What a lovely name. And congrats to them for keeping it secret so long.

Lovely name for a most certainly lovely little boy. 

It appears that baby Christopher got christened on the isle of Wight at the weekend. It took place in the very church, where Ben and Sophie got married as well:

http://metro.co.uk/2015/09/14/benedict-cumberbatch-sophie-hunter-christened-their-son-on-the-isle-of-wight-5390211/

Congrats to Christopher and his parents.

There are pap pictures going around of Ben and little Christopher  

I just had a small 'fight' with a very good friend on facebook over them... she shared some of them and tagged me to show me, all proud even. I can't make her understand just how wrong this is. 
The pics are horrible. Ben is trying to hide his son and run away from the photographers 

In the end the girl removed my name from the post... but that's just not enough. How can anyone think it's okay???

What really hurts is that she honestly thought I would be happy to see those pictures

I don't even know who took those pictures... but The Fail seems a likely culprit. 

Right now my facebook is full of those pictures and Doctor Who spoilers... I don't know why but I'm getting so worked up about this, The argument got worse with that girl and her friends who just don't see the problem and I also got some trouble for saying my opinion on one of the BC facebook pages... 

So I'm on a facebook break from now on. Gah. 

mrshouse wrote:

..... What I find VERY VERY disturbing is that it's just a welcomed occasion for those haters again to flesh out every detail as about the state of their relation and other nasty little insults... Gah...

I know nothing about the haters and the nasty stuff they have to say, because I don't hang out on twitter or tumblr. At all. For those who are disturbed by what the haters (all types of haters!) have to say, the only defense is to get as far away from them as possible.  Just what I do, it helps keep me (relatively) sane.

 

Aww, I just went to the Daily Mail website and looked at these supposedly controversial pictures of the three of them, and honestly, the photos looked lovely to me. Ben and Sophie are not paying a bit of attention to whoever took the pics. It's just the three of them, the baby in a stroller, and a couple of pics have Ben carrying him up against his shoulder. No photos of the baby's face, just an infant in blue. And there's an adorable pic of Ben pushing the stroller, looking down into his son's face, and making a wonky googley-eyed face at him, the way one might with a smiley infant. Too cute for words.

See, I don't see this as an invasion of their privacy, not at all.  They were on a crowded public street, no one disturbed them, no one was threatening them, etc. At least here in the US., this kind of photography is perfectly legal. So...  I guess I just can't get worked up about any of this.

The baby's name, which we all have been led to believe is Christopher Carlton Cumberbatch (say that fast two or three times, I dare you, lol) has apparently not been released in an official way yet, if the Mail is to be believed anyway.

 

Hm, that is a bit too black and white for me, Phantom.
Every kid must be protected from nastiness, there is no doubt about that. Celebrity children are endangered to get overexposed without the consent of their parents. I think it's absolutely right not to show them off, blur their faces, not to share them on social media and take them down on request again.
That said, the question was, how comfortable Ben and Sophie were in this very situation. I just couldn't agree with you that those pics looked like they were on the run or trying to hide the little baby away.

This Is The Phantom Lady wrote:

Ancient, regardless of how it looked I still firmly believe that pictures of celebrity kids should be illegal.

Also knowing what Ben said about taking pictures... This is going very much against him. When 'fanpages' post things like that they automatically turn to hate sites in my eyes.

Respect... it has apparently gone out of fashion

We probably should start a new thread about this.

I have no idea how it works in other countries, but in the US, photography of celebs in public could never be made or considered illegal. Unless photos are taken in the commision of a crime or in order to facilitate a crime, then the press is 100% free here, and photography is part of "press". Some of us might not like the gossip rags and gossip websites, but their content comes under the umbrella of information, and here in the US, that freedom is a First Amendment right.

And of course, it's OUR right not to look, if we don't like it. That's an important right too!