Toddler Covers Herself in Paint While Mom Is Distracted

Yahoo!Parenting ^ | July 9, 2015 | Esther Crain

[CGASMIA68]

I think the post sucked deal with it

[Kaslin]

I am not sure if people still use play pens or not. I know I used them for my kids when they were little.

[Kaslin]

Thank you

[Kaslin]

If you think I am going to ask you what I can post you are mistaken. I will not and now get off my thread

[Kaslin]

If you look close the latter steps are not white

[Swordmaker]

I don’t think it is a set up. I think the child was somehow able to pour it all over her front. I’ll bet her back is not painted. The arms show that she reached down into the bucket, leaving her shoulders and face bare. That is why only the edge of her hair is painted. You can see her artwork on the fireplace and her footsteps across the floor.

You're reaching . . . There is no way a child playing with paint won't get it on her face. Children always touch their faces.. . or the tops of their heads. The symmetric adult hand sized bare spots on each upper arm show she was placed in the bucket. The foot prints are not steps because they are equally imprinted and don't lose definition as the paint wears off. Instead the steps are equal with each impression. There are no distinctive drips as she moved across the room, yet there ARE drips where she is posed for the photograph where she was put down and, in my considered opinion, told to stand. There are no runs down her legs from what would have been sopped underwear. All of these are red flags to me.

Your assumption that her back was not covered is just that, an assumption. No child would be so carefully, completely covered except on her face by herself. Hurt hair shows signs of just being just having brushed against her paint wet shoulders. There is so much about this that was staged starting with the drips of paint below the can's lid on the hearth.

[Swordmaker]

Hurt hair = Her hair

I just had eye surgery and have a bit of a problem seeing this afternoon. Sorry about that.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

I knew what you meant.

Her hair looks like she leaned forward. It is shaped around her face. Kids are all different. Some don’t like to touch their face. Her hair is in her eyes so clearly she was not touching her face even to move her hair.

The footprints do get lighter. There are more paint drips where she is standing, but that could be explained by just spending more time in that spot and allowing time for it to run off.

The back is an assumption. It doesn’t really matter to the truthfulness of the story. No one saw her do it.

Anyway it is a cute story. If it is staged there is no real harm done. But I think the bare shoulders and the paint shaped around the front edges of her hair really looks like she leaned forward into the bucket.

[Bigg Red]

I am calling hooey on this story. Isn’t the paint a little too even?

[Rebelbase]

LOL!

[R. Scott]

Today’s young mothers might think of them as prisons.

[Kaslin]

Probably and the same with those garters you put on the toddler when you are walking with him. People give you a dirty look. They don’t realize that this for the safety of the child.

[Kaslin]

I remember my sister and I used to cut each other hair too onetime when we were small

[R. Scott]

When I was a toddler I had a harness and leash. They were common.

[Kaslin]

She got paint in her hair and if you notice her hair is all over her face.

This was staged and she's posing.

Set Up!

Yeah right *rme*

[Kaslin]

I used it on my daughter. My sons were 7 and 10 years old when she was born and when they were small leashes and harnesses were unknown

[Fresh Wind]

[Kaslin]

OMG, LOL. Are those your kids? I sure am glad that you posted this, because some idiots in here think that can not happen