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
 
  #881  
Old 09-25-2012, 04:07 AM
awcblue's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 34
Why is there outrage and criticism railed at the Duchess of Cambridge and yet no one objects to the women on Solomon Island...skin is skin...isn't it?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #882  
Old 09-25-2012, 04:12 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

Yes the French law was broken because there was a lucrative opportunity. What I dont get is the mindset of William & Kate - do they think they get a pass because of who they are, seriously, with all the history and recent Harry-Gate, how can one assume that paparazzi will not use their chance when spotting Kate topless, breaking the law or not.

I seriously doubt her understanding of her role if Kate thinks she can in private continue to behave like Jane Average and pull the "law breaking" card. Its delusional, sorry. If you want to go topless, just do it and stand by it, like other royals. But please dont think you can do it unnoticed as William's wife & future Queen.
I'm sorry it doesn't matter if it was Kate, Kim Kardashian or Helen the librarian, spying on someone and taking pix of them in a private moment is wrong. Your flippancy about law breaking is rather astonishing. I know some on here hate it, but thiese excuses made for the people who did this to Kate really remind me of excuses given when a woman is raped.
If a woman is walking down a dark alley at night in a shirt skirt and she gets attacked, no matter what she was doing wearing or whatever a law was still broken and the criminal is the one in the wrong.
__________________

__________________
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
  #883  
Old 09-25-2012, 04:28 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I'm sorry it doesn't matter if it was Kate, Kim Kardashian or Helen the librarian, spying on someone and taking pix of them in a private moment is wrong. Your flippancy about law breaking is rather astonishing. I know some on here hate it, but thiese excuses made for the people who did this to Kate really remind me of excuses given when a woman is raped.
If a woman is walking down a dark alley at night in a shirt skirt and she gets attacked, no matter what she was doing wearing or whatever a law was still broken and the criminal is the one in the wrong.
No doubt it is WRONG and should be CONDEMNED and there are laws in place to regulate but unfortunately reality is different. Although it is wrong and there are laws in place to prevent people from doing wrong it does happen. We do not live in an ideal world.

Each individual, to prevent him or herself from getting harmed, should use common sense eg do not walk at night in a short skirt or do not go topless on a terrace if you dont want to take the risk something happens to you that you dont want to happen to you. In the end the damage is done, eg topless pictures circulating forever, and it will only be of little comfort that there were bad people out there who broke the law. One should expect every individual to look after themselves in that sense.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #884  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:17 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Each individual, to prevent him or herself from getting harmed, should use common sense eg do not walk at night in a short skirt or do not go topless on a terrace if you dont want to take the risk something happens to you that you dont want to happen to you. In the end the damage is done, eg topless pictures circulating forever, and it will only be of little comfort that there were bad people out there who broke the law. One should expect every individual to look after themselves in that sense.
"Do not walk at night in a short skirt" Wow really?? Why because you must be 'asking for it' if you wear a short skirt at night?

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge did take all reasonable precautions IMO.
They were on a large private estate belonging to a family member and not on the beach in Ibiza
They were NOT visible from any public area except for with at least an 800 mm super-telephoto lens (google it to see what we're dealing with) which cost around 6000 US dollars, not exactly something your 'average' passer-by would have handy.
This was a grotesque violation of the law and really the people who keep on this track of 'what were they thinking' are saying that ANY crime of opportunity should never be prosecuted because there will always be more the victim should have done to prevent it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #885  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:30 AM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by awcblue View Post
Why is there outrage and criticism railed at the Duchess of Cambridge and yet no one objects to the women on Solomon Island...skin is skin...isn't it?
Yes, interesting, isn't it?

And, WWOTS, the irony of having that/those moment(s) in the days immediately following the incident was ... strange.

What was truly ironic was that the coverage of those moments was very carefully and discretely filmed so we didn't actually see any breasts (or I didn't in the footage I watched). So, we have women who are clearly comfortable within their social mileau who have visible breasts who are NOT filmed and we have a woman who lives in a society where this would make her uncomfortable and she IS filmed. It certainly speaks to the "public interest" issue and makes it all the more disturbing - from this evidence one presumes the intent was not to show the breasts but to embarrass and make uncomfortable the woman.

When you break it down like that, it should give everyone a little shiver of discomfort.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #886  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:37 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
No doubt it is WRONG and should be CONDEMNED and there are laws in place to regulate but unfortunately reality is different. Although it is wrong and there are laws in place to prevent people from doing wrong it does happen. We do not live in an ideal world.

Each individual, to prevent him or herself from getting harmed, should use common sense eg do not walk at night in a short skirt or do not go topless on a terrace if you dont want to take the risk something happens to you that you dont want to happen to you. In the end the damage is done, eg topless pictures circulating forever, and it will only be of little comfort that there were bad people out there who broke the law. One should expect every individual to look after themselves in that sense.
I'm afraid your logic is a bit off... You can't compare what happened to Will and Kate to being raped in a public area. If what had happened had happened on a public beach (or anywhere else public) you would have been right. But this is more like wearing a short skirt in your own garden, getting raped and then having people tell you it's your own fault since you wore a short skirt..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #887  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:49 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
I'm afraid your logic is a bit off... You can't compare what happened to Will and Kate to being raped in a public area. If what had happened had happened on a public beach (or anywhere else public) you would have been right. But this is more like wearing a short skirt in your own garden, getting raped and then having people tell you it's your own fault since you wore a short skirt..
I only picked up the skirt example from another post ... what I wanted to say is, dont bring yourself in a situation you dont want to see happen to yourself because you cannot count on people playing by rules ... in an ideal world you could but this is reality.

If you dont want to be pictured topless, dont go outside topless because you cannot count on people respecting your privacy - what is wrong but still is happening - as many examples show.

The pictures will remain forever, and who will ask many years ahead if a law was broken or not.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #888  
Old 09-25-2012, 08:02 AM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Why is everyone repeating the obvious as a means of ... what? making themselves feel better - because if blame can be deflected then their consciences are clear - no further action needed? If you can mitigate the outrage with a little reasonable doubt by using a straw man deflection, it's okay?

Cripes, thank goodness many of the major revolutions for some of the really big issues have already taken place - I'd hate to have this lot of society being responsible for social change or civil disobedience or anything approaching a "movement".

Yes, let's just concede it. If she had not taken her top off there would be no pictures. Hard to argue the fact. There it is. Self evident truth.

By this logic, no child would climb a tree because all mothers know children can fall from them and be hurt or killed - so no tree climbing ever again - just to be safe. Because this logic would make the mother liable and guilty if something did happen. I can just hear it, "Well, if she'd kept him from climbing that tree..."

Just stop it. It's just a way of mitigating one's unwillingness to take a stand against something wrong. It's a form of blame the victim that says *volumes* about the moral and ethical slide of our society. It's an excuse to sit back, open another beer and shake one's head in a "well they should have known" self congratulatory crapfest of moral laziness.

Well, as long as you people are tossing blame on the Duchess, I will be here with a mirror, throwing it back on you.

I have become Picard. (just the Trekkies will get this) I can't do much, I can't change the world, but I can sure as hell not let it change me. And that, as history proves, is quite enough if enough people choose that path.

/steps off soapbox but keeps it under the chair in case I need it later
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #889  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:12 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,133
I don't see how this topic is still active, it's just posters repeating their opinions from 10 or so pages back. Moaning isn't going to make a difference people.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #890  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:17 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
I don't see how this topic is still active, it's just posters repeating their opinions from 10 or so pages back. Moaning isn't going to make a difference people.
Until someone closes the thread, people are going to post their opinions, even repeating their opinions if necessary. From what I've been reading, its not the first thread for this to happen and I personally feel very strong about this disgusting matter and I apologise to all for ranting and raving.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #891  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:19 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
I don't see how this topic is still active, it's just posters repeating their opinions from 10 or so pages back. Moaning isn't going to make a difference people.
I didn't realize that there is a time limit on how long things could be of interest to a person? If that is the case, surely my personal interest in the Abdication of 1936 as well as the martial history of Henry VIII is well PAST its shelf life.

Nonetheless the worlds press seemed to have moved on, I don't imagine there will be any new information regarding this scandal unless they find the photographer who took the pictures.

And I would also disagree with you assessment on people moaning, rather I think we are having a spirited debate with different opinions being expressed. Isn't that the purpose of a forum?
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #892  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:26 AM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
And I would also disagree with you assessment on people moaning, rather I think we are having a spirited debate with different opinions being expressed. Isn't that the purpose of a forum?
Thank you :)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #893  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:36 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I didn't realize that there is a time limit on how long things could be of interest to a person? If that is the case, surely my personal interest in the Abdication of 1936 as well as the martial history of Henry VIII is well PAST its shelf life.

Nonetheless the worlds press seemed to have moved on, I don't imagine there will be any new information regarding this scandal unless they find the photographer who took the pictures.
The Abdication, Henry VIII's wives are part of history. If topless photos of Catherine make it in to the history books I'll eat my socks. When people talk about the abdication or Henry's marital issues, they're usually adding new opinions on the matter. Rather than repeating the same things over and over.

I'll agree that until this thread closes, or people get bored and this thread gets pushed further down the date line, people will go on repeating. I think the photographers been known to the right people for a long time, but I doubt we'll get to know who it is. What's the point?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #894  
Old 09-25-2012, 01:41 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Serene Highness - Picture of the Month Representative - Britain
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach (CA), United States
Posts: 1,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
No doubt it is WRONG and should be CONDEMNED and there are laws in place to regulate but unfortunately reality is different. Although it is wrong and there are laws in place to prevent people from doing wrong it does happen. We do not live in an ideal world.

Each individual, to prevent him or herself from getting harmed, should use common sense eg do not walk at night in a short skirt or do not go topless on a terrace if you dont want to take the risk something happens to you that you dont want to happen to you. In the end the damage is done, eg topless pictures circulating forever, and it will only be of little comfort that there were bad people out there who broke the law. One should expect every individual to look after themselves in that sense.
What does wearing short skirts at night have to do with anything? Rape is about power and violence, it's not about the clothes one is wearing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #895  
Old 09-25-2012, 02:30 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
... they're usually adding new opinions on the matter. Rather than repeating the same things over and over.

...What's the point?
I will assume that is not rhetorical.

I rephrase my argument approximately the same number of times as the opposing argument is framed by a different person or framed differently by the same person. This is how I believe a good discussion works - each "side", so to speak, attempts to change the other side's mind by way of reasoned argument. Haven't you ever sat with a group of friends well into the night discussing some issue or another? I have and it is my experience that arguments get repeated, reframed, altered, etc. It stops when one or the other parties withdraws or changes their mind (or gets tired and goes to bed, of course).

If someone becomes tired of listening to it, *they* go to bed. Then the people who want to continue the discussion, do so. The person who doesn't ... well, doesn't.

To answer the question, "What's the point?": The point is to change people's minds in a polite and reasoned manner.

I have one in return. As it adds nothing to the discussion and has the effect of casting a pejorative shade on those who do want to continue, what's the point in pointing out you don't see the point?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #896  
Old 09-25-2012, 02:46 PM
awcblue's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 34
Apparently, some seem to spend several hours daily on this forum and they post their strident opinions on many topics but when others dispute and disprove them, they claim the topic has lost interest and should be closed. I agree that they should go to bed more often. Smile.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #897  
Old 09-25-2012, 06:00 PM
Mystiblue's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post

And I would also disagree with you assessment on people moaning, rather I think we are having a spirited debate with different opinions being expressed. Isn't that the purpose of a forum?
And thank you from me
__________________
"Hope is the thing with feathers, that perches in the soul, and sings the tune without the words, and never stops at all."
~Emily Dickinson
Reply With Quote
  #898  
Old 09-25-2012, 06:34 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
I suggest that those who are bored by this discussion do the obvious - simply don't read these pages.

The UK newspapers might well have seemingly abandoned their coverage, but it's not forgotten. Ignoring the person of the victims, the issue remains one of general importance, not least because of the soon to be released report of the Leveson Inquiry into the role and behaviour of the press in the UK is imminent. Privately, individual British press attitudes to the publication of these illegal photos is one of barely suppressed anger, which remains reluctantly suppressed to not further inflame a volatile, domestic situation.

At a more critical level, if we can believe statistics, they reveal that 1 in 4 women experience sexual violence at some point in their lives and that 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 10 boys suffer sexual abuse during their childhood. It is estimated that there are between 6 - 13% rapists in the general community. That's a significant target market, given that it's claimed that 5% of the population are declared LGBT which enables corporations and business to speak openly about 'the pink pound/dollar', which they actively pursue. But we hear little about another, larger group of comsumers who are knowingly targeted - sexual abusers. A significant amount of products and advertisements are overtly targeting what is commercially, if somewhat furtively, referred to as 'the rape pound/dollar'.

A not too subtle example of this was Closure's commercial imperatives in publishing those photos, knowing that large numbers of people would buy a magazine that they usually wouldn't touch, for the pleasure of participating in the sexual humiliation of an attractive, famous woman. These readers were all aware that the photos were taken without Catherine's knowledge or consent, and that she did not want them published, but that only added to the titillation and fleeting sense of power they got from looking at them. That, in short, is the power of what commercial interests call the 'rape pound/dollar', in full flight.

It is dispiriting that so many cannot, or will not see, that they are being so blantantly manipulated. Instead, we read comments castigating the Duchess for her carelessness, that she should have known that society has unwritten rules about what part of the body it's acceptable to display! I've never heard of such 'rules' myself, particulary in relation to moments of intimacy between husband and wife, and generally, when hundreds of thousands of women find it perfectly unremarkable to sunbake topless on countless beaches. To claim that photos of the Duchess were not sexually exploitative or disciminatory because if they were, one would 'just know it', is tantamount, in my mind, to the apologists who say 'I am not racist, but.....'; 'I am not anti-gay, but......' Self-deluded at best, they are.

Taking photos of someone without their knowledge or permission on private property, 1.6 kms from a road, is the photographic equivalent of breaking and entering. Despite any other considerations, using the profound principle of freedom of the press (to inform, free from political intereference) to defend such criminal behavior and commercially-inspired invasions of privacy is inappropriate. The best testament to genuine freedom of the press would be to punish those who use the camera as a weapon to destroy, to inflict pain and harm —as well as those who profit from it
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #899  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:18 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly View Post
Taking photos of someone without their knowledge or permission on private property, 1.6 kms from a road, is the photographic equivalent of breaking and entering. Despite any other considerations, using the profound principle of freedom of the press (to inform, free from political intereference) to defend such criminal behavior and commercially-inspired invasions of privacy is inappropriate. The best testament to genuine freedom of the press would be to punish those who use the camera as a weapon to destroy, to inflict pain and harm —as well as those who profit from it
Although you are undoubtedly the better spoken, we're sisters from different mothers, Polly. Thank you very much for your continued participation.

Yes. Our global sense of Freedom of the Press, important as it is, has become very much like the handy discourse over right to bear arms in the United States. An important *idea*, limited as it was from the start with ineffectual language, is used to justify any number of acts, the spirit of which utterly and completely opposes the intent of the idea. The founding fathers never intended, one imagines, the right to bear arms to be used as a defense for one citizen killing another. Likewise, freedom of the press was initiated to protect the public from GOVERNMENT interference - not to allow the press to freely do anything they please. These are critical and important distinctions.

The more we wash it aside, the more immune we become to the dangerous level it has reached. Acts of violation travelling under the cloak of freedom. It is the most disgusting of things to look around you and realize not enough people are angry at or even aware of the slippery slope we are all sliding down.

The longer the institution (we the people, in this case) tolerate the wrongness, the more insidious the rot within becomes.

Simply, she said "no". Even the most poorly educated of us understands the meaning of this. She said no and not enough people listened. She yelled no from the highest rooftops and not enough people listened. How many times does a girl (or a boy, but a girl in this case) have to say no? And why the hell are not every single one of us enraged? Did you not hear her say no?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #900  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:41 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly View Post
It is dispiriting that so many cannot, or will not see, that they are being so blatantly manipulated.
Polly - first let me say again, I find your ability to approach a subject with clear logic very refreshing. That you can communicate that logic so that I can understand the nuance is a delight.

Re: the manipulation for gain, and in the interest of taking responsibility for one's own actions, we should note the advertisers above, below and to the side of Forum posts for all our 900 plus posts on this subject.
__________________

__________________
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
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria engagement 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 nobility olympic games ottoman president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:24 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]