Catherine & William: 'Closer' Magazine and Breach of Privacy - September 2012

[Duke-of-Earl]

IDK, informally most adults I've spoken to have said 'what were they thinking". They think it's wrong that the pictures were published and are glad they won the law suit. Still, most say the Duke & Duchess were naive or arrogant in thinking they still had privacy. Most are baffled by the underwear coming off out of doors, especially for a member of the royal family.

Respectfully, when people say 'out of doors' they make it seem like the couple were topless on a public beach with no expectation of privacy. Royal or not, William and Catherine are the victims here and to me all the rest is victim blaming.

 

[dbarn67]

Respectfully, when people say 'out of doors' they make it seem like the couple were topless on a public beach with no expectation of privacy. Royal or not, William and Catherine are the victims here and to me all the rest is victim blaming.

Also respectfully, most people I've spoken to don't go into their backyards and disrobe. Most are on Catherine & William's side in this but there's still a question mark as to the extent of the nudity. I've spoken to European who accept the topless as natural but are just a confused as the other part. I did speak with one lady who's boyfriends' family was Mediterreanean and the all got completely nude to sunbathe but other Europeans I've spoken don't.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Also respectfully, most people I've spoken to don't go into their backyards and disrobe. Most are on Catherine & William's side in this but there's still a question mark as to the extent of the nudity. I've spoken to European who accept the topless as natural but are just a confused as the other part. I did speak with one lady who's boyfriends' family was Mediterreanean and the all got completely nude to sunbathe but other Europeans I've spoken don't.

What does the 'extent' of the nudity have to do with anything?? The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are the victims of a disgusting crime. Full Stop!

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Watch out ladies, don't wear a skirt that is 'too short' or you're asking for trouble

 

[Kit]

Okay, could we all please calm down a little bit? Thanks!

 

[Zonk]

I don't know anyone personally but I have certainly heard of people sunbathing topless in the privacy of their own home. Are doing it in the city on the balcony or cul de sac in the suburbs, I don't think so but if you have a nice fenced yard and are some ways from your neighbors. Yeah why wouldn't you? You are own your own property and have an expectation of privacy.

I also think that Europeans have a entirely different concept of the human body as it pertains to nudity and as natural as the day you were born, and as Americans (generally speaking) we don't. We (again generally speaking) tend to be a more prudish.

And again William and Catherine weren't on the balcony, or the beach in Cannes. They were in a private home off the beaten path, from the pics if you were on the street looking down at the house, you wouldn't see them. Unless of course, if you had a photograph lens and were told they were out sunbathing.

Now should have William and Catherine know better and should have not put themselves in such a situation. Yes, I think they should have. Unfortunatley for them, they thought they were so removed from the road that no one can see them.

Either way, I believed they learned their lesson. They will continue to have their public and private life and the private will become more closed off.

This situation reminds me a bit of learning their dogs name. At first I thought they were ridiculous for not sharing the name and making a mountain out of a molehill but now I finally get it. So much of their life if public, and the public has a right (or at least the British taxpayer does) to get their value for what they are paying (for travel expenses, security, etc.) and they might not have control on certain aspects of their life (unless they give it all up) but the name of their dog, is such a private thing that is just between them and their little family that they didn't want to share it.

Now that some of their private life has been exposed (excuse the pun) I can certainly see why they fight so hard to keep certain parts of it just between them.

 

[dbarn67]

Watch out ladies, don't wear a skirt that is 'too short' or you're asking for trouble

This is a bit vitriolic. If someone can't make a point without it turning into accusations like this then there can be no discussion.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

This is a bit vitriolic. If someone can't make a point without it turning into accusations like this then there can be no discussion.

You were the one that made an issue of the 'extent of their nudity' as if that has anything to do with what happened. IMO, the extension of that kind of thinking (victim blaming) is that victims of certain crimes are 'asking for it'

 

[Zonk]

Can't we all play nice in the sandbox?

 

[dbarn67]

You were the one that made an issue of the 'extent of their nudity' as if that has anything to do with what happened. IMO, the extension of that kind of thinking (victim blaming) is that victims of certain crimes are 'asking for it'

I did not say the victim of a crime deserve it. What you're saying is anyone disagrees with you is "victim blaming".

 

[Kit]

The ironic thing is that William and Kate were even in this scandal "lucky" that just the topless pictures of her appeared. Imagine if they had printed pictures of her completely naked and apparently such pictures exist.

 

[dbarn67]

The ironic thing is that William and Kate were even in this scandal "lucky" that just the topless pictures of her appeared. Imagine if they had printed pictures of her completely naked and apparently such pictures exist.

The bottomless pictures were printed in a Danish Magazine.

 

[Catherine J]

Also respectfully, most people I've spoken to don't go into their backyards and disrobe. Most are on Catherine & William's side in this but there's still a question mark as to the extent of the nudity. I've spoken to European who accept the topless as natural but are just a confused as the other part. I did speak with one lady who's boyfriends' family was Mediterreanean and the all got completely nude to sunbathe but other Europeans I've spoken don't.

Perhaps they were about to have sexual relations? Since we can assume that the Duchess would not expose her breasts were she to suspect she was visible, and that William would not "allow" her to had *he* suspected she was visible ... we can assume that they were operating under the assumption of privacy.

I don't know - but sometimes my husband and I had sex when we were in private.

Didn't the editor of Chi, the Italian publication, indicate they had such photos? Or photos of a more personal nature? Didn't he suggest William should stop his action because "it could be worse". I'm too lazy/on vacation and I do this for a living so I don't want to track that down and provide a citation, but it seems to me such a thing was said/implied.

Here's the rub: why in the world is her level of nudity germane? I am not sure I follow the thread of thought back to relevance. What difference does it make at all how nude, what they were doing, what they were thinking, what their carnal intentions were or were not? It's just more speed bumps set up in front of the real issue so we can justify our ambivalence to the violation/crime, in my opinion.

YMMV.

The thing is this: once we get to the reasonable assumption of privacy we should have a full stop. What they were or were not doing, what they were or were not thinking ... these are things they did not want us to know/speculate upon - we know this because they were working under the assumption of privacy.

For us to use what happened behind the wall of privacy as a reason for justifying the invasion is really wrong. Yes, I mean that in a moral sense.

For us to speculate on what or why they were doing it is human. For us to judge it is rude.

 

[Kit]

The bottomless pictures were printed in a Danish Magazine.

OMG. That's all I have to say.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Ladies and gentlemen, the act of stalking a married couple and photographing them with an 800 mm super-telephoto lens from over half a mile away on their large private estate is ILLEGAL. Full Stop! Clothed, partially nude or fully nude, it makes no difference whatsoever.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Apparently there are lots of topless pictures from the honeymoon shelved at the agencies that werent printed as yet, so Kate seems to have the habit of doing topless. Nothing wrong with that but paparazzi are a close nit community so if one magazine reckless enough not wanting to share with others sent a photographer knowing she might pull blank during her vacation in France it was an easy job.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

And with the people that matter, the British public, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are winners. 82 percent think its wrong to publish the photos and 72 percent agree it was right to sue.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

And with the people that matter, the British public, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are winners. 82 percent think its wrong to publish the photos and 72 percent agree it was right to sue.

I dont know why one cannot include the other? While I agree with what is said above, at the same time I wondering, what was she thinking???

In terms of winners, in Britain for certain. Rest of the world, I am not so sure.

 

[dbarn67]

Perhaps they were about to have sexual relations? Since we can assume that the Duchess would not expose her breasts were she to suspect she was visible, and that William would not "allow" her to had *he* suspected she was visible ... we can assume that they were operating under the assumption of privacy.

I don't know - but sometimes my husband and I had sex when we were in private.

Didn't the editor of Chi, the Italian publication, indicate they had such photos? Or photos of a more personal nature? Didn't he suggest William should stop his action because "it could be worse". I'm too lazy/on vacation and I do this for a living so I don't want to track that down and provide a citation, but it seems to me such a thing was said/implied.

Here's the rub: why in the world is her level of nudity germane? I am not sure I follow the thread of thought back to relevance. What difference does it make at all how nude, what they were doing, what they were thinking, what their carnal intentions were or were not? It's just more speed bumps set up in front of the real issue so we can justify our ambivalence to the violation/crime, in my opinion.

YMMV.

It's germane because it speaks to the judgment of the most popular royal couple in the world. If the nudity were no big deal then why was there a spread in multiple magazines. If there were just pictures of Catherine in her bikini the lawsuit may have taken place but the story would have come and gone in the blink of an eye.

Whether people are allowed to have the discussion or not the question's about their judgement is out there and that doesn't mean people are not are their side

 

[Catherine J]

It's germane its about the judgment of the most popular royal couple in the world.

What? You're saying because they are the most well known/popular royal couple that the details (proceeds from a crime, in fact) related to the invasion of their privacy are germane to the public interest?

I disagree strongly.

Maybe the public is interested, but it is not in any way, by any stretch, a matter of public interest - which is the only circumstance under which it would be germane. If they had photographed them doing drugs, for instance.

If the nudity were no big deal then why was there a spread in multiple magazine, a lawsuit and this thread?

That's sort of the point, isn't it? The popular interest in their nudity fueled a criminal act.

This thread, and my participation in it, has nothing to do with the nudity and I do not have an opinion on it, in fact. This thread and my personal participation in it is about the interest I have in the criminal act that resulted in the violation of their privacy.

My interest, if I have one, is in protecting the Royal Family of my country against scurrilous judgments of their character based on "the nudity" and to ensure the world, or the part of the world this thread touches, that there are those of us who do not care about the contents of the photos - ONLY the fact that they were taken.

YMMV

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Should We Be Scared of Kate Middleton's Naked Breasts? - Forbes

 

[dbarn67]

What? You're saying because they are the most well known/popular royal couple that the details (proceeds from a crime, in fact) related to the invasion of their privacy are germane to the public interest?

I disagree strongly.

Maybe the public is interested, but it is not in any way, by any stretch, a matter of public interest - which is the only circumstance under which it would be germane. If they had photographed them doing drugs, for instance.




That's sort of the point, isn't it? The popular interest in their nudity fueled a criminal act.

This thread, and my participation in it, has nothing to do with the nudity and I do not have an opinion on it, in fact. This thread and my personal participation in it is about the interest I have in the criminal act that resulted in the violation of their privacy.

My interest, if I have one, is in protecting the Royal Family of my country against scurrilous judgments of their character based on "the nudity" and to ensure the world, or the part of the world this thread touches, that there are those of us who do not care about the contents of the photos - ONLY the fact that they were taken.

YMMV

This is my point exactly, the interest is there whether you or they like it or not. William's mother was killed because the paparazzi were chasing a car driven by a drunk chauffeur, and that was 20 years ago. If death isn't going to stop the interest there is not enough outrage on your part to stop the interest in their personal lives or the intrusion. That's the reality no matter who likes it or not.

 

[Catherine J]

Should We Be Scared of Kate Middleton's Naked Breasts? - Forbes

Good article, actually.

I think, and it just hit me this morning, that my most enduring reaction is sadness. Profound sadness. We're such a sick, sad society that even people who are willing to give up 90% of their privacy and toil for the rest of their lives in service to us are not immune to our petty, selfish and small-minded intrusions and insults. This is no spirited discourse on their roles, how they play them or their value as "Royals" - this is prurient, debased, curiosity coupled with smug judgment from armchairs all over the world.

Question becomes: is there *anything* we will respect more than our curiosity and our "right to know"? Is there *anything* we hold in such high regard that we are willing to defend and honour that thing, even at the cost of aspects of our own lower nature? Is there *nothing* sacred anymore?

The answer, from all the things I have read seems to be "no". And not even a sad no, but a smug, self satisfied, "hell no!"

So, yeah. It makes me sad. I'm an idealist at heart, it seems.

 

[Catherine J]

This is my point exactly, the interest is there whether you or they like it or not. William's mother was killed because the paparazzi were chasing a car driven by a drunk chauffeur, and that was 20 years ago. If death isn't going to stop the interest there is not enough outrage on your part to stop the interest in their personal lives or the intrusion. That the reality no matter who likes it or not.

Yes, you're right, of course. That's the reality.

I suppose I believe we ought to be working to change the reality, not succumb to it with hands in air in a classic "what can ya do?" pose, or worse, in a "can't beat 'em so might as well join 'em" pose.

Yes, I really am that "naive". And I am well educated, well employed in a field that demands I be aware of current events and the temperature of the public in general, not young at all and have certainly had enough personal experience to warrant some cynicism

Thanks for the reply.

 

[Zonk]

Should We Be Scared of Kate Middleton's Naked Breasts? - Forbes

From the article



Maybe Kate’s breasts are really about everyone’s endangered privacy, an issue that’s increasingly on our minds in this era of Facebook and government and private video cameras lurking nearby wherever you go, your location easily tracked through the mobile device in your handbag or pocket. You don’t have to be the beautiful Duchess of Cambridge to be afraid that somebody somewhere is going to catch you doing something you’d rather not be seen doing.

---------------

And that to at least is what the whole thing is about. Its not about the topless pictures or even who she is (although they certainly play a BIG role) its about how this lack of privacy. Are we so desentitized by social media where people feel the need to share EVERYTHING that we don't get it when someone's feels that their privacy has been violated?

 

[Catherine J]

... Its not about the topless pictures or even who she is (although they certainly play a BIG role) its about how this lack of privacy. Are we so desentitized by social media where people feel the need to share EVERYTHING that we don't get it when someone's feels that their privacy has been violated?

And there you have it, folks. In a succinct nutshell.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

If people want to see 'boobies' , just scan the right-hand side of the DM and you can fill your boots. TOWIE z-listers giving it away to all and sundry.

 

[AdmirerUS]

Should We Be Scared of Kate Middleton's Naked Breasts? - Forbes

And we all thought icons were those things we clicked on to open an AP. LOL

 

[Sonjapearl]

One thing I certainly I have learned in regards to these photos, is how judgmental and prudish some people are. Instead of being upset over someone's privacy being violated, some people are losing sleep over a woman being topless on private property with her husband. I guess the world will come to an end thanks to a woman being at ease with her body and not being so uptight about it.

Unbelievable.

 

[Catherine J]

And we all thought icons were those things we clicked on to open an AP. LOL

Funny. I did LOL.

And, weirdly, to point. Privacy is not a Facebook setting ... it is a fundamental human right