MckMama Drama - Including the Fire - Merge

[GenerationCedarchip]

I have had kidney stones. In fact I currently have one right now. I am on meds, and if it is not gone by Wednesday I have an outpatient procedure to break it up.

I suspect her children have state benefits, and she and her husband may have them too. In order for them to have state benefits though her photo business must be under the table and cash only.

I thought the family was in Kenya about now?

I could be completely off my rocker here, but I thought I remembered someone on the old board talking about how her blog made crazy amounts of money. If that's true, I don't see how they would qualify for state benefits because the bar for that is pretty low. I also kind of wonder how much of her income she actually declares and pays tax on.

[julie]

Just found out about the post titled "Sumo." Apparently, her boys were naked and playing together, and she posted pictures? It's protected now, thankfully. Can anyone clue me in about the homophobic comments that were left on that post by someone named Alyssa? I read something about it on MWOP but can't see the comments on the post since it's blocked... gracias! It's not shocking at all that she'd allow homphobic comments to stay up when she deletes everything else, but sheesh.

[fundiefan]

Just found out about the post titled "Sumo." Apparently, her boys were naked and playing together, and she posted pictures? It's protected now, thankfully. Can anyone clue me in about the homophobic comments that were left on that post by someone named Alyssa? I read something about it on MWOP but can't see the comments on the post since it's blocked... gracias! It's not shocking at all that she'd allow homphobic comments to stay up when she deletes everything else, but sheesh.

I saw the picture before it was protected but didn't read the comments. I only saw the picture because it was talked about elsewhere and I looked. I don't read Mckmama because she makes my eyeballs bleed.

Anyway. The picture was...inappropriate for a public blog. For family, it was a moment. For public viewing, with the crazies on the Internet, it was just wrong.

I do know that some people were apparently bothered by her son having pony tails in his hair - that was the topic being talked about on the site where I heard/read about it (not mwop; that site hurts me more than Mckmama) - maybe that inspired the homophobic remarks? The absolute least inappropriate thing about posting that picture publicly but some people have their dead horses to beat and see the gays everywhere.

[longskirtlotsakids]

I saw the pic... it was not so much the ponytails as it was the way the kids were positioned.

THe 3 year old with the pigtails was on his back with his legs straddled.

The 12 month old was on top of him between his legs.

It looked totally posed.

It's obvious to those that have been following her that it was meant to stir up clicks and interest by people looking for child porn.

It is only going to get worse. It was a pic that even those with no aversion to nudity would have found questionable at best to share with others, let alone post on the internet.

I equate her to a female Warren Jeffs. As long as she pretends to be a Xtian, she will have followers no matter how low she goes, simply because her followers don;t want to admit they have been duped.

[Kitchen Princess]

And the boys had no clothes on?

Far be it from me to complain about toddlers going commando around the house. It is one of the joys of childhood; peeing outside ranks right up there with it.

But I don't think they should be wrestling naked. I don't think my older child would have appreciated my younger son getting all over him while they were both naked. And then posting it on the INTERNET?

There is only one explanation, really. Clicks. Grandma doesn't want to look at that. It's gotta be clicks.

[Patsy]

Was this the thread where she actually used suggestive words in the pic descriptions so people searching for suss pictures would get to her?

[QueenMother]

Jennifer McKinney makes my skin crawl. The woman will do anything for clicks. Posting naked pictures and using suggestive words to attrack the child porn crowd is sick. sick. sick.

[TMS]

I saw the picture before it was protected but didn't read the comments. I only saw the picture because it was talked about elsewhere and I looked. I don't read Mckmama because she makes my eyeballs bleed.

Anyway. The picture was...inappropriate for a public blog. For family, it was a moment. For public viewing, with the crazies on the Internet, it was just wrong.

I do know that some people were apparently bothered by her son having pony tails in his hair - that was the topic being talked about on the site where I heard/read about it (not mwop; that site hurts me more than Mckmama) - maybe that inspired the homophobic remarks? The absolute least inappropriate thing about posting that picture publicly but some people have their dead horses to beat and see the gays everywhere.

Ditto. About the picture being completely innapropriate for a public blog. I can understand it was a cute family moment and all, but I was appalled that she would post it publicly.

And ditto about not regularly reading her blog because of the bleeding eyeballs thing....

[Patsy]

We

have

a

new

washing

machine!

Just fucking type in paragraphs for the love of Jesus!

[Lillybee]

I didn't see the pics but if she posted them, there is something not right about this woman. Who would post pictures that would appeal to kiddie porn people?

[Vex]

What kind of tags did she use?

[Patsy]

I don't know - I've just seen other people talking about it, and they never actually said what sort of terms were used.

[Beeks]

I saw it. I ALMOST emailed her to politely tell her she may want to take the picture down because of the crazies out there, but then I remembered that she'd likely posted it for just that reason. She knows what she is doing and she is sick.

The picture was wildly, wildly inappropriate. I don't remember what tags were used on the post but I just know I looked at it and immediately closed my reader and shook my head in disgust.

[booksnbeats]

Someone on the MWOP blog decided to make a post on her unknown blog using the same kinds of suggestive keywords "MckMama" does and saw an explosion in visitors. "MckMama" can see how visitors find her site and what sites they come from--this is all definitely intentional. It's beyond sick.

[Guest Anonymous]

This is beyond sick. This bitch is staking her own kids out as bait, just to increase traffic to her site.

[Patsy]

Quick clarification: I mentioned pedo-attracting search tags, wanted to clarify that I saw people discsussing this a while ago, so it was for a different post to the recent one. This post was not the first one out there as bait for predators.

At mwopblog now, and quoting for truth:

It would be one thing if she just didn't know. When I started blogging, I assumed the only people reading my blog were family. I never put anything "bad," but I also wasn't a smart as I could have been. I did go back and make sure anything questionable was deleted, but knew that it might have been too late. I haven't made the same mistakes again. It's a scary wake up call to think that pedophiles use mommy blogs and it never dawned on me until MWoP1.

She knew better. She did it anyway. This is not her trying to protect her kids. It's trying to damage control and protect her image. And that is sickening to me.

[antifundie]

Wait, this crazy woman has put those kind of tags on her posts more than once????? OMG.

I could see how a "mommy-blogger" would make a mistake or two, but this McM person has been around the block enough to know what's what. Ugh. Disgusting.

[Patsy]

I'm not sure if there were tags on the recent one, but others have said that the photo in question was clearly a little dodgy - she'd had to have noticed it and chosen to post it anyway.

And to be fair I am not actually sure about the older tags, either, because I've only heard about them secondhand.

[Bookworm89]

I don't remember what the tags on the posts were but I did read the comments. Everyone got on to one posted about Stellen having his hair in pony tails when she called it turning him into a fag or something to that extent. It was the word choice that set everyone off.

I didn't think it was appropriate to post the picture on the web, nothing was really really obvious but to much was suggestive in the way the boys were "wrestling" together to make it inoccent enough to post for everyone (at the time time) to see. Just my oponion tho.

[Petunia117]

Here's what happened with the gay slurs: Mckmama posted the picture and a few people asked if she ever worried that she was confusing gender roles with her kids (or something). Alyssa jumped in and said that her boys dressed like boys because the Bible says (especially in "this day and age") that we should teach our boys to be men and our girls to be women and that she wouldn't put pigtails in her boys' hair because "people would think they are fags." That comment had to be approved by Mckmama- it's not like it was put up and then never deleted or anything. Mckmama also didn't publish anyone calling Alyssa out for saying that.

Alyssa also said things which I have to believe were meant to be sarcastic. Things like pedophiles=gay people, and that being gay is wrong just like pedophilia is wrong, but "no one has a problem with pedophiles". (huh? I don't know either.)

As for the picture itself, she had readers post their experiences, like they'd had cloth diaper photos stolen and traded by child predators or that they work with abused children and that predators search blogs just for things like this. She deleted all of those comments but left the picture up. It had a very creepy sexual vibe to it, not a 'brothers roughhousing' feel. And the tags she puts on her photos, I think people are referring to when she puts words that sound awkward in conversation into a post, presumably just to draw creepy traffic in. She'll say something like "here are my young shirtless boys". I have never in my life said that in conversation, but if I had to guess terms creeps would be searching? That'd be one. She also uses sexual slang terms, but I think those could be innocent, because they're things you find on urban dictionary, etc. and those aren't really well known. But all of her posts with nudity (and there are many) use creepy wording.

At the same time she posted the "sumo" junk, she also had a Craigslist ad up with her address, so people could easily see where those naked kids reside, which totally freaks me out.

I don't really care that her kids hang out at home naked (one of mine usually does as well) or even that they were wrestling. But it was clearly a staged photo and she left it up knowing that sickos were getting off to it. That's about as bad as it gets.

I think there's really weird stuff going on in that house. She told a story once where she said "Yes, it does sound like fun, but that's something you do after you're married." (How the heck would you explain sex to a very young child in a way that would sound "fun"?) It just gives me a really, really weird/gross feeling.

[Beeks]

Oh my God, I hadn't even put it together that she had her address posted on CL at the same time that pic was up. She isn't this naive. How can she be so careless with those kids??

[longskirtlotsakids]

Wow.

My god.

I honestly think she is fishing for an abduction.

I don;t want to believe it, but given that she barely even mothers those children- and the trail she is laying for predators to follow with her naked kids...she is that desperate for attention??

[julie]

holy freaking crap. those poor kids. thanks for answering, tho! i feel totally sick after reading about it...

[forever ago]

Someone should call CPS on this lady. She's whoring her own sons out. There's no way she's possibly this stupid or naive.

[antifundie]

The more I hear about this woman, the more I dislike her.

I read that neither she nor her husband have jobs? Why not?