Kate Middleton dressed Princess Charlotte as a mini version of herself for the eight-year-old’s first time attending Wimbledon. The Prince and Princess of Wales made a family visit on Sunday 16 July, to watch the men’s Singles Final between Novak Djokovic from Serbia and Carlos Alcaraz from Spain. Princess Charlotte and Prince George, nine, the couple’s two eldest children, accompanied their parents to the prized match for their first appearance at the tournament this year. While Prince George was able to attend Wimbledon last year, Princess Charlotte had never been until this past weekend. To match her mother’s style, the princess donned a blue and white floral dress adorned with ruffle sleeves designed by the Spanish brand Friki. Meanwhile, Kate stunned in a Roland Mouret emerald green mid-calf dress with ruffle detailing along the neckline. The patron of the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC) continued her green streak from her previous two appearances this year, when she wore a structured Balmain jacket and a Self-Portrait belted short-sleeve dress. On Sunday with her family, Kate accessorised with a bow pinned to her chest in Wimbledon colours. Rather than representing a variety of green shades, Prince William and his children wore a range of blue instead. The 41-year-old father layered a gray suit jacket over a light blue shirt and matching navy tie and trousers. Prince George showed up in a navy blue suit similar to the one he wore last year, which sparked concern at the time. According to a report in People from 2022, the couple’s eldest son told his father he was “too hot” in his outfit not long after they arrived at the men’s finals in the 84F weather. Despite the high temperature, Prince George’s attire was in accordance with the renowned tennis tournament’s dress code. According to the Wimbledon website, all men sitting in the Royal Box at Centre Court must don “suits/jacket and tie.” A picture of the nine-year-old son exposed him overheating in his long-sleeve outfit with his hand on his forehead. He appeared to be wiping away sweat before his mom was caught checking his temperature with her hand on his face. Though the heat made it difficult to watch the match in formalwear, Prince George had already been required to follow the suit codes for several other events. That same year, the heat prompted the tournament to adjust their attire requirements in the Royal Box for the women’s final. Usually, large hats aren’t allowed in the private section because they could block other people’s views. However, because the temperature was so high and the sun was beating down, women were allowed to wear the large accessory to stay cool. Read More Novak Djokovic fined 8,000 US dollars for ‘racket abuse’ in Wimbledon final Kate Middleton returns to Wimbledon for ladies’ singles wearing pale green outfit Kate Middleton consoles heartbroken Ons Jabeur after Wimbledon loss

A mother of two has faced backlash after revealing that she packs her toddler a meal to eat out at a restaurant. Karlie Smith, a 21-year-old mother from Ohio, went viral on TikTok this week when she shared how she gets her two-year-old son to eat at a restaurant. “Call me cheap, call me whatever, but if we’re going out to a restaurant, I’m packing my kid a meal,” she began the TikTok, which has since been viewed more than 55k times. Smith, who goes by @unbreakablemomma on the app, shared with her followers that her family gets together for dinner on Friday nights, but this time was different because they were going to a restaurant. “My son is not getting food out,” she said, before explaining why she prefers to pack her son a meal ahead of time. “For one, you want me to pay $6.99 for chicken tenders and fries that my son is going to throw half of it on the floor, you’re crazy. Also, whatever I pack is probably gonna be healthier than what the restaurant has anyways.” The mom then showed the meal she had packed for her toddler, which included a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, cut-up banana, mild cheddar cheese cubes, and a chocolate Lara bar stored in a plastic container. “Also, when we get to a restaurant, my child is not waiting for anyone to take his order – he wants to eat now,” she said. “I can just hand him this and let him go to town. Also, my child is not opinionated. He does not care what he eats; he just wants to eat.” However, Smith added that if her son wants restaurant food, she’ll order it. “Also, I usually get him chocolate milk because that’s his little takeout treat,” she said. “And after he finishes his food, he’s usually eating off my plate.” While Karlie Smith’s parenting hack may work for her family, many people in the comments section were outraged that she would deprive her son of restaurant food. Some TikTok users went so far as to claim it was a form of “abuse” to pack her toddler a pre-made meal. “My brother-in-law’s step-father used to do this to him as abuse,” read the top comment under Smith’s video. In response, the mother of two wrote back: “No one said I’d do this forever, I even said if he wanted something off the menu I would give it to him and share my meal, but he’s happy.” @unbreakablemomma ♬ Monkeys Spinning Monkeys - Kevin MacLeod & Kevin The Monkey Others chimed in, “Stop throwing the word abuse around,” and, “At that age they don’t know the difference between restaurant food or a home-cooked meal. It’s far from abuse.” Some people also claimed that eating out at a restaurant should be a special occasion for everyone, including their young ones. “I just bring a snack for the wait but I think going out to eat is special for everyone, not just the adults,” said one TikToker. “In my house everyone eats out or no one eats out! My parents had the same rules!” another wrote. When one parent shared that they tried pre-packing their daughter’s meal once but they felt “so much mom guilt” for “leaving her out,” Smith replied: “I get it! Sometimes I take my son out for special mommy and me meals!” Despite the negative comments, many people still praised Smith’s parenting tip and told her to block out the haters. “This is actually genius. My son is so picky and I always end up paying for something he doesn’t eat,” said one TikToker. “Love this! My kid is autistic and doesn’t want to wait for the order to come,” another person said. “Go momma!!” “I thought everyone did this!!” said someone else. “Literally common sense to bring toddlers snacks while eating out!!? It’s like a parent hack.” However, it was Karlie Smith who had the last laugh when she poked fun at some of the backlash in a follow-up video. “What people think I do because I said I pack a meal for my two-year-old at restaurants,” she wrote over a separate TikTok video, which saw Smith act out outlandish scenarios, such as feeding her child a can of green beans and a raw onion. @unbreakablemomma Replying to @Kayla2022 the american girl doll is a paid actress ♬ Monkeys Spinning Monkeys - Kevin MacLeod & Kevin The Monkey “You clap back at those haters, girlfriend,” said one fan. The Independent has contacted Karlie Smith for comment. Read More College student says didn’t know she was pregnant until baby was crowning due to ‘cryptic pregnancy’ A TikTok model made viral videos of her grandmother’s choice to die. Here’s why Mother speaks out after video about putting fake tan on baby goes viral

Scorching weather gripped three continents on Sunday, whipping up wildfires and threatening to topple temperature records as the dire consequences...

One of Meta’s core goals is to facilitate the “metaverse,” where people can hang out

Nepo babies are forever turning our TikTok FYP into a flashy display of gilded glamor. Our most recent fascination: Sofia Richie Grainge, daughter of Lionel Richie.

Spooky season is almost over, and Thanksgiving is on the horizon. In wardrobe speak, this means that winter isn’t just coming. It’s pretty much here. Temperatures are dropping fast, and we’re layering up even faster, starting with the winter dress. The winter dress is not that much different from the fall dress; just add some extra weight and/or fabric, so it’ll stand the test of snow, sleet, or whatever else the season throws at you. Think sweater-like materials and yuletide prints, long sleeves, and high necks.

An Italian court on Monday convicted and sentenced around 200 mobsters and their white-collar helpers, the culmination of a historic, nearly three-year trial...

Few people haven't seen Greta Gerwig's Barbie yet, or at least it seems that way

The mother of the four Indigenous children rescued after 40 days lost in the Colombian jungle remained alive for four days before succumbing to her injuries suffered in the May...

South Korea’s government has formally endorsed the safety of Japanese plans to release treated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea as it tries to calm people’s fears about food contamination

SAVE $100: As of September 14, the Insignia HEPA air purifier is on sale at

When Walmart approached Gay Pride Apparel founders Sergio Aragon and Jesus Gutierrez to launch an exclusive Pride Month collection this June, it felt like a “full circle” moment for the first-generation Mexican Americans, who have been shopping at the discount big-box store their entire lives. “My family grew up low-income and Walmart was all we had,” Gutierrez tells The Independent. “If I would’ve seen a Pride display at age nine, it would’ve been so special.” Little did the founders of Gay Pride Apparel – whose mission is to celebrate and empower the LGBT+ community through clothing and accessories – know that they would soon be on the receiving end of “violent threats” from protestors, angry over the Pride Month merchandise. They’re not alone. This month, both queer designers and customers have faced numerous attacks from anti-LGBT+ groups over Pride Month collections. Target was infamously at the centre of significant backlash over its wide-ranging Pride merchandise. The outrage began after conservative media outlets falsely claimed Target was selling “tuck-friendly” bathing suits in the children’s department. Rather, the “tuck-friendly” swimsuits were designed for trans women who have not had gender-affirming surgery, but the misinformation didn’t stop there. Erik Carnell, a gay trans man based in the United Kingdom, received “hundreds upon hundreds of hate messages” for his queer inclusive brand Abprallen, which was also featured in Target’s Pride collection. While the retailer sold three of his designs in its stores, it was his items using occult imagery that received conservative backlash, despite not being sold in Target stores at all. In Montana, a transgender couple was harassed by a far-right extremist who destroyed a Pride display at a Target in Missoula, telling the couple to “enjoy [the merchandise] while you can.” Several videos also showed anti-LGBT+ protesters harassing Target employees, destroying Pride Month displays, and shouting “Your kids can’t be gay!” inside stores. In response, Target announced it was pulling some of its Pride Month merchandise after several employees experienced “confrontational behaviour” from angry customers. “Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” the retailer said in a statement. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the centre of the most significant confrontational behaviour. Our focus now is on moving forward with our continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year.” Target wasn’t the only major retailer to face conservative outrage and boycotts from anti-LGBT+ groups. Kohl’s, Adidas, The North Face, and Starbucks have all been criticised for their Pride Month campaigns and collections. And most notable of all was Anheuser-Busch, which featured trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney in a social media promotional post for Bud Light back in April. From parades, to demonstrations, to even marketing, LGBT+ empowerment has dominated the month of June for more than 50 years. But this year’s Pride comes amidst an unsettling time for the queer community, as America’s largest LGBT+ civil rights group issues a “state of emergency” for LGBT+ people living in the United States. Hundreds of bills have been introduced in state legislatures impacting the queer community, specifically targeting trans and nonbinary people. Out of 220 bills, more than 75 have been signed into law, and at least 19 states have enacted policies banning gender affirming healthcare for young trans people. This Pride Month, it seems as though the minority of Americans (more than 70 per cent of people in the US support same-sex marriage) are speaking the loudest. It may be because conservative legislation, largely targeting trans Americans, has emboldened anti-LGBT+ individuals to feel comfortable attacking the queer community in public spaces. However, many LGBT+ business owners believe it’s the increasing visibility and popularity of queer-inclusive fashion that has angered protesters. In fact, queer-owned businesses have generated more than $1.7 trillion in economic impact, according to the National LGBT Chamber of Commerce. The purchasing power of the queer community is without question, hence the age-old trend of corporations “rainbow-washing” during the month of June – slapping a rainbow on their products or logos to signal themselves as “gay-friendly,” rather than holding themselves accountable in their support for the LGBT+ community. Queer-owned businesses have existed for decades, and the ongoing attacks against retailers supporting them during Pride has only made them feel more empowered. TomboyX is a queer-founded fashion brand that designs gender-neutral undergarments for people of all sizes and across the gender spectrum. In 2012, co-founders Fran Dunaway and Naomi Gonzalez set out to make the perfect gender-neutral boxer brief after recognising a gap in the market for inclusive underwear. Today, TomboyX’s underwear and loungewear can be found in major US retailers like Nordstrom. “From the very beginning, we always recognised that there was this white space in fashion that was very much gendered,” Gonzalez tells The Independent. Her wife, Dunaway, added: “I think that for us it was just really important to be inclusive because we’re part of the LGBTQ+ community. We’re a married couple and so we really felt what it was like to not be seen and represented in fashion.” While TomboyX may have started the conversation on queer-inclusive fashion more than a decade ago, it’s continued to be a part of it. “There’s a sense of pride in just having more queer, non-binary designers out in the world, expressing themselves in all the ways that they see fit and having accessibility to the broader audience that way too,” Gonzalez says. “I think this isn’t about, you know, just one brand or anything like that. This is very much a movement. It’s very much an expression of the importance of being yourself.” The movement for non-gendered clothing has made headway in recent years, having much to do with the growing number of young Americans who self-identify as members of the LGBT+ community. In fact, the number has almost doubled, with a record one in five Gen Z adults identifying as LGBTQ. “In the past four or five years that we’ve been in this industry as a company, we definitely notice an increase of people coming to us asking not just for gender-inclusive clothing, but for non-binary related items,” says Gutierrez. While the demand for gender-inclusive fashion has grown in popularity, public backlash from right-wing media has forced companies to finally take a stance on LGBT+ rights. For Target, it responded by removing some of its Pride merchandise from stores, much to the dismay of its queer customers and LGBT+ allies. “It’s terribly disappointing that Target is caving in to threats of violence from anti-LGBTQ bigots by removing Pride Month displays,” tweeted Jon Cooper, Democratic majority leader of New York’s Suffolk County. “If these extremists decide to attack displays celebrating Black History Month next, will Target remove those as well?” “Target should not be responding so easily to criticism and threats from the likes of the Proud Boys,” said Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson in a statement. “Target should put the products back on the shelves and ensure [its] Pride displays are visible on the floors, not pushed into the proverbial closet. That’s what the bullies want. Target must be better.” The backlash has shown real financial consequences for companies too. Weeks after Anheuser-Busch received pushback from conservative public figures over its partnership with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney – notably Kid Rock, who posted a video of himself shooting cases of (purchased) Bud Light – the company released an underwhelming statement that it “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people”. However, Anheuser-Busch made no mention of Mulvaney, nor the transphobic rhetoric perpetuated during the backlash. Not only did Bud Light’s retail sales in the US drop 24 per cent in early June, but the Human Rights Campaign has rescinded the company’s benchmark equality and inclusion rating. Emma McIlroy is the co-founder of Wildfang, a clothing brand based in Portland, Oregon, with the mission to rethink gender norms in fashion. For McIlroy, the recent financial results from companies like Anheuser-Busch are “terrifying” because it influences how brands will support the LGBT+ community in the future. “I think we live in a space right now where we’ve built a forum for divisiveness, and that’s what we’ve leaned into. None of it’s particularly shocking,” McIlroy says. “Once financial results take a complete beating, as a result of some of those decisions, that’s terrifying for me because I think you’re gonna see a lot of brands make different decisions, and that’s tough. It’s going to be very hard for other public CEOs to stand up for what they want to stand up for.” For others, they were disappointed to see Target facing such conservative backlash, considering the brand has largely been known as a leader in providing inclusive clothing during Pride Month. Unlike other major companies, the retailer has gone so far as to source small, queer business owners to join its Pride campaigns. JZD, a queer-owned, family-operated small business based in Texas, spent an entire year designing custom pieces for Target’s national Pride campaign. Ashley Molesso and Chess Needham, a queer and trans couple based in upstate New York, were asked to have items from their small gift and stationery company – Ash + Chess – featured in Target stores too. “Lots of companies have done a much better job of moving away from private labels, being inclusive of queer designers and queer brands,” says Rob Smith, CEO and founder of The Phluid Project. “I’ve seen that, this year, really come to light. I think Target is actually one of the companies that did it best, really creating much more space for queer brands.” While Target may have been setting an example for retailers during Pride Month, perhaps it’s when we look to major corporations to take a stance on social issues that we run into problems. Has the public outrage towards Pride collections become a turning point for corporate allyship? “I think every corporation really needs to decide where they’re going to stand in terms of who they think is their market,” says Sophie Bjork-James, an assistant professor of anthropology at Vanderbilt University. “Is it going to be a vocal minority or is it going to be everybody? I think that what we’ve seen, with some of the recent decisions by corporations, is that they are not completely sure what their stance is.” McIlroy thinks it’s a “non-starter” that companies should be prepared to support the communities that they “commercialise,” saying: “To do one without the other, it means you stand for nothing and it means you stand for no one.” It could be argued that Target did indeed take a stance on LGBT+ issues when it removed merchandise from its Pride Month collection. Some critics believe that, by rescinding its gender-inclusive items, Target “encouraged further acts of violent intimidation from the far-right”. Others may believe that none of this is Target’s fault, and that the company simply stood by its responsibility to protect employees. “I think a lot of companies are being reflective and thinking, where are we right now? Are we a company that’s grounded in culture, grounded in community? If you are, then yeah, go have a great Pride campaign,” says Smith. “But I don’t think it’s time to pull away. I do think it’s time to lean in. I think stepping away all together, for fear, would be really disappointing.” Despite the pushback from a small, but vocal minority opposing Pride Month, many queer designers believe the right-wing outrage actually draws more attention (and money) to small queer-owned brands, as well as the issues facing the LGBT+ community. However, showing support during Pride Month does not mean simply purchasing a T-shirt with a nondescript rainbow printed on it from your local big-box chain store. In fact, amplifying queer voices that often go unheard should happen year-round. “In the middle of this chaos, it just shows how much progress there’s been – that both of the largest retailers did have a collection for Pride,” says Gutierrez. “That’s why there was backlash, because it’s so big and in your face, that I want to take that as the winning moment. Like, look at that. We’re talking about queer rights now because you guys decided to come for us.” Read More Kohl’s threatened with boycott over Pride-themed clothes after Target forced to remove collection over threats Trans designer behind Target’s Pride collection flooded with orders as he responds to backlash Starbucks denies claims that it's banning Pride displays but union organizers are skeptical Rihanna steps down as CEO of Savage X Fenty Glastonbury 2023: All the best fashion at the biggest UK festival of the year Sarah Jessica Parker rewears iconic Vivienne Westwood wedding dress in And Just Like That