On Thursday, Princess Lili Diana turned five years old. The Duchess of Sussex posted two lovely new portraits for the occasion – one of Lili solo, barefoot in a Montecito flower garden, and one of Lili being held by Prince Harry as Harry and Meghan looked at their daughter adoringly. You couldn’t really see Lili’s face in either photo, and Meghan’s spokesperson even released a statement explaining (yet again) why Meghan carefully curates social media photos of her children. The usual suspects twisted themselves in knots to complain about the new photos, but at least one Mail columnist is making a somewhat valid point. That point? That Lili’s childhood is probably a lot happier in Montecito than it ever would have been in the UK. An excerpt from Vanessa Tait’s “Why this picture of sweet ‘hippy child’ Lilibet with her bare feet and hair flowing free makes my heart break for George, Charlotte and Louis. Maybe Meghan got it right after all…”
Lilibet has turned five, and her doting parents Harry and Meghan have posted a couple of photos to mark the happy day. Nothing wrong with that, you’d think. Here she is, barefoot on the grass in Montecito, in a light summer dress, her glorious flame-red hair flying loose and unbrushed as she reaches out to touch a sprig of agapanthus in the garden. And there she is again, squirming in Harry’s arms, her hair obscuring her face, Meghan leaning in beside them both. It is entirely charming.
Only, a large portion of the online royal-watching population seems to be clutching its pearls. ‘Why why why can’t she comb her daughter’s hair? Or put shoes on her feet? Poor child always looks unkempt,’ says one social media comment. ‘Clothes look as if they’ve been rescued from a trash bin,’ adds another. ‘Nothing laid-back or hippy about it. More like neglect and bad parenting,’ opines a third, after worrying about Lilibet’s exposure to athlete’s foot, fungus and parasites on her little bare feet.
Oh, do give it a rest.
And I say that as someone who has had plenty to say about Harry and Meghan over the years, and no doubt will again. You won’t find me defending every decision they’ve made – not the books, not the Netflix series, not the talent for grievance that has characterised their recent career. But none of that is Lilibet’s fault. She is five, and she is doing what five-year-olds should do: running around in bare feet and poking at flowers. She is free to be a child and I, for one, couldn’t be happier.
I bet that many of the people criticising these photographs would also lament the pressures placed upon modern children in other contexts. We worry that childhood is disappearing. We complain that today’s young grow up too quickly. We fret about social media, image consciousness and impossible standards of perfection. But the moment we see a child – even more so a famous one – blissfully unaware of all that, we criticise her for not looking polished enough.
If Lilibet’s parents had stayed as working members of the Royal Family, what would her fifth birthday photograph have looked like? I can tell you exactly. A formal portrait, taken in some well-appointed room at Kensington or Windsor. Lilibet in a smocked Liberty-print dress, probably pale blue, with a white Peter Pan collar. Her feet encased in white ankle socks and round-toed leather shoes from the high-end children’s shop Trotters, almost certainly, as they have been for every royal child for the past four decades. Her red hair brushed to within an inch of its life, pulled back in neat plaits tied with ribbon to match the dress. Positioned by a royal photographer. Told to smile – and smiling, no matter what she was actually feeling.
There is nothing inherently wrong with any of this. It’s what happens when you are born into one of the most famous families in the world, and we all hoover up the adorable photographs of George, Charlotte and Louis – their side partings and shiny shoes and general air of being characters in a children’s book from another era brought to life. It’s tradition, and tradition matters. But there is no getting away from the fact that it’s also a performance, carrying with it the full weight of royal expectation. Even poor Louis chafes at the bit sometimes. I’d wager he’d rather be barefoot in a garden than standing to attention on a palace balcony.
Lilibet, by contrast, looks as if she is having a rather more normal childhood – and, dare I say it, a happier one….Lilibet’s hair is a mess because she’s been having a childhood. There are far worse things to be accused of. And I say: Happy birthday to her.
Yeah, I’d like to point out something about Lili’s hair – and I cannot stand all of the nitpicking about this child’s hair – it’s clear that Lili has her father’s wiry, frizzy red hair. Lili’s hair is not a “mess,” she just has a different hair texture than most kids. It’s likely to change as she grows up too. Otherwise, I’m fine with what’s being said here. There have been so many public events where the Wales kids are on display, and I always think “thank god Harry and Meghan got the hell out of there.” Not only would Archie and Lili be on display in the same way, but they would be actively scapegoated to make their Wales cousins look better.
Photos courtesy of Meghan’s Instagram.
The entire family are happy and relaxed in Montecito away from toxicity. Why would Harry and Meghan subject their beloved children to anything toxic. Primary role of a parent is to keep your offspring safe in a loving and nurturing home and shield them from anything detrimental to their wellbeing.
And Lilibet is such a princess 👑 her strawberry blonde hair is so adorable ❤️
Her mom is also half black and naturally has insanely thick and curly hair. Lili’s hair was never going to be pin straight.
A broken clock is right twice a day. Glad someone can at least have enough sense to lay off a child.
I liked this article a lot – even when the author says that she has criticized H&M in the past and will likely do so in the future. It’s sort of refreshing to hear a hater/critic acknowledge that some criticisms are a bridge too far.
As for Lili’s hair – it looks fine. It looks she’s been playing and running around during a family photoshoot and it was probably brushed and looked smooth etc before and then she ran around. It doesn’t even look unbrushed to me, lol.
And yes there is no doubt in my mind that everything else aside, the Sussexes made the best choice for their children. It was the best choice for the parents too, but those children are growing up so much happier than if they were in London. Even if H&M had resisted some of the pressure to parade them before the press, they probably couldn’t have resisted all of it. And they would not have been given the pass in the press that the Wales children are for their behavior (imagine Archie behaving like Louis did at the Jubbly – it wouldnt be considered cute and “oh he’s such a scamp!” it would have been endless stories about Meghan’s poor parenting etc.)* As it is the kids get to go to school – and we have no idea where they go. We have no idea what activities they do besides surfing and dance – and even then no idea where she dances, when her recitals are, etc. And we dont need to know that! But meanwhile we’ve been in a 2 year debate in the press about where George will go to school.
*not starting a debate about that incident, lol, just pointing out how it would have been covered for Archie v. Louis.
I’m over this hair thing. Like you, her hair does not look unbrushed to me. In fact, it doesn’t even look a mess to me. I get that the author is saying her hair looks a mess bc she’s having a happy childhood which I appreciate. But to me at least, her hair did not look a mess in these photos so I wish the writer Vanessa had noted that. Bc idk if I’m getting oversensitive, but all this attention being given to the “messy hair” of Meghan’s daughter is getting real weird real quick, shades of nappy new year’s, just saying.
Yup, @Jais, I’m with you there. If Lili’s mother were a pale skinned Caucasian lady we would not be hearing about how “messy” her hair is. And fwiw it isn’t — it’s very healthy, natural, normal hair. No five year old she be groomed like a pageant queen.
Her hair is not a mess. The anti-blackness just jumps out with these people. Her hair is not unkempt because it’s not beaten into submission with edge tamer and hairspray. Hair comes in a variety of textures and people really need to educate themselves, before complaining about certain things. It reminds me a lot of the Blue Ivy hair narrative when she was little. Sadly, a lot of it coming from black people who have been indoctrinated into what looks ” presentable”.
They’re focus on the hair for a reason, her strawberry blonde hair is triggering them so they are trying to discredit it. Lili looks like everything they think a princess should look like and they just can’t accept it😃
Forreal. The microaggressions are crazy when it comes to her hair.
I liked the article a lot also, except for the comments about a lily’s hair and bare feet…her hair looks exactly like most of my childhood photos before hair products.. I have frizzy curl it’s beautiful with products and styled but before products it was never smooth and just does what it wants.. I love that Lilys hair looks like she’s been running around outside and swimming she’s absolutely adorable.
The hair and feet comments are so offensive..Charlotte’s hair is dyed and I bet straightened -she definitely gets a blow out and has done for years , as a child. That’s neglect. Her mother wears dead animals that smell on her head..why not discuss that?
Btw the WAILS did shoeless pics right after the Sussexes did. Strange that’s not commented on. The derangers are abusive. The less energy we give those psychos the better.
My kids all have this hair texture. Thick and wavy. Without product, it looks just like hers. My girls are older now so they use a lot of product but I didn’t when they were little. Just kept it clean and brushed 1-2 x per day.
@Lamb Chop: right?! I don’t recall reading any concerns about athlete’s foot, fungus (isn’t athlete’s foot a fungus??), and parasites after the barefoot big jump at the beach photos.
Yes, this is as positive an article as we’re ever going to see from the DM – I’ll celebrate it. And I had to laugh at the description of Lili’s hypothetical birthday portrait, blue Liberty print with the Peter Pan collar – almost a description of Charlotte’s 4th birthday photo.
Yeah, there’s nothing unkempt or “unbrushed” about her hair. It’s obvious that it looks like that because it’s wavy! Mine was like that when I was little. I’ve had a gutful of press and derangers appearance-shaming a five-year-old to push a racist child neglect narrative. FFS.
But I suppose anything vaguely critical of the bizarre environment the Wales kids are growing up in has to get in a few swipes so the writer can keep her job. It’s just exhausting at this point.
I think that Vanessa Tait wrote the article in part to be able to repeat and amplify the vile comments that were made on social media. Attacks on a 5-year old and statements that her clothes look like they are from a trash bin (clearly written by someone who is legally blind) tell us everything anyone needs to know about why Meghan and the kids are simply not safe in the UK. The vitriol is off the charts for merely posting sweet pictures of a beautiful child.
Repeating more than once how it’s fine that Lili’s hair was a mess. Fascinating, right?
Yes, excellent point. That is not messy hair.
Exactly THIS. These Daily Fail reporters aren’t even clever. She probably wrote some of those hater comments herself. But taking hateful comments from social media about a CHILD and amplifying them to thousands of people who would never otherwise have heard those comments is a CHOICE. The repeated “unkempt hair” trope is also racist as hell.
She deserves no praise for this article. She accomplished her purpose. And because she pretended to be complimentary *for once* she can point to that and claim plausible deniability. But she knew exactly what she was doing. And now has a host of people rushing to defend Lili’s hair, when it isn’t necessary in the first place, and when they could have ignored this woman and starved her of the clicks she was after.
It’s as Toni Morrison said: “The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again…”
🙁sigh..
That dress looked like a very expensive kid’s dress. That commenter was an idiot.
@Beanie, I thought the same about the dress! And I also don’t think her hair looked the least bit unbrushed or “unkempt.” It’s appalling that they’re writing about a five-year-old child like this.
It costs 320 $ – and sold out the same day.
Yup, the “Sussex Tax” at work again
Lili’s hair looks absolutely fine. Tousled because she’s outside running, playing, being a child. Derangers need to stop with the comments that imply Lili’s unkempt or neglected.
Lili is not ‘squirming’ in that photo, and her hair isn’t a mess. I do appreciate that someone sees the lovely childhood taking place but also, what weird projetion.
Her one leg is blurry like it was in motion. Maybe that’s what she’s extrapolating? I figured she was swinging her leg like kids do though, not squirming.
Yeah, I didn’t get the ‘squirming’ part either. And how do you see squirming in a still photo?
This gutter rat took the time to write a post about a 5yo while posting the nastiness she saw online. This child is heathy, happy and loved. Her hair is a product of her heritage from both of her parents. If Meghan wanted her daughters hair to be bone straight it would be, but she is allowing her daughters hair to grow naturally. To have this many people discussing this child’s appearance is unhealthy for them, not this child because she is far too young to understand this nonsense and her parents only show their backs because of the unhealthy discourse surrounding their children. Many of these folks are angry because from what they can see, these children look white with read hair and they cannot see their faces. This is not about the clothes are even their hair, it is because they cannot phantom a mixed race woman birthing children who have these features.
Comments about Lili’s hair are a racist micro-aggression. There’s nothing wrong with her hair it looks healthy and well groomed. I’m surprised they’re talking in this coded way. All of the other racism directed at this family has been bluntly stated.
This woman is obviously suffering a bout of temporary sanity. No doubt the Mail will get her whatever help she needs. Bless her ❤️.
Lordamercy, but that is funny! She’ll need to go back to the daily mail center to be rebooted.
Rebooted!! LMFAO
Maybe, just maybe – if they spend some time discussing Kate’s appearance, they palace might intervene and get her some help.
I’m actually glad she highlighted some of the deranged comments by Sussex critics. I mean, asserting that a child being barefoot is at risk of parasites and fungus??? That’s delulu.
Yeah, I wouldn’t let my kiddo walk barefoot on the streets of London. But in her own backyard? On lush grass? These people are insane. And racist as hell, referring to Lili being “unkempt” and wearing clothes out of the “trash bin.”
I liked Tait’s column — I hope DM readers choke on their Weetabix as they read it — but notice that yet again, the rota is acting like the decision to leave England was Meghan’s sole decision (“Maybe Meghan got it right after all…”).
Well, some people are far more generous than I am because this writer made her point in the most reluctant, backhanded and begrudging manner possible. First, she paid the “Sussex tax” of listing the things she believes the parents to be guilty of against the crown. She also goes on and on about “unbrushed” and “messy” hair, without considering that a little girl playing and running around just may become tousled along the way regardless of how she was dressed in the morning. Even the “dare I say, happy birthday to her” seems begrudging. What a country England is. Sadly, this column does, in its pathetic way, qualify as a somewhat positive thing.
I agree with you 💯. Its offensive, listing all the ‘wrongs’ and frankly abusing a 5 year old child. Im shocked how easily people fall into the media traps.
What is this obsession with her hair? She has beautiful, healthy hair. It looks clean and brushed to me ( and I’ve seen children with tangled hair). Maybe they dont like that fact that it loose and not held back, that its not controlled within an inch of her life..
Lili’s the only one who everyone says truly takes after Diana, appearance-wise, and the only granddaughter with red hair, so as usual, the racists are doing their damndest to sully this child’s appearance. They are latching onto the hair because it’s mostly what we see and mostly what people comment on when they see images of Lili, and they almost always link her with her late grandmother. That’s why the Mail is amplifying the abuse which is being hurled at her, under the guise of wishing her (begrudgingly) a happy birthday. Lili does not need birthday wishes from people like that.
And as someone wrote above, the constant references to “unkempt” hair are their way of restraining themselves from outright saying “nappy-headed” the way they insinuated with Archie.
This article is meant to provoke William and Kate. Most of the time the Wales kids look like they’re practically wearing straight jackets. It’s a criticism of how Kate dresses and presents her children. I mean it’s nice that positive things were written about Lili but that will provoke them as well. The article is very devious.
These photos are very cute and show Lili growing up to be a happy and well loved child. I know the British tabloids are still very critical of everything H&M do but I think the tide is starting to turn. People are tired of reading about how much the British tabloids hate them. Meghan keeps posting fun pics and videos from As Ever and her personal Instagram. There’s only so much they can do to criticize the kids. They don’t see their faces and barely know anything about him so not much they can do with that.
Even if H&M had stayed in the UK, I doubt they would have done any of the formal birthday photos this article alludes to. Even William and Kate don’t do formal posed photos for their kids’ birthday photos. Yes, sometimes the photos are from planned family photo sessions but they tend to be very casual and not stuffy and formal.
The comments after that article were horrific ..still harping on the same nastinesses . The kids are not real . They rent the kids . Its a different child each time . Meghan never birthed anything . Its AI . Their hair changes colour. And of course all that garbage about messy hair and barefeet? How do these people live with themselves . Unless they are bots planted by William and his henchmen
Kids, especially younger ones should be allowed to “kid”. She’s a little kid in her own home playing, she doesn’t have to be trussed up to fit uptight adult’s fantasies. She’s part black, when it’s humid or we sweat things get a little poufy or frizzy. This is just how her hair is just like when they would complain because Megan’s hair isn’t perfectly straight and it doesn’t have to be. I’m glad that they don’t parade their kids and push them into the spotlight. I’ll get dragged for this, but I wish Beyonce and Kim K, would just let their older girl’s kid. They’re only 13, plenty of time to do the nepo baby thing, let them have some privacy now.
Right? In fact Meghan has a very tight curl and ‘frizzy ‘ too if you remember her childhood pictures. It’s like they really want to attack the black part of Lillie but they are also disingenuous about it.
Why don’t the editors of these publications make it off limits to criticize and complain about a 5 year olds hair and attire. The derangers rush to make comments
Yeah there’s nothing wrong with Lili’s hair. These royalists used that same microagression against Meghan when she was a working royal. The overall piece was correct but left out a vital issue which was Harry didn’t want his children put on display and heavily scrutinized like he was when he was a child and it was part of the reason why he left the Royal Family. There was no doubt that the Royal Family was going to use Archie and Lili as scapegoats to protect the Wales children. Heck a few months after Archie was born someone in the press was already stating that he was going to be a brat.
It’s interesting the Fail is increasingly letting it’s “reporters” off the reservations. Liz Jones, Amanda Platell, and now this article. Of course everyone has to pay the Sussex tax, but still.
And I absolutely agree with everyone here, that the Sussexes made the right decision to raise their kids in California. The alternative was being under a magnifying glass in Britain, completely with hateful cartoons and scapegoating articles meant to make the Wales kids look better.
Even when the rota relent and speak 1 truth (the Sussex children are better off not being raised on salt island), they have to get their racist, sexist, classist swipes in. It really is a blessing that the Sussexes escaped the system that would have destroyed their marriage and children for sport to protect and embiggen Will-not, his spawn and his odd wife.
That is a CULT GAIA DRESS! It costs the better part of $300! She’s not out there in an Old Navy tank and hand-me-down overalls (and if she was: more power to her)
This kid is standing in a professionally landscaped yard, in an expensive dress, having a perfectly sunlit picture taken (possibly also professionally). If anything, this image screams luxury, and I bet it more closely resembles the pictures taken of very wealthy British kids than the DM wants to admit. The way the *royal* kids are displayed is entirely unique to them, anyone who thinks it’s a normal way to make a kid look “classy” has a very performative vision of elegance.
Love Lili’s little dresses. They are so pretty, not restricting, and cool to wear in the California sun. Charlotte looked cute in her birthday pictures at that age as well, but her dresses were very very English- very buttoned- up, Peter Pan collars, smocking on the bodice, little cap sleeves. They both reflect where they live and their very different lifestyles. Notice that they also seem to reflect their mothers as well. Lili is often barefoot, running around on grass, hair free, lots of room to be free. Charlotte’s life is not as free as Lili’s, obviously.
As a young girl, I had very straight blond “Anglo-Saxon” hair and my mother would brush it in the morning. However I hated to have my hair curled or brushed, so most of the time my hair looked very much like Lili’s because I played outdoors and had fun instead of staying inside. I ran through sprinklers, swam in a lake, climbed trees, and basically got very dirty every day. Much better than having to wear a suit or fancy clothing to go to a picnic or sporting event as the Wales kids do.
‘…athlete’s foot, fungus and parasites’??? Have these people never gone barefoot on a lawn before? A manicured lawn at that? FFS, I went barefoot my entire childhood in Southern California, only putting on shoes for school, and I never had any of those problems. I had stubbed toes, blood blisters, and once ran over my own big toe with my skateboard, but that’s different.
Anyhoo, it was nice to see an almost normal column saying almost normal things about a kid just being a kid.
I could not have rolled my eyes harder at the comment about all of the dangers of Lili’s bare feet
The long hair au naturel is the style right now, but I’ve never been a fan, as when I was little my mother constantly said that if we didn’t keep it in some sort of brushed style, we’d have to wear it shorter— which I guess imprinted on me because I don’t like charlotte’s hair so long and stringy either! But that is my personal preference, as there is obviously nothing wrong with this adorable picture.
This little girl is so adorable! I like the bracelet she’s wearing on her left wrist. Maybe a birthday present?
Harry looks so so happy in the picture holding Lili. It looks good on him, im glad to see it.
Speaking as a Black woman living in America, where the “1 Drop Rule” – the policy that if you had only 1 drop of Black blood, you were treated as Black – has been an ongoing feature and staple of society, I can confidently state that the insulting and othering of Lili, Archie, and their beautiful mom will continue indefinitely. White culture is fragile and often in its feelings, especially in the face of Black excellence. It’s unlikely the haters or British media will ever stop insulting and abusing the Sussex children.
Amen…that hideous rule. The one drop rule, does genetics even work like that? These people and their coded racism is getting curiouser and curiouser and it’s very aggravating because they think we don’t see the micro aggrations.
Looks to me that in the not too distant future we will see pictures of the children with their faces revealed. The images being released are gradually showing more and more amounts of facial features….
I doubt faces will be shown . Considering deranger reactions to those children. On various discussion boards
I’m baffled by the hair comments. Kids’ hair gets messy when they run around and play. And plenty of white children of British ancestry have curly, unruly hair too. I’m one of them. That’s exactly what my hair looked like at the end of a school day when I was a little kid, which is why my mother often put it in braids.
I agree a lot of the commentary about her hair is probably driven by racism, but it’s not like all white kids in the UK have pin straight hair? The late Queen and her sister both had curly hair! Look at pics of Margaret when she was hanging around on Mustique and didn’t have it coiffed.
Lily gets her curls from both sides of the family. She’s barefoot because she’s a child in the garden in sunny California. Her dress probably cost $200 at a Montecito boutique. People need to get out of the 1950s. They honestly need to get out of the 1850s.
Do the English never go bare-footed outside? I’m asking. Could it be weather-related (always cold or rainy)? Or is it just the British stuffiness that makes them think bare feet are “rude?” Everyone has them–shoes or no shoes, we all have feet. They are so frigging odd.