Shorts under skirts for girls - a new thing?

[Biggrizzlybear]

A discussion on a school parents chat has brought up something I'd not thought about. Apparently a number of parents of September reception starters (girls) are looking for shorts to go under their daughter's school dresses "to make sure they're decent." I don't remember this happening when I was at school. Is that not what pants are for? I don't know what to think about it. On the one hand, I don't want my daughter to look indecent in comparison to everybody else. But I don't want to teach her that how she looks and dresses is indecent when she's fully dressed. If her dress is long enough, surely she'll be decent. I doubt she'll spend more than a minute or two a day with her dress over her head!

Do little girls wear these nowadays? Am I being silly or neglectful in some way?

Nothing to do with sexism btw, boys shouldn’t have their privates on show, neither should girls (and in normal pants, they routinely do)

Marks and Spencer so seamfree knickers that look like little shorts. No need to wear additional knickers underneath!

I used to do this in the 80s/90s so definitely not a new thing. Much more comfortable and when running, jumping, cartwheeling it ‘saves the boys seeing your knickers’

neither should girls (and in normal pants, they routinely do)

How many girl vulvas have you seen in your life due to knicker malfunction?

They appear to be a thing and my DD is 12. She wears them if she is going to the park wearing a skirt and wants to do a cartwheel. If schools are going to insist that they wear skirts I don't see a problem with it tbh.

@PrincessConsueIaBananaHammock of pretty much every active girl in my son’s class that doesn’t wear boyshort style pants. Girls should be able to jump, climb, do handstands and cartwheels without showing their vulva. Tiny, baggy knickers just slip to the side or are too baggy anyway. Just get boyshort style, problem solved

Yes, lets all fall over to discuss girls underwear in the greatest of detail. It's not a well known troll subject at all is it.

I just put a school polo tops and shorts on my daughter in hot weather. Lots of her friends started doing the same.

My DD is in between sizes so most knickers are either too small or too baggy. I tend to put cycling type shorts on with dresses. She starts school in September & the school have skorts on their uniform list so will probably get some of those.

Quite a few posters are saying buy knickers with better coverage or the short style knickers. But it's not always that simple.

My yr1 DD is small for her age, so probably an exception that, knickers that are a more generous cut just don't fit well. They tend to gape or are slightly baggy. Which she finds uncomfortable as they then move and she's constantly pulling.

Pairs that fit well around the waste do not provide good coverage everywhere else and again she's then uncomfortable. Not in a modesty sense, but physical e.g. wedgie.

Not too big of a problem until she starts climbing and things, which then becomes more uncomfortable.

It seems that she finds that the 'modesty shorts' are the comfiest fit. (Boys boxers have a little extra material at the front). However if not, then she would probably choose to wear boxers.

She certainly doesn't wear them for modesty as she also wears them under pants. She wears them for comfort.

(Calling them 'modesty shorts' really fucks me off. )

If your DD isn't bothered and is comfortable OP, then I would just leave her in normal knickers.

@StripeyBananas

No the message is

Dear girl,

Despite wearing the required uniform and playing completely suitable games, you Must wear this extra piece of clothing if you do want to play. It doesn't matter that you're too little to even be able to spell modesty, or that you don't care, or that your classmates don't care. We decided you must protect it.
Enjoy your new found issue about showing your underwear."

I think the message is " Dear daughter, if you want to: 1 feel more comfortable sitting on rough surfaces and/or 2. not risking your genitals being on shown then I will support your choice

Good God NO!

At 4, a child should not even be aware of their 'genitals'. It's sexualising them.

Knickers cover girls' front bottoms.

If they don't you are buying the wrong ones.

Get BIG pants.

I am astounded that mums are buying shorts and cycling shorts when a child is so young.

Children this age are not aware of their bodies as sexual or something to be ashamed of and therefore cover up.

This is all about adults projecting their own perceptions onto a child and it's wrong.

Exactly @PrincessConsueIaBananaHammock

Also, very important to remember is that up to upper ks2 (maybe y4) kids still get changed together for PE. Plenty of knickers,vests, naked torsos etc.

Why is it an issue only in the playground?

Mine has almost completed reception & is never heard of it omg
And I have another in secondary & never learnt then either

Clearly I live in a parallel universe....

I’ve worked with kids for over 30 years and have never seen a vulva pop out of a girls pants.

I wore shorts under school skirts and dresses in the late 80s / early 80s. Definitely not a new thing.

I'm sure at school we just tucked our dresses into our knickers when we did cartwheels etc.

I did have netball knickers for PE though for under the netball skirt

I am a bit worried about this thread TBH. Lots of descriptions of knicker malfunctions. I think it's a troll. Few schools are open at the moment, Why is this coming up now? This subject has been done to death.

Me and my friends used to put our PE shorts under our dresses when we were 7-10 or so so that we could do somersaults During break time without the boys seeing our knickers. Depends whether she’s bothered or not I suppose!

I'm 36. We had a very unsafe climbing frame at my primary school. I wore white cycling shorts under my gingham dress so that I could hang upside down (aged 5)

Where the hell are people getting all these “tiny, baggy” pants from for girls?

I have never come across pants that are loose enough to fall aside or see what’s underneath. If they do they aren’t fit for purpose.

Pants should be close fitting. If they aren’t you’re doing it wrong. Try m&s next time.

Fwiw I teach gymnastics. Lots of little girls with legs akimbo. 30 odd years i have never seen a vulva. Penis yes, when parents have put them in underwear shorts with a flap, or the shorts don’t have the insert and it falls out the leg when they sit down.

The only time i’ve ever come close to seeing a girls genitals is when the parents put the kid in a leotard about 4 sizes too big with no pants underneath.

DD always preferred to wear shorts rather than dresses, so was usually in grey school shorts and polo tshirt.

When she wore dresses, again she preferred to wear black cotton shorts underneath.

I remember gym knickers being worn over our own pants before being allowed to do cartwheels and handstands, and i'm 39.. so its not a new concept.

This always comes up in this discussion. A lot of people are adamant that there are vulvas on show everywhere ,with regularity. While an accident might happen once in a blue moon , I believe it's mostly in their heads. Completely made up issue.

We wore shorts under skirts to school or the play ground in the 80s, and I got the same for my daughters. I wouldn't have let my DC, the boys or the girls, go about in public with their underwear on show at any age.

With all the NSPCC stuff about 'private pants' (I cannot remember the slogan, sorry) it makes sense that more and more girls will want to ensure their pants are covered. Not from worrying about boys or adults or anything like that, but simply because they have been taught that their pants are private.