Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Topless Kate Pics: Are We Being 'Denied'?
I will declare immediately that I do not buy so called raunchy magazines etc of naked young ladies, even if I do find the sight very attractive.
Let's face it, there is an absolute frenzy throughout the world, including many in the UK, for tittilating (no pun) snaps of beautiful female celebrities.
Sexist? Maybe. True? Yes. There's normally very few rules - if any - and magazines are virtually given carte blanche to flout any laws of decency in order to satisfy the demand. I include the UK in this from what I've seen.
So why don't our editors just employ the old press mantra, i.e. "Publish and be damned!" just because Kate has married an heir to the throne? Does she not merely come into "celebrity" catalogue, and is therefore 'fair game'?
Or is she suddenly transformed into an 'untouchable' for having married into royalty? Let's face it, had it been Anne or Camilla, apart from any photographer being unhinged in the first place, no one would have batted an eyelid (or opened it) would they?
***PS: Yes, I'm well aware of the 'privacy' / 'intrusion' / 'royal' arguments***
Let's face it, there is an absolute frenzy throughout the world, including many in the UK, for tittilating (no pun) snaps of beautiful female celebrities.
Sexist? Maybe. True? Yes. There's normally very few rules - if any - and magazines are virtually given carte blanche to flout any laws of decency in order to satisfy the demand. I include the UK in this from what I've seen.
So why don't our editors just employ the old press mantra, i.e. "Publish and be damned!" just because Kate has married an heir to the throne? Does she not merely come into "celebrity" catalogue, and is therefore 'fair game'?
Or is she suddenly transformed into an 'untouchable' for having married into royalty? Let's face it, had it been Anne or Camilla, apart from any photographer being unhinged in the first place, no one would have batted an eyelid (or opened it) would they?
***PS: Yes, I'm well aware of the 'privacy' / 'intrusion' / 'royal' arguments***
Answers
William and Kate should be thankful that he's not the heir to the throne of Swaziland. The king there, and one of his many wives, have to perform a very private act in the full glare of the public gaze in order to ensure the harvest.
07:56 Mon 17th Sep 2012
naomi,
Don't think they can have it all ways, though? Yes, indeed they do court publicity, after all what's the point of their present tour to south east Asia if it isn't to reinforce the fact that it is the Queen's jubilee year?
However, if they want to be taken seriously, they must act accordingly at all times. Of course they are young and entitled to some fun, but no one causes the negative headlines but them.
Did anyone force Kate to strip off in apparent full view of a public road? Did anyone force Harry to cavort bo**ock naked in Vegas? Or to stumble drunkenly out of nightclubs?
They are in exceptionally privileged positions, are not children anymore, but still seem to be acting very stupidly on occasions.
Anyone blindly defending them should remember that they are not only supposed to be representing Her Majesty, but also Great Britain. I expect better.
Don't think they can have it all ways, though? Yes, indeed they do court publicity, after all what's the point of their present tour to south east Asia if it isn't to reinforce the fact that it is the Queen's jubilee year?
However, if they want to be taken seriously, they must act accordingly at all times. Of course they are young and entitled to some fun, but no one causes the negative headlines but them.
Did anyone force Kate to strip off in apparent full view of a public road? Did anyone force Harry to cavort bo**ock naked in Vegas? Or to stumble drunkenly out of nightclubs?
They are in exceptionally privileged positions, are not children anymore, but still seem to be acting very stupidly on occasions.
Anyone blindly defending them should remember that they are not only supposed to be representing Her Majesty, but also Great Britain. I expect better.
I sometimes wonder what kind of advisors these people employ. If Al Fayed's head of security had shipped a car with darkened windows to Paris for the use of his son, William's mother might still be alive.
Somebody might have told John Prescott, the former deputy PM, that playing croquet on the lawn of a country mansion in full view of the public was almost guaranteed to have his pictures splashed all over the front of the right-wing press.
Kate and William should have been told that if they didn't want a particular activity of theirs on the news they shouldn't do it in public.
Somebody might have told John Prescott, the former deputy PM, that playing croquet on the lawn of a country mansion in full view of the public was almost guaranteed to have his pictures splashed all over the front of the right-wing press.
Kate and William should have been told that if they didn't want a particular activity of theirs on the news they shouldn't do it in public.
naomi,
I agree that far too much has been made of this from their point of view. They have now set a very dangerous precedent - is this going to be their continued response to every gaffe they commit? There will be lawsuits flying right, left and centre. I reckon that the only reason we haven't heard of any following Harry's Vegas faux pas is simply because he made an absolute 'See You Next Tuesday' of himself in the first place?
By the way, what was his punishment from his Commanding Officer to this serving soldier? Had that been you or I we'd still be scrubbing the parade square with a toothbrush. Harry? He allegedly is very conveniently sent to Afghanistan - yeah, right! Probably living it up in some oil rich sheik's harem, more like?
I agree that far too much has been made of this from their point of view. They have now set a very dangerous precedent - is this going to be their continued response to every gaffe they commit? There will be lawsuits flying right, left and centre. I reckon that the only reason we haven't heard of any following Harry's Vegas faux pas is simply because he made an absolute 'See You Next Tuesday' of himself in the first place?
By the way, what was his punishment from his Commanding Officer to this serving soldier? Had that been you or I we'd still be scrubbing the parade square with a toothbrush. Harry? He allegedly is very conveniently sent to Afghanistan - yeah, right! Probably living it up in some oil rich sheik's harem, more like?
naomi,
Yes, I agree that it is indeed 'pathetic' to feel 'denied' because I don't personally. But there is still this sort of frenzy, as I referred to it, by multitudes of people for this kind of 'scandal'. Or am I wrong in that assertion?
That in itself is of course no excuse, but I still subscribe to the fact that the vast majority of 'celebrities' - God, I hate that word - are so vain that they not only crave publicity but they actually encourage it. And when all is said and done, Wills and Kate are the aforementioned hated word.
Yes, I agree that it is indeed 'pathetic' to feel 'denied' because I don't personally. But there is still this sort of frenzy, as I referred to it, by multitudes of people for this kind of 'scandal'. Or am I wrong in that assertion?
That in itself is of course no excuse, but I still subscribe to the fact that the vast majority of 'celebrities' - God, I hate that word - are so vain that they not only crave publicity but they actually encourage it. And when all is said and done, Wills and Kate are the aforementioned hated word.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News7 mins ago
Crosswords14 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.