Does anyone read the French Magazine Closer?
I know, I know, stupid question. Of course you bloody well
don't. Unless you're plunging head first into the world of fashion as a career (which,
according to one of my friends who has made that disastrous mistake, requires
learning languages that you will never use, rather than sitting at the sewing
machines making sparkly clothes), reading Closer isn't high up on your bucket
list. It certainly isn't high on my bucket list - it might just be after
listening to Rebecca Black on repeat or gauging out my eyeballs.
 |
| Clooooooozuuuurreeee - "The photos that will go around the world." |
Honestly, I don't see the attraction of reading tabloid
journalism to find out which celebrity has been cheating on their other half,
or whose been seen absolutely car parked outside some fancy nightclub. The
amount of times I have been lying in gutters on Wind Street, chatting to Hobos
about the fine art of haggling have been numerous... More than I care to
mention, actually, but you don't see people around Swansea University saying;
"Did you see Gemma out on Wind Street the other night?" (Insert
bitchy comments about my inability to hold my drink here.) Let's face it,
people have better things to talk about than my social outings and err..
adventures. Plus, I love telling my own stories of my drunken ventures on
Friday nights... and Saturdays and Sundays and Mondays and.. well, you get the
point... So why shouldn't the same thing apply to celebrities?
Well, I hear you cry, they're famous! They should be
prepared to be judged and prepare to be involved in massive scandals that
revolve around sex tapes and topless photographs. They need to prepare
themselves for the onslaught of the media and public attention that is to be
brought their way when they become famous. While this may all be true, does it
make our constant discussions about celebrities about their lives under the
glare of the media and the public any more justified?
No - Not really. The whole issue with Kate Middleton only
emphasises that point.
The Duchess of Cambridge and sweetheart of Great Britain, has
been left red-faced after a French magazine published photos of her topless in
a private chateau in France, with her beloved husband and some long lost
relation of his - that family is literally related to everyone. Of course, when
I say topless, every innocent soul immediately thinks of a bad Photoshop job,
but no my dears. I mean photographs of her modest bosoms, placed on display by
the magazine for all to see, leaving Queen Lizzie reaching for a pair of specs
and grimacing.
The French version of Closer magazine, which is also called
Closer but you have to say it with a funny and stuck up accent, (it's probably something like
Clooooozuuuurrrreee), published the
photos last week, which showed our great nation that the future Queen of
England has pixelated breasts. I suppose this is good news for women, like me,
who find themselves constantly comparing their bodies to that of good ol' Kate.
It's nice to find out that the Duchess has at least one thing about her body
that isn't perfect. Personally, the 'Kate Middleton photo scandal', as they are
calling it, is not really about the boobs.
For me, the fact that her privacy was so grotesquely invaded
is the main issue. The photos were obviously taken without her permission,
considering the fact that the paparazzi who snapped the shot was about a
kilometre away. Honestly, I don't know which is worse - the fact her tits are
out, or the poor photograph quality that makes her chin look as chiseled as
Stan Smiths from American Dad.
The magazine that first published the photos based them on
Kate's nudity, as if that was the main shock factor of the story. I guess, for
some puerile people who have never been to the beach or out of the countryside,
that may be the case. But, for me, nudity isn't really the issue here. I am far
less appalled by the idea of seeing as much of someone's breasts as you might
see flash out any day of the week by a breast feeding mother in a cafe, (the
whole, rosy lot of them), than I am by the idea and fact that couples, no
matter how famous, has the right to their own privacy and intimacy.
 |
| Courtesy of BBC |
I agree that images of breasts may no longer be a taboo, but
certain things are still sacred and, for me, a couples right to behave indiscreetly
and affectionately in a remote location is one of them; even if they are set to
be our future King and Queen. The
flailing editor of France's version of 'Clooooozuuuurrrree' got one solitary
thing right in all her protestations of running the spread of Kate's boobs; and
that was that there are nipples visible in public all around us. While that may
be true, it's not much of a justification. Just because some women enjoy
showing the world their breasts, doesn't mean that other women should have to,
especially if they don't consent to it.
Frankly, her hollow justifications carry zero weight in my
eyes.
Am I the only person on the god damn planet who things we
have no right seeing Kate strip off to catch a nice all over even tan? It's
either she gets her tits out, or gets a spray tan and becomes a 5ft something
walking umpa lumpa (is that how you spell it??) for at least the next week and I assure you, the press would
have a field day with that. Whatever that girl, and other celebrities alike,
does, she will constantly be criticised. I've said it before, and I'll say it
again - the media know no limits. Except if you're in the UK at the moment and
you've turned the photographs down. It's good to know our tabloid press have
such strong morals in Britain. God bless them.
Now excuse me while I go and read The Sun - just checking if
there are any more updates on Prince Harry's naked adventures in Las Vegas.
