I just bought these but they piss me off.

[frogswimming]

They are to go over my dd nappy for under skirts. But the name really pisses me off. Why can't they be called 'under skirt shorts'? There's no need to be judging two year olds on their levels of modesty.

I found pants over nappies under a skirt or dress practical as it kept the nappy in place while playing. Especially with a child that bum shuffled.

Anecdote, in my youth, our school uniform included big thick brown knickers that were to be worn over our normal knickers, every day.
It was an all girl school ! :o)

@Hailtomyteeth

I reflected on this for a moment or two.

Little girls (at least, me when I was a little girl) don't like a lot of fuss over their bits. One layer (knickers) or two (knickers and trousers/shorts whatever) are plenty.

So, the ultimate problem is the expectation that little girls will wear skirts. Why should they have to? Let them wear trousers, shorts, dungarees, things that they can happily play in without having to worry about what's on show. My dd is pushing forty, but when she was small we could get great shirt and trousers sets from M&S (basically, shalwar kameez in style). She had freedom of movement, was covered and they had lovely designs. Lets stop worrying little ones with skirts. Designate skirts as fashion items to be worn by teens and up.

Or even big girls. I'm pushing 70 but I think it is probably 2 years since I wore a skirt.

@Twinkie01 - exactly, it's ridiculous. Surely the knickers are there for modesty?!

It's the word 'modesty' I don't like. Girls climbing trees shouldn't have to think about being modest.

I spent a lot of my childhood climbing trees and doing handstands. Probably not in a skirt but if I had then I wouldn't have wanted other kids to see my knickers or the risk of giving them an eyeful of possibly more than just knickers. The name just doesn't bother me at all.

My dd wears them over her knickers but under trousers! When she sits down, she has the same problem as me in that her backside is on show/has builders bum. So these are to protect her modesty in that way. I wish I could buy some for myself!

@frogswimming

It's the word 'modesty' I don't like. Girls climbing trees shouldn't have to think about being modest.

Too right they shouldn't but even I can remember being 6 and waiting until all the boys had gone away until I did a handstand because I didn't want the boys to see my knickers.

Shorts is a better word than knickers or pants, that's all the boys will see if you do a handstand near them. Modesty is a bit off though isn't it - overshorts perhaps?

I like the idea that they're called something else to differentiate them from normal knickers. I'm not sure if "modesty" is the best word though- 'cartwheel-proof shorts' would have been better.

There's plenty of little girls who love tumbling or climbing stuff as well as wearing skirts or dresses, especially in the summer. If this product lets them do that without feeling uncomfortable I'm very happy NEXT are listening and catering to them.

@Lalalapurple

Why do you need to cover the nappy? I wouldn't.

It depends on how old the child is. Potentially the op meant inconcinence pants. I can’t imagine why you’d cover a two year olds nappy.

Thwy do exactly what they say on the tin

I don't know why a little girl would be bothered about her pants being on show. I spent every playtime upside-down against a wall at infant school age and couldn't have care less if the boys saw my knickers or not. We also stripped down to knickers to play in the public paddling pool and on the beach and never gave it a second thought. Labia hanging out while crossed legged on the school assembly hall floor was just everyday life- we weren't ashamed of it and the boys weren't even interested! It wasn't even a topic for discussion.

Why are they not just called girl's boxer shorts like boy's ones?

And why can't they wear them alone instead of over normal knickers?

My DD6 wears something similar from H&M but they are just called boxer briefs, and are a type of knickers not to go over them. They’re more comfy than knickers that tend go up your bum.

Not sure I’d have bought them while she was still in nappies though.

I think they should be called chastity concealers.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

It's the word 'modesty' I don't like. Girls climbing trees shouldn't have to think about being modest.

I agree 100%.

But they don’t have to think about it if they’re wearing these because that’s the whole point of them.

I honestly think that if people have got headspace for nonsense like this they need to get a life. Who really gives a shit about how knickers are marketed?

If they don’t have to think about being modest, why are you buying them? I have 2 girls now young women. Never crossed my mind to hide their nappies! Why?

You could use the vests with poppers, that covers and contains the nappy.

Yes I think mine always had those popper vests at that age unless it was boiling hot, which isn’t very often.

@Bluntness100

I had knickers to cover my DD's nappy in summer to ensure it kept in place when she was playing or more importantly when we carried her as she liked sitting on our shoulders.

In winter she just wore tights or leggings.

They are girls boxers.

They don't even need the girls bit added to the title but there are differences in the design for males and females due to needs.

Way back in the 60s when I was a lass. We just did handstands and cartwheels and didn't think twice about our knickers. What the hell has gone wrong since then?

Dear Lord, people will always find fault where there is none. I prefer the name but either way I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I might have an issue if they called them fanny coverings.

I work in a primary school . Girls still do forward rolls on bars etc. Boys don’t bat an eyelid. Buying those things makes girls think they should cover up.