PDA

View Full Version : Who will be next?



secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 15:52
First we had Harry flashing his backside and clutching his crown jewels in Vegas.

Now we have Kate flaunting her raspberry ripples in the French countryside.

Who will be next? Prince Willy going out to play without his bodyguard, or pippa popping out her pippins in public?

The Queen must be furious.

nightspirit
15-Sep-12, 16:49
massive telephot lense - is hardly flashing - i am no royalist but COME ON a PRIVATE villa in the middle of the countryside are they not alowed ANY time where they can relax.. ths was no a publice display nor flaunting anything in this they were completly blame less - shame on u .. ur as bad as the dang photographer !

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 16:56
I don't defend the paparazzi for one moment, nor do I defend any of the publishers, but I think the future Queen Kate and King Billy should have been more careful.

nightspirit
15-Sep-12, 17:05
In a remote private castle - where should they go the moon.. sry i would not want to be huntes the way they are or his mother was.. just saying that they are entitled to some privacy !

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 17:06
You're missing the point nightspirit. They may be entitled to some privacy, but they aren't guaranteed to get it - as the pictures prove.

Rheghead
15-Sep-12, 17:21
You're missing the point nightspirit. They may be entitled to some privacy, but they aren't guaranteed to get it - as the pictures prove.

Prince William and Princess Kate and the rest of the Royal Family live a privileged life. They are the ones who are rich beyond most people's dreams. So when a photographer takes a photo and sells it, the Royal family are the ones that say there is no motivation for the breach of their privacy other than greed!

Double standard?

Alrock
15-Sep-12, 17:29
So what...
It's only a pair of breasts & not a very good picture at that...
If you really want to see a pair then just type "Breasts" into Google & you will find loads of better pictures to look at than them.

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 17:49
Prince William and Princess Kate and the rest of the Royal Family live a privileged life. They are the ones who are rich beyond most people's dreams. So when a photographer takes a photo and sells it, the Royal family are the ones that say there is no motivation for the breach of their privacy other than greed!

Double standard?Perhaps.

Making a bit of money from the tabloid media when the super rich bare themselves isn't illegal (and quite rightly so), but it's not living on the moral high ground.

I think hunting paparazzi with hounds should also be legal. :cool:

joxville
15-Sep-12, 18:30
Shock!!! Horror!!! A princess has breasts!!! What makes those paparazzi think we want to see celebs or royalty in states of undress? They were in a place that was supposed to be private, and, from what I watched on ITN News, the pics were taken with a super long lens, hardly flaunting her breasts, was she? I hope Wills and Kate win massive damages, more than the magazine earned in sales, because the magazines and photographers only do it for titillation, it's NOT in the public interest. Newspaper and magazines for too long have been too quick to use the excuse 'it's in the public interest', but is it? Certainly not in this case.

Btw, Pippa is not Royalty, I'm sick of the media portraying her as if she is. She is as common as you or I and free to do as she pleases. If she wants to gets her tits out in public then that's her business, it's hardly something likely to embarrass Queenie.

Rheghead
15-Sep-12, 18:57
What do we mean literally by the vague phrase 'In the public interest?

a. Something that is beneficial for the public to know?
b. What satisfies the public's curiosity?

Two different meanings. I'm sure the phrase, In the public interest is being banded about by people who have different agendas but are hiding behind the misuse of the phrase.

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 19:01
I should perhaps add that I enjoyed one or two of the "offending" images - which is a very good reason for them not being made public. :cool:

squidge
15-Sep-12, 19:10
Do we really care? I dont! Strikes me that there is nothing particularly news worthy about a single captain in the Air force having a wild time just before he leaves for Afghanistan - whether it is in Vegas or Blackpool. I would be surprised if he WASNT doing something mad and life affirming.

As for Kate's boobs, well I have sunbathed topless happily when I was young but I wouldnt have liked it if someone had taken MY pictures simply to ogle at my breasts. If they had appeared on the front of a magazine I would have been mortified. They are however probably the most famous couple in the world and as such such expect long lenses and intrusion. They are right to sue though France doesnt pay out huge damages for this sort of case - a guy on the news yesterday said it would be about 50 000 Euros - hopefully it will be given to charities if they win

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 23:11
What do we mean literally by the vague phrase 'In the public interest?

a. Something that is beneficial for the public to know?
b. What satisfies the public's curiosity?

Two different meanings. I'm sure the phrase, In the public interest is being banded about by people who have different agendas but are hiding behind the misuse of the phrase.It should mean the former, but it's usually used to justify something that makes money for a creep.

Dadie
15-Sep-12, 23:26
Just wait for the telescopic shots of the Queen and Prince Philip....
in comprimising positions...(she cant work the deckchair and he cant get it up)....:D
or princess Anne unable to handle a stallion........
better titles than pics........

secrets in symmetry
15-Sep-12, 23:40
Just wait for the telescopic shots of the Queen and Prince Philip....
in comprimising positions...(she cant work the deckchair and he cant get it up)....:D
or princess Anne unable to handle a stallion........
better titles than pics........Awesome titles, dreadful pics lol!

Can I ask how you would feel if your topless photos appeared on the front page of a glossy magazine?

Rheghead
15-Sep-12, 23:49
The trouble with the royal family and other celebs is that they need the public's gaze in order to survive. But they want it on their terms, they selfishly want to be able to turn it on and off like a light at will. The real world isn't like that. If you court the public's gaze then you enter a symbiotic relation, each one taking what they need from eachother for their own benefit.

So in the case of someone who leads a private life then it should be unacceptable for their pictures to end up on the cover of a tabloid.

joxville
16-Sep-12, 00:04
Celebs can have a private life if they want, however over the last few years it's tended to be the ones with the least talent are the ones whoring themselves at every opportunity, then crying about press invasion.

secrets in symmetry
16-Sep-12, 00:07
Celebs can have a private life if they want, however over the last few years it's tended to be the ones with the least talent are the ones whoring themselves at every opportunity, then crying about press invasion.Agreed. But the Royal Family is a cut above all those whoring talentless "celebrities", and as such surely deserve to be treated better.

crayola
16-Sep-12, 00:07
Can I ask how you would feel if your topless photos appeared on the front page of a glossy magazine?I'd be delighted. As I am always. As is my bank balance. ;)

joxville
16-Sep-12, 00:09
Agreed. But the Royal Family is a cut above all those whoring talentless "celebrities", and as such surely deserve to be treated better.I agree, I should have said so in my post.

joxville
16-Sep-12, 00:11
I'd be delighted. As I am always. As is my bank balance. ;) I guess it would be the first time a magazine has published a pic of a belly button between breasts, but it had to happen sometime :-)

crayola
16-Sep-12, 00:27
I guess it would be the first time a magazine has published a pic of a belly button between breasts, but it had to happen sometime :-)Ha ha, I'll have you know I did some promotional work recently and I was told by the twenty sonething photographer that I had the body of a twenty year old. ;)

secrets in symmetry
16-Sep-12, 00:27
I agree, I should have said so in my post.Good.

I still think Kate should have been more careful about taking off her bikini top anywhere she could have been photographed - even from a distance with a long lens.

joxville
16-Sep-12, 00:32
Ha ha, I'll have you know I did some promotional work recently and I was told by the twenty sonething photographer that I had the body of a twenty year old. ;)He failed to add it was the body of a twenty year old Volvo truck :-)

joxville
16-Sep-12, 00:35
Ha ha, I'll have you know I did some promotional work recently and I was told by the twenty sonething photographer that I had the body of a twenty year old. ;)I've read the reply I'm about to give you on other forums: 'photos or you're a liar' :-)

RecQuery
16-Sep-12, 12:12
I've less concerned with there being naked photos of people like this or people in general than I am with the ease with which they were obtained. Going topless on a private island is one thing but not a relatively public chateau. Ttaking some discrete escorts back to your Vegas hotel room is one thing but not random girls and strippers. Hell Harry must have seen someone with the mobile phone camera pointed at him.

crayola
16-Sep-12, 12:50
I've read the reply I'm about to give you on other forums: 'photos or you're a liar' :-)Ade you asking for photos of my Volvo? :)

secrets in symmetry
16-Sep-12, 19:32
According to the BBC "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are to make a criminal complaint against the photographer who took topless pictures of the duchess."

Good luck to them!

Gizmo
16-Sep-12, 20:07
Can't see what all the fuss is about. I've looked at the pictures a few times, and I still can't see any boobs :p

secrets in symmetry
16-Sep-12, 20:30
Can't see what all the fuss is about. I've looked at the pictures a few times, and I still can't see any boobs :pI like the ones taken from the side. :cool:

joxville
16-Sep-12, 20:37
Ade you asking for photos of my Volvo? :)As long as its your Volvo and not airbrushed :-)

Corrie 3
16-Sep-12, 21:00
Who will be next to be "exposed"?......Let me see..................I am hoping that the Groat or Courier will expose an obnoxious member on here doing his proper job and not the scientific one that he clams to do!!!!

That would be a front page scoop!!!

C3.............

ducati
16-Sep-12, 23:13
Who will be next to be "exposed"?......Let me see..................I am hoping that the Groat or Courier will expose an obnoxious member on here doing his proper job and not the scientific one that he clams to do!!!!

That would be a front page scoop!!!

C3.............

What? A fishmonger?

ducati
16-Sep-12, 23:14
I've looked at the pictures a few times

Perv.........

Corrie 3
17-Sep-12, 01:32
What? A fishmonger?
It could be......I know it's not a rat-catcher or pig farmer !!!

C3...............;)

Metalattakk
17-Sep-12, 04:09
I don't see the fuss. It's not as if she's got a wazzo pair of norks. :confused

RecQuery
17-Sep-12, 08:43
According to the BBC "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are to make a criminal complaint against the photographer who took topless pictures of the duchess."

Good luck to them!

They've evidentally never heard of the Streisand effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect).

ducati
17-Sep-12, 19:39
I don't see the fuss. It's not as if she's got a wazzo pair of norks. :confused

I wish the PC brigade would just brugger off!

Actually the cure would be some SB Officer shooting the photographer in the head, having mistaken the long lens for a rifle. Where was security anyway? That is my question.

Rheghead
17-Sep-12, 22:23
Is there any irony in that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were being presented with gifts by topless women from the Solomon islands? :roll:

Rheghead
18-Sep-12, 18:02
And yet another disgusting invasion of privacy emerges...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/18/topless-pictures-kate-william-ken-barbie-_n_1893232.html

George Brims
18-Sep-12, 19:49
First we had Harry flashing his backside and clutching his crown jewels in Vegas.

Now we have Kate flaunting her raspberry ripples in the French countryside.

Who will be next? Prince Willy going out to play without his bodyguard, or pippa popping out her pippins in public?

The Queen must be furious.
I believe Pippa's pippins have already been exposed on the intertubes. Not that I would ever Google anything like that myself.

crayola
22-Sep-12, 00:36
As long as its your Volvo and not airbrushed :-)My little Volvo would have been 25 years old this coming spring. I replaced her with a tiny shiny red Japanese model which I still have. :)

secrets in symmetry
23-Sep-12, 17:19
I believe Pippa's pippins have already been exposed on the intertubes.So they have!

The two look even more alike when topless....

Thanks for the heads up. :cool: