To think that infant school pupils don't need special cover up knickers?

[DrSeuss]

A local FB seller is flogging gingham over knickers to wear with school summer dresses. Just in case a child of five should do a cartwheel and someone should see her underwear for a brief moment, presumably? My daughter is five. While I would not wish her to run around showing her Frozen themed undies to the world all day, I have no wish to teach her that she must cover herself at all times. Having taught as a peripatetic in primary schools, I always walked a fine line between wishing they could sit on a carpet without flashing me their pants and thinking that their innocence and lack of inhibitions were to be held onto as long as possible since they would be sexualised soon enough.
Would any of you want to buy the chequered modesty preservers?

My school had uniform knickers. Bottle green in winter and striped in summer.

I presume we still flashed these knickers, but at least they were colour-coordinating knickers

I bought these, which are cotton and dd loves them

www.zulily.co.uk/brand/sparkle-farms.html

I saw this advertised a whiles back, she doesn't say on the ads on the run of the mill selling sites but she claims on the Special needs one she designed them for girls who have to where pads or nappies still, which sort of makes sense but I don't really understand why they are needed only for summer dresses and not winter skirts?
Each to their own.

If our school tried insisting on shorts under dresses, especially if the dresses were mandated, I'd have no choice but to padlock myself upside down to the monkey bars in protest, quite possibly naked.

DD1 is in yr3 and asked for shorts under her school dress just last week. It infuriates me but I'm not going to argue with what makes her feel more comfortable and if she wants them then she can have them so I bought them. (She also asked for a crop top at the same time and paraded round the house in the shorts and crop top like Taylor bloody Swift 😩)

My girls have always worn dark cycle shorts under their skirts/dresses but aside from modesty they have never forgotten their shorts for gym and they are great for holding their tights up in winter. Not so sure about gingham ones though😚

Why is everyone so down on summer dresses?

They are like instant dressing. DD is in hers and zipped up wh,e her brother is still struggling with buttons.

I have very s unathletic stock though - no one knows how to cartwheel in this family.

Would anyone who objects to shorts under dress send their dd to school in tshirt and knickers? Coz that's the effect of being upside down, shorts solve the impracticality of the dress, we already teach little girls not to display their knickers, the shorts aren't an extra message just correlation. If the shorts are "totally unnecessary" why have the dresses down to the knees and not just stopping at hips like a tshirt?

missing it's cold when girls where winter skirts, so they tend to do handstands less.

This wasn't a thing when my children were at their UK primary I guess knickers were just occasionally visible from time to time but I can't remember ever really noticing. When we moved to non uniform schools very very few of the girls wore skirts or dresses, they were pretty much all in t-shirts/shorts in the summer and jeans/hoodies in the winter, just like the boys.

Why would anyone need to wear shorts on top of tights and then with a skirt on top of that? Sounds very uncomfortable to me.

Showing your underwear isn't freedom or equality. When a boy does something physical, his clothes don't fall out of place. Girls need proper, covering clothing, too. Trousers and a tunic top would be much better, but shorts under a dress would be better than just knickers.

I hate that dd's school requires them to put on their PE shorts under their dresses if they're going to cartwheel etc. She has proper big pants (I just discovered the Boden ones) that show nothing, there's just no need except a sort of weird prudishness on the part of the lunchtime supervisors.

But I know if I raise it, I'll be told that some parents have asked for it, it's doing her no harm etc and I don't want to create an argument with the school over this when I may well need their goodwill at some point in the future.

To be fair to these girls who are asking for shorts - my ds is year 2 and no way would he be ok with other children seeing his pants while he played. I don't think it's just something that girls are feeling - it's just girls who have the impractical uniform that exposes knickers during normal play. That's the problem imo. Girls should wear the same uniform as boys and there would be far less distinction between them and they would have the bonus of being less exposed to the notion that women dress to be pretty and men dress to be practical.

Cycling shorts black or white under dresses are now part of the uniform at dds school for upside down play. They must not be longer than the dress. Yawn.

I agree with a pp that the term 'flashing' is just horrible. It is just underwear that is showing.

Rather than cycling shorts and dresses wouldn't it be simpler just to have shorts for everyone?

PP keep saying the girls should wear shorts - but my dd prefers dresses and always has. She wears dresses by choice at home, too. She runs hot, and dresses are cooler than a polo shirt and shorts. I still don't see why shorts are necessary as long as they're wearing pants the right size.

DD wouldn't wear shorts. She now will wear culottes but they're too hot for very summery weather. As I said cycling shorts are now uniform requirement.

I've seen these recently on my fb. Seem to be quite popular. I remember worrying about showing my knickers at about 6ish so I think if my DD asked for some I wouldn't object.

Janecc how does that work for your dd then? She won't wear shorts, but now she has no choice, she has to wear shorts, she can just wear a dress as well. Which seems fairly odd really as apart from little girls in non optional uniforms who wears a dress/shorts combo?

If the issue is that dresses aren't compatible with primary school life then uniform redesign seems the obvious option, with skorts a definite possibility (my dd used to love skorts, girly and practical).

My daughter wears shorts, no dress, just shorts like her brother.
They look smart. I don't really like seeing knickers, especially not on a 9 year old.

Putting shorts under a dress would defeat the purpose of a cool summer dress surely?

Nooks - she won't wear school shorts. She wears the cycling shorts under her dress on the days she decides she wants to do cartwheels/hand stands.

Chilver - from aged one
age 2-16 Though they look more like briefs than the ones labelled shorts from aged six.

But going for a wee in a gingham playsuit must be a pain. Another stupid item of clothing IMO.

Not to mention the fact that it would be impossible to find one that actually fits. They would either rub too low down or cut you in half when you did your handstand.

Dd has a couple of gingham dresses she only wears them when it's hot though (so hardly ever ) but she hasnt mentioned cycling shorts, I've only seen those on y5/6 tbh. Most of the time she sticks to trousers.