To think Kate Middleton should have kept her tits in

[moogster1a]

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

Have to disagree, op. They're her boobs, if she wants to sunbathe (in private whilst off duty) topless then that should be her right and prerogative. As it should be anyone else.
I totally agree that she should go with a somewhat gallic shrug 'so what?' attitude though. It's about time the media grew up on this one.

sirzy I might have got it wrong - don't listen to me!

Thing is, it is just boobs. So what if she walks around the pool with no top on? She's a young woman on holiday with her lovely husband. That's what people do. The idea that a woman has to cover up even in a private situation is weird - she's allowed to take her top off in her own accommodation.

I think this is really intrusive because they were in the garden of a private house. If she was on a public beach she should expect to be photographed but she could expect privacy here.
I just hope she was being sunsmart!

Probably unfortunate that it´s just after the Harry show!

I agree she should be able to do this if she wants.

I think I would only find it odd if security were around!

"Tits"? Really? Bit vulgar for a thread title, isn't it?

Sadly, I agree with moogster and others. She has huge privilege from her position, but there are always downsides to privilege and lack of privacy is one.

Besides, if people didn't buy magazines that had photos (topless royals /slebs, up skirt shots etc) or crappy "is she pregnant" stories, papers wouldn't buy the pictures and stories and paparazzi wouldn't hang around with long lenses

I'm not sure you can complain about the use of tits when some members have far more offensive user names and 'cunt' regularly crops up

Who are the people that would, on a random morning, choose to buy the paper with a picture of her boobs in it over a paper without?

It's all about money when it comes down to it. And bloody boobs! It is just boobs as callin says. Ridiculous.

What lubey said, with knobs on! :)

And while we're at it, Harry's photos were taken in the privacy of his own (temporary) residence. So actually we should expect shots from the royal boudoir very soon

Well they'll go nicely on the mantelpiece with the Will-having-a-slash pictures - royal knob in full view.

That's their mantelpiece. Not mine!

God help her when she has a baby and breast feeds in public. It will be a frenzy of boob snapping lenses.

Poor woman. They are just breasts!

True kim. Very true.

None of this is going to change anytime soon is it? :(

I hope she and William decide to use these photos on their official Christmas card. If their dog happened to be there or can be superimposed then so much the better.

I hadn't heard about this.

So was the photographer trespassing?

I believe that if she were on a massive private estate then she should have been left alone. Its an invasion of privacy.

I hope she whips them out nonchalantly when she has a baby wanting a feed.

Ledkr YABU BIG TIME

She ought to be able to do what the heck she likes in private.

I hope she sues the photographer and whoever has published them.

It's totally ridiculous. Why the hell should she not be able to do what she wants in private? French magazine are disgusting for publishing it, and as bad as the pap who took the photos!

And as others have said, they are just boobs. Half the population of the world have them, and those who are the lucky ones among the other half may even get to touch them so they are hardly secret and mysterious FFS.

Poor woman.

I think it's bloody horrible and a total invasion of privacy. Getting your top off on a boat in St Tropez is one thing and it would be naive of her to do that.

If it's ok to do this then surely it would be just as ok to take photos through a curtain and into your home? Or install secret cameras inside the home? If it's ok to do the one then why not the other?

Why are these sorts of photos (invasion of privacy, not of tits) even allowed to be printed?

Yabu. While I am no royalist, and wish the lot of them flung from office with immediate effect, I think Kate Middleton's tits are her business, and that this has been a gross invasion of privacy.

Can't imagine she's got much to show in the nork department, what with resembling a hat stand and all that...but whatever norkage she does possess is hers to do with what she will, and if the woman wants to sunbathe she bloody can, without some cunt with a long angled lens taking photos.

The photographer should be facing prosecution.

Why should she "keep her tits in"?!

What you do in your own home - house or garden - should be private and regardless of her position she has every right to expect privacy in that situation.

A few years back, didn't a German mag publish pictures of prince Charles naked, taken with a long lense through a hotel window?

Where on earth do we draw the line - do the public really have an appetite for that level of intrusion?

I don;'t Sarah - that's for sure. I feel soiled by things like this - Kate's tits are not for my eyes for example, and I will feel wrong if I shopuld happen to see them. Not because I'm bothered by nudity or anything like that, but because it's none of my business.

Do famous people 'go topless' on holiday more than normal ones? It's not something that would ever really occur to me to do!

Somewhat sickened by the reportage on this: a 'bitter blow' for the royals, and Prince William has 'tried to shield his wife' from the press.... blerk.