Come on Kate, it's only pair of titties.

bags I agree, half the world would probably have missed it, now there's a lot more publicity fuelling the flames. I spoke to DH about it (making conversation) and he went 'huh? who? Harry? no? oh ... those two? but aren't they in Malaysia?' ...and went back to watching sport, not the slightest bit interested.

I think this is all getting a bit ridiculous.

It was only her boobs on show. Loads of people show their tits these days, one way or another. No one would bat an eyelid if it was anyone from the celebrity world.

Alright, I know she's going to be queen of England one day, but so what?! They're boobs. We've all got 'em!

And on the Today programme I heard someone say they were both quite laid back about it when they first heard at breakfast time. It was only during the day that they gradually got more and more steamed up about it. I think their first reaction was the best.

Someone tell them it's 2012!

The Irish Daily Star has published the photos now - how many more are going to jump on the bandwagon?

As you may know I am not a royalist but I do think it is wrong to publish photos of naked /half naked women without their consent. Our bodies are our own to decide who see them! Women's bodies are not commodities to be used by others for profit.

If you or I thought we were in a private place on our property, not overlooked and chose to sunbathe/ walk about naked /semi naked and a neighbour climbed onto their wardrobe and hung out of the top of a window and took a photo then published on FB or elsewhere I would be very pissed off!

Do I sound a prude? I am not! I have sunbathed topless on a beach but that was my choice 9 and a long time ago!) so could not complain if photo taken...different if I was deliberately trying hard to be private.

Back in antiquity (ancient Egypt?) formal dress for queens (or the equivalent) was an expensive long dress with a plunging neckline that went neatly under the boobs. Presumably it proved that she was definitely female and equipped to produce and nourish an heir.

Don't think it would catch on here, though it would bypass the paparazzi completely, they would have to photograph her showing an ankle.

Don't think Liz would go for that Elegran ! Bit chilly for our climate too

Liz doesn't need to – she has done her reproducing. Kate could though.

nanaej - Completely agree. It's not about the boobs, it's about the invasion of privacy for financial gain, wherever and whomever you are.

I feel very sorry for her and I think the fact she is touring muslim countries is especially emabarrassing and I hope they don't kick off at some point like they have over the cartoons and recent film. It could be a very difficult time if that were to happen and the fanatical muslim groups are very volatile and don't need anything much to start trouble.

Let's be honest, not one of us would like a photo of ourselves all over the news with our boobs out. She was in a place she thought was safe from prying eyes and probably relaxed and just did the normal thing at the time, not thinking who the hell will see me, she thought they could'nt.

As for the 'paps' no pun intended they were only doing their job I suppose but they are a bloody nuisance. I suppose to expect the world to see her as anything other than a celebrity would be a bit naive, it's still a shame though.

We were only talking about this earlier when we watched the news. She's having to put on such a brave face when in the public eye all of the time [d'you think they deliberately published the photo's now because of that?]. As for the muslims and their reaction; well [on the subject of that other issue that they're annoyed about] I don't know what the video is that's caused all of the fuss but I would have more time for their anger if they made peaceful protests about it other than making me think they are just looking for an excuse to wreak havoc. On the other hand [going back to the subject of this thread], when non muslim people/countries behave like this it's no wonder they feel their way of life/faith is somehow superior to ours. [sorry if what I've said doesn't make sense; I'm a bit fed up at the moment ].

They don't feel superior. If they had any real confidence in themselves, they'd be more dignified, as are the muslims I know well, who are as disgusted by the extremists as anyone else, but cannot say so for fear of reprisals from their own kind

Does everything have to come back to religion?[bored emoticon]
Malaysia is a 'multi-confessional state' according to wikipedia, with only 61% of the population being muslims. It is not at all like the middle eastern countries.
Bags is right, the vast majority abhor the atrocities carried out by fanatics.
Nanaej you are spot on with your comments about photos being published for profit without consent.
I am sure we would all rail against the exploitation of young women who are brought to this country to work as prostitutes - perhaps it is stretching it to compare that with Kate's experience, but essentially is there a difference?

I don't like the use of the words 'titties' and 'boobs' - it smacks a bit of the playground. They are breasts.
What hypocrites the UK editors are - many of them are very happy to publish pictures about 'celebs' accidentally showing bits they would rather keep covered and now they are on fire with indignation - perhaps because they are not making money from the photos. I don't care about Page 3 girls - they know what they are doing.
I will comment on another thread about the anti-American riots, as this thread is not about religion.

As someone who has also sunbathed topless on a French beach, I too feel so very sorry for Kate and Wills.

If I put myself in their place, and I am on a 640acre estate with my husband, having a long awaited holiday and the nearest public road is a kilometre away. It's hot and I want to sunbath topless with the only person to see me being my husband. Then, a couple of weeks later during a public visit to Singapore.....

...pictures of my topless self are splashed all over a french newspaper and I am horrified to think that men will be mentally undressing me wherever I go from now on, I would be mortified.

It's not really a question of her being topless, as others have said, she's no different from any other woman in that respect but she chose to do it in the, what she thought was, the 'privacy' of the location. It took a supertelescopic lens to get those photographs.

If the photographer or the editor of the magazine has a partner, how would they like a photo of them being published when they thought they were in private. Now there's an idea.

mischief …or a daughter?

Greatnan - sorry about the "titties" and "boobs".

I'm really bored with it now.

She's not really that royal. And by the time she does become queen, all the royals will be a lot less royal. Probably.

Yes! I know she's doing a great job!

And she's very nice.

Greatnan - get the thread deleted. On the grounds that we are all sick of the sight of it.

totally agree with BAGS! why take the risk? would it really have killed her to keep her top on? it's a question of being discreet-you can't imagine any photos of the Queen topless turning up anywhere can you! there must have been security men etc around too so why not just be a bit more modest! and in no way am I a prude btw though I would be far too shy myself to go topless outside of the house (even when young)

Jingle - I have never asked for any thread to be deleted, except when I was afraid that my daugher would be able to read what I had said about her. Nothing on any other thread is sufficiently important to get it deleted.
I don't bear grudges.

I seem to remember reading that Lord Linley bought the chateau in France with the proceeds from the sale of Princess Margaret's home in Mustique. She got up to some rare old high jinks during her holidays there and we didn't find out about them until after her death as the locals were discreet. When in Europe, keep your top on Kate.

As others have said, they were not alone as there would have been staff and security personnel all around. She is clearly not shy and could certainly have been under no illusion that only her husband could see her body. There must always be a risk of leaked photographs from any of these sources, and I cannot believe that they are not advised to be more discreet. At the same time, I agree that the publication of such photographs without the consent of the subject is disgraceful.

I didn't say that you have had threads deleted Greatnan! I just meant I was sick of the sight of this one. Didn't mean anything by it.

Don't over think all this.

I read that pics were taken from a road a mile away. So hardly a passing paprazzi, he must have had a v strong pair of binoculars in the first place, then homed in with the telephoto lens, nowadays photos can be easily enhanced digitally so I spose nothing is safe. But a mile is a long way, it wasn't passing good fortune but a deliberate invasion of privacy.

I mean if they forget to close the bedroom curtains one night and someone zooms in through the windows would that be publishable ie 'they should have closed their curtains, what were they thinking of' etc

Oops imagines Superman appearing at their bedside. I was meaning camera lens zooming.