Teacher telling girls to wear shorts over pants if their dress/skirt is too short

[Justcheckingimnotmad]

Hi,

My daughter's last day of school yesterday (she's 8) and as she was getting dressed in the morning she said her teacher had told her that she had to wear shorts if she was wearing a dress.

I discussed this with my daughter, i.e. would it be ok if she wore swimsuit or tankini bottoms instead? Her pants are covering her private area so why cover up what's already covered up? Did she know why she'd been told this? (She didn't).

Anyway, I gave the teacher the benefit of the doubt as I know innocent comments can be misinterpreted by kids.

After school I talked to the teacher and she said that she had told her class that if, on the last day, they were wearing dresses too short then they should wear shorts so they don't show their pants on the climbing frames. She laughed and said it wasn't school policy.

AIBU to be fuming?

[Thedutchwife]

*their

[LucyLou49]

If your doing a gymnastics lesson then a leotard is appropriate, if you're at the beach or a pool then swimwear is appropriate.

As adults we do not go around showing our underwear and by the time children are 7/8 (in my experience), they start to become a little uncomfortable doing so.

If I was required to be upside down at any point or sit on the floor then I would ensure that I dressed in a way that my underwear wasn't exposed. I have no problem with my child (male or female) being asked to do the same.

[Shampooeeee]

YANBU it’s a terrible message to send children. Why should girls be so ashamed of their bodies that they must cover up twice?

[LockedOutOfMN]

Underwear covers private areas. Girls and women don't need to wear extra layers over their underwear. What happens when we decide that - this is an expression I find incredibly offensive - 'modesty shorts' aren't modest enough? Will our DDs have to start wearing floor length bloomers on top of those? Then a Victorian bathing machine over the bloomers? Then just stay indoors with the light turned off? Madness.

[gillybeanz]

My dd would have loved this suggestion, rather than having her knickers showing on th climbing frame, or worst the boys thinking it funny to lift their dresses up and shout what colour knickers she was wearing.

[WrongOnTheInternet]

Thing is, little boys don't flash their underpants all the time do they? They have extra layers on.
I don't like the fact that skirts and dresses are decreed as normal wear for little girls, and then they are criticised for only having the one layer between the world and their genitals. Given the option I'd have my dd in shorts and trousers all the time. But she isn't stupid and she was noticing that she was the only little girl not dressed in pink and dresses by the time she was 1.5 yrs old. I have started asking her to put shorts on underneath dresses and skirts, at 9 yrs. I don't want her wearing clothing that is specifically designed to express women and girls' sexual attractiveness in public.

[MyNameIsNotSteven]

When she's in secondary, OP, will you have an issue with the school stipulating the length of skirt? I mean if they're wearing knickers there's nothing to see, eh?

[UpstartCrow]

If pants have to be covered by shorts then shorts should be the uniform.

[Thedutchwife]

It’s an absolute joke especially when most school won’t allow girls to wear trousers.

[sparklyllama]

The young girls in my DDs primary school chose to cover up their knickers when they got to a certain age. Purely because they were constantly doing handstands; cartwheels etc.
They all liked the black 'modesty shorts' by Next. They were very cheap

[RoboJesus]

It's a good habits to get in to and is much less risky, especially since they're all monkeying around. I don't see why not

[SometimesMaybe]

I don’t understand why it’s “less risky”. What is going to happen it someone sees an 8 year olds pants in a school environment?

My daughter is 7 and if and when she decides she wants to cover up her pants then she can do so. Before then i have no interest in a requirement for her to be “modest”

Appalling sexualisation of young children.

[BottleOfJameson]

If there private areas are being covered why do the girls still need to be shielded by the boys/men’s looks. It’s such ingrained misogyny most people don’t even realise it I don't think the girls are being shielded from sexual looks - I would hope there is no one wandering around a school that wants a look at girl's knickers but even if the girls were in an all female environment showing your underwear isn't appropriate surely?? I wouldn't flash my knickers to a female friend or colleague! Now personally I don't really care too much about whether or not some little girls show their knickers but I do see the side of the argument that says it's not appropriate. Some of these girls will be starting their periods (often unexpectedly) soon and might be mortified if the entire school were to see.

[BottleOfJameson]

It's not just girls either. My DS is 7 and wanders around the house naked. I have had to insist he stops answering or coming to the door naked. I very much doubt that the postman or Hermes guy is going to be looking sexually at him but it's just not appropriate to be naked or showing your underwear in public past a certain age.

[GetToFuck]

OP, was she telling or suggesting?

I remember wanting to wear the shorts and I was glad I did.

[Boulshired]

I know at a primary school I am involved in they have already had incidents of up skirting. Phones are banned but impossible to completely police and images printed off so no way of knowing who took the photos. The world we live in.

[BottleOfJameson]

Girls and women don't need to wear extra layers over their underwear.

Really? But this isn't the social norm. People can't go to work in just their underwear they need to be more covered up (both men and women). I think the school in this case are just representing what is normal in society.

[Bloodyfucksake]

The uniform should be sports shorts for everyone in summer. Then they can all climb and cartwheel as much as they want.

I had boys first, so when I had DD I was shocked by the contrast of how restrictive 'girls' clothes are. Almost anything worth doing as a child is harder in a skirt. Total joy killer. Showing knickers aside (she doesn't care and either do I), she was always standing on them when climbing or getting them caught up in things. Now she prefers shorts.

Shorts for all!

[Seniorschoolmum]

I think it’s completely weird. If a child is wearing a dress and a pair of little girl pants rather than a thong or high cut briefs, then she’s appropriately covered.
Wearing Lycra shorts or leotard in this steamy weather is the quickest way I can think of to give small girls a yeast infection - just horrible & completely unnecessary IMO.

[LockedOutOfMN]

Boulshired That's terrible.

But I think we all know that girls wearing 'modesty shorts' isn't the way to stop upskirting.

[Walkingdeadfangirl]

I think we now live in a 'multi-cultural' country and some people find underwear offensive. So its natural to make sure everyone covers up and wears modest clothes.

[redexpat]

My dd would have loved this suggestion, rather than having her knickers showing on th climbing frame, or worst the boys thinking it funny to lift their dresses up and shout what colour knickers she was wearing.

Why are those the only 2 options? Why arent the boys being punished?

[RoboJesus]

Less risk of accidentally showing foof...

[Yura]

Makes a lot of sense - a lot of girls are wearing loose fitting underwear (or it doesn’t fit well, no idea) and basically have their privates on show if they play actively (i‘ve seen a lot more than just underwear from a lot of girls in my son’s class). Just get her boxers instead of knickers - no need for 2 layers. Also provides more protection from rope burn etc.
Boys tend to wear knee length shorts, nothing on show. My son wears a belt to avoid his bum being on show - he is very slim. Nothing to do with bodyshaming, just sensible clothing.