Saturday, September 15, 2012

Irish Newspaper Publishes Kate Middleton Topless Photos - Italians Join In - French Have Sex Photos


Apparently after Kate Middleton took off her top while on vacation with Prince William his little King George started getting excited and the couple had sex which was duly caught in photographs. Those photos have not been released, but I bet someone is trying to buy them to release right now. Kate and William have sued the publisher of Closer magazine in France, but the biggest fine they face is $30K which is nothing compared to the millions they must be making. An Irish newspaper has published nine pages of the photos stating they are very tasteful and it is not like she is the Queen of Ireland or ever will be. An Italian Magazine also is publishing almost 30 pages of the photos. Meanwhile, Kate and William went zip lining in Borneo. Kept their clothes on too.

80 comments:

Barton Fink said...

This will be the generation that brings the Crown Jewels out from the display case and into public view.

Jamie 2 said...

Oh, boy. If there are actual sex photos, I retract all my previous "who cares" comments. That is WAY over the line.

TV Junkie said...

This is ridiculous and disrepectful. They were on private property. They did nothing scandalous. Leave them alone!

SusanB said...

Agree - they're married, they're in love, obviously when these pictures were taken they were minding their own business, just let them alone! Journalists (and I use the term loosely) have absolutely no ethics, morals, or standards of decency.

Jamie 2 said...

@Barton: Nope, this is the age when people have the technology to grossly intrude on other people's privacy.

Lulu G said...

I second @ TVJunkie. I think it's sad. It's not like it's LiLo who is a skank to begin with. This is just disrespectful. I feel badly for them. Total invasion of privacy and no one has any respect anymore, not at least the media.

trudi said...

I wonder if all the outdoor love making happened before or after baby brother was getting all the Vegas antics headlines.

Lulu G said...

Enty, if those photographs are published and are available on line, could you please NOT join the party. Please do not post any links to them. Just out of respect.

Thanks.

The Black Cat said...

What a sad day and age we live in that anyone would be interested in seeing this.

SusanB said...

I got a copy of the Brookstone catalogue this week and noticed they're selling a drone for personal use that you can attach a camera to so you can take pictures while the drone is in flight. Cost around $200.00 (I think). Just a warning for those who like outdoor sex! Can't wait to see the lawsuits that'll come out when pictures like that are published or posted online. Or what if someone who feels they're being intruded upon decides to shoot the drone down? (and I wouldn't blame them). The only time you'll know you're safe is if you're in your house with the curtains shut and in the dark. And even then, there are devices the police can use that'll show how many people are in a building by measuring the thermal energy inside (or something like that). There is NO privacy any more.

MISCH said...

Actually it's funny..
Royals just need to be more careful in public...it's a different world now. Oh those Irish !
Off with their heads...

Jamie 2 said...

@Lulu,
Seconded.

Cancan said...

While I'm appalled at the lack of privacy and respect, I'm more concerned that the bodyguards fell down on the job here. What if the camera were a sniper rifle? This never should have happened.

Cecilia00 said...

Can they get the photographer for trespassing in private property?

Merlin D. Bear said...

OMG.
They actually had sex on their honeymoon? Hold the presses.

IMHO, the pap incident occurred because of who they are, the inherent salaciousness of the international press not to mention the public - and of course, greed.
That being said, it's not unreasonable to expect privacy, as they did.
After all, no one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

babo said...

Lulu is right, pls don t post it Enty.

William and Kate were shot from such a distance that they had every reason to believe their intimacy would not be compromised.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/14/article-2202895-15046777000005DC-546_634x460.jpg

I am no fan of Kate Middleton but she deserves some modicum of a life.

Sarah said...

Good point, Cancan. I wouldn't have thought of that. Scary!

This young couple is still honeymooning in between obligations. I'm very happy for them that they are so in love after so many years together.
Crossing onto probate property and scaling walls or trees to get photos, that should make them illegal.

WW said...

I am completely appalled that a photographer was lurking around with a long lens shooting them from a mile away. This sort of thing ruined the life of Diana, she has been quoted saying she felt hunted. She could never truly relax because she knew the paps were always watching, stalking her, hunting her — can you imagine? It ultimately cost Diana her life. Now this. I saw Sarah Ferguson on the Today Show last week talking about how she has told her daughters from a very early age that the minute they step out onto a public street they must be in "Princess mode." I'm sure that's how William and Kate handle their lives, too, but this was in a private courtyard in a private home on 650 acres.

LeGrange said...

I secod this!

smashbash said...

This is beyond f'ed up that people who enjoy selling these pictures and SEEing them non the less.
I just had almost this exact conversation. They are young and in love, as they should be. Why, just because they are royals they lose all their rights of privacy. For once I actually wish the queen could behead someone, because the stupid ass people who took the pictures should be punished.

LeGrange said...

Second...

g.strathmore said...

There is no place for aristocracy in the modern world, except as paparazzi fodder. I say, "Let the games begin."

nancer said...

what's next? speeding through the streets with paps in pursuit and a fatal car crash?

i think it's appalling that these kids can't find ANYWHERE to go relax and be a normal couple in love. what a terrible way to live.

Ms Cool said...

This is so absolutely disgusting.

Del Riser said...

This should never have happened. It does point out that their safety was just as much in jeopardy as their privacy.

I'm with the rest, Enty, don't show or link to these photos.

Common Land said...

whether you are a royalist or the exact opposite, makes no odds. This is about the right to a personal life. They were in a private property. Anyone that thinks it is acceptable to publish these is just morally dead.

msgirl said...

Agreed - this is disgusting.

What are privacy laws when it comes to something like this - a photographer blatantly invading privacy! If there aren't any, then there should be. I think this is criminal, the guy should be arrested, not be able to collect millions on these photos.

lazyday603 said...

We might might have pictures of the moment of conception of a future monarch of Great Brtain & the Commonwealth? How cool is that? If she announces a pregnancy this year we'll need to count the days back to see if that was the actual moment.

Anyway why is the heir to the throne trying to impregnate his wife a scandal? That's what they are supposed to be doing. Going childless would be the real scandal.

Dee Lurker said...


Oh me-Oh my, I was hoping I wouldn't be the evil minority on this one. I mean, don't get me wrong, I was and still AM highly outraged by the invasion of privacy, but I gotta say, the idea of sex pics of these lovebirds as opposed to just her boobs, titilated me wildly.

I know! SO wrong, but please take pity on this severely under-sexed single mom..."I wanna know what love is" even vicariously.


But OF COURSE I would never ADMIT to checking the pics out-that would be DISGUSTING

auntliddy said...

Stopitstopitstopitstopitsfopitstopitstopitstopitstopit! Leave them alone, and shame on ant one who pubs pics.

Pogue Mahone said...

When you're always in the public eye ya gotta watch what ya do in public!

Brenda L said...

Let's get them on out there in public so everyone can see them and say "oh my!" and then we can all get on life. Dear God.

Lulu G said...

@Pogue. That is the point. They were NOT in public.

Layna Day said...

They weren't in public. What part of PRIVATE VACATION ON A 600-ACRE PRIVATE ESTATE MILES is so hard for some to understand.

If you want to be smug about the Royals and anti-monarch, fair enough. But be honest about it and stop with the be careful in public angle. It doesn't hold water.

This isn't much different than perverts who take upskirt pictures on mall esclators with their camera phones. Those victims were actually in public, so it's OK that they were violated for some of you? Unreal.

sylmarillion said...

@pogue: but that's the point, they were in private. Nasty. How would you like it if everything that happens in your home/your garden was published for the world to see?

FS said...

So it's okay to be photographed with a super long range photo lens in the privacy of your cousin's vacation home because you went outside? Or because you're Royals?

No, this is not okay. They were not on a beach, they were not even out on the open sea on a yacht. They were on a private estate at the home of a family member for an extended weekend holiday over the summer. NOTHING about this whole thing is okay.

Cee Kay said...

So scandalous that a married man is having sex with his own wife! Let's publish the evidence of this horror for all the world to see!

"Journalism" died years ago.

Mango said...

@ Barton Fink - some photogs already sold a pic of Will's schlong - it's of him taking a leak outside against a fencepost. Yes, very classy of them.

Mango said...

@ Barton Fink - some photogs already sold a pic of Will's schlong - it's of him taking a leak outside against a fencepost. Yes, very classy of them.

Sherry said...

I cannot imagine how horrifying this must be for them both. I would be completely bereft if someone invaded my sexy time with the Opster and sold pictures to the public. You would never truly feel safe again. Off with their 'eds!

Crystal said...

@Cee Kay- That was my very first thought too. *Gasp* A man and wife having sex!!!
But it is totally not cool that they were photographed at all where they were, let alone during sexy time. No wonder she looked so concerned in photos yesterday. She wasn't thinking "Oh crap, I got caught with my top off". She was thinking "Oh God, I hope there aren't pictures of what happened next"!!!

MrWolf said...

It's not outdoor sex if it happens indoors.

Himmmm said...

Interestingly enough I had this conversation this morning with others. According to my attorney and some Brit pals, the French mag (Closer) and the Italian mag are both owned by...Silvio Berlusconi.

Yes, the ex-Prime Minister of Italy. He was caught "en flagrante dilecto" with several underage femmes, which contributed to HIS downfall. The twist is that he waged war upon the photog who "exposed" him alfresco, including criminal charges and suing the pap into oblivion. Not that hypocrisy is foreign to politicians. (Even foreign ones -hah!).

My attorney said this will really get bizarre the moment the actual sex photos emerge (if they do). Because if released he says it gives precedent to release the Harry Ginge photos without Crown retribution. Not sure if he's right on that one - I don't think he's ever repped any royals (just royal pains in the ass).

Things sure have changed since the 60s and 70s when the Queen's sis, Princess Horsey, got caught on the beach going full shagrat with an odd man. The royals issued a blackout and media complied. That was the case upon which that bank heist film was based (since remade with Statham I believe).

The best royal scandal similar in note far bested Wills-Kate. I recall years ago seeing photos of the stunning Princess Caroline of Monaco around her 18th bday (in the 70s I think?) letting her "freak flag" fly INSIDE Studio 54 or some disco - on a VIP sofa - with more than one, uhh, *ahem*, "flagpole" at once.

A mountain of coke on the table, and powder everywhere. The pix were B&W and taken close up yet not a soul seemed to mind any of it - least of all the participants. Used to be said Caroline had some vulgar nickname like "Golden Throat" or mouth something (and not for her singing skills either). From the looks of those photos she seemed to have the situation "well in hand". She was (and still is) strikingly attractive.

No idea what became of those photos, but Monaco was always more liberal I suppose. From all indications, her daughter Charlotte seems to be carrying many similar traditions today. I hope she's more careful as bad luck+choices seem to haunt that family tragically as well.

So back to the UK, and for all the conspiracy theorists. I wonder if they theorize anything yet? Like do they say Mohammed Fayed hired the photogs? Or did MI6?

Or as they said of Diana's death - IF the SAS or MI5 or MI6 had Diana murdered to prevent a scandal/embarassment? Why would they not have wiped out a silly lil pap photog to spare the same?

Unless, of course, THEY (the secret dr. evils) wanted to do this? If so - what is this REAL motive?
(as I twist my fake waxy moustache and do my best Stephen Fry accent):
Let us specualte for just a moment, shall we?

Is this a ploy to calm the burning Arab world?

Or to distract the Yanks from elections?

Distract the UK from Harrygate?

Distract Harry from warfighting in order to rush home and hang out with dear brother and Kate?

To let Prince Wills know that if he cannot control HIS woman, that we - the evil ones - shall?

Or maybe it is all a grand conspiracy to bring about the fall of Victorian morals in our cou -
(oops, sorry. got carried away a bit there).

Regardless? God Save The (future) Queen...indeed!
(PS - Sorry for the long nonsense shamble-rambles. Been missing the fun here and have unable to post much lately!)

iheartjacksparrow said...

Wills and Kate are celebrities and exclusive photos of them command large sums of money. Surely they must know that. Every celebrity needs to realize that if they want to do something that they don't want plastered all over the internet and in newspapers and magazines around the world, then they need to keep it inside of four walls and a roof no matter how far off the beaten path you are. It may be considered an invasion of privacy, but paps don't care; they need to pay for those expensive telephoto lenses. How hard would it have been for Wills and Kate to go back inside before doing the naked pretzel?

not on my dollar said...

ITA with @iheart.

Cancan said...

Himmmmm.... what provocative comments! Very entertaining for a Saturday afternoon. I never knew about the Princess Caroline photo scandal. Thanks for the interesting food for thought.

Cancan said...

Stephen Fry is that guy who plays Moriarty in the Sherlock Holmes movies, right?

Dee Lurker said...

And the (Gossip) Gospel choir sings "Himmmm"!!! ;p

Bangagong said...

If I were famous and in the middle of a private property that measures 600 or 650 acres, I would not expect to be photgraphed by someone outside the property.

Why?

Because 640 acres is equal to one square mile.

Those photographers went through crazy and absurd lengths in order to obtain these pictures. When someone has taken so much trouble in order to take a picture, it is reasonable to believe that there has been an invasion of privacy involved. In that case, it should not matter how famous you are.

feraltart said...

I put myself in their shoes. I would expect that I could have privacy in that setting. They did nothing wrong. If people stopped buying magazines with the photos in then this would stop. I feel empathy is dying out in our society and it saddens me.

smashbash said...

Oh himmmm you always know the perfect moment to appear. Dia will be sad.
I actually thought for a moment this morning, what are they trying to cover up? If the royal government said it was ok to take the pictures? Libya and Syria are about to go to war, are they trying to distract from that? It still makes to so wrong they took the pictures.
I also just half an hour ago thought about the princess of Monaco topless photos. She was on a beach just struttin it.

Have a great weekend himmmm and all!!!

Ramone Love said...

She's hot, has really nice boobs.

Sherry said...

Amen Gong.

Beta said...

@Common Land
I politely disagree,
if kate was not married to the prince of england those photos would not be published.
those people are living lavishly off the taxes of the subjects of great britain.
I have no personal vendetta against kate, but im happy that this kind of incident has happened because im sick of the undeserved popularity wave of the british monarchy
As @g.strathmore perfectly said, monarchy has NO sense in the 21 century in europe

Upside Downunder said...

Want some expectation of privacy? Become a "commoner" and be night manager at macdonalds. It is quite vile to have a monarchy. Bring back the guillotine!

FS said...

I almost hate to say this, but here is a good rundown in... The Mail Online. (eek) It is worth a look, and it confirms that the French mag is owned by Berlusconi.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-action-French-magazine.html

Upside Downunder said...

Wait wait wait! There are pictures of them bonin'? Holy crap that's awesome, publish publish publish. If you're screwing outside anywhere in the world you gotta realize there might be a camera somewhere.

All of you hypocrites hanging out on a gossip site criticizing the "invasion of privacy" are kinda pathetic. If you truly were offended you would't be here in the first place. Me? I am highly entertained by the filth of mankind.

Lola said...

Even if they became "commoners" today, they would still be wealthy, socialite, former royals and would still be hounded.

Whatever you think of the monarchy, William did not ask to be born into it. He is not to blame for people's fascination with all that is royal. Perhaps you can blame Kate...she married into it.

Nonetheless, I think they know that when they go out in public they are always "on". They weren't out in public. This is an invasion of their privacy, pure and simple; no different than if any of your neighbors started photographing you in your house just because they could (with a long camera lens) see clearly into your windows.

Wrong. Period.

Jamie 2 said...

@UpsideDown: Yes, it's a gossip site (how did you find it?), but it's clear from the majority of comments that we hypocrites draw a line at what is acceptable and what is not.

People are asking Enty not to link to the pictures. A bit odd on a gossip site.

It's because most people here are repulsed by how far over the line the papps and the press have gone in order to get page hits.

We are not talking about "leaked" sex tapes by some celebutante attention-seeker. It's perfectly clear that the couple did not have sex on tape and they didn't and don't want photographs of their personal vacation beamed around the world.

rejectedcarebear said...

Jared Harris plays Moriarty but Stephen Fry played Sherlocks brother in the sequel.

astrogirl said...

Upside I couldn't really classify your rant better than you do yourself. Witless blather, indeed.

Some Aussies had relatives fight and die for their King or Queen and country, It's quite vile to read such a disrespectful comment.

Upside Downunder said...

Yes, cannon fodder is a glorious way to go. I respect the military, I have very little respect for the commands. What happened a 100 years ago is still happening now, the governments send the youth to be slaughtered in the middle east. Wait, isn't it a 1000 years, no, more like 2000. You would think we all might get tired of war.

Alita said...

If you haven't seen 'QI' (quite interesting), you MUST youtube it! Brilliance! Panel show, funny, Stephen Fry hosts it.

astrogirl said...

I hate war, but I hate people who piss on the memory of those who served a whole lot more. Have some respect or fuck off.

Upside Downunder said...

I have some respect, as I said above. So you fuck off.

astrogirl said...

Sarcasm is not respect. If you learn the difference, and some manners, you may be a decent commenter one day.

May being the operative word.

Upside Downunder said...

Yes, you got me, my aspiration in life to have an imprimatur from asstragirl. Oh, I cant wait.

g.strathmore said...

Don't you think that most of the people who fought and died for the commonwealth did it because they felt they were fighting the tyranny of despots and not for the honor or whatever of some head of state? I know that when I was deployed to fight (as an American), I did it because I believed it was in the protection of certain values or protection of the people, the commoners of my country. I did not fight for the head of state. I don't think the average Australian or Scot or Indian or even Englishman fought for the Queen/King but fought instead for their people and their values.

astrogirl said...

Why did you join G? Was it for a decent paycheck, an education maybe, a way to get out and see the world?

Or was it because your King asked for volunteers on the wireless, you would know that famous broadcast from the movie The Kings Speech?

I lost a lot of relatives in that war and yes they went because their King asked them to, not for money or glory or country and so did a lot of Australians, so touches a raw nerve when people dismiss their valor.

g.strathmore said...

I'm not part of the commonwealth so obviously I don't know the motivations of people who are from there. However, from my experience in the American military, I know that presidents come and go, the Congress comes and goes, but the Constitution is constant, and that is a fair representation of American ideals - not that American people are always the best at honoring it. I imagine that when people in the commonwealth fight, they are fighting for values as represented by their constitutions or their communities, and not fighting for the royal family. I don't think that it is insulting to suggest that. In fact, in my humble opinion, it is more honorable that they went to fight for their people or values than for their king/queen.

astrogirl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lola said...

If you want a fun taste of Stephen Fry (and a funny take on a Brit's experience traveling through America), I recommend "Stephen Fry in America" on Netflix.

(Also, "Fry and Laurie", "Jeeves and Wooster", "Blackadder"...too many to name)

g.strathmore said...

I'll check that out, Lola. Thanks.

Robin the Mad Photographer said...

During the previous administration, an acquaintance of mine who was stationed in Iraq for a while had this to say when the question of what soldiers fight for was asked: "We're not fighting for George W. Bush--we're fighting for BOOBIES!" Bless his heart... ;-) Granted, he was being a bit of a wiseass, but his main point was that many, many members of the military don't see themselves as fighting for Some Great Cause as much as they do fighting for their loved ones and way of life...take that as you may.

As for Will and Kate, no matter what one thinks about royalty as an institution, the fact remains that they were in what should reasonably be considered a private space, and the photos/videos taken of them constitute a gross invasion of privacy. (Besides, who's to say that, even if they were indoors, someone wouldn't have tried to rig up one of those mini-drones mentioned above w/a camera to try & peek through the blinds? Crimony, are they only allowed to get busy behind blackout curtains or some such?) Harry at least was being drunk and foolish (although why his security didn't hold all the cell phones until the party was over is beyond me), but these two were minding their own business doing what happily married people all over the world do, in private, not out on the high street or at Wembley Stadium. It's one thing to watch a sex tape that's obviously been recorded w/the knowledge and consent of the performers, and released for the profit of said performers, but I don't want to see pictures of people who were just living their lives and not courting the cameras, fame whore-style. Remember, he was born into his role, and she's taken her role on because she loves him, and has decided he's worth the trouble of dealing w/the trials of being part of the royal family. (Anybody marrying somebody in the public eye would have similar decisions to make; while there are advantages to marrying the well-known, there are also plenty of drawbacks, so you'd damn well better love them a whole lot to be willing to put up w/the latter. It makes me glad my royal ancestors date back 500+ years, not more recently, believe me...*still gets a big kick out of being descended from Eleanor of Aquitaine* ;-)

I know people are curious, but if everyone could just restrain their curiosity and not buy the magazines or click through for the photos, it might get the point across that there is such a thing as going too far, and this is definitely it. Remember, if it stops being profitable, it won't keep happening...

(Hi, Himmmm! I was wondering when you'd show up to give us your perspective on the whole business! Have you healed up well enough to go back to work yet?)

Himmmm said...

Greetings Robin of Aquitaine my dearest...thanks, and thanks for everything! Advances in medical technolgy to prevent added damage is amazing. But, even more amazing are the healing powers of zillion year-old Asian medicine and Robinbrownies!!!

I must admit my prior love for the state of NC has evolved into full-blown second-citizenship now. Of course, as long as the fam is around then home is wherever we roam, yes?

Have an amazing day/night my cdan pals. And remember folks: Royal boobies are just routine boobies with a fancy title!
("Tit-ular"??)

PS - I happily suggest to anyone thinking having your life documented by paps is not a big deal? Try it. I give you a week. Especially a coffee or juice run early a.m. looking like sasquatch! Somedays it can wear you thin. But I accepted it years ago as part of this profession. Yet if my family were ENDANGERED due to paps? I cannot begin to imagine my childishly violent initial reaction which would likely scare a Hell's Angel.

Meanwhile, I resign to be jaded as this is the trade-off. So for me - no more masturbating in the flower garden hummingbird feeder. Tough price to pay but we trudge on!

Call me yndy... said...

Long comment eaten by Safari/iPad crash.

The summary? Don't blame the victim for the actions of the morally bankrupt. The logic that William & Kate should have hidden in the dark so some determined creeper/Pap could take sex pics could be used to say that if you don't want to be robbed? Don't live in a nice house or have nice things. If you don't want to be murdered?dont go outside where sociopaths might be. Ever.

There's a line. It was crossed. Don't blame the victims, blame the guy that shot & sold the pics and the ones that paid for & will print them.

PS nice to see you lurking about again Himmmm

E Gee Be said...

Ahhh, what treat to roll in after a long day at a wedding and get all caught up with what the gang over here has been up to! Interesting, provocative comments on just about every post, and special guest starring cameo appearances by our favorite Himmmm! Thanks for popping in!

wenx said...

Himmmm, it warms my heart to see your affection for NC---part of my family's from there, I grew up right over the state line in VA practically w/in spitting distance of Carolina, and spent summers on the Outer Banks. I love it dearly, so it's always cool to see it getting the props it deserves. Welcome to the fan club ;)

As for Wils & Kate, I feel sorry for them (& anyone else that has that kind of intrusion in their lives on a regular basis). Granted, Kate knew what she was in for by marrying William; but I imagine if you asked him, he might say he wouldn't have chosen this life in the public eye if he had been able to choose. He was born into it; Kate married into it, and they have the right to privacy just like any other couple on the planet (even if a significant portion of the planet knows who they are). It sucks :p

Just another one of those examples that practically puts me on my knees thanking God I am not famous in any way or by any connection. Some might think such attention is a blessing, or even crave it like a drug. I think that shizz is a curse, and I wouldn't want any part of it.

Robin the Mad Photographer said...

Himmmm: Wanking in the hummingbird feeder, eh? Now there's a visual...I don't know whether to laugh my ass off or scream and crap myself! (I'm going to resist the urge to see if Rule 34 of the Internet--"if it exists, there's porn of it somewhere online"--pans out in this regard, partly because I'm at work, and partly because I'm afraid of what I might find...)

While I've not had my DNA checked yet (unlike you, perhaps? ;-) , my mother's family has always been into genealogy in a big way, and w/the advent of the Net, my brother's really been able to go to town digging up ancestors we didn't know we had. Royal descent of some form is actually pretty common; if any of your ("your" referring to anyone reading this) ancestors came from western Europe, odds are very good that you're descended from Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, or any number of other royals. Henry I of England did a pretty damn good job at being the "father of his people," seeing as he had between 15-25 bastards; the royal connection on the Pike side of my family is through Henry's oldest bastard, Robert of Gloucester, who fought bravely for his half-sister Matilda during her battle for the English throne. The Titus branch picks up through Matilda, her son Henry II & his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine (why yes, The Lion in Winter DOES remind me of many more recent family fights...), through John (a lousy king & an asshole to boot, alas), and down through to Edward III's granddaughter Anne Plantagenet, through his youngest son Thomas of Woodstock. (The Wars of the Roses become SO much clearer when you realize it's just another big family feud, albeit one w/large numbers of weapons and heavily armed men involved... ;-) Eventually both the Pikes and Tituses came over to Massachusetts around 1635 (where yet another branch had already been there for, oh, a few hundred years or so...), but that's another story.

Really, I highly recommend genealogical research--not only can you find out all kinds of fascinating info about your background, but it's a good reminder that human nature hasn't changed at all in hundreds or thousands of years. Nothing like having that kind of blood connection to make history really come alive, eh? ;-)

Robin the Mad Photographer said...

OK, soooooo...I just Googled "hummingbird feeder masturbation", and came across this story and film clip: http://www.thezenparrot.com/2012/03/birds-do-it-and-bees-do-it-sex-lives-of.html

There weren't very many other links listed, so this is perhaps the closest I'm ever going to come to Googlewacking (yes, I went there), hoo boy...

(Dear God, I just watched a hummingbird jack off on the Internet...what has my life come to??? And yes, Himmmm, this is ALL YOUR FAULT... ;-)