Sunday, 16 September 2012
-
Kate Topless
The wife of Prince William is embarrassed as topless photos of her were published on several websites and released in a few newspapers. (I think she was warming up for my Save the Boobs campaign).
She was in a private area. The photos were taken from a distance and over a fence. Here is the link: Link
Some are saying her privacy was violated.
Was Kate's privacy violated?
-
recommend
- recs 2
-
email
- sent 0
- like
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to TheTheologiansCafe's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in TheTheologiansCafe's local time zone: GMT -06:00 (Central Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (51)
If it was me I wouldn't mind if someone was on distant hill snapping photos of me doing my post-shower sexy dance.
However other people get all touchy about being seen in the nude, I don't get it, but I suppose by the general unspoken rule of privacy, it was violated.Well, it was in a private place and not out in public. So yes, her privacy was violated.
william was also topless... not sure if anyone caught that.
Saw her tits; wasn't impressed. 1/5 stars
History repeats itself. You'd think they'd learn.
Yes.
Well crap nobody is beating my door down to get a naked photo of my old saggy boob. I am jealous:):)
Yes it was a violation of her privacy but that is the price of fame. At least she didn"t strip and shake it like her royal brother in law.
Whoever took the photos should get the same treatment as the scumbag who took the peephole videos of Erin Andrews.
She was at a private home-- not even some hotel where other people or creepy photographers would be expected-- a person's home. Definite invasion of privacy. There should be a level of confidence that such a situation should be safe from scandal-seekers, but when you're famous, that's not always promised.
Yeah, but that's what you get for being married to the prince.
She was topless in a private area. her privacy was violated because what was once private is now public with out her approval.
We all know that the royals have always violated other people's privacy to a greater extent than taking pictures of people by surprise, but it is still wrong to take photos of them without their consent..By their very presence and costs these royals are actually invading society as much as those who are invading them..
what a jip. princesses and other royalty are suppose to live in a tall castle with 5 story high brick walls and sharpshooters guarding the area, not those idle nutcracker soldiers!
Umm, yes? For the love of God, it's not like she leaked cell phone pictures. For once it actually wasn't her fault. She kind of has the right to be topless in private.
Oh No!!! She has boobs.I get why they are upset, it was private. I find it hard to believe though that she never flashed anyone in her drunken party days.
"Some are saying her privacy was violated..."
Is she?
Nobody has privacy in this world anyways, regardless. She knew what she was getting in to when she married the prince.And she knows damn well that if she's going to be topless, there are going to be people there to snap it.
If you're in a place that can be seen from another place (as in a deck, balcony, or other area of your home with windows), expect that someone can see you naked if you're naked.
Easy solution? Be a never-nude.
Yes, it was a total invasion of her privacy, and she has every right to be upset about it.
But - what is making ME a bit pissed, is the way it's being compared to the hounding Princess Diana put up with from the paparazzi (even though I know she courted the press herself avidly when it suited her).
Having a long-distance photo taken while sunbathing topless is NOTHING like being forced at high speed into the wall of a tunnel and having your chest splattered open by photographers who just don't know when to give up.
Invasion of privacy? Yes
But she pretty much agreed to forfeit her privacy by marrying a prince.
She shouldve known better then to be topless outdoors if she didn't want to risk this.
Why is catching a photo of a tit any more of a privacy violation than catching a photo of a hand?
Yes, she was at a private home. She wasn't flaunting herself in public.
@twilike - now that...i'd like to see lol