Kate middleton - closer magazine

[fairyflowers]

As seen on the news, the magazine published photos of Prince William and Kate topless on holiday. Just wondering what peoples veiws are on the issue.

 

[Fizzoid]

I'm sure she thought she was safe from prying eyes, but if you don't want pics of you topless to appear anywhere, don't go topless!

 

[fairyflowers]

Thats exacly what i thought!

 

[Andypanda6570]

Me, too..Lol...........

 

[special_kala]

I'm sure she thought she was safe from prying eyes, but if you don't want pics of you topless to appear anywhere, don't go topless!

Sorry but i think it should be that people just dont take those pictures.

She was on holiday in a private villa and the paparazzi stood over half a mile away and zoomed in. That is not ok

If someone took a picture of you in your bra in your garden from 5 houses away and plastered it all over your street i dont think the same would apply would it?

Shes a person, not a commodity, we dont own her and she should have the same rights as everyone else.

 

[baby_maybe]

I'm sure she thought she was safe from prying eyes, but if you don't want pics of you topless to appear anywhere, don't go topless!

Sorry but i think it should be that people just dont take those pictures.

She was on holiday in a private villa and the paparazzi stood over half a mile away and zoomed in. That is not ok

If someone took a picture of you in your bra in your garden from 5 houses away and plastered it all over your street i dont think the same would apply would it?

Shes a person, not a commodity, we dont own her and she should have the same rights as everyone else.

Completely agree with this, I was only saying the exact same thing to my hubby the other day when we were discussing it.

 

[Soccergurl3]

If I don't want pictures of my boobies plastered everywhere then I keep them covered. They were outside and they know that they are hounded by paparazzi constantly so if it was that detrimental to them to have naked photos...then DONT go naked!!

 

[Fizzoid]

Sorry but i think it should be that people just dont take those pictures.

In an ideal world you'd be right, but someone in her position, to think this, is either naive or stupid. You'd think she'd have known that ANY opportunity the press would get to intrude into her privacy, then they'd take it, and think about the consequences later (if at all). Especially as this comes just after her Brother-in-Law recently made photographic headlines

 

[robinator]

I'm sure she thought she was safe from prying eyes, but if you don't want pics of you topless to appear anywhere, don't go topless!

Sorry but i think it should be that people just dont take those pictures.

She was on holiday in a private villa and the paparazzi stood over half a mile away and zoomed in. That is not ok

If someone took a picture of you in your bra in your garden from 5 houses away and plastered it all over your street i dont think the same would apply would it?

Shes a person, not a commodity, we dont own her and she should have the same rights as everyone else.

I don't care if she was on the moon. She was dating William for how long before they got married? She knew what she was getting herself into when she went royal - a life of little to no privacy or freedom.

 

[Jaylynne]

They're just boobs. Everyone has them to some degree.


That being said, I think it was a little silly to go topless if she didn't want to have them exposed. There's always papparazzi in their case. I do think it's rather unethical to publish them. But I think she was very naive to do it.

Did she go topless in front of bodyguards and staff?!

 

[sparkle_1979]

I think she should have realised that someone could have taken those pictures, even if you are in a private villa in the middle of the country, her family know the paps will do anything for a picture so it was naive of her to go topless.

I do think though that there should be much stricter laws regarding the paparazzi and that taking these pics is not right and they should be prosecuted

 

[nosocks]

She didn't need to go topless so I think she should've just stayed covered up! The villa was surrounded by trees so surely at some point it crossed someone's mind that it would be possible to take a picture from very far away.
She knows she's one of the most photo-d people in the world and so it was probably a silly choice! Like I'm sure there are other things she'd be very conscious of not doing on the off chance someone caught her.
It Just part and parcel of being in the public eye and I don't think she should get special treatment more than any other celeb who is doing the same thing in their private villa.
Andactually I dont think anyone will think any less of her for doing it.

 

[Sarahcake]

You know the thing I find the most unsettling about all of this? That she was in plain view from the road via a high powered zoom...lucky that was a camera that got her is t it and not a sniper rifle scope pointed her way.

I think it should be a lesson in security for the pair more than anything.

As for the actual topic, I don't think those pictures should have been published no. It's not like she stripped off and walked through town like it, she was in the confines of the villa, just the photographer is a pervy ******* who chose to crack out the high powered zoom to get her.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

It's irrelevant who she is, she was topless in private! If someone zoomed in and took a pic of me topless though my bedroom window and published it I would be livid (not that anyone would be remotely interested haha!) Now if she did it in a public place then that's completely different...

 

[special_kala]

It's irrelevant who she is, she was topless in private! If someone zoomed in and took a pic of me topless though my bedroom window and published it I would be livid (not that anyone would be remotely interested haha!) Now if she did it in a public place then that's completely different...

Exactly. She isnt fair game because shes a celebrity

 

[Brookey]

I dont think its right that the pictures have been published...

HOWEVER,

On the news they have been showing the villa that they were staying at and it is visible from the road. Im sorry but did someone not think there would be the slight possibility that there may be a pap trying to get a sneaky picture????? I mean, come on, it was a bit of a silly mistake.

Its a shame that she is not free to do what she wants but unfortunately she knew what she was marrying in to and I think they should have been more careful.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

I dont think its right that the pictures have been published...

HOWEVER,

On the news they have been showing the villa that they were staying at and it is visible from the road. Im sorry but did someone not think there would be the slight possibility that there may be a pap trying to get a sneaky picture????? I mean, come on, it was a bit of a silly mistake.

Its a shame that she is not free to do what she wants but unfortunately she knew what she was marrying in to and I think they should have been more careful.

I don't think she should have to be careful in private, I haven't seen this on the news though, was she topless in clear view of the road? If not then they were snooping and that is out of order, same as if they zoomed in on you or me through our bedroom window as I said before, where is the line? Should she walk around inside covered up as well just in case because she should expect paps to do anything for the shot?

Shame on the paps, especially seeing what happened to her late mother in law (depending on which version of events you subscribe to).

 

[lindseymw]

I dont think its right that the pictures have been published...

HOWEVER,

On the news they have been showing the villa that they were staying at and it is visible from the road. Im sorry but did someone not think there would be the slight possibility that there may be a pap trying to get a sneaky picture????? I mean, come on, it was a bit of a silly mistake.

Its a shame that she is not free to do what she wants but unfortunately she knew what she was marrying in to and I think they should have been more careful.

I don't think she should have to be careful in private, I haven't seen this on the news though, was she topless in clear view of the road? If not then they were snooping and that is out of order, same as if they zoomed in on you or me through our bedroom window as I said before, where is the line? Should she walk around inside covered up as well just in case because she should expect paps to do anything for the shot?

Shame on the paps, especially seeing what happened to her late mother in law (depending on which version of events you subscribe to).

As far as I am aware, she wasn't in her bedroom getting undressed or anything like that. She was sunbathing topless I think

Whilst I agree that the photos were a bit of bad taste being published, I do feel she must have been very naive to think that there were no paps around to take photos.

I wonder if there would be as much 'outrage' if it were say Katie Price photographed sunbathing topless in a private villa?

 

[Jaylynne]

Just out of curiosity, houw many of us actually looked the photos up?

 

[joshiesmum]

I did shes beautiful god i sound like a right perv!! Xxx