Welcome to Question of the Day – debating the ethics behind the K-Middy candid topless pictures. Kind of.
*SHOCK NEWS* Kate Middleton – a woman and the future Queen of the United Kingdom – has breasts with areolas and nipples and everything. A French photographer got some candid snaps, exposing the fact that she has breasts that she likes to tan in private, i.e. the scoop of the millennium, and the French division of Closer magazine published them.St. James's Palace called it greed, the Queen is outraged, big-Willy appaled and Philip – well, Philip's probably not all that fussed. The thing is, does anyone really care? Are Kate's boobs in the public interest, or just another another pair of tits on the internet? Should we put more impetus on creating a nude image archive of Royalty that we can all easily access with the click of a mouse?At base level; would you publish pictures of Kate Middleton’s tits?
Lloyd, 25 (left), Tim, 23 (centre) and Paul, 23.VICE: Would any of you publish the pictures of Kate Middleton’s tits?
Lloyd: In which publication?Any. I don't think it really matters in this hypothetical world of boob publishing.
Tim: No.
Paul: No.Why? Have you seen them?
Lloyd: I’ve seen them, but I wouldn’t publish them. It was a bit distasteful, wasn't it? Have you seen them? Did you like what you saw?I'm merely an impartial party in all this, I'm afraid. Would you like to see the Queen's tits?
No, I obviously have no interest in that whatsoever.
Evette, 24: No, I wouldn't. Kate's a part of the Monarchy now and she needs to maintain her privacy. She helps bring tourism to the country, and we need tourists to kick our economy back into gear.VICE: Do you think her tits would help tourism?
Hmm; tourists definitely shouldn’t see her as some sort of page three model, that's for sure. People need to respect her.If you were Kate, what would you say to the photographer?
Well, basically, I would say to them, "Why the hell did you do that? Are you happy? Are you satisfied?"Yeah, that's it – you tell 'em.
Paul, 39 and Darren, 22.Darren: I probably would have published them, yeah. But, to be honest, I was a bit disappointed with the pictures. I thought her boobs would be golden. With pearl nipples.VICE: I know, what a letdown. Do you think it’s in the interest of the British public that the whole world knows what our prospective Queen's bare boobs look like?
Paul: Well, there's definitely no problem with it. They're only a pair of tits at the end of the day. She must have known that she'd be photographed.Yeah, she definitely must have known that there was a photographer with a telephoto lens hiding 500ft away from her.
Mick, 68: You know what? That’s for her and her husband, that kind of thing. That’s for their world. It’s not meant to be shown and that’s why I don’t look. She’s a beautiful lady and he's our future King; we should leave them alone.VICE: You're telling me you're not even slightly interested in what the future Queen's boobs look like?
I can imagine they’re absolutely beautiful. All women are beautiful; we need them. I’m not gay – I’ve been married a few times; seen it all, done it all.OK then. Fair enough.
Charles, 20 (left) and Kit, 20.Charles: No, it’s a bit private.
Kit: I'm not sure what you mean. I haven't seen any pictures of Kate's boobs.VICE: As in Kate Middleton, our future Queen. You know, that story that's been in the news all week.
Kit: Oh. Ohhhhhh, OK! Yeah, she's pretty.That she is, Kit.
Nick, 21: I don’t really care about any of that, mate.VICE: Would you care if they published topless pictures of you?
Well, there aren’t any and I’m not famous, am I?I suppose not, except to whoever is currently reading this. Do you think it was a dumb move on her part to get her tits out?
No, not at all. It wouldn't be an issue for her if there weren't paparazzi following her everywhere. But yeah, I really don’t care if she’s naked or not, it doesn't mean anything to me.Previously – Would You Want to Fly if It Meant Not Being Able to Walk?
Annons
Lloyd: In which publication?Any. I don't think it really matters in this hypothetical world of boob publishing.
Tim: No.
Paul: No.Why? Have you seen them?
Lloyd: I’ve seen them, but I wouldn’t publish them. It was a bit distasteful, wasn't it? Have you seen them? Did you like what you saw?I'm merely an impartial party in all this, I'm afraid. Would you like to see the Queen's tits?
No, I obviously have no interest in that whatsoever.
Hmm; tourists definitely shouldn’t see her as some sort of page three model, that's for sure. People need to respect her.If you were Kate, what would you say to the photographer?
Well, basically, I would say to them, "Why the hell did you do that? Are you happy? Are you satisfied?"
Annons
Paul: Well, there's definitely no problem with it. They're only a pair of tits at the end of the day. She must have known that she'd be photographed.Yeah, she definitely must have known that there was a photographer with a telephoto lens hiding 500ft away from her.
I can imagine they’re absolutely beautiful. All women are beautiful; we need them. I’m not gay – I’ve been married a few times; seen it all, done it all.OK then. Fair enough.
Kit: I'm not sure what you mean. I haven't seen any pictures of Kate's boobs.VICE: As in Kate Middleton, our future Queen. You know, that story that's been in the news all week.
Kit: Oh. Ohhhhhh, OK! Yeah, she's pretty.
Annons
Well, there aren’t any and I’m not famous, am I?I suppose not, except to whoever is currently reading this. Do you think it was a dumb move on her part to get her tits out?
No, not at all. It wouldn't be an issue for her if there weren't paparazzi following her everywhere. But yeah, I really don’t care if she’s naked or not, it doesn't mean anything to me.Previously – Would You Want to Fly if It Meant Not Being Able to Walk?