To think kids shouldn't wear bikinis?

My 9 year old daughter only wore swimsuits last year. But she was living in crop tops for dance and had a white belly and brown legs and arms so I have let her get bikinis this year.
She has amazing abs. Why shouldn’t she show them off if she wants to? It’s only sexualised if you make it. She is proud of her abs because of all the sport and dancing she does and sees it as a sign of strength, nothing else.

My sis and I wore bikinis in the early 80s as little kids on the beach at Skegness. I didn't see a problem with it.

Surely this is more about other people sexualising a child, which unfortunately happens. We know there are peados and weirdos all around, so why put a child in something that would show off even more of their body than necessary? I don't understand

YANBU. Another way to sexualise young girls. Their upper body is no different from a boy's. If anything all children should be wearing anti uv t-shirts in the sun but a bikini is just ridiculous.

I think you can think whatever you like for your own child but people have different opinions, my DD is 7 and would be embarrassed being outside in only bottoms. She has a few bikinis and prefers them over swim suits which she finds more uncomfortable.

Don’t put a bikini on ur kid then. Let other ppl choose how they want to dress their kids it’s not really ur business

I had swim suits when I was little - for holidays and for swimming lessons but once I got to 6 or so, I wanted a bikini for holidays. My mum brought me a couple with crop tops - she didn't want me in a bra style that I didn't need at such a young age. I very quickly realised it was easier to swim in just the bottoms so the tops were for show and after that we bought swimming knickers that came as knickers only. I lived in them on holiday with suncream on, a t shirt or sarong on when needed and staying out of the heat of the day. They were easier to change or wear-to-dry on holiday than a one piece, too. Much nicer and much more practical for a child.

There was nothing sexualised about it, I just wasn't going to wear something uncomfortable and unnecessary. I'd never have worn a rash vest/ suit thing either, they look claggy and heavy and awful. Antithesis of holiday freedom to me. I appreciate they're great for many children though.

Then again, I'm not a bikini fan as an adult either. I got boobs at 9/10 and switched to one pieces for all swimming - class and leisure - ever after to keep them contained. It is easier to swim in a swim suit. I had a couple of bikinis as teen for sun bathing / to wear as part of an outfit on holiday but rarely bothered and didn't replace them as they wore out / I grew. We have a private non overlooked terrace so I'd sit suncreamed, somewhere warm but shady, t-shirt close by to throw on and be more comfortable in cotton knickers than lycra bottoms. And again- not staying out in the heat of the day.

Agree. They're grim. My girl will be in shorts and a rash vest, like her brother.

I completely agree. We've just come back from centre parcs where we spent every day in the pool and while there were a few women there with very fit and toned bodies who perhaps (but equally perhaps not) were happy and proud to be wearing such skimpy swimwear. And when I say skimpy, I mean just the standard costume/tankini easily available and affordable to women. But the vast majority of women there were just normal mums and grans with very real and imperfect bodies and I do wonder just how many of them are thrilled at the cut of women's swimwear. I only saw one woman over the age of mid twenties in a bikini. I don't relish having no more coverage on my bottom half than if I were out publicly in a pair of knickers. Last year there was a lady there who I'm guessing was Muslim and she was wearing a modest swimsuit like the kind women wore until the 1940s? Or maybe later? It didn't look frumpy at all to my eyes, she was lovely and slim anyway and it was navy blue, came to her mid thighs and had wide shoulder straps and a zipper. She looked fab. I think we are just stuck in what has become normal, it will take a big culture shift to change it now.

Don't get this point of view at all. Bikinis are far easier for going to the toilet in; and bikini bottoms also work really well with rash vests, making them safer in the sun.
If you're not very active when you're on holiday then I can get why you might find a swimsuit practical but, imo, if you're spending full days on the beach and in the sea surfing/bodyboarding etc then bikinis and a rash vest are just easier.
M&S do pick-and-mix sets with the bottoms, tops and long-sleeve rash vests which are usually on 3 for 2 in the summer and have a great range of prints. Nothing "sexualised" about it.

I don’t see the problem as long as the style of the top is age-appropriate (ie no triangles, strings, padding etc). It’s certainly not a new thing either. I wore a “bikini” (cropped vest and pants style) when I was 5 in 1990.

Agree, never put my dd in a bikini. She had a full length top covering her arms and tummy, and then bottoms with a frilly skirt on. I’d have rather she went topless than have a bikini top on. Each to their own though and we all have different parenting approaches.

I used to (back in the day ) to get more sun tan.
Of course not now.

Exactly - I had a yellow one with an octopus on the pants.
I loved it

I remember on holiday wearing a little pair of bikini briefs and that's it. After a while our parents would put one of those T-shirts on us with the tassels - 'I ❤️ Torremolinos' or similar. She'd cover us both in factor 50 and we never once burned.

I agree, little girls don't need bikini tops, but not because they're sexualised but because they're unnecessary. Same as little boys don't need them.

A bikini top for women v men’s trunks is because women’s breasts are considered sexualised, unlike men’s chests.

I have no idea why small children’s nipples need covering up, and wearing a bikini therefore suggests something about their bodies that needs covering up.

My Dc either wore just bottoms, or bottoms plus T shirt for sun protection, or rash vest / suit.

Well my dds wore them sometimes and none of the above happened. They were more like short tankini tops and were absolutely fine.

Didn’t make them look like mini sex objects 🙄

Same here, I've bought some for my 3 year old for next summer. Getting in and out a one piece when you need the toilet is tricky enough as an adult!

No- it’s on the people who design and sell them. Small children do not need their nipples covered, and to suggest they do IS sexualising their bodies.

I'm with you OP. I'm always thinking they look weird, mainly because the top of a bikini is usually cut in a curved or triangle shape to look aesthetic and cover boobs. If you are a kid and don't have boobs, it just rides up and is pointless and uncomfortable.

Plus why does a small child need something cut to showcase a chest and make it look attractive, surely it's just functional?

Little boys don't have shorts cut to make their bottoms or fronts look attractive, or to highlight their abs, people would find that downright weird, so why is it OK for girls?

Better to have shorts or brief bottoms and a vest type top, gats better for sun protection too and won't ride up and be uncomfortable 🤷🏼.

My family owned a holiday home in a hot, sunny European country when I was a child. So we spent every holiday out there (80s child). I was not allowed to wear a bikini and instead wore bottoms. My mum allowed me to wear a swimsuit back in the UK for swimming lessons, if only to have a place to sew all my badges. 😂

My parents would have totally lapped up all the arguments about bikinis sexualising children and the top half being completely redundant for little girls with no breast development yet.

FINE. But this takes no account of the fact every other little girl in my friendship group, and in fact, every other little girl around me as far as I could see, wore a two piece. I was the only girl I knew forced to wear bottoms and never given the choice. Irrespective of the logic around wearing a two piece, I felt exposed, embarrassed and different from my friends and the fact I was wearing only bottoms was commented on by them. Had I been given the choice, I would have opted for the kind of two pieces my friends were wearing. I just wanted to fit in.

Seems a bit like overthinking it to me.

I mean there's no reason women should have to cover their top half. Breasts are for breastfeeding. Society has sexualised women's breasts too much.

I wouldn't put a child in a sexualised bikini. But a child's bikini is fine and purely down to personal preference whether the girl wants a one piece, a bikini or just swimming shorts/bottoms.

In reality no one at the pool (whether at your local pool or on a beach holiday) takes the slightest bit of notice what anyone else is wearing.

It depends what kind of bikini really, both my DDs have had them to go on holiday because it's way easier to go to the loo in a 2 piece when you're in it all day on holiday.
But they have been the sporty type ones with a top that looks like a cropped vest.
Bikinis in "sexy" styles are a bit gross for little girls but also people shouldn't be thinking of children that way anyway....

Are you posting from Downton Abbey?

Two piece swimwear is much easier for changing and toileting but I will be be trying to keep DD in the sunsafe ones with full coverage and sleeves as long as possible for skin cancer prevention (and avoiding constant sun cream application). It used to be common for girls below a certain age to just wear the bottoms on the beach before we all became a bit more sun aware.

I’m sure some of the bikini style ones are being worn with a rash vest anyway.