Royal boobs

[Ian Thumwood]

I have to say that I think the current fuss over the topless pictures of Kate Windsor is high amusing. In normal circumstances I think this story would be typical of the way that the press invades privacy and frequently fails to grasp what exactly is in the public interest. I would therefore have to say that I think the way that the press behaves both in this country and abroad is appallng. The Leveson enquiry has provided ample examples.

Despite the fact that this instance with Kate is a gross invasion of privacy I welcome the publication of the pictures. My enthusiasm isn't so much for the fact that she is an attractive young woman who, I am sure, probably looks terrific in the buff, but for what it exposes about ourselves. For me, it makes the Royal Family seem far more ordinary and unexceptional and anything that diminishes their status must surely be welcomed. I think that this is a lowering of the respect to the Royals which I wholeheartedly welcome and think it is a shame that the media in this country show them far too much respect.

Of course, the current furore also tells us alot about the nature of the British media and public who feel that this is the "essential" Royal story of the moment as opposed to Prince Harry's deployment in Afghanistan where he will be piloting one of the most lethal weapons of war ever created: -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_AH-64_Apache

I would have liked to have thought that one of the members of our Royal famiily will be using this weapon against Afghanistani civilians would be a more newsworthy story than the fact that someone has taken pictures of his sister-in-laws tits. It appears that this is not the case.

Whilst on the subject of the legal niceties of the alleged invasion of privacy, it is also telling that the British media which previously relentlessly pursued Princess Diana is now foaming at the mouth with indignation about the intrusion by a French photographer whilst strangely remaining totally silent with regard to the fate of a man who has remained in custody in a British prison for 8 years without charge:-

http://www.freebabarahmad.com/

Is is me or are our priorities in this country seriously confused?

[teamsaint]

Its not just you...our priorities have been seriously confused by those seeking to further their own interests at others expense.

We are sleepwalking into dangerous places.

As for princess middleton, I suspect that her "advisors" have been deliberately negligent, so that if the time comes to jettison her, there is plenty of ammunition to use against her.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I think it's utterly sick that magazines editors can sink so low.

All for money.

[MrGongGong]

No one asked me whether I was happy to have my "privacy" invaded by thousands of CCTV cameras some of which are pointed at supposedly "private" land...... so it's a bit of a double standard really to hear all this faux outrage. There are much more important things to get worked up about so
YES our priorities are seriously confused ..........

[gurnemanz]

Kate wouldn't have got much sympathy from Princess Margaret, as quoted in my Sunday paper:
"We've got plenty of houses. If you don't want to be seen and photographed, you don't have to be."

She got snapped quite a lot, so presumably she wanted to be .... though not topless, as far as I remember.

[Flosshilde]

Kate wouldn't have got much sympathy from Princess Margaret, as quoted in my Sunday paper:
"We've got plenty of houses. If you don't want to be seen and photographed, you don't have to be."

She got snapped quite a lot, so presumably she wanted to be .... though not topless, as far as I remember.

but frequently with men who weren't her husband, I believe. There didn't seem to be so much of fuss then (as far as I can remember).

[decantor]

I have a slightly different take on this. Never mind the privacy issue. Why does the aspiring consort of our future Head of State, given the privilege of a nice holiday pad in the South of France, regard it as an essential part of the fun to display her boobs outdoors at all? Once she's done so, all that has followed is inevitable. And then, why sue? The remedy is obvious - keep your bra on, dearest, unless the curtains are closed. Bad decisions (whether "just a bit of fun" or "sue them for every cent") do not deserve to result in sympathy or damages.

[cloughie]

I have a slightly different take on this. Never mind the privacy issue. Why does the aspiring consort of our future Head of State, given the privilege of a nice holiday pad in the South of France, regard it as an essential part of the fun to display her boobs outdoors at all? Once she's done so, all that has followed is inevitable. And then, why sue? The remedy is obvious - keep your bra on, dearest, unless the curtains are closed. Bad decisions (whether "just a bit of fun" or "sue them for every cent") do not deserve to result in sympathy or damages.

Or in private why can't she be just left alone without some papparazzi peeping tom with a long lens trying to make a fast euro. Maybe, however, ignoring the low-life with the camera would be more effective than suing - why compound it by overpaying some greedy lawyer!

[David-G]

For me, it makes the Royal Family seem far more ordinary and unexceptional and anything that diminishes their status must surely be welcomed.

On the contrary, it must surely be deplored.

[johnb]

Or in private why can't she be just left alone without some papparazzi peeping tom with a long lens trying to make a fast euro. Maybe, however, ignoring the low-life with the camera would be more effective than suing - why compound it by overpaying some greedy lawyer!

Well, nobody forced her to marry into the Royals and she must have known that this kind of thing is likely to happen. (Come to think of it, anyone who marries into that family must be totally balmy.)

[Pabmusic]

Well, nobody forced her to marry into the Royals and she must have known that this kind of thing is likely to happen. (Come to think of it, anyone who marries into that family must be totally balmy.)

Or barmy, even - though balm might come from the luxurious lifestyle, I suppose, but we are regularly told it's not like that.

There is much to be said for your main point, and Decantor's in 7, that it is so probable that the newspapers will rush to publish topless pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge, where they wouldn't by interested in most people. That being so, it is very stupid of the Duchess to go topless sunbathing at all, let alone somewhere that's not completely secure. That's what makes the legal action seem greatly over the top.

[kernelbogey]

Pictures of Kate Middleton's boobs are of interest to magazines and to their readers only because they are hers. Publishing the pictures is a deliberate act of defiance.

In this country we are both prudish about boobs in public - much less common for women to go topless on the beach than it is in France and many other European countries - while fetishising them in the tabloids and 'Lads' Mags'. Deborah Orr argued convincingly in Saturday's Guardian that the Sun's Page 3 feature is the tip of our society's mysogyny.

[teamsaint]

the people at the top seem to want all the power and privilege with none of the down sides . dave(this is my first job and I am loving it) cameron is always on holiday....he needs it apparently...the royals want it all, and everyone to love them for it.
Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
We are far too tolerant of the corrupt way our society is run.

[Sydney Grew]

. . . anything that diminishes their status must surely be welcomed. . .

1) I am sorry to be obliged to reveal that there is no "must" about it.

2) I am also sorry to be obliged to reveal that there is no "surely" about it.

3) "Be welcomed" - not welcome at all to persons with any feeling for history. It is to tell the truth a view "welcome" only to plebeians.

[french frank]

Of course, the current furore also tells us alot about the nature of the British media and public who feel that this is the "essential" Royal story of the moment as opposed to Prince Harry's deployment in Afghanistan where he will be piloting one of the most lethal weapons of war ever created [...]I would have liked to have thought that one of the members of our Royal famiily will be using this weapon against Afghanistani civilians would be a more newsworthy story than the fact that someone has taken pictures of his sister-in-laws tits. It appears that this is not the case.

QED?