Why did Caroline and John John wear blue to their father's funeral?

Because their father's brains were so blew that day. Heh heh.

I noticed that little John Johns suit was navy blue also..Does anyone know off hand or care enough to Google?

I don't recall ever seeing a photo of his suit. His coat was not navy blue.

They're both wearing dresses! This was the time when little boys wore dresses until they were 5, right? Something about helping them go to potty and change their diapers easily.

The black of deep mourning has traditionally been considered inappropriate for children.

I could have sworn it was navy.I always thought it was a coat.

The Master Criminals who own the Fed ordered JFK's murder after he signed an executive order the previous June that threatened to end their monopoly control of the money and credit of the USA.

I don't think there were black coats for small children, so that was the next best sober color

Both he and his sister are in light blue dresses. Jackie was always very "European" and thought nothing of dressing her toddler in drag. She considered it chic.

Children do not dress for mourning. They are to dress in the clothes they usually wear for religious services.

I imagine there was no set dress code for the children of an assassinated president.I'm sure Jackie just decided at the last minute.She really could have thrown some pants on john-John.

More proof that DL is going down the tubes.

R8 You win for dumbest post of the thread. I'd say of the day, but to be fair to you, it's way too early.

Thanks, R13! At least I knew the dress was joke! Actually, the younger set might view it as a serious question.

Because Vault Of Heaven Blue is the colour of the Illuminati!

Back then, it really wasn't customary to take young children to funerals or funeral homes. They were considered too young to be exposed to death.

It's a coat - he's wearing a shorts outfit underneath which were fashionable in the day.

Regardless, its unforgettable. That damn Kennedy curse must be real.look how John John died. I hope we get a first lady with style. If Hill wins,will Bill feel pressured to be GQ?

He wore shorts which were fashionable for little boys at the time. But it was November. Perhaps longer pants would have more appropriate with a chill in the air.

[quote] I hope we get a first lady with style

We already have one.

[quote] He wore shorts which were fashionable for little boys at the time.

I didn't buy little Patrick his first pair of long pants until he was 10.

Have you been formally diagnosed, OP?

That isn't shorts, it is a skirt.

Actually the more I look at it, it looks like the kids are just wearing pea coats and are probably nude underneath.

Maybe after the funeral Jackie was going to jet them off to some secret Skull & Bones or Bilderberg meeting to offer them up as playthings to save her own life.

A lovely Boy Skirt, with an onion on his belt, which was also the style at the time.

R23 I assure you, little boys were NOT wearing skirts in 1963. He had on shorts.

The Robin egg blue was Jackie's way of putting her children in a spotlight to draw more sympathy toward her. The fact that little John-John was there is the first place was frowned upon by many observers. However, it worked as that is all the average American woman later remembered about the dreary, drawn-out funeral procession.

It was the standard dress for rich little kids at important occasions.

Blue is worn by illegitimate children in society circles. It was Jackie's way of telling the world that John was not the "real" father.

[quote] The Robin egg blue was Jackie's way of putting her children in a spotlight to draw more sympathy toward her

Right. She had to do something, and fast. Because the American public (and the world) didn't have enough sympathy for a 34-year old widow with 2 children, who was sitting next to her husband when half his skull was blown off by as assassin.

The boy is obviously wearing a coat, like his sister. she is wearing some sort of short dress and he is wearing shorts underneath? why would the boy wear a dress in the early sixties? are you idiotic?

The average woman didn't remember it as a long, drawn out, dreary funeral. The " average " American woman, and even the average man, loved the Kennedy's. They admired Jackie for choosing to walk the distance behind her husband's horse drawn casket rather than riding in a car. After the funeral, she hosted a birthday party for one of her children. She wanted life for her kids to go on as normally as possible, under those particular circumstances. At that moment in time, she was considered a strong and courageous woman who put her own grief aside, and carried on, for the sake of her children.

I like blue!

Despite any rumor of scandal, anyone who was alive at the time, and watched Jackie go through this horrific ordeal, realized how much she truly loved her husband. The look of devastation and grief on her face just said it all.

I was twelve at the time, and I still can't forget the look of a woman who's heart was breaking.

"I am so devastated he is not around to whine about his back or fuck movie stars behind mine."

--Jackie's thoughts that day

I love Michelle Obama, but she does NOT have style. Sorry, R20. She dresses like a professional Midwestern frau.

R35 She does not dress like a "Midwestern frau". Maybe you need to be reminded what one actually looks like.

I was obsessed with those images of the blue coats and maroon shoes as a child

R35, please. A Midwestern frau looks at Obama in a Tracy Reese dress and thinks she looks too "African."

Is Caroline playing with one of these?

[quote] They're both wearing dresses! This was the time when little boys wore dresses until they were 5, right? Something about helping them go to potty and change their diapers easily.

Why can't we have emoticoms cause this truly deserves a ROTFLMAOOOOO.

I hesitate to call someone stupid, perhaps totally lacking in experience or reading, but seriously where does this crap come from? Little boys wore short pants at that age and older. Blue was a very common child clothing color for coats. Children rarely wore black back in the day. And children did attend funeral services from time to time. It certainly wasn't unheard of. I don't remember anyone making a negative fuss over the children's presence.

The potty stuff is even more hilarious. Someone actually thinks little boys wore diapers up to age 5?

R40 The poster said go to potty AND change diapers.

And...I can't believe I used the phrase "go to potty". Thanks, thread!

Everyone seems to forget that JBKO was trained to marry a rich man and manage his home, his social life, and his children. Michelle Obama was trained to be an attorney.

💁 Just go away, and let me grieve in peace.

I think he had on a canary yellow skort to contrast the robiins egg blue jacket.Jackie was a trendsetter.

Because there was no "Fashion Police" in 1963.

OP, the fact that you even ask this question is a dead giveaway as to your class.

There are lots of pictures prior to his death where JFK is forcing his little John-John to salute him. He was a regular Nazi. It's no wonder Jackie aborted their latest babie. Oh they said it was crib death but it was an 11 month abortion by her hanger for sure.

[quote]OP, the fact that you even ask this question is a dead giveaway as to your class.

Just as Jackie Kennedy marrying Onassis for his billions was a dead giveaway to her lack of class.

Those were the only outfits that Goodwill had in their size.

R48, please back out gracefully now. You have no idea what you're talking about.

r51

It's true, look up at all the photos of John-John being trained to salute his father. And that "baby" died under mysterious circumstances. It was only because of JFK's death that the investigation was ended.

As for the coat, John-John looks like the "Morton Salt Girl"

You've got to be kidding, R52. Who anywhere was investigating the death of the President's infant son? What bullshit.

If you really want to know: It was common for parents to put siblings in matching outfits, especially for dress-up occasions back then. It was a sort of fad at the time. For example, two sisters wearing matching dresses, sometimes different colors of the same dress. if it was a boy and girl, they would wear the same color, or the boy would wear a shirt and tie the same color as his sister's dress. Two siblings with matching coats was considered chic. It also was a way to show closeness. You could buy matching outfits from higher end children's clothing boutiques, right down to Sears. They were common outfits for attending weddings, church, or holiday entertaining. The two children wearing matching coats in that picture tells me they were their best dress coats.

It was virtually unheard of for an American child to even own a black dress. She probably couldn't get one on short notice. Black was considered inappropriate for a child to wear. My mother had a friend with a high quality children's clothing store in the 1960's. They didn't sell black dresses for children, although there were beautiful, very dressy party and confirmation dresses. Department stores didn't sell them either. The idea of children wearing black dresses didn't become popular for decades. Children under 10 or 12 usually didn't go to funerals unless it was a parent. Maybe not even then. They were supposed to be sheltered.

This is a holdover from the fact that in 1963, it was very common for mothers to sew their children's clothes. Clothing pattern envelopes for children's wear would show several siblings and mom wearing the same styles, out of the same fabric. Remember the scene in the Sound of Music where Maria sews play clothes for all the children out of drapes? If people in town saw that, they would know the children were related. Women would buy enough fabric yardage to clothe all the children the same. In those days, it was thought that since children grew so quickly, it was more economical to sew their play clothes.

If you look at Sears' catalogs and magazines from the era, there are a lot of mother/daughter matching dresses too. The child would wear a drindl or pinafore version, the mother would wear a more sophisticated version of the same dress. The daughters were thrilled wear to dress matching their mother's. People wore matching clothes the way they wear friendship rings or necklaces now.

Jackie dressed the kids in identical outfits as a gesture of family solidarity. It was to comfort the children, to make them look like a family. People understood that. They were very touched by it.

R48, it wasn't crib death and no one said it was. And how could it be an "11 month abortion" when the baby was premature and died 2 days later? If you're going to troll, at least make it clever. Or funny.

Back in those days not dressing one's children in blue following the murder of a parent carried a mandatory jail sentence, even for the first lady of the land. As much as Mrs. Kennedy loved her chillen, she was in no mood to entertain lesbian sex during her grief and sorrow time. It was different world in 1963 and the sun was still rising in the west and setting in the east, not at all like today.

The color of the light blue coats was also symbolic of the innocence of children, that they were too young and innocent to have to wear mourning.

Jackie was said to be angry about JFK's death, and at the time probably still in shock. I believe she was also saying to whoever really killed JFK, or conspired to do it, that these are the innocent children you have orphaned by your actions, look at what you did. She wanted them to stand out in that crowd of black.

I bet she eventually knew something about what really happened, but probably not in time for the funeral. She probably thought the assassins or their co-conspirators were still out there somewhere, watching on television. Imagine how that must have felt.

R54 Fuck off with your smugness. You act like parents don't sometimes dress children similarly today. Just because there are some confused dummies in this thread doesn't make you their queen of history.

I think that entire funeral demonstrated just how astute Jackie was at the theater of politics and why the Kennedys were the first great TV presidency. She's in mourning, traumatized, and yet she carefully researched and planned that day down to every last detail. Her walking alone in the funeral procession in full veil, the riderless horse (named Black Jack of course), the eternal flame, John-John saluting his father--she knew instinctively all those moments had to be iconic and unforgettable. The children in their blue coats were all part of that. A sophisticated shade of blue but still child-appropriate. They looked like baby royalty. It was like the punctuation mark to what everyone thought was her effortless elegance as First Lady. She was so much more media savvy than I think she got credit for.

If John jr had been saluting his father, thenthecaisson would have obstructed the phtographer's shot. He said something about this when he was publishing George.

R59 Or maybe she just had good help.

R60, only one photographer was able to get the unobstructed view of Jr. salute. It's clear from the larger photo he's imitating the soldiers' and facing the same direction as them.

R61, I'm sure she had help. But the military brass in charge of the funeral made clear she was butting in a lot. They made a lot of concessions to demands she made to their faces.

Thank you, R54.

When they were getting ready to swear in Johnson on the airplane, Johnson wanted Jackie to be shown in the picture, as a symbol of the continuity of the government. At that time, they thought the assassination of JFK might be someone trying to overthrow the government, Communists I suppose in those days.

From Wikipedia:

"Several people asked Mrs. Kennedy whether she would like to change her suit but she refused. When Lady Bird offered to send someone to help her, she responded:

"Oh, no ... I want them to see what they have done to Jack."

Despite the advice of John F. Kennedy's physician, Admiral George Burkley, who "gently tried to persuade her to change out of her gore-soaked pink Chanel suit," she wore the suit alongside Vice President Johnson as he was sworn in on Air Force One as the 36th President of the United States. In the photograph of the ceremony (right) the blood stains cannot be seen as they were on the right-hand side of the suit. Lady Bird recalls that during the swearing-in:

"Her hair [was] falling in her face but [she was] very composed ... I looked at her. Mrs. Kennedy's dress was stained with blood. One leg was almost entirely covered with it and her right glove was caked, it was caked with blood – her husband's blood. Somehow that was one of the most poignant sights – that immaculate woman, exquisitely dressed, and caked in blood."

Kennedy had no regrets about refusing to take the blood-stained suit off; her only regret was that she had washed the blood off her face before Johnson was sworn in."

I think it might be that attitude that she was trying to communicate by bringing the very young children to the funeral, and dressing them as she did.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]A lovely Boy Skirt, with an onion on his belt, which was also the style at the time.

Thank you, Cousin Edie!

R65 is exactly right, and Jackie's refusal to change out of her bloodstained suit for the swearing-in ceremony on Air Force One has to be one of the greatest decisions ever made on the fly by any woman, let alone a newly widowed First Lady. Good for her.

Her kids looked great at that funeral procession, and I'm sure they later appreciated having not been shuffled away as their dad was shown such respect one last time.

[quote]it wasn't crib death and no one said it was.

Of course it wasn't it was MURDER. Everyone knows that Jackie was ashamed to be pregnant and JFK kept her pregnancy under wraps. Most Americans failed to realize Jackie even had a third kid. Ask anyone today, most won't know. It was all hushed up, because of the planned abortion was not allowed to be for political and Catholic reasons. Therefore the pregnancy was kept under the boiling point and ended with the "death" of a the child.

This way Jackie avoided abortion of a child she didn't want and got sympathy, always her angle.

The childrens' wardrobe at the funeral was typical of what they wore when seen in public and the occasion was more or less formal. They'd just been photographed in these same outfits two months prior to the funeral.

Photo from September 1963.

You are so fucked up r69. What ever made you mother want to keep you?

R69, I thought I asked you nicely to shut up. Take your lunacy to the cray cray sites and fuck off.

The children had a nanny. Trust me Jackie did not dress them. I doubt she even picked out their clothes.

Most of the "authorities" on this subject weren't even born when JFK died.

I never would have pegged John-John as a crossdresser but I'm assuming that was all Jackie's "chic" bullshit.

Still you have to wonder...even as an adult...that if he spotted a royal blue peacoat he had an itch to put on a skirt?

Blue is gender friendly.

Pink is not.

In case anyone thinks R69 is serious, from Wikipedia:

"Patrick Bouvier Kennedy (August 7, 1963 – August 9, 1963) was the last child of United States President John F. Kennedy and First Lady Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy. He was the brother of Caroline and John Jr.

"Patrick Bouvier Kennedy was born by emergency caesarean section five and a half weeks early at the Otis Air Force Base Hospital in Bourne, Massachusetts. His birth weight was 4 pounds 10 1⁄2 ounces (2.11 kg).[1] Shortly after birth he developed symptoms of hyaline membrane disease, now called infant respiratory distress syndrome (IRDS). He was transferred to Boston Children's Hospital where he died two days later, following treatment in a hyperbaric chamber. At that time, all that could be done for a baby with hyaline membrane disease was to make efforts to keep the patient's blood chemistry as close to normal as possible.

Patrick Kennedy's death, eclipsed a few months later by his father's assassination in Dallas, did in time help spark interest in research on prematurity and led to innovations in the care of premature infants, which gave rise to the pediatrics subspecialty neonatology. A funeral mass was held on August 10, 1963, in the private chapel of Cardinal Richard Cushing in Boston. The child was initially buried at Holyhood Cemetery (the final resting place of Rose and Joe Kennedy) in Brookline, Massachusetts. His body and that of a stillborn sister, whom Jacqueline Kennedy called Arabella, were re-interred on December 5, 1963, alongside their father at Arlington National Cemetery, and later again moved to their permanent graves in Section 45, Grid U-35."

There's an interesting article on a historical archives website showing the original manuscript letter JFK wrote thanking some in-laws for their condolence letter about his son Patrick:

"Patrick Bouvier Kennedy was born prematurely on August 7, 1963, and died, just thirty-nine hours later; President Kennedy was with him. Afflicted with a lung condition that blocked the supply of oxygen to his bloodstream, the infant, Kennedy said afterward, “put up quite a fight.” Kennedy was not a man who showed emotion readily - and his tears, almost never. But in the days surrounding tiny Patrick’s death, he was seen weeping on three occasions; alone, after the boy’s death; when telling his bedridden wife about the ordeal; and at the funeral, so “overwhelmed with grief,” Cardinal Cushing recalled, “that he literally put his arm around the casket as though he was carrying it out.”

Everyone knew about the newborn's illness and struggle. The Boston Globe had a headline, "He's a Kennedy - He'll Make It."

Joey Luft was special style adviser to Jackie Kennedy

Too soon, R1.

Please. Stop. Calling him. John John. Please, please stop. It. It's like the Motown-thread fools who refer to Berry Gordy as Barry.

I'll bet that Mary Todd Lincoln didn't dress Robert up like a little girl for his father's funeral, that's for damn sure!

Yet another thread from 2015 bumped.

So the "I hate my own dick" / "2015 thread" troll is:

American

Old (actually gives a fuck about the Kennedy family)

Hates himself

Bottom who doesn't want anyone to touch his dick

Only in Latvia

[R7] you are on the money. The oligarchs are behind debt based banking. That way they can control economies. They can bring on recessions or any other problems in the financial system. What we are experiencing now is a backlash to put Trump out of power. They created this virus to scare the public into running home and staying there. We would have done well if the virus was treated as the flu. You have to remember we have a vaccine for the flu but we still have issues with it being correct for the strain. This is intended to bring the economies of the west down and China will take control. The oligarchs will probably win....