Print Story Woman goes commando. Or does she?
In a scene considered too controversial for the UK press, the German magazine Bild has published shocking photographs of Princess Kate, who appears to have ignored all royal protocol and gone commando in a very brazen way. 




Is this a sign that British Royalty is going down the well worn path trodden by the likes of Paris, Lindsey and Britney? It's bad enough being governed by a bunch of shape-shifting trans-dimensional energy vampires, without them thrusting their genitalia in our faces at every opportunity.

But in fact if you look closer at the photo, it's not really clear whether Kate is really going commando or if she is merely wearing a very skimpy thong, hence my poll. (Please do not demonstrate the same level of apathy as the British electorate did last Thursday).

In other news it appears the public have seen through the media's demonisation of UKIP and sent a rather strong message to the metropolitan so-called 'elite' that enough is enough. Amusingly the mainstream parties are still trying to pretend that it is 'business as usual'. Unfortunately for them, this is only the beginning...


< Grave goods | Laptop issues >
Woman goes commando. Or does she? | 11 comments (11 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Resolution and camera angle limit analysis by marvin (4.00 / 4) #1 Mon May 26, 2014 at 08:56:54 PM EST
Looks like the underwear issue may remain forever a mystery. So sad.

I believe that this is a stellar example of the benefits of maintaining the monarchy. Given a choice between Bild running a photo of a fit twentysomething's ass or the ass named of Nigel Farage, I think I speak for most men in choosing the former.

Are you sure? by gmd (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:17:13 PM EST
 Have you studied it closely and for long enough? 

--
gmd - HuSi's second most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
Not worth it by marvin (4.00 / 3) #9 Wed May 28, 2014 at 10:05:17 PM EST
Last time I checked, there was no shortage of higher resolution images on the internet. Kate would lose out on the cost/benefit analysis.

[ Parent ]
But how many by gmd (2.00 / 0) #10 Thu May 29, 2014 at 02:51:50 AM EST
 Are of genuine royalty? Surely that's got to count for something....

--
gmd - HuSi's second most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
How genuine? She was born a commoner. by marvin (4.00 / 2) #11 Thu May 29, 2014 at 11:35:36 AM EST
Was it the wedding that elevated her to royalty, or was it being shagged by a royal that did the job?

This royalty business sounds suspiciously like catching gonorrhea or syphilis.

[ Parent ]
In the New Age of Peace and Enlightenment .... by The New Age of Peace and Enlightenment (4.00 / 1) #2 Tue May 27, 2014 at 07:22:36 AM EST
.... this sort of thing won't happen.

Not because it'll be illegal, or anything, but because people will have better things* to do that try to photograph other people's genitals without their consent.

* In the interests of placating fans of genital photographs, it should be pointed out that one of those things could well be photographing people's genitals with their consent.


The way to bring about the new age of peace and enlightenment is to assume that it has already started.
Genitals? Where? by marvin (4.00 / 1) #3 Tue May 27, 2014 at 09:12:41 AM EST
Remember, utbnb. Buttocks are not part of the reproductive system.

[ Parent ]
Well not on display here by gmd (2.00 / 0) #4 Tue May 27, 2014 at 01:19:29 PM EST
But it's surely only a matter of time... 

--
gmd - HuSi's second most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
Well by Bob Abooey (2.00 / 0) #5 Tue May 27, 2014 at 04:00:49 PM EST
Churchill used to go sans underwear all the time according to his "unauthorized" biography.

Of course that was pre-Internet so there were no amateur photographers around to snap and publish photos of his shapely buttocks...

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob

How's my blogging: Call me at 209.867.5309 to complain.

Maybe it's an illuminati thing? by gmd (2.00 / 0) #6 Tue May 27, 2014 at 04:13:52 PM EST
 This depraved lack of undergarments could be another aspect of their reptillian nature, after all I never saw a crocodile wearing underwear...

--
gmd - HuSi's second most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
Possible by Bob Abooey (4.00 / 1) #7 Tue May 27, 2014 at 04:32:51 PM EST
However in Churchill's case I believe he was simply supporting the war effort - they needed all the cotton/rayon/polyester fibers to make gas masks for the boys at the front.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob

How's my blogging: Call me at 209.867.5309 to complain.

[ Parent ]
Woman goes commando. Or does she? | 11 comments (11 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback