The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #781  
Old 09-22-2012, 01:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Thank you :)
I find it hilarious for a person to strip for a decent tan when everyone knows the side effects. Catherine looks good with pale skin. I personally find stripping, for anyone anywhere a strange idea. Not just for royals.
Actually I found it odd to put on one swimsuit to swim and another to tan. It has always stuck me as a bit odd to put on anything in order to get wet, at least when swimming in private. And why bother at all when tanning. Who wants tan lines anyway. A nice golden allover tan does look much better and sexier than a pasty white body though.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #782  
Old 09-22-2012, 01:59 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen
Thank you :)
I find it hilarious for a person to strip for a decent tan when everyone knows the side effects. Catherine looks good with pale skin. I personally find stripping, for anyone anywhere a strange idea. Not just for royals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia
I happen to agree with you completely, on both accounts ...
I'd be interested to know that if you agree "completely", if that includes the fact that you too find it "hilarious".

I ask for clarification because I find your posts thoughtful and well-balanced. You finding another person's misfortune - whether minor or major - "hilarious" doesn't line up with what I've seen from your other posts here.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #783  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:01 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 6,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi
A long with my image of William going into a rage over this; I also fear Catherine has said tears over this. No woman....or person deserves this crap.
I won't doubt it for a moment. My heart goes out to them both, as I've said before. I think that one has every reason to expect privacy when on the grounds of a family estate, and in my eyes, the couple has every right to be angry and upset. Yes, they pay a hefty price for the privileges they have, but, their private time is just that, private. It's disgusting that anyone can dehumanized a person (woman or man) for the purpose of making a buck/pound/etc.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #784  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:12 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
This may stray a little off topic but here goes. Many people commenting here are of the opinion that because William and Catherine live a life of 'privilege', they have to accept they have no rights whatsoever and are public property. Really??

Who made up the rules that W&C are public property 24/7 ? It seems to me that the tabloid press are the self-appointed 'keepers' of the Royal Family and they are the ones that decided to put W&C on display 24/7

Back to the life of privilege. If the monarchy in Britain was abolished today, W&C would still be multi-millionaires, they would still have public influence with large sections of the public, they would still own many private properties and still spend their Christmases at Sandringham and their summers at Balmoral, in short be 'better off' than they are now because they would be able to do what they want and give 'two fingers' to anyone that questioned their behaviour.

If Britain is at a place where they expect the BRF to have no lives and no rights in return for a 'life of privilege', then this is one monarchist that would rather a republic, then to subject the BRF to such an unbearable life of no privacy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #785  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:23 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanRoyal View Post
I'd be interested to know that if you agree "completely", if that includes the fact that you too find it "hilarious".
I ask for clarification because I find your posts thoughtful and well-balanced. You finding another person's misfortune - whether minor or major - "hilarious" doesn't line up with what I've seen from your other posts here.
I agreed with the two points made by Lumutqueen - about pale skin (although I'm probably biased since I'm naturally very fair myself), and about getting completely naked anywhere (but your own bedroom/bathroom, obviously), certainly not where you could be seen by anyone (and again, I acknowledge being rather more conservative than many).

"Hilarious" would not necessarily have been the word I would use to describe the situation. Although I do think that there was some lack of judgement involved (just as with Harry's Vegas adventure), my sympathies are on William and Kate's side because this is an unthinkable invasion of privacy, an act of harassment and simply humiliation that should not, in my opinion, go unpunished.

Thank you for your very kind words concerning my other posts.
None of the posts I make are intended to offend anyone (royals, members of this forum, or others): I simply express my point of view as politely as possible.
Reply With Quote
  #786  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:23 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanRoyal View Post
I'd be interested to know that if you agree "completely", if that includes the fact that you too find it "hilarious".

I ask for clarification because I find your posts thoughtful and well-balanced. You finding another person's misfortune - whether minor or major - "hilarious" doesn't line up with what I've seen from your other posts here.
Just because Artemisia rights well thought out posts, does not mean she isn't allowed to agree with someone who clearly disagrees with you.

If you read what I wrote, I do not find Catherine's misfortune hilarious. I find the situation she got herself into hilarious. She got naked on a balcony or whatever just to get a suntan. That's more crazy than eating a cheeseburger with a doughnut as the bun.

Quote:
NGalitzine: A nice golden allover tan does look much better and sexier than a pasty white body though.
Could not disagree more, particularly when being pale causes you no potential illness but baking yourself in the sun does. Catherine's had a tan before, when she came back from her honeymoon and she looked awful. You're either born with that sun kissed glow or your not, don't mess with what God intended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
This may stray a little off topic but here goes. Many people commenting here are of the opinion that because William and Catherine live a life of 'privilege', they have to accept they have rights whatsoever and are public property. Really??
You know I think one of the main issues with this, is the media relations as a whole between the british royal family and the press. You notice that the British press, who hound these two royals as if they were meat and hadn't eaten in days didn't touch these pictures with a barge pole. Although I hate to admit it our press has some deceny. William and Henry, in this country, have always been off limits to anything but good press. They are Diana's sons and the majority of papers, depending on how they spin things, keep it light about these two.

Foreign press on the other hand, and notice it does tend to be countries that don't have a royal family (barring the Danish paper who's apparently printing the totally nude pictures), tend to grab all the gossip they can and just shove it out there to make money.

There needs to be some guidelines or rules for all press when dealing with royals, there has got to be some give and take.
I always thought that when something happened like a wedding or an occasion, the press would receive something like official pictures or inside information etc. In return the press would 'owe' the royals a favour, and when something like this would come out they would back off and refuse to publish. The media has always been an issue for the BRF, they are IMO just too closed off to a public and press that do love and appreciate them.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #787  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:26 PM
lancchick's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 419
I really can't believe this thread is still so active. The pictures are out there and will be on the internet forever so to me it's moot whether Kate and William win any court cases. The point is that the pictures exist. And that's where the real problem lies, IMO.

I am of the belief that no woman, whether royal, celebrity, or not should show her breasts in any place that someone you don't want, can see them. So, that would include every location outside a building or home where the blinds are not closed.

There is right and wrong behavior for every human being. That's just life. I don't think, as Kate is a very popular person, she should expect people (especially those wanting to make a buck) to "respect her privacy." She might want very badly to be able to sunbathe with no tan lines. I might want very badly to sunbathe topless on my front lawn. But people will stare, I might be arrested, and for sure, my photo will be on Facebook, etc. Would I have a right to privacy in that situation? I'd be on private property.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #788  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:30 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 6,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl
This may stray a little off topic but here goes. Many people commenting here are of the opinion that because William and Catherine live a life of 'privilege', they have to accept they have rights whatsoever and are public property. Really??

Who made up the rules that W&C are public property 24/7 ? It seems to me that the tabloid press are the self-appointed 'keepers' of the Royal Family and they are the ones that decided to put W&C on display 24/7

Back to the life of privilege. If the monarchy in Britain was abolished today, W&C would still be multi-millionaires, they would still have public influence with large sections of the public, they would still own many private properties and still spend their Christmases at Sandringham and their summers at Balmoral, in short be 'better off' than they are now because they would be able to do what they want and give 'two fingers' to anyone that questioned their behaviour.

If Britain is at a place where they expect the BRF to have no lives and no rights in return for a 'life of privilege', then this is one monarchist that would rather a republic, then to subject the BRF to such an unbearable life of no privacy.
I agree with you. No one deserves to be treated like a source of revenue, be they royal or not. To clarify; the royals should be photographed in a respectful manner during public appearances, and be left completely alone when on holidays, unless there's an arranged photo session. They're human beings first and foremost, and deserve to be treated as such at all times. To get the kind of pictures the degenerate did is basically treating a person as an object; an exhibit at the zoo to be stared at.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #789  
Old 09-22-2012, 02:30 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
I agreed with the two points made by Lumutqueen - about pale skin (although I'm probably biased since I'm naturally very fair myself), and about getting completely naked anywhere (but your own bedroom/bathroom, obviously), certainly not where you could be seen by anyone (and again, I acknowledge being rather more conservative than many).

"Hilarious" would not necessarily have been the word I would use to describe the situation. Although I do think that there was some lack of judgement involved (just as with Harry's Vegas adventure), my sympathies are on William and Kate's side because this is an unthinkable invasion of privacy, an act of harassment and simply humiliation that should not, in my opinion, go unpunished.

Thank you for your very kind words concerning my other posts.
None of the posts I make are intended to offend anyone (royals, members of this forum, or others): I simply express my point of view as politely as possible.
Thanks for the clarification - when you used the word "completely" it threw me off.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #790  
Old 09-22-2012, 05:42 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ..., Canada
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daria_S View Post
To get the kind of pictures the French degenerate did is basically treating a person as an object; an exhibit at the zoo to be stared at.
Are we even sure he's French? And no matter what's the photographer's nationality, let's not generalize his behaviour to the whole country or demonize its people.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #791  
Old 09-22-2012, 05:46 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
This may stray a little off topic but here goes. Many people commenting here are of the opinion that because William and Catherine live a life of 'privilege', they have to accept they have no rights whatsoever and are public property. Really??
I've been surprised by the number of people who believe this, too. William and Kate live public lives but they are in no way public property. They will always have a somewhat symbiotic relationship with the press and there will always need to be give and take on both sides, but the idea that this couple should give up the most basic right of privacy because, after all, they're incredibly privileged is abhorrent to me. I guess the somewhat privileged people on this forum should only have to give up some of their right to privacy?

I think the royals need to take responsibility for their actions - I had very little sympathy for Prince Harry a couple of weeks ago, for example, when he did everything but paint a bullseye on his own back. But William and Kate were on private property and had every reasonable expectation of being alone.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #792  
Old 09-22-2012, 06:16 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
... William and Kate live public lives but they are in no way public property. They will always have a somewhat symbiotic relationship with the press and there will always need to be give and take on both sides, but the idea that this couple should give up the most basic right of privacy because, after all, they're incredibly privileged is abhorrent to me...
Yes, I also think this is one of the takeaways from this conversation/thread: that some people have an attitude that is best described as embittered. By this I mean that it seems some people believe that because a person has wealth, status or other privilege that they have, in some way, become less entitled to privacy or other basic human/social rights. As if one is related to the other.

I do not feel that we "fund" the Monarchy, in the sense that they are accountable to us as individuals and/or taxpayers. I do believe my government is so accountable, but the Monarchy is not elected nor does it govern. Frankly, if I had a problem with any tax money going to them, I'd be talking to my MP, not a member of the Monarchy. I believe they are accountable to us as a society in a broad sense but I am not remotely interested in them in a celebrity sense. I don't care what they wear or what food they like. I don't care how many cars they have or what kind of dog they prefer except in the same vague way I am interested in all popular culture.

I am interested in the way they weave themselves into the modern world, as an extension of their historical role and a hint at their future role. The more modern we become the more I am convinced we need to hang onto such symbols of nationality, tradition: identity.

Whoops - went on a tangent. Rather than delete I will just carry on ...

Privilege and position come with certain tacit obligations, yes - but not one of them entitles anyone to infringe upon their privacy or to presume that said privilege entitles *anyone else* to anything beyond their own interest.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #793  
Old 09-22-2012, 06:34 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425


Personally, I don't think rich or famous people are not entitled to privacy, far from it. Artists, actresses, entrepreneurs, and others in position of wealth or fame have as much rights to privacy as anyone else. The thing is, those people don't live in castles that (in most cases) belong to people, their security is not paid by people, their official expenses are not covered by people, they usually have made their own fortune through hard work, their well-being is not placed above that of any of their countrymen...

From that perspective, Royal Families - all of them - do in part belong to people. If royals do not like that state of things, they can always relinquish their rights and become private citizens - immensely wealthy and privileged still, but private nonetheless.

Again, this is my opinion. No offence is meant towards anyone or disrespect towards anyone's point of view.
Reply With Quote
  #794  
Old 09-22-2012, 06:38 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post

From that perspective, Royal Families - all of them - do in part belong to people. .
We gave up owning people in the British Empire a long long time ago.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #795  
Old 09-22-2012, 06:46 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
We gave up owning people in the British Empire a long long time ago.
Touché!
Owning and belonging are two different things though. I may consider my life belongs to my country, but it sure as hell doesn't own me.
The point I was making is certainly not shared by a lot of people here, and I respect that; however, that does not change my opinion either.
Reply With Quote
  #796  
Old 09-22-2012, 06:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
I think it is an awfully perverse world where Britain requires 'the heir of body of the Electress Sophia of Hanover' to be our Head of State (without giving said heir a choice) and then say for the 'privilege' of requiring 24/7 security ( to keep the crazies away) and having their expenses paid for (do we expect any head of state to pay out of pocket?) and allowing the royals to stay in castles ( this is a perk?), the Royals and especially William and Catherine have to live in a fish-bowl for their entire lives is just brutal.

I will say again, either the people of the realms 're-negotiate' our relationship with the royal family or it won't last.

William and Catherine are humans and to treat them or any member of the BRF as a sideshow exhibit is just not humane.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #797  
Old 09-22-2012, 07:36 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
From that perspective, Royal Families - all of them - do in part belong to people. If royals do not like that state of things, they can always relinquish their rights and become private citizens - immensely wealthy and privileged still, but private nonetheless.
In the context and spirit in which I believe you mean this, I agree. Prince William has the duties and obligations that are part and parcel of a royal existence. He must serve his people in some capacity that is both clearly beneficial and inclusive. Wholeheartedly agree.

William Wales or Windsor or whatever name he uses in his private existence owes us nothing beyond not doing anything that would clearly be detrimental to us, his people.


Back in the day when the Monarch could chop off your head there was a natural, albeit Draconian, balance in effect. The Monarch could ENFORCE his or her privacy and the people could revolt. Ask the French, right? Today, the people can still revolt but the Monarch has been systematically stripped of their power to balance the popular demand with the right to a private life. The Queen cannot simply demand that the photos be not published in England, as an example, or demand that no paps follow Kate. But we can still demand from them what we think they owe us ... the balance is gone and the new rules of engagement are still being worked upon :)

Imagine. Being the man who will be King one day and knowing the public will demand a great deal from him and yet being unable to demand that photos of his naked wife be kept private. It is a street that does not run entirely evenly in both directions.

Anyhow ... yes, they belong to us - but isn't that as much a protective mode as it is a demanding one? When did we stop protecting and began only demanding?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #798  
Old 09-22-2012, 07:45 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
I will say again, either the people of the realms 're-negotiate' our relationship with the royal family or it won't last.
I ought to have just said ... "What he said."

Respect is not just a curtsy or the use of a title. One might characterize respect as the diligent application of good manners as a token of esteem. Although I doubt its on a list anywhere, good manners, where I come from, says you avert your eyes if the future King's wife's breasts become visible. Thereafter you pretend it didn't happen and you give the stink-eye to whomever has the bad manners to mention it. If necessary you smack the camera from the hand of the moron who is pointing it. Or something like that. What you do NOT do is tell the future king his wife should have bought a better bra or worn two in case one fell off.

:)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #799  
Old 09-22-2012, 07:49 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 6,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalps09 View Post
Are we even sure he's French? And no matter what's the photographer's nationality, let's not generalize his behaviour to the whole country or demonize its people.
I edited my post to make less offensive. I was a bit hot-headed when I wrote it.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #800  
Old 09-22-2012, 08:11 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,286
I'm all for renegotiating how the media behaves not just for royals but for all famous people. Another issue I have is taking pictures up woman's skirts.
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit visit wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:21 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]