The Royal Bum

New Posts

It fascinates me that people would be all atwitter over seeing someone's butt.

There must be 453,321 more news-worthy things in the world.
 
jjenny said:
Skirt + wind + thong (or commando) = naked behind. I am sure everybody knows that.
Click to expand...

Helicopter = wind

She did not know this? Her husband is a helicopter pilot.

Perhaps the royal designers can come up with a solution for this problem. Something like coverup style underwear to match each garment designed in a non-see-through fabric. And not thong style, of course.

This is her job. She needs to think ahead and dress for any eventuality. She's not all THAT airheaded, she has a college degree. A full skirt, a thong, and a helicopter - a disaster waiting to happen.

My thought, still, every time I see a thong, is "How in the heck can anybody stand to wear one?"
 
blue22 said:
Keeping people from publishing pictures of her body, should not be her responsibility. It should be the laws responsibility.

If I am at a beach and my top comes up, because of a strong wave...no one should have the right to publish those photos. If I am breastfeeding and am momentarily exposed, no one should have the right to publish those pictures. Public does NOT mean exploiting people. It shouldn't.

The fact that you are making this into an attractive body part vs. unattractive, is really gross. Not to mention a symptom of a really larger problem.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem looking at naked female butts. I don't even need glasses.You have a problem with nakedness. I guess you don't visit art galleries much. The laws responsibilty? In Australia? So every country in the world should pass laws because you have a problem with nudity? If Kate's gonna show it, I'm gonna look. It's what men do and I'll not apologize for being a man.
 
AlwaysShocked said:
Helicopter = wind

She did not know this? Her husband is a helicopter pilot.

Perhaps the royal designers can come up with a solution for this problem. Something like coverup style underwear to match each garment designed in a non-see-through fabric. And not thong style, of course.

This is her job. She needs to think ahead and dress for any eventuality. She's not all THAT airheaded, she has a college degree. A full skirt, a thong, and a helicopter - a disaster waiting to happen.

My thought, still, every time I see a thong, is "How in the heck can anybody stand to wear one?"
Click to expand...

It's not the first time she is photographed with her skirt flown up. So of course she knew it. Maybe she likes for the world to look at her nekkid behind-that's the only thing I can think of to explain why she would go out in public in a dress and very little under it to cover her bum (or nothing at all).
 
I have no complaints about what I see in the pic;)
 
BBM The onus is on the paparrazi and those who buy the pictures. Why should she have to wear granny panties? Damned uncomfortable anyway. lol

blue22 said:
I think she should be able to wear whatever underwear she pleases. MANY women wear thong underwear. There is nothing exhibitionist about it. Sure she knows the press will be there. And if she has obvious panty lines, they will be talking about that. The topless photos where on her balcony. It was SUPPOSED to be a private, and secure part of the island. There is nothing exhibitionist about being topless, when you think there is no way of someone seeing. They used a crazy lens from very far away, and they didn't think they would be anywhere near the secure spot they were. They have taken similar vacations since, and you don't see it happening again. Most likely, because they know realize they don't get secured private vacations. It's impossible, even when people promise them security. There is nothing exhibitionist about a helicopter lifting a skirt. How many helicopters has she been on, dozens? This is the first bare bum photo, so obviously she wasn't counting on this particular helicopter lifting her skirt.

Now, I literally couldn't care less about the royal family. I often find it strange what is and is not allowed. I mean, if someone walked by and took a cell phone photo up her skirt, but you can post a bare photo without someone's consent. It makes no sense. I'm not a defender of the royal family (I actually think having them is pointless) but a girl should be able to wear underwear she i comfortable in and walk under a helicopter, without some creepy photographer publishing a photo of her private parts, that she OBVIOUSLY didn't consent to showing or the picture of.
Click to expand...
 
Jacie Estes said:
BBM The onus is on the paparrazi and those who buy the pictures. Why should she have to wear granny panties? Damned uncomfortable anyway. lol
Click to expand...

Granny panties are uncomfortable but thongs are not? Assuming she actually has a thong on.
 
Jacie Estes said:
BBM The onus is on the paparrazi and those who buy the pictures. Why should she have to wear granny panties? Damned uncomfortable anyway. lol
Click to expand...


What onus? You don't have to pay. You can see it on the internet for free.
I agree. She shouldn't have to wear panties if she doesn't want to. You go commando girl.
 
TrackerSam said:
I don't have a problem looking at naked female butts. I don't even need glasses.You have a problem with nakedness. I guess you don't visit art galleries much. The laws responsibilty? In Australia? So every country in the world should pass laws because you have a problem with nudity? If Kate's gonna show it, I'm gonna look. It's what men do and I'll not apologize for being a man.
Click to expand...

I have a problem with assuming, because people find her butt "attractive" she shouldn't be concerned or embarrassed that the word is looking at it. Like attractive women should be fine with their bodies being exposed. That's just a really ridiculous and misogynistic line of thought.

And, yes. I DO think there should be laws about publishing photos of what is considered private body parts, without consent. I think it's funny that you assume that I have a problem with nudity. Both my husband and I are actually artists, so we have nudity all over the place. I have absolutely no problem with nudity, but people should consent. I think in order to publish nude photos of a person, that person should consent to it. Is that really such an nutty thought?
 
Has she never heard of a half slip?

I'm a bit tired of seeing her bits and bobs, to be honest, along with Miley's and Madonna's and Kim's, Rihanna's....

You don't expect any different from a musician but Kate must either be a bit slow on the uptake or just not mind her undies shown to the world. I thought these people have dressers to make sure they don't put something on backwards or wear floaty in gale force winds?

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/LUXURY-PURE-SILK-LACE-HALF-SLIP-14-COLOURS-MEDIUM-/360323491019

I should send her one....
 
I'm just eternally grateful that we got to see Kate's bum and not the Queen's. :facepalm:

JMO
 
Did this ever happen to Diana?
I don't recall it every happening but I was young, so I may not recall.
It does seem like some simple weights in the skirt or a less full skirt would solve the issue.
 
MsFacetious said:
Did this ever happen to Diana?
I don't recall it every happening but I was young, so I may not recall.
It does seem like some simple weights in the skirt or a less full skirt would solve the issue.
Click to expand...

Diana learnt her lesson.

Don't you remember the first photo of her EVER, standing with the light behind her while working as a child carer, in a flimsy skirt that outlined everything?

Gosh I do. I must be showing my age. It caused an absolute uproar at the time. :)

She was never, ever caught again.

Like I said, Kate's either a bit slow on learning the lesson, or she just doesn't mind the upskirt in front of the paparazzi.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/14/article-0-12DCBA15000005DC-308_306x511.jpg
 
blue22 said:
I have a problem with assuming, because people find her butt "attractive" she shouldn't be concerned or embarrassed that the word is looking at it. Like attractive women should be fine with their bodies being exposed. That's just a really ridiculous and misogynistic line of thought.

And, yes. I DO think there should be laws about publishing photos of what is considered private body parts, without consent. I think it's funny that you assume that I have a problem with nudity. Both my husband and I are actually artists, so we have nudity all over the place. I have absolutely no problem with nudity, but people should consent. I think in order to publish nude photos of a person, that person should consent to it. Is that really such an nutty thought?
Click to expand...

Yep. She was in public, exposed because she doesn't know how to dress. It's like expecting Facebook posts to be private mail.
I never said she should "be fine with their bodies being exposed". I said she shouldn't be embarassed. Nice try. Like artists can't be prudes? :floorlaugh:
I'm sure we'll be seeing more of Kate in the nude very soon. She knew about the weights in the hem trick. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the world to pass laws about nude pictures. They are a staple of the tabloids. You think she was the only celebrity ever caught with something exposed and the pictures published? Any laws get passed because of it? When similar pictures of Jennifer or Madonna made the tabloids, did you raise objections here at WS or is it just Kate? Back to you. :seeya:
 
kate doesn't know how to dress? funniest thing i've read today.

no skirt has received this much attention since the black micro-mini in bridget jones' diary. well, maybe the one lady gaga wore that was made of meat.

much ado about nothing.

i do agree the pics should not have been published. the shame ought to be on the photog for not deleting and the rags for publishing, not kate.
 
MsFacetious said:
Did this ever happen to Diana?
I don't recall it every happening but I was young, so I may not recall.
It does seem like some simple weights in the skirt or a less full skirt would solve the issue.
Click to expand...

No. Diana had the famous.."see through, no slip with her skirt" shot. (or maybe she had a slip, I don't know..but if she did, it was a useless one).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 204 more.
Total: 4,474 (members: 205, guests: 4,269)

Online statistics

Members online
205
Guests online
4,269
Total visitors
4,474
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,428
Messages
17,968,693
Members
228,766
Latest member
CoRo
Back
Top