AIBU to question a pool asking my four-year-old daughter to cover up?

What’s the difference and why does it matter?

What on earth does a hijab analogy have to do with Ops post ?

If the leisure centre insists on a four year old girl covering her chest, I would demand to be told their reasoning

I don't they're obliged to give any reasons. They can make their own rules.
Like it or lump it.

@PinkWaffleMaker Whether a girl is developed or not I'm sure there's still plenty of weirdos out there that get a kick out of nipples on a child. I don't see what's wrong with protecting girls from that.

But not boys.

why not - at it’s heart that’s what ‘modesty’ specifically female modesty is built around. Cover up your breasts because breasts are sexual and can lure men.

You may not realise that’s essentially what it means but the female body is morally dangerous!

This 100%.

Interestingly was it bikini style bottoms or shorts. No judgement either way but I noticed this year for my daughter all the swimsuits were bikini style bottoms with a rash vest rather than shorts style or a one piece that included shorts. I found the bikini style bottoms felt like sexualising the girls. Why do the boys get shorts and the girls have half their bums out. Whereas last year there were loads of more gender neutral styles around (as in unicorns and pink etc) but not made to be shorter and more exposed than the boys

At what age do breasts become sexual? I mean, they’re only there to feed babies and women are (rightly) allowed to breastfeed wherever they want. Does that mean I should encourage my 12yo niece to be topless in Tesco? No, of course not. Because if I want to make a stand against cultural norms I should do it myself and not use a child to further my agenda.

Aren't we meant to teach children that the parts that a swimsuit cover are private? That they shouldn't be touched or photographed by other people.

The whole point of it being a swim suit being that it usually covers a girls top half too.

Whether a girl is developed or not I'm sure there's still plenty of weirdos out there that get a kick out of nipples on a child. I don't see what's wrong with protecting girls from that.

OK so 4 year old willies and bums get covered, so do little girl front and back bottoms. Little boys nipples don't get covered, why do little girls need their covered? At 4 yo u can even tell the difference

@Kalioko In Europe most girls don't wear tops until they're 8-9-10yo. Why would they? They're chests are no different to the boys.

Right.

I’ve always found bikini tops on small girls icky personally.

For young children in the west, these particular societal expectations did not exist in the 1960s or '70s, as shown by some of the adverts of the time.

Maybe it's about time those"social norms" are challenged though?

I'm retired, I have never really thought about swim wear for kids. My DD wore a swimsuit and my boys wore shorts, however this thread has opened my eyes. I think OP is absolutely right that by making little girls dress differently to boys it is implying their bodies are sexual and to be hidden.

A wet cozzie is not the same as shorts and tshirt.

OP I have lads so would obv put them in shorts, I'd buy a cozzie or shorts and vest like you have, not a bikini, and would put the tip on cos, you just do. But see absolutely nothing wrong with what you did and if she's happy then it doesn't matter.

Is expecting a 4yo to wear pants sexualising a child? Or is it helping them to recognise that there are some body parts which are private?

I don’t think it’s unreasonable of the pool to require normal swimming outfits for children. I’ve never seen a girl even of toddler age wearing just bottoms in a pool. Beach, yep. But I’ve also seen adult women topless on the beach and I’d be shocked if any of them did that at the council leisure centre!

"Boys usually don't cover their chest when swimming."

Exactly, so that wouldn"t be anything exciting or different to a paedo who hangs about near swimming pools.

It’s ridiculous. I’ll be interested to hear what Nuffield says. She’s 4. Why had she got to have her chest covered? What’s that all about??

I think this post contrasts nicely with the pjs at the hotel breakfast one from earlier.

Yes it probably shouldn't matter if a young girl has her top half covered to swim or if adults change into day clothes before eating breakfast when in a hotel, but it DOES because there are certain customs and societal expectations you are breaking, and when you do it makes people uncomfortable.

Life isn’t always dictated by logic- sometimes it’s just based on feelings and internalised rules. There are lots of things we do that are not 100% dictated by logic. Now you can rally against it and say it’s illogical but there are obviously a lot of women on who wouldn’t have dressed their own daughters as the OP did.

Sometimes you can fight the good fight and other times it might be better to just adapt behaviour. I’m not sure there are many 4 year olds who would actually object to wearing a swimming costume.

Yes, "covering up" is embedded in our consciousness for some reason, it probably goes back to some ancient protection mechanism in the brain, younger people seem less bothered, maybe because social media is frying their brain cells.

You think paedophiles are only turned on by little girls when their nipples are exposed? That's not how it works. And if it did it would apply to the naked flesh of little boys as well. So the logical argument there would be that all children should be covered at the pool but that is not what happens when people make this argument.

I guess in posting I was trying to gauge whether my instinct was normal or whether I should just be forcing her into a swimsuit or 2 piece

You should certainly be trying to get her used to it. She won't always be 4

@Wtafdidido She’s not sexualising your daughter she is trying to protect her from the possibility of some pervert paedo who may be at the pool and getting their rocks off on the mental image of your half naked daughter.

Pervert paedo will look at girls regardless of what they are wearing.

And why does this same concern not exist for pervert paedos looking at boys? Boys usually don't cover their chest when swimming.

We had no idea why he was there yet! It took till later that day for his wife to come and apologise/explain. Dh just gently shooed him out (almost too politely in my opinion at the time, I wanted to call the police!)

On that note, dh would also not have wanted to meet any police with no top on. There's barely any situation where he'd be happy with no top on.

Similarly he hates it if the kids try to go into the bathroom when he's having a wee, whereas I'm ok with having a toddler for an audience.

Those are all examples of modesty without sexualisation. I could go on. Just because we don't have an alternative word except the ambiguous "modesty", doesn't mean the concept doesn't exist in our culture. I'm astonished there are so many on this thread who can't understand that the concept of modesty can exist separately from sexualisation.

All these people saying that it is 'normal' and you should follow the dress code for girls by putting them in a one piece or bikini need to ask themselves, 'Why?' Why is it normal? Why do we have that dress code? There is absolutely no justification whatsoever in a prepubescent girl. And it is absolutely sexualising them. Just because you haven't stopped to think about it and there is no intention on your part to sexualise doesn't mean you are not participating in that.