Kate Plus Eight!

Curiosity got the better of me, and I watched the tape I made. Not that much has changed except that the kids are older and Jon is not there. Same expensive trip that only a tiny few could possibly afford; multiple parties for the younger kids.

I thought the skimpy bikini Kate wore was very inappropriate. I wonder if the older girls find her choice of clothing embarrassing and get teased about it at school.

Kate still cackling and screaching; it's like nails on a chalkboard.

If Jamie is such a dear and long-time friend, why have we only started seeing her recently? I think one reason the kids like the crew is because they take the place of grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins most kids have. Kate has cut relatives out of their lives. I think Jon has reintroduced them to some, which is wonderful.

I did try and watch the second hour which seemed to be all Kate, all the time, but I just couldn't stomach it. My heart goes out to those children being raised by a mother like that. However, many other children have grown up in less-than-great conditions and somehow triumphed. What a rude awakening for those children when the fancy trips and go-to-the-head-of-the-line outings finally end, and they will be treated just like everyone else. I hope they don't end up like some child actors who are never able to transition to an ordinary life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheIrishEyes;3927310;

I don't think the pinata was empty to begin with. A couple of times when Cara or Mady hit it, you could see pieces flying out, and they ran over to the grass to pick them up. So I think the candy just was coming out at intervals while they were beating on it, and by the time they knocked it completely down, it was empty. I wasn't watching that closely and I'm not going to bother going back and re-watching, but that was the impression I got. Besides, if it had been completely empty and Cara and Mady hadn't gotten any candy at all, I think we would have seen another major meltdown.

---

Thanks, IrishEyes. This has actually opened up an interesting discussion.

I was mad that I had allowed myself to get caught up in the outrage over this incident, because I am usually more careful than that. I did some more checking and found that things occurred as you have described. So this begs another question (to you or anyone who watched the show). A couple of posters here believed the pinata to be empty. Many commenters on the other blog I read also believed the pinata to be empty. So can anyone comment on whether this was a matter of bad editing, or a matter of questionable editing designed to make Kate look bad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denna40

I have two quick questions;

If you (that's just a general you, not specific to anyone) are against reality tv based on children, does that include the Duggar family? I always wonder why they seem to get a free pass when the parents are essentially filming their kids' lives same as Jon and Kate.

If posters dislike Kate so much, why continue to write about her? Doesn't that just boost her fame quotient?

Just curious.

---

Hi Denna - For me, this includes the Duggar family and every other reality show that includes children. Children on these shows are not actors playing characters. The characters they play are themselves. Many psychologists have stated and written that this is very harmful to a child's healthy development. Add to this the fact that no federal laws exist to protect children in entertainment, and the fact that some networks (e.g., TLC) and production companies try to circumvent some already weak state child labor laws on the books, and these children are at high risk to be exploited for the financial gain of others.

The 1st-person accounts by the surviving Dionne quintuplets of how years of being put on display and gawked at by strangers and of being used to sell products ruined their lives should be a clear indicator of what is in store for many of these children. The surviving Dionne sisters felt compelled to write an open letter (published in Time Magazine) to the McCaughey family urging them to not put their septuplets in the spotlight and to protect their privacy.

I think some folks don't have a problem with the Duggars because the parents don't project the same offensive image of greed and total product placement as the Gosselins do. From all accounts, the Duggar parents are involved and treat their children with respect. I am glad for that, but they don't earn a free pass from me because of it.

To answer your last question, I will continue to write about Kate (and Jon and TLC) in an effort to bring awareness to anyone willing to listen about this kind of child exploitation. Kate's words and behavior have caused me to see her as a parent who views her children as possessions to be used for personal gain. And while this might boost her fame, the fact that people are willing to write things to protest this can bring about reform and protections. It is happening already. Public outcry about the Gosselins is responsible for a new child labor law being introduced in PA this week. Public outcry forced TLC and the parents to start putting money into trust accounts for the children. (Granted, the amount is laughable - 15% of revenue from the show divided among the 8 children - but at least it is a start.) These things would not have happened had people just sat back and said nothing.

I believe that no child should have to endure the invasion of privacy that the Gosselin children have endured. They shouldn't have their naked images put on TV and shown to millions of strangers. They shouldn't have strangers watch them being potty-trained. They shouldn't have their tantrums and meltdowns filmed so that strangers can label them as "difficult" or "horrible" children. They shouldn't have to worry about their friends and strangers seeing their mother mock and belittle them. They shouldn't have to put on a happy face for the cameras while they are experiencing the turmoil and confusion of their parents divorcing. They shouldn't be lied to for the sake of a story line. They shouldn't have to cover their faces with their hands or clothing because they don't want pictures snapped of them. They shouldn't have to work to support their parents' desire for wealth and fame.

Children are not chattal. They deserve their privacy. They deserve a life full of spontaneous joy, not scripted moments for the entertainment of others.

Thanks all for listening.

Thanks Mushybrain for such a well thought out response. I have to say I agree with much of what you say.

I did not see the pinata incident, but it's interesting to me how many people leaped on it as another example of bad Kate. Doesn't that make you wonder if there were another examples of bad editing?

I see the Duggars doing a show more to "spread the word" on Christian living etc....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mushybrain;3927522;

Thanks, IrishEyes. This has actually opened up an interesting discussion.

I was mad that I had allowed myself to get caught up in the outrage over this incident, because I am usually more careful than that. I did some more checking and found that things occurred as you have described. So this begs another question (to you or anyone who watched the show). A couple of posters here believed the pinata to be empty. Many commenters on the other blog I read also believed the pinata to be empty. So can anyone comment on whether this was a matter of bad editing, or a matter of questionable editing designed to make Kate look bad?



Hi Denna - For me, this includes the Duggar family and every other reality show that includes children. Children on these shows are not actors playing characters. The characters they play are themselves. Many psychologists have stated and written that this is very harmful to a child's healthy development. Add to this the fact that no federal laws exist to protect children in entertainment, and the fact that some networks (e.g., TLC) and production companies try to circumvent some already weak state child labor laws on the books, and these children are at high risk to be exploited for the financial gain of others.

The 1st-person accounts by the surviving Dionne quintuplets of how years of being put on display and gawked at by strangers and of being used to sell products ruined their lives should be a clear indicator of what is in store for many of these children. The surviving Dionne sisters felt compelled to write an open letter (published in Time Magazine) to the McCaughey family urging them to not put their septuplets in the spotlight and to protect their privacy.

I think some folks don't have a problem with the Duggars because the parents don't project the same offensive image of greed and total product placement as the Gosselins do. From all accounts, the Duggar parents are involved and treat their children with respect. I am glad for that, but they don't earn a free pass from me because of it.

To answer your last question, I will continue to write about Kate (and Jon and TLC) in an effort to bring awareness to anyone willing to listen about this kind of child exploitation. Kate's words and behavior have caused me to see her as a parent who views her children as possessions to be used for personal gain. And while this might boost her fame, the fact that people are willing to write things to protest this can bring about reform and protections. It is happening already. Public outcry about the Gosselins is responsible for a new child labor law being introduced in PA this week. Public outcry forced TLC and the parents to start putting money into trust accounts for the children. (Granted, the amount is laughable - 15% of revenue from the show divided among the 8 children - but at least it is a start.) These things would not have happened had people just sat back and said nothing.

I believe that no child should have to endure the invasion of privacy that the Gosselin children have endured. They shouldn't have their naked images put on TV and shown to millions of strangers. They shouldn't have strangers watch them being potty-trained. They shouldn't have their tantrums and meltdowns filmed so that strangers can label them as "difficult" or "horrible" children. They shouldn't have to worry about their friends and strangers seeing their mother mock and belittle them. They shouldn't have to put on a happy face for the cameras while they are experiencing the turmoil and confusion of their parents divorcing. They shouldn't be lied to for the sake of a story line. They shouldn't have to cover their faces with their hands or clothing because they don't want pictures snapped of them. They shouldn't have to work to support their parents' desire for wealth and fame.

Children are not chattal. They deserve their privacy. They deserve a life full of spontaneous joy, not scripted moments for the entertainment of others.

Thanks all for listening.

---

VERY well said! I totally agree with you, and the Duggar clan don't get a pass from me either. I have often wondered if their many kids get any of the money they make from the show. I also really disapprove of the mom having more kids while her already overworked older girls are parenting the ones she already has. And doing most of the housework, apparently. Those girls must not have many "downtime" moments in life, and that is sad.

But the Gosselin kids I feel even sorrier for. I believe that Kate deliberately had as many multiples as she could so she could get the attention and freebies. I suppose this is total hearsay, but from what people know about her she had an obsession when she was younger with some set of multiples whose name I can't remember right now. There was also the fact, which she evidently talked about herself, that her ovaries were overstimulated at some point and some folks including me believe she went against doctor's advice and her and Jon took care of things the normal way. Knowing her actions and that they actually shopped a video around looking for a show, I believe Kate planned this. And that makes her worse than a pimp. I believe she actually had those kids for a purpose and it was not so she could be a mom.

Mushybrain, great post. I agree on most all points. I think the Duggar kids are used too and in a terrible way, but more so by the parents using them as hired help for childcare and household chores than tv performance. But, I guess I should put that on their thead. Their case is actually one in which I think the home environment is so restricted and disabling that the cameras are actully helpful to opening up the world to them and possibly exposing the children's conditions to the outside world. That might be a good thing, although the long term repercussions on the children are still uncertain.

I do agree about the harm of the show on the Gosselin children. I wonder why Kate is the only one who dosen't see the problem. It may be amusing for us to watch little kids as they grow up, but their privacy should be respected. It's just not right.

When she tried to act like it was great to film again because the kids loved the crew, I just felt so sad for them. It's not the filming they are starved for, it's the people. It's almost like they have to perform on film to get those human contacts. That's how I see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Debb70;3927548;

Mushybrain, great post. I agree on most all points. I think the Duggar kids are used too and in a terrible way, but more so by the parents using them as hired help for childcare and household chores than tv performance. But, I guess I should put that on their thead. Their case is actually one in which I think the home environment is so restricted and disabling that the cameras are actully helpful to opening up the world to them and possibly exposing the children's conditions to the outside world. That might be a good thing, although the long term repercussions on the children are still uncertain.

I do agree about the harm of the show on the Gosselin children. I wonder why Kate is the only one who dosen't see the problem. It may be amusing for us to watch little kids as they grow up, but their privacy should be respected. It's just not right.

When she tried to act like it was great to film again because the kids loved the crew, I just felt so sad for them. It's not the filming they are starved for, it's the people. It's almost like they have to perform on film to get those human contacts. That's how I see it.

---

Great post! There are some smart cookies on this board, and if I can't say it better, why try? I totally agree with everything you've said. It's very very sad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kidstookitall;3927367;

I don't think you will hear Michelle crying "woe is me" like Kate because Michelle doesn't take care of her kids. Her kids take care of her kids.

---

Kate does not take care of her kids either. Between the nannies and the camara crew Kate has very little to do with the kids. And when you think about it when does Kate have the time to spend with her kids? She did Dancing with the Stars, her book tour and then filming for her own tv show without her kids. Kate may want to think of herself as a great mother and someone that people should look up to but really all she is is a very selfish person who puts herself and her wants above her children or anyone else.

I just don't share the general outrage about the Gosselins being on TV. No, I don't like everything I see on their show but know what? I don't like everything that goes on in my home and family either. I don't choose to show my family on TV but the Gosselins do, and that's their choice.

So many people are saying things to the effect that the kids are suffering, damaged, won't be able to adapt to life without cameras & publicity, etc. I think that's speculation. The new film that was shown this week was after the kids hadn't been filmed for 1/2 a year, which is a long, long time in the lives of not-yet-6-year-olds, and a hefty percentage of the time they've been truly cognizant of their circumstances. From what I saw on the film, the kids didn't seem any the better nor the worse for wear having not been filmed for 6 months. They just seemed a little bigger and somewhat more articulate than the last time we saw them - as would any 6-year-olds be a year after being 5.

I understand and agree with the cry for regulating the filming conditions and compensation of minors - reality TV is a different breed of the same animal as documentary filmmaking and it is a different animal than performing artists and I agree, laws and ethics have to catch up to this new genre, just as laws lag behind in all sorts of "advancements" and technological breakthroughs in our society.

I'd like to suggest, though, that those who are concerned about the privacy of minors should also be concerned about the privacy of the children of celebrities, who are all too often photographed and exhibited like trophies. Also, let's not forget there are celebrities who sell the rights to their babies' first photos. I don't know if there are laws about who is earning that money or if any part of it has to go into trust for the child. There are celebrities who doggedly keep their children out of the press (ridicule it or not, when was the first time you saw the face of Prince, Paris or Blanket Jackson? Perhaps it was a year ago this month . . .?) To me, it's creepier and more foolhardy for these extremely wealthy celebrities to parade their kids in public; at least in the Gosselins' case, the kids are the quote unquote celebs and they're among those being compensated for being in the public eye. (And no, celebs shouldn't have to go to Jacksonian extremes to hide their children, but I wish they'd be less cavalier about flaunting them. Can it be done? Try finding a photo of Goldie Hawn's daughter growing up, before she herself became an actress.).

One more note, and that's about comparisons between the Dionnes and the Gosselins (I can't speak to the Duggar situation because I don't watch or follow that family). The Dionnes were ripped from their family, put under the ward of the Canadian government, and actually put on live display as a carnival show. It's a different situation than the Gosselins but I don't doubt that the experience of the Dionnes is far from the minds of those who make decisions for the Gosselin family.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sclilred1;3927638;

Kate does not take care of her kids either. Between the nannies and the camara crew Kate has very little to do with the kids. And when you think about it when does Kate have the time to spend with her kids? She did Dancing with the Stars, her book tour and then filming for her own tv show without her kids. Kate may want to think of herself as a great mother and someone that people should look up to but really all she is is a very selfish person who puts herself and her wants above her children or anyone else.

---

The point I was trying to make was Michelle may not have nannies to take care of her kids, she still doesn't take care of her kids. I just don't see the difference between the two. Neither spend time with their kids. Also Kate is a single parent and the Duggers are both there and the Dugger girls still do all the parenting.