I thought that might get your attention!
So it seems that someone has managed to get some photographs of the Duchess of Cambridge sunbathing topless while on holiday in France. They are set to be published in a French gossip magazine.
Now much as I very much like the idea of seeing Kate Middleton without any clothes on (which straight male - and some females - wouldn't?) all I can say is leave the poor girl alone. If she was cavorting around undressed somewhere very public then, to a certain extent, she should expect to get attention and photographs taken (even if she wasn't destined to be our next Queen). That may even be the point. However here it's quite different. She is a young lady sunbathing and under the impression that the only other person around is her husband. I'm willing to bet that the villa in question was chosen principally because it was secluded and offered a degree of privacy. Instead someone has got some seriously hardcore photography equipment and managed to reel off a couple of snaps. And why? What purpose does it serve?
Incidents like this make a strong case for the return of Britannia or something similar. This would serve a dual purpose. Firstly, it would give senior royals somewhere private to entertain people on their terms. It would be emphatically their property therefore they could set their own rules; no mobiles, no cameras, etc. Secondly, it would be a damn site more difficult to take compromising photos of a ship in the middle of the sea. There could be a family only area that is secluded and segregated from the rest of the ship where nobody could see them or interfere. No doubt some muppet would try and charter a helicopter or plane to try and obtain areal photos. Either that or try and hack into satellites to get photos that way.
There will no doubt be some people that say the Royals are heavily publicly funded and therefore are public property. This is true to an extent. Royals on official duty to represent the British population at home or abroad. And when they do that they generally do an extremely good job. However we cannot and must not forget that they are human beings too. Yes they are charged with representing the U.K. and her interests but that doesn't mean that they forfeit all rights to privacy and a personal life. Such an idea is ludicrous. What next? Webcams in the Queen's shower? A live twitter feed from Prince Charles' car? We neither can nor should expect the Royals to be on duty all the time so when they're off duty, leave them alone. Would anyone else like (or accept) their employers, workmates and everyone else minutely following everything they do when they're in private? Didn't think so. The sad fact is, animals in zoos have a greater expectation of privacy; most animal enclosures have privacy areas where the animals can hide away from being gawked at.
Of course some will say that if they didn't want this kind of attention then we should just disband the monarchy and be done with it. Maybe so but I genuinely think that the Monarchy is a force for good for the U.K. They are an apolitical organisation who's sole purpose is to promote our best interests. They know they will be there in the weeks, months and years to come so they can concentrate on doing the best for the country rather than worry about re-election. They also still have huge novelty value. People are excited about meeting senior Royals: this is true across the board from senior politicians to kids and pretty much everyone in between. Not only will this hopefully make decision makers more open to suggestion and negotiation, on a much more gentle note, it will brighten people's days. What's wrong with that? On an even more subjective note, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have more than a whiff of a Disney film about them (Prince William did feature in the film Princess Diaries 2) so rather than try to spoil it, why not just either let them be or enjoy the story.
If you were hoping to get copies of the pictures here then sorry, no chance. Hope you enjoyed the read none the less.
JR
So it seems that someone has managed to get some photographs of the Duchess of Cambridge sunbathing topless while on holiday in France. They are set to be published in a French gossip magazine.
Now much as I very much like the idea of seeing Kate Middleton without any clothes on (which straight male - and some females - wouldn't?) all I can say is leave the poor girl alone. If she was cavorting around undressed somewhere very public then, to a certain extent, she should expect to get attention and photographs taken (even if she wasn't destined to be our next Queen). That may even be the point. However here it's quite different. She is a young lady sunbathing and under the impression that the only other person around is her husband. I'm willing to bet that the villa in question was chosen principally because it was secluded and offered a degree of privacy. Instead someone has got some seriously hardcore photography equipment and managed to reel off a couple of snaps. And why? What purpose does it serve?
Incidents like this make a strong case for the return of Britannia or something similar. This would serve a dual purpose. Firstly, it would give senior royals somewhere private to entertain people on their terms. It would be emphatically their property therefore they could set their own rules; no mobiles, no cameras, etc. Secondly, it would be a damn site more difficult to take compromising photos of a ship in the middle of the sea. There could be a family only area that is secluded and segregated from the rest of the ship where nobody could see them or interfere. No doubt some muppet would try and charter a helicopter or plane to try and obtain areal photos. Either that or try and hack into satellites to get photos that way.
There will no doubt be some people that say the Royals are heavily publicly funded and therefore are public property. This is true to an extent. Royals on official duty to represent the British population at home or abroad. And when they do that they generally do an extremely good job. However we cannot and must not forget that they are human beings too. Yes they are charged with representing the U.K. and her interests but that doesn't mean that they forfeit all rights to privacy and a personal life. Such an idea is ludicrous. What next? Webcams in the Queen's shower? A live twitter feed from Prince Charles' car? We neither can nor should expect the Royals to be on duty all the time so when they're off duty, leave them alone. Would anyone else like (or accept) their employers, workmates and everyone else minutely following everything they do when they're in private? Didn't think so. The sad fact is, animals in zoos have a greater expectation of privacy; most animal enclosures have privacy areas where the animals can hide away from being gawked at.
Of course some will say that if they didn't want this kind of attention then we should just disband the monarchy and be done with it. Maybe so but I genuinely think that the Monarchy is a force for good for the U.K. They are an apolitical organisation who's sole purpose is to promote our best interests. They know they will be there in the weeks, months and years to come so they can concentrate on doing the best for the country rather than worry about re-election. They also still have huge novelty value. People are excited about meeting senior Royals: this is true across the board from senior politicians to kids and pretty much everyone in between. Not only will this hopefully make decision makers more open to suggestion and negotiation, on a much more gentle note, it will brighten people's days. What's wrong with that? On an even more subjective note, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have more than a whiff of a Disney film about them (Prince William did feature in the film Princess Diaries 2) so rather than try to spoil it, why not just either let them be or enjoy the story.
If you were hoping to get copies of the pictures here then sorry, no chance. Hope you enjoyed the read none the less.
JR
No comments:
Post a Comment