her brother...
     
  5. Crystalsecrets

    Crystalsecrets New commenter

    True Lily but the article states (and i know papers aren't always acurate) that these were the official photos, a bit different to the usual pap photos that you could expect them to want to shield the children from.
    I admit when i read it my first thought was why do they want to hide her away. But they have obviously now decided she needs to be seen in public, the life she was born into means she will have media interest as she grows up.
     
  6. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    Agree but.......as we taxpayers pay for their privileged lifestyle can they really justify keeping out of the public eye? If they want to do that then do as Princess Anne did and reject a title for the children. Like having your cake and eating it?
     
  7. Ah, I think it's fair enough to let the royal children grow up without the media glare. FWIW, I think Princess Anne did a really caring and sensible thing with her children and they appear to have grown up to be well-rounded and grounded.
    It's not the fact that Edward and Sophie have kept their children out of the limelight that bothers me, it's the official Christening photo 'thing' that makes me feel really uncomfortable.
     
  8. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    That's not good. No, not good at all. It just makes me think they were embarrassed by her. Which is sad.
    Indeed she did and I reckon they're as normal and grounded as anyone can be, given the circumstances of their birth.
    Wonder what will happen when Wills and Kate pop a sprog? I rather like Wills (again, well grounded and a man who knows his own mind) and Kate seems as well suited to the job as anyone could be, but I wouldn't swap places or wish it to be my own daughter for the world.
    There's no price I'd take for my anonymity!

     
  9. They have not kept her locked up away from view

    They have simply avoided he being in the Public Eye

    I am sure that they have many lovely family photos of the christening and every other event that is important in their lives
     
  10. She was not in her baby brother's christening photograph. Of course, she's being hidden away or as they prefer to say "protected". It is very sad and very unenlightened. It reminds me of The Lost Prince.

     
  11. doomzebra

    doomzebra Occasional commenter

    Shall state-sector teachers be made to have their children available for photographs too?
     
  12. I should imagine that she was in her baby brother's christening photographs, as I said
     
  13. marshypops

    marshypops New commenter


    I was about to agree with this and then I remembered how rude some areas of the media have been towards Beatrice and Eugenie, so perhaps her parents simply wish to protect her from any media gaze as this may be upsetting and these are <u>official</u> photos so are meant to be seen by the general public, I bet she's in loads of family photos.
     
  14. It seems strange that they would not want to correct the problem. I can understand them wanting to avoid headlines screaming "Royal child has a SQUINT!!".
     
  15. Not in the official as others have said. Can't you read?
     
  16. Yes, I agree about Beatrice and Eugenie, but if you go clubbing in skimpy attire, you're fair game.








     
  17. ...official ONES..
     
  18. catmother

    catmother Star commenter

    The whole thing has intrigued me and,I just had to Google her. There are plenty pictures of said little girl at various royal events,therefore it doesn't really look as if they are trying to hide her. As for the fact she has not had the op,I'm sure that there are very good medical reasons for this. Reasons that strangely enough her parents did not feel they had to inform the general pubic or the Daily Mail!
     
  19. Why is she often wearing a hat?
     
  20. doomzebra

    doomzebra Occasional commenter

    Royals wear hats
     

Share This Page