Yes I do mean that actually and it makes lots of sense to me.
What doesn't make sense to me and what is way left field to me is how far you went into their private lives! I find it very offensive that you would think I would want to see Kate's private, her childbirth or Will on the john. I was not talking about their "consummation". Come on that is definitely definitely private. If you read my post thoroughly you would see that I said royal "weddings" should be covered and watched by billions.
Whether we like it or not royals do not have privacy. I'm sorry but being royal does mean you forfeit your privacy because you are not your own anymore.
If they don't have privacy then the above comment can be justified - that might seem to go too far but how far is too far? In the past royals were subjected to that sort of scrutiny - do we really want to go back to the middle ages and have the royals live their lives in public with no real privacy?
Common people (as you put it) indeed have a lot more privacy, that's common sense. I'm definitely not saying they should have cameras etc, cause that's pathetic. Like the saying "to whom much is given, much is required"...that goes for royals too. You took what I said way to literal. If you don't understand what I'm saying ask me and I'll gladly tell you. Bottom line: royals will never have privacy...except for the extremely personal moments that you mentioned above.
The point though is how much should the public have access to the royals? Currently the BRF have a lot of private time and that is absolutely right. They are human beings with feelings and needs as well and that includes the right to be able to relax with close friends and family on special days after having the world watching their nuptials.
Shouldn't they be able to have some part of their day with just their family and friends?
Surely the procession through the streets, having the world watch the ceremony and being able to cheer them as they start their lives together from the balcony should be enough invasion from the public into the events of their day.
After that they should be able to relax with just their family and friends.
That is what we had with the Queen's children and that was more than what we got with the Queen, where if you weren't in London you didn't get to see anything live.
If they allow more this generation then the next generation will be expected to go further and the sort of scenario described above may very well be expected.
Some privacy isn't too much to expect for anyone and that includes having some time just with their family and friends.
Maybe the Scandinavians are happy having the world in their private lives but the Windsors haven't done so in the past and I hope they don't.
Queen Penelope summed it up nicely:
You disagree - and that is the attitude that lead to William losing his mother at such a young age - the attitude of some of the public to the idea that they had a right to know everything about her life - result high speed chase through the streets and death. I don't actually blame the paps for her death as much as her fans - they killed her and if the idea of the royals having no privacy is common it will see more of them killed so that the public can see them in private moments that they want to keep private but the public believe they have a right to see.
The idea that taxpayers have a right to see things because they are paying for it is wrong as the British taxpayers don't pay William, Kate or most of the royals. The pay the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh only and the official expenses of the rest of the family - i.e. just like any employer who reimburses employees for work related expenses. Security is paid for of course but that is just the job of certian members of the police force who would either be protecting someone else or be unemployed.
yes the CBC and the other media outlets here do a great job covering royal events cant wait
