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
How many of us also had heard of Pippa Middleton until the last couple of years at most?
Now, she appears to be revelling in the full glare of publicity, smiling broadly every time a camera is pointed at her? Suddenly she's 'rear of the year' and is careering around gay Paris with several other privileged wastes of rations, one of whom's firing a pistol at another motorist. Pippa's grinning broadly. She's now also - allegedly - a 'fashion icon' and has been paid a vast sum of money for a book on 'party planning'.
What does this have to do with Kate? If I have to answer that one, I give up!
Now, she appears to be revelling in the full glare of publicity, smiling broadly every time a camera is pointed at her? Suddenly she's 'rear of the year' and is careering around gay Paris with several other privileged wastes of rations, one of whom's firing a pistol at another motorist. Pippa's grinning broadly. She's now also - allegedly - a 'fashion icon' and has been paid a vast sum of money for a book on 'party planning'.
What does this have to do with Kate? If I have to answer that one, I give up!
This comment from La Stampa says it all in my humble opinion...Vittorio Sabadin in Italy's liberal La Stampa
''The real problem, as Queen Elizabeth learned while still a child, is that being a member of the Royal Family is a privilege with very high costs. The role and duties mean that you cannot expect at the same time to be a Royal Highness and also live a normal life like ordinary people... If you want to continue to play the part of a Royal Highness, there are painful sacrifices to be made: no more strip-billiards, and topless sunbathing only where you are really sure of not being seen.''
By the way, when she has her first child I do hope she breast feeds the baby in public..
''The real problem, as Queen Elizabeth learned while still a child, is that being a member of the Royal Family is a privilege with very high costs. The role and duties mean that you cannot expect at the same time to be a Royal Highness and also live a normal life like ordinary people... If you want to continue to play the part of a Royal Highness, there are painful sacrifices to be made: no more strip-billiards, and topless sunbathing only where you are really sure of not being seen.''
By the way, when she has her first child I do hope she breast feeds the baby in public..
chaptazbru,
Great minds obviously think alike, eh?
BOO,
"Isn't that what Kate thought she was doing?"
I'd fully agree with you on that point. The only drawback to that is that she's either a very trusting soul, or exceptionally naive with little or no idea that any lowlife would be snooping on her and Wills. I'd opt for the latter guess because she surely wouldn't have probably even dared to sunbathe at all had they both not been so gullible.
Let's face it, though, she may not have been born with that royal spoon in her mouth, but it's obvious that she enjoyed a privileged and sheltered upbringing, something guaranteed to ensure a complete lack of being 'streetwise', i.e. what happens in the real world. That clearly contributes to her naivety. Wills is no better.
People like Kate and Wills, though, have a virtual army of chaperones, advisors, bodyguards etc who, in my opinion, have failed them abysmally for not making them aware of the ever present risk from scumbags whose only aim is to make as much money as possible from their (Kate's+Wills's) misfortune.
The hope which all of us should share is that this has been a steep learning curve for them and may stand them in good stead from now on. But I still won't hold my breath.
Great minds obviously think alike, eh?
BOO,
"Isn't that what Kate thought she was doing?"
I'd fully agree with you on that point. The only drawback to that is that she's either a very trusting soul, or exceptionally naive with little or no idea that any lowlife would be snooping on her and Wills. I'd opt for the latter guess because she surely wouldn't have probably even dared to sunbathe at all had they both not been so gullible.
Let's face it, though, she may not have been born with that royal spoon in her mouth, but it's obvious that she enjoyed a privileged and sheltered upbringing, something guaranteed to ensure a complete lack of being 'streetwise', i.e. what happens in the real world. That clearly contributes to her naivety. Wills is no better.
People like Kate and Wills, though, have a virtual army of chaperones, advisors, bodyguards etc who, in my opinion, have failed them abysmally for not making them aware of the ever present risk from scumbags whose only aim is to make as much money as possible from their (Kate's+Wills's) misfortune.
The hope which all of us should share is that this has been a steep learning curve for them and may stand them in good stead from now on. But I still won't hold my breath.
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.