To be surprised Kate changed her bikini bottoms outdoors?

[Liketochat1]

I absolutely think the Duchess of Cambridge should have privacy and I think the behaviour of the photographer was disgraceful. I am surprised though to learn that she changed her bikini bottoms outdoors. Even I wouldn't do that in my back garden on the off chance someone saw. AIBU?

[motherinferior]

If I were holidaying at a private villa in hot weather I would run around stark nekkid all day, frankly.

[Narked]

It does make me wonder about that Motherinferior, because that's pretty much what we did as DC. Will the photographers creep around taking pictures of any children they have in the future, eg swimming? Are they going to have to ensure that they're never less than completely covered or end up with pictures of their naked DC all over the internet?

[eurochick]

I know what the OP means, I think. These pictures should clearly never have been taken and it is absolutely wrong that her privacy has been invaded in this way. But it is rather odd in my experience for an adult to change swimwear outside (even under a towel). I think the last time I did it I must have been under ten! I'm not justifying the taking of the pictures in anyway, just finding it rather odd that the situation where they could be taken occurred in the first place.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

Six.
Hundred.
Metres.

[Trills]

:o at the appropriate username there Doctrine

[LadyBeagleEyes]

I've changed many a time when on holiday.
If my bikini bottoms are wet after a swim and I'm going for lunch and I'm changing into shorts or something.
I usually do it modestly under a towel.
I can't believe this is such an issue for people.

[slowestwildebeast]

Poor woman. I sunbathe in the garden and am forever stripping. I just don't care or worry. it must be horrible to do things you'd normally take for granted and have to stop yourself each time and ponder perverts in the bushes.
I hate the royal family but this is stupid.

[ZZZenAgain]

I am afraid my dh does this. All the time. He has a swim and changes his trunks anywhere (under a towel obviously) on the beach, at a hotel pool etc. It drives me nuts. He even did this on beaches in the US where I was told by American friends afterwards, it is actually illegal. Whether that is true, I don't know.

I have no idea why he can't leave them on like everyone else but I have given up commenting on it. He will always have two with him, one to wear, one to hang up or lay out to dry.

[gindrinker]

The photographers were going to take the pictures anyway.
We don't hear about the days the photographer had to spend watching and waiting for her to do something he could sell.
The invasion of privacy is huge.
I don't care that Kate was topless or bottomless or even naked with her husband while on holiday in France.
Have you never flashed your husband when you've been alone (or assumed you were)

[honeytea]

I can't see a problem with her changing outside.

What are we going to find out? SHe has a bum or even more shocking a fanny what did we think she had under there?

If you don't want to see her bum don't look at the pictures, if you do want to see her bum then your a perv, if your friend was changing outside you wouldn't stare you'd look the other way (surely.)

The photographer on the other hand was in the wrong.

[Nishky]

The issue I had was not with changing outside it was th actual changing at all. I can understand the changing if going to lunch, but if just to carry on sunbathing I didn't get it. Though as someone explained up thread it may be a case of not wanting to lie on lounger with wet pants

I am rather aged now but my trips to beaches tended to involve wearing one bikini all day, throwing in shirt or sarong to go back to hotel if wanted to change. It would not occur to me to have a spare bikini.

[wilderumpus]

eek just got back from italy where I would get my dress on after swimming in the sea and whip my bikini tops and bottoms off underneath and put clean knicks on so all dry for lunch! is this really taboo now?! we swim so much it just seems daft having wet bottoms or looking like I wet myself in a restaurant.

it is well pervy for the DoC and cannot be justified. who cares why she was changing?! TBH if she was laid out stark nekkid the pics would not be allowed to be published. 600 metres away is insanely creepy :( How can you live thinking you never have privacy? you'd go mad surely.

[McHappyPants2012]

In a private villa then even I would change outside.

The media should respect people privacy.

[ZZZenAgain]

me neither in dh's case Nishky. He swims, changes, lies down and sunbathes, swims, changes etc

I swim, lie down and sunbathe in my wet things and they dry quickly, then I swim again

Some people just dislike the feel of wet clothes I suppose. I would also change to go and have lunch

[OldCatLady]

How awful for her. I always change under a towel on the beach, if a picture of me naked ended up in the press...I'd be MORTIFIED and FUMING!!

[ZZZenAgain]

I didn't realise that actual photos have been published, in France I suppose?

[InfinityWelcomesCarefulDrivers]

PMSL at Rick Tapestry

[honeytea]

There were published in Denmark, the topless ones were published here in Sweden but no one was interested as toplessness (real word? sp?) is normal.

[aquashiv]

Of FFS its Diana all over again. I am fed up to the back teeth of reading such innane trivial shit about this woman leave her alone and give us some peace.

[GiserableMitt]

Have you never flashed your husband when you've been alone (or assumed you were) Good Lord, No! He might think he was onto something

I didn't realise DoC was changing under a towel. Obviously, even being careful isn't enough.

[Narked]

These are the same rags that pay people for pictures of dead celebrities in their coffins. They have no line. I dread to think what they'll do to any DC they have.

[purplehouse]

She was on a totally private estate with a 600m radius of privacy. The person taking the photo is just a scummy sod. Kate did nothing wrong.

[zlist]

She did nothing wrong at all, although I would expect that their security people were fairly close-by and for that reason I am a little surprised.
Press privacy invasion has definitely gone way too far across the line for far too long now, which I think leads some in the general public to think it is ok for them to do the same (e.g. taking photographs of traffic accidents and uploading without a thought for the victims and relatives).
I think the British press have a lot to answer for as well in this case - simply by highlighting the existence of these photographs to the brits on the internet. I not surprised that an estimated 25% of the UK population have now seen them.

[WipsGlitter]

She's not really under a towel ie it's not wrapped round her. More draped over her shoulders.

OP I agree, even if I was in the middle of no-where I still would have gone inside.

[GnomeDePlume]

Of course she did nothing wrong. At this rate the poor woman is going to end up having to shower with her swimming costume on in case some photographer manages to fold himself up into the airing cupboard and take pictures through the keyhole.

My guess is that the court case was about drawing a line in the sand before children are on the scene.