Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think Kate Middleton should have kept her tits in

745 replies

moogster1a · 14/09/2012 07:34

Surely she can't be unaware that she's one of the most photographed women in the world and there are paparazzi everywhere.
I know in an ideal lovely world she should be able to skinny dip in privacy, but in the real world I think she is being a bit naiive to go topless and then be so upset when the pictures are published

OP posts:
Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:19

Flatbread you are spot on. However, it seems that very few people grasp this very simple principle.

MadgeHarvey · 14/09/2012 19:21

Oh I can't flame people but you can right? Yeah. Ok. You carry on and I hope you feel good about yourself. Oh - did you know it's ok to hold and express views that are NOT couched in terms that would shame a foul mouthed uneducated drunkard? The loathing on here for someone you've never met is astonishing.

GoldShip · 14/09/2012 19:22

Laughing my head off at periwinkle.

purplehouse · 14/09/2012 19:22

The person who took the photo is a scumbag. The people who published the photos are scumbags. That's it really.

MadgeHarvey · 14/09/2012 19:23

Anyway - since this thread has now, inevitably, been steamrollered by the competitive "I can hate the Royals more than you" contingent I suppose it would be a good time to bail out. I really hope that one day you never find yourself hated and vilified like this by people who really don't know you.

NoWayNoHow · 14/09/2012 19:24

I'm sure I read a thread a few weeks ago about an OP who discovered that her husband had posted topless photos of her on a dating site without her consent.

The "Leave the Bastards" were unanimous.

Yet a woman who went to great lengths to escape to have a secluded break and didn't even know her photo was being taken has the pictures sold and published across the world's media, and she's "naive", "inviting it" and many more choice phrases.

It's revolting.

Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:30

NoWayNoHow you can complain about it being illegal until the cows come home too. It makes not one jot of difference. It will continue to happen because it is worth people's while in a financial sense to take the risks involved in taking such photos. I'm not ignoring the fact it may very well be illegal, and be proved to be so in Court, I am not ignoring the fact however, that it will continue to happen.

I have never called Kate a "cow" or "entitled". I am simply being realistic about the fact that they are not ordinary people and do not even have the status of ordinary public figures like say, Madonna or Victoria Beckham who can carry on however they want to. They are extraordinary and there is an extraordinary level of public interest in them. Add to that the weight of duty and obligation to act in a certain way that comes with their roles, again extraordinary. It doesn't start at 9am and end at 5pm. Ask the Queen all about it, she knows and she could teach them a thing or two about how to do the job properly. You can bet your bottom dollar she's sick as a parrot about this - and not because they had their privacy invaded either.

That's a fact that I think people like you are failing to acknowledge or accept.

diddl · 14/09/2012 19:31

"So they have more privileges but less freedoms than the rest of us."

So not even any right to privacy?

Or in fact common decency-as I doubt that the pics were legally taken.

Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:32

Laughing my head off at MadegeHarvey who must get the award for hysterical overreaction of the week.

JumpingThroughMoreHoops · 14/09/2012 19:33

"inviting it" oh yes, now that is a phrase that is so used and MN get riled about in other circumstances.

Now I know "inviting it" is allowed next timeI see one of those threads, I shall point it out.

JumpingThroughMoreHoops · 14/09/2012 19:35

"So they have more privileges but less freedoms than the rest of us."

they ?

last week we were classless now we have them and us, but because they are different they have no rights I might apply that to a disabled query thread next time one comes up

Flatbread · 14/09/2012 19:38

Perri, I know Smile

I think the main issue regarding the outrage by the monarchy, is that this sort of stuff ultimately diminishes the power of the institution. It is hard to revere someone if you have seen them with their bum in the air, pulling their underwear off.

Continuing the monarchy is difficult -on one hand, they have to come across as modern and with the times, so as not to alienate people. Yet, they need to maintain the 'mystery' the 'respect' so people continue being brainwashed into thinking this family is superior to the rest of us. A tough tightrope.

I think we still have the monarchy because an old axis of power and money keeps common people fed with 'nice' stories of the royals primly doing charity work and working 'hard' for us....and stuff like this undermines that image

Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:39

Clearly Kate experiences no problems and no lack of privacy whatsoever in being naked in all manner of places as we have not seen a photo of her naked/topless before now.

When she is outside of the confines of a room in a house/hotel she should keep her private parts under wraps. The vast majority of people - who no one would have any interest in taking a photo of - have no problem in doing that so it would make sense for a person with such a high profile public role to do so too - for her own sake and the sake of the dignity of the institution of the British Monarchy.

GoldShip · 14/09/2012 19:40

Ooo it's perri now. Wink

NoWayNoHow · 14/09/2012 19:44

Of course it will continue to happen, because there's an appetite for it.

The way you are insinuating that this is Kate's fault because she's not being "royal" enough is something I absolutely won't acknowledge or accept at all, so you're right about that, completely.

By the way, it's been confirmed that the photo was taken from half a mile away

Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:51

Spot on again Flatbread. The arguments you put forward are all those I've seen put forward in a book I have called "The Myth of British Monarchy" - a bit old now but nevertheless, still a very interesting and relevant read.

The way that society has evolved over the years is definitely out of step with the whole foundation on which monarchy is based. Society is no longer as ignorant, unstintingly deferential and sycophantic as it once was. As you say, the Monarchy has had to try to evolve too and move with the times in order to try to retain its grasp but it's totally at odd with modern values.

The Queen will know the score with this one and it'll have her spitting feathers. I really think that once she's gone the Monarchy's days are numbered.

JeuxDEnfants · 14/09/2012 19:52

Yabu, such thing as privacy...

prettybird · 14/09/2012 19:54

I am both Angry and Sad at some of the attitudes being expressed on here. The fact that Catherine is now a royal is irrelevant. She is a woman - no, a human being whose privacy was invaded - for someone else's profit and for voyeurs' titillation.

It's wrong on so many counts :(

MadgeHarvey · 14/09/2012 19:55

Oooh steady on now prettybird - you'll have the angry bird double act calling you hysterical any minute!

Perriwinkle · 14/09/2012 19:56

Don't worry NoWay soon a lens will be developed that will enable them to take a snap from 10, 20 or 30 miles away. Nothing will stop them.

Kate should behave in a way becoming of a Queen in waiting at all times - that's what she's signed up for and they just don't go topless outside of the bathroom/bedroom. Can't understand why she doesn't get it. She acted in an unguarded manner and William let her do it too. The Queen gets it and always has and I'm sure she'll be telling Kate - and Wills - in no uncertain terms pretty soon.

bionicmummy · 14/09/2012 20:00

OP has a point but photographer is still a vile individual and should be sued etc.

prettybird · 14/09/2012 20:02

As it happens, I am not a royalist - but I believe that "No means no" and that the absence of consent does not mean yes.

I used believe that most MNers also thought that - but it would appear I was wrong :(

Either that, or there are a lot of hypocrites on here who are blinded by anti-monarchy sentiment. Hmm

diaimchlo · 14/09/2012 20:03

What JumpingThroughMoreHoops said

MadgeHarvey · 14/09/2012 20:04

This debate shouldn't be about Royalist or otherwise. It should be about decency. Of course, that was never going to happen was it.........

MrsTerrysChocolateOrange · 14/09/2012 20:11

I can't bear the Royals. It's class-ridden, elitist and dreadful. There, I've stated my credentials.

However, I think anyone who takes or publishes pictures of anyone in this way is dreadful and should be prosecuted. You could argue that any woman in a short skirt who travels on the tube knows there are pervs with camera phones who are snapping away and if photos end up online, they have asked for it. Of course, that is shit and is no less shit because Kate is now a royal.