To send little one to nursery in a dress without shorts?

I agree. It happens from time to time. My own daughter used to take her knickers and socks off at home when very small and once I didn’t realise she was knickerless until we were out and I picked her up. I definitely put some on when I dressed her.

That's ridiculous.

I really don’t understand this argument of ‘my child is too young to be aware that adults don’t flash their knickers so I must protect her from the shame she will inevitably later feel when she realises I let her wear a dress without shorts by covering her up at 3 years old.’ Children are generally very un self conscious and that is wonderful. Girls have a lifetime of having to worry about what people think of what they are wearing, whether it is modest enough etc (on a spectrum obviously). Why put that burden on a preschooler? I doubt many adults are ashamed that they wore a dress without shorts at nursery and someone saw their knickers or even their genitalia. I have fond memories of proudly dressing myself for nursery and then realising I had forgotten my pants when I sat on the cold wall outside so we had to go home. A lot of childhood things have come up in therapy for me but that isn’t one of them!

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a three year old being active in a dress. They're cool and surprisingly practical. She doesn't need shorts. She's THREE.

This is ridiculous. Dresses are lovely and light, the easiest to put on / the off and give the most freedom.
The "dresses don't allow girls to play" lobby is utterly.nonsensical.

OP knickers are absolutely fine, I wouldn't have considered shorts until primary school.

Wait until she is older, about 8+ and she will probably experiment with dresses 'spinning out' .

Little girls seem to love this, they spin around and the skirt flares out. Often seen at weddings.

I truly hope that no safeguarding issues arise in school because a girl does not wear shorts under her dress.

Yes, this! And getting them changed for PE was another matter. We had to have little chats to the parents, whose English wasn't great.

There are those who think that shorts are needed lest anyone catch a glance of knickers. And there are those who think that the function of knickers is to prevent anyone catching a glimpse of what actually matters. The shortie knickers someone linked to would be excellent for that, ensuring that the knickers don’t slip to the side in an unfortunate way, without needing two layers.

Similar to a previous poster, DD5 has always worn short type knickers and a lot of summer dresses. A few of the girls at school wear shorts under their uniform summer dress and I will probably do this next year. I hadn't been too concerned because of her knicker shorts but she mentioned that a few of them lift her/their dresses because of the actual shorts. Also handy if she cycles home as I can tie her dress up.

Perfectly normal word.
I've always said pants for what boys wear and knickers for what girls wear. It might have become an old fashioned word but I'm too old to have noticed!

Nothing to be embarrassed about. I'm a primary school teacher and used to teach Reception. If there was a child with no pants on (which would happen occasionally), then I knew that they'd dressed themselves in the morning. To me, that was a sign of good parenting because it showed an independent child.

Poor parenting was the ones who had no idea how to put a pair of socks on because it had always been done for them.

I think if they are sturdy shorts type pants, that's fine.

My sister is a head teacher in a primary school. She spends a great deal of time working on safeguarding issues. Her own daughter had worn shorts under skirts and dresses since she was toilet trained.

Why are we so funny about underwear anyway? It’s the same thing as a bikini. The point of it is to cover the private parts.

The world’s gone mad. I’ve got 3 dds, now young adults and no one put shorts under dresses when they went to school.

I feel sorry for these little girls having to wear a thick layer of jersey in the hot weather. Defeats the point of a nice cool cotton summer dress.

I know! When I first started teaching (nearly 20 years ago) I taught in a school with mainly kids of Pakistani heritage. It was common for them not to wear underpants. One day on PE a child had a rather unfortunately located home in his tracksuit bottoms and as he sat down his penis popped up though the hole. Goodness I was horrified but also didn't want to draw attention to it. I very quickly got everyone up and made sure there was no more sitting that lesson!

Agree - little kids just aren’t aware enough to realise they are showing off their underwear when playing sometimes (eg hanging upside down on monkey bars). Most adults wound be mortified if everyone saw their pants so why would it be ok to let a child do that?

Disagree with the whole ‘not my job to worry about the male gaze’ argument, it absolutely should be. There are so many perverts out there, no way I’m letting them get their kicks from watching my child.

My 4 year old so just about to leave nursery will ask for shorts and a dress so I’ve just been putting her in shorts and a dress as she’s asked. I bought matching dresses and shorts in three colours from H&M last year as her nursery stuff so I think that might be why, but I do think in hot weather going down slides and playing on outdoor plastic stuff might feel a bit hot in just pants. But I think if she’s not bothered you don’t need to worry.

My daughter does love those next shorts pants as previously linked because they don’t give her a wedgie though and I love that they do come in the smaller sizes! Well worth it I my opinion!

I never wear shorts or trousers. I play footie in the park and climb trees just fine. Women climbed Everest in skirts.

And the skirts and dresses were ridiculously short in those days too!

The problem is, if most wear these shorts, and some don't, the ones who don't will be the odd ones out, so it becomes more likely that this will be pointed out. It all becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

I wouldn't, though mine don't really wear dresses so would likely just wear shorts anyway but it really isn't necessary to wear shorts under dresses.

I will never be putting my daughters in shorts under their dress unless they specifically request that.
I make sure to buy good quality non see thru underwear.
I won't be making my girls self conscious about their bodies. They'll get enough of that from the world as adults.
It's not my daughters responsibility what people think of it.
I want them to have confidence and never be taking on responsibility for the male gaze.
And as far as I'm concerned as long as knickers aren't see thru and have full coverage what on earth is different about knickers and shorts? 1cm of fabric? It seems nuts to me. A load of faff about nothing that has the potential to make little girls hyper aware of their bodies and think about how men are looking at them.

Why would you do that? Just a dress & pants is fine?