Empress
Heir Apparent
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,122
- Country
- United States
It's not as if the CP couple could just disappear out of Denmark without letting people know where they are going. The public would in all likelihood have a complete fit, and then some of them might in fact be worried. And when pictures did emerge, as they would be bound to do, they would be upset that they were not made aware that their crown princely family was out of the country. I think that it is a no win situation for the couple, although, I would suspect that they've appeased the majority of people by letting it be known that they would be out of the country.
You would hope that the press would be more polite themselves, and be satisfied with one day of pictures. Enough. Yes, they are public people, but even they are entitled to a few days without the press hounding them. I think that the press are overstepping their bounds. Frankly, we have no right to all of these photos, and only becuase we demand them do the press hound this family. Yes, I think one day of photos is sufficient, and I don't think that Mary was rude at all in asking the other press to leave, especially if they had arranged a specific time to take photos.
And if they arranged a photo shoot? So what? Almost all of the Royal families do that on their private vacations, in the hope that this will be sufficient for the press, and they will be let alone to enjoy the rest of their vacation.
Staying in a private place or where no one knows that they are there? Well, why should they have to? Mary would like to see her family. And she probably does not want to put the burden on them for paying to go somewhere (no doubt exhorbitantly expensive) where they will be completely left alone? And no doubt there would be people who would complain if she offered to pay for it for her family, and call them hangers-on. And no doubt, there would be others who complained that they were wasting money if they themselves paid for such a thing for themselves. And, who doesn't stay with their family, at least for a short while, when visiting them? Of course she wants to visit with her family as much as possible, given that she sees them so rarely.
It's a learning experience. Just like everything else in life. So with each experience they know what to do differently next time. I think that they have dealt admirably with the intrusiveness of the media in this instance. And they might not allow so much access the next time.
For those of you who scream that she/they are all about the photos. Give the woman some credit. I sincerely doubt that she wore Prada boots with a logo so that the press would take photos of them to give to the masses who would then complain. If you all truly think that of someone whom you've never met, I feel sorry for you, since you obviously have no faith in human kind. She might just be like the MAJORITY of us, and when we can afford the better things, and the better quality, we do. It's not always about the labels, but frankly, the labels have a much better quality and workmanship than something from HEMA or H&M. She seems like a good and caring mother, and I can't reconcile that with what other people are reading into pictures, which is that she is a self possessed, self centered and egocentric woman. It doesn't work that way. You can't be so brand conscious, and full of yourself, and still be a good mother.
And a final note. Royals are not comparable to celebrities. Royals, despite the fact that they are mostly apolitical figures, are still figureheads linked to the political entity in their various countries, and are therefore high profile kidnap/terrorist/whako targets, and are therefore in need of more security than you average celebrity. A royal is in essence a call to action for the entire country. Imagine which would have more effect in your country (if you are in a country that has a monarch) if (let's use Britian as an example) the monarch was kidnapped or hurt? What would be the publics reaction to Queen Elizabeth being the target of a kidnap plot or terrorist plot versus say Kate Winslet or Helena Bonham Carter? I don't think you can compare.
You would hope that the press would be more polite themselves, and be satisfied with one day of pictures. Enough. Yes, they are public people, but even they are entitled to a few days without the press hounding them. I think that the press are overstepping their bounds. Frankly, we have no right to all of these photos, and only becuase we demand them do the press hound this family. Yes, I think one day of photos is sufficient, and I don't think that Mary was rude at all in asking the other press to leave, especially if they had arranged a specific time to take photos.
And if they arranged a photo shoot? So what? Almost all of the Royal families do that on their private vacations, in the hope that this will be sufficient for the press, and they will be let alone to enjoy the rest of their vacation.
Staying in a private place or where no one knows that they are there? Well, why should they have to? Mary would like to see her family. And she probably does not want to put the burden on them for paying to go somewhere (no doubt exhorbitantly expensive) where they will be completely left alone? And no doubt there would be people who would complain if she offered to pay for it for her family, and call them hangers-on. And no doubt, there would be others who complained that they were wasting money if they themselves paid for such a thing for themselves. And, who doesn't stay with their family, at least for a short while, when visiting them? Of course she wants to visit with her family as much as possible, given that she sees them so rarely.
It's a learning experience. Just like everything else in life. So with each experience they know what to do differently next time. I think that they have dealt admirably with the intrusiveness of the media in this instance. And they might not allow so much access the next time.
For those of you who scream that she/they are all about the photos. Give the woman some credit. I sincerely doubt that she wore Prada boots with a logo so that the press would take photos of them to give to the masses who would then complain. If you all truly think that of someone whom you've never met, I feel sorry for you, since you obviously have no faith in human kind. She might just be like the MAJORITY of us, and when we can afford the better things, and the better quality, we do. It's not always about the labels, but frankly, the labels have a much better quality and workmanship than something from HEMA or H&M. She seems like a good and caring mother, and I can't reconcile that with what other people are reading into pictures, which is that she is a self possessed, self centered and egocentric woman. It doesn't work that way. You can't be so brand conscious, and full of yourself, and still be a good mother.
And a final note. Royals are not comparable to celebrities. Royals, despite the fact that they are mostly apolitical figures, are still figureheads linked to the political entity in their various countries, and are therefore high profile kidnap/terrorist/whako targets, and are therefore in need of more security than you average celebrity. A royal is in essence a call to action for the entire country. Imagine which would have more effect in your country (if you are in a country that has a monarch) if (let's use Britian as an example) the monarch was kidnapped or hurt? What would be the publics reaction to Queen Elizabeth being the target of a kidnap plot or terrorist plot versus say Kate Winslet or Helena Bonham Carter? I don't think you can compare.
Last edited: