Video
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/competitionnews/388/258373.html
“<fascinating subtle distinction> You need to get out more” - fancy free
To be honest, you may need to get out more, and find out that not everyone agrees with how you define things. In fact, quite a few people don’t believe the above. I really have to admit, it isn’t a distinction I’ve spent a lot of time mulling over in the last 53 years, nor is it something I’d suggest someone I don’t know on a bulletin board needs to believe in order to be worthy in some obscure way.
As far as needing to get out more, I get out plenty, but perhaps not to places where you go, to study the subtle differences between the two items above.
well slick-- at least katie is out there doing dressage and not riding a keyboard pretending to do dressage via words-
shes out there and making money and that money she gives to charity
she might be a top less model whatever but shes earning her money and giving it to the needy
so good luck to her in all that she does. and by the way
shes not as dumb as some people make her out and shes a nice person when you get to know her
if she wasnt as famous by what she did or doesnt do as she is most would have her as a mate
as she very much – like tell it as it is type and not beat around a bush
and certainly doesnt pretend to be something shes not
I guess it would be inappropriate to ask for the links to these videos, so I could judge for myself? And does she sell those cell phones in pink?
Katie Price, money or not, has it much, much harder than 99% of us, with a seriously handicapped son who will require round-the-clock care for the rest of his life, and no support from the boy’s father. Nowhere in her job description does it say Must Be Shiny Example For The Youth Of This World. She has put a bigger spotlight on dressage than any expensive marketing scheme that anyone else has managed to, Germans and Dutch notwithstanding. Good for her!
PS as for wearing makeup in the ring, whatever. I would point out, however, that makeup can be your friend and, truly, a lot more people should wear it. 
I am sure you get out frequently enough… but just a heads up… you may want to avoid the art galleries… gasp! They are chock full of “porn”… by the likes of Botticelli, Michelangelo, Picasso, Manet, Canova, Delacroix, Hanna Wilke, Clodion, Pollaiuolo…
[QUOTE=slc2;3758860]
“<fascinating subtle distinction> You need to get out more” - fancy free
To be honest, you may need to get out more, and find out that not everyone agrees with how you define things. In fact, quite a few people don’t believe the above. I really have to admit, it isn’t a distinction I’ve spent a lot of time mulling over in the last 53 years, nor is it something I’d suggest someone I don’t know on a bulletin board needs to believe in order to be worthy in some obscure way.
As far as needing to get out more, I get out plenty, but perhaps not to places where you go, to study the subtle differences between the two items above.[/QUOTE]
Just curious, how many times did you edit that one? Must have hit a nerve. So sorry for the 'you need to get out more" comment, but my granny has the same mind-set: “Boobs equal porn.” She hasn’t been out since 1972. It was an obvious comparison for me. :lol:
What I love about Katie Price infiltrating dressage, is that she sure will shake up a lot of mustie-dusties who don’t believe she belongs in the sport.
well slick-- at least katie is out there doing dressage and not riding a keyboard pretending to do dressage via words-
Yes exactly.
I am sure you get out frequently enough… but just a heads up… you may want to avoid the art galleries… gasp! They are chock full of “porn”… by the likes of Botticelli, Michelangelo, Picasso, Manet, Canova, Delacroix, Hanna Wilke, Clodion, Pollaiuolo…
Yes, that’s exactly what I was thinking as well.
My first thought was Ok, to slick, Manet’s Luncheon on the Grass is porn?
Actually, Manet’s “Olympia” came to mind, which of course is very reminiscent of Titian’s “Venus of Urbino” :yes:. But “Luncheon on the Grass” will do too :D.
yeah , any of those , but Luncheon on the Grass was my first thought because of its mundane, non sexual depiction of a nude woman surrounded by fully clothed men:cool:
Second thought was Botticelli’s Venus or Venus on the Half Shell as I like to think of her.
Strongly suggest googling the cell phone pix. That is no Botticelli, my friends. And while I feel very badly for her and her son, I hope that he never has to see those pictures of his mother, joke or no joke.
I don’t think KP actually did any “porn”, but like many celebrities, she made a personal sex tape video that made its way online. Oops!
If she is a decent rider and is kind to her horses, she should be able to do whatever she wants.
The boy is blind. And what she does in photos really is up to her, isn’t it?
I don’t ‘get’ why people are so interested in this person but then I don’t ever watch TV so had never even heard of her until Theo started posting stuff about her on this board.
The boy is blind. And what she does in photos really is up to her, isn’t it?
As I said, I feel really sorry for her son. I don’t know if there will be or are other children. What she does in the photos is up to her, and how I respond to those photos is up to me. I don’t think a “smart” person ever puts herself in that position, no matter how much notoriety or money she wants.
I honestly feel just fine being sanctimonious and self-righteous about those particular photos. They were stupid and self-indulgent.
I do agree about the makeup 
she has three kid harvey is the blind one and his dad didnt want to know
so she does everything for him as hes disabled as well
then there s tyler she had with pete her hubby
and latest is princess both of those are ok
pete has been great with harvey and accepted him as his own
and is very supportive of katie same as katie is supportive of pete
they are a nice couple regardless what there jobs are
or were
[QUOTE=Sakura;3759232]
I am sure you get out frequently enough… but just a heads up… you may want to avoid the art galleries… gasp! They are chock full of “porn”… by the likes of Botticelli, Michelangelo, Picasso, Manet, Canova, Delacroix, Hanna Wilke, Clodion, Pollaiuolo…[/QUOTE]
Totally off topic, but I was shopping at the bookstore the other day and witnessed an interesting conversation between a mom and her son when he opened a book of classic art. Said conversation would seem to agree with SLC.
Maybe it would. Since it’s not clear what was said, I couldn’t tell.
Actually, not everyone agrees that a Matisse is ‘porn’, even if it’s of the same subject. Some people feel older art nudes are porn, some don’t. I think for some people even during those days, the paintings were either ‘porn’ or ‘not porn’. There is a classical tradition of picturing the human form that dates back to - hey! The time of Xenophon! LOL. Actually well before that.
It’s probably fairly evident to most people that there is a difference, and that a classical depiction of the human form could be considered to not be porn.
I don’t actually begrudge people the right to make a living, but I do actually think there are other things people can do than be a ‘topless model’ or do ‘porn’. I think the draw is that one can make more money than say, flipping burgers. Some people look at both options and say, ‘I would rather flip burgers’, because they think that while the other options might make more money right now, another longer term plan might be better, and not involve closing off so many other avenues to them - most people realize that such careers are going to interfere with a lot of other goals, since not everyone is quite so open minded and tolerant as all us wonderful people here.
Katie is the media darling in England, not sure why, but my guess is that she is being presented as sort of a hero for the common man. Or woman. ‘Salt of the earth’, and all that. Once someone is popular in the media, anyone who doesn’t jump up and down with delight at everything they do is pretty unpopular
It was quite short. Something about “put down that awful book” and “those old paintings all had naked people in them.”
