To think that 5/6 year old little girls don’t need to wear shorts under dresses to “protect their modesty”

[Darthwazette]

Just what the subject like says really. I’d be interested to know other parents thoughts. I’m not a weirdo, this request has been made of my daughters from school and it makes me feel a bit icky.

We had this from school too.

Pants that actually fit without shot elastic shouldnt be flapping around revealing anything etc. Our school is gated and its not possible to see into the playground/field unless you are stood by the office window. It feels a bit weird making a 6y o girl hide pants from other children/dbs checked staff, when half of them don't bother closing the door when they go to the loo etc.

Children who are bothered will tend to choose to wear shorts when they get a bit older.

I can't even see how they can police it either, without watching kids constantly. Can you imagine a 6 yo getting in trouble for doing handstands that reveal their pants? In 2023?!

The pants are already there providing the apparently needed "modesty" (urgh).

Why do shorts then need to cover the pants? Tons of little boys emerge from school with their pants showing above shorts or trousers, why is it only little girls who need to be modest?

Only baggy/badly fitting pants with knackered reveal anything. A family that can afford to buy shorts can afford to replace pants with some suitable ones that fit. Pants themselves are nothing to hide and ffs, a cartwheeling child reveals them for seconds.

This is all about imposing old fashioned standards of modesty on girls.

I don’t see ‘tons of little boys’ coming out of school with their underwear showing. If I did and it was my child I’d say ‘pull your pants up, they’re not on properly.’

So it isn’t ‘only little girls.’ Boys wear shorts or trousers that cover their underwear. I don’t know any parents that would happily send their son out to school in clothes that leave their underwear exposed.

EXACTLY the same problem, really struggle to get decent-fitting pants for my daughter 😭

I'm not going to get queasy at the thought of teachers seeing a flash of knickers if she's upside down on the climbing frame, but I know from experience that if she's assing around with her legs wide apart it's not just knickers you'd see!!!

I might try those Amazon shorts that PP referenced, but I worry that even those will gape as she has slim thighs...

@mumlikeaboss - I have those ones from Next that a previous poster linked to for my 4 year old. She is also tall and skinny - currently wears 3-4 in those shorts.

Even myself a n adult, if wearing a skirt or dress I wear cycling shorts underneath

Doesn't even have to be cycling shorts. They can be a bit clingy in hot weather.
There are loads and loads upon loads of nice soft cami knickers on sale from websites manifold. You don't have to wear them over knickers. They 'are' knickers. They've been available since the year dot. I've worn them with short skirts, long dresses, and even under trousers. They are just ordinary soft cotton knickers with a bit of leg. Has nobody here heard of cami-knickers?

I'm over 60, so maybe nobody has!

They are the equivalent of men's comfortable underwear. Men have had them since year dot. Women seem to think they have to wear teeny tiny bits of cloth, and even encourage their daughters to do the same. It's very sexist to buy your sons proper supportive underwear that covers his genitalia, and not do the same for your daughters. Why do parents think that's ok?
Why would you send your son to school in substantial cotton underwear which resemble shorts, yet your daughters in knickers with floppy crotches?

As a TA, I see all the boys in assembly cross legged and alert and unremarkable.
I have never seen one willy, or anything even close to it.

However, I have seen plenty of female genitalia, labia, from front row girls who have inadequate underwear. It really doesn't happen with boys.

I think maybe boys are more aware of personal privacy.

No one has to conform to your standards of “decency” with regard to their own body and boundaries, let alone a 12 year old CHILD. She can sit however the fuck she likes and so can any adult woman for that matter. If you have a problem with that, that’s for you to sort out

I'd just think it sad that she was taught no better.

Oh for goodness sake, Little girls in dresses and skimpy pants show off much more of their genitalia than boys in their trousers and shorts do.

Stop being so bloody argumentative about it, and equal it up. Get some proper knickers for girls. Parents of boys have to do it.

And I have three girls and no boys!

I just can't believe the amount of mothers who think it's ok to flash your pudenda in nursery school. Nursery school is where you begin to learn what is and is not acceptable in general society. Keeping your privates private was the first thing I learned when starting to work with very young children.

Then again, it was 30 years ago I worked in a nursery. And there wasn't one child over 2 yrs old that needed a nappy. In fact, children in nappies were excluded.
Not enough staff to deal with it. Kids who need nappy changes not really their target audience. Those kids were not ready for pre school . And who can blame them?

They didn't have the knowledge or training to deal with special needs.

I don't understand why you wear shorts, how will someone see up your skirt? I usually wear g strings, reason for this is I don't like my pantyline showing, I feel that's more "titillating" having the outline of your underwear showing through your clothes, big fashion no-no from me

There are many people on this thread who have repeatedly exolained how or why underwear may show. Or more than just underwear....

Have you never walked up stairs (or stood under stairs) when somebody wearing anything shorter than a knee length skirt/dress walked up? Especially if it's a wide or flowy skirt (pencil skirts obviously less of an issue).

I have. And it's not that I'm looking but yes, I have seen some underwear. Also when some people wearing skirts ride bikes. Or sit. Or if it's windy!

And children often like physical activity during playtime. The slides, monkey bars, swings etc.

Underwear will easily show if you wear a dress during these activities.

And bare upper legs make the slides pretty much impossible anyway ime. I hated having to rearrange my skirt so my skin wouldn't stick...

Boys are generally covered up all the time because they wear shorts or trousers. These issues only arise for girls because dresses are not really practical for active small children. I can remember doing a handstand and my loose dress falling over my head, completely exposing me from the shoulders.

I think wearing shorts under a dress is quite sensible. We used to tuck our skirts or dresses into our knickers so nothing was exposed whilst doing handstands and cartwheels on the school field.

DataNotLore
Agreed.

Apparently they need skirts for their female identity.

---

Nonsense. That is not why I chose to wear a dress.

DD has quite a .... um.... rounded derriere so I do need to size up for her. I do across all her clothes though as she's tall, too. I recommend actually going into a shop and having a look at them. I reckon they're probably fairly true to size generally, but if in doubt buy larger because they'll grow into them eventually!!

@voxnihili @CatMattress tvm... Might invest in some next time I'm in there!

This. It’s not all sinister and over protective; it’s basic modesty.

Honestly no. Usually if I'm walking up stairs and have a situation like that I'd hold the skirt close so it doesn't leave a big gape. As far as on someone else, maybe once or twice in my lifetime. I find it really weird that grown women do this.

I can't see how this has moved on to decided other women are strange for their own clothing choices. Why is it a problem that some choose to wear shorts under a dress? Everyone feels comfortable in different things. It's not something I have ever chosen to do as an adult but my imagination can stretch far enough to see why others may make that choice.

And yet it still happens (occasionally) to adult women who have had a lifetime of getting used to this and learning to be careful (Holding the skirt closed etc)...

It's therefore IMO not at all surprising that it happens to young girls on a rather frequent basis...

And seeing as their underwear frequently doesn't provide adequate coverage (I'm choosing to believe the many educators on this threas)... well, shorts might be a good idea.

So: girls’ pants are badly-fitting.

We should buy children “better” underwear (still not sure what this means as it all looks the same to me and it’s not something you can try on, but ok).

In fact we should have underwear like they did in the old days…

which was long-legged and with a higher rise…

in other words…cycling shorts 🤦🏼‍♀️

so everyone sending girls to school with cycling shorts under their dress IS buying better underwear, it’s just no longer seen as underwear.

Fair point well made

Girls in “the old days” doing PE in their knickers…the one in the middle is wearing shorts basically identical to the cycling shorts DD wears under her dress. It’s not fear of boys or training girls, it’s that people have always naturally wanted to cover up to an extent, and as underwear gets smaller we come up with another solution.

Only if they are made of cotton with a proper gusset.

A boxer knicker would do the job.

Exactly!

Why does a boxer knicker = sensible, the proper thing to do, no pandering,
liberating etc etc and cycling shorts = oppressive, teaching girls to be ashamed of their body, giving in to men and so on. They’re 99% the same garment! Doing the same thing!

I mean, nobody here is pro-young children (female or male) flashing their bits at other people, albeit inadvertently. And we’re all just advocating different ways of avoiding that, so why is one way sending out a terrible harmful message to girls and another way, which is to all intents and purposes the same thing, fine and dandy?

A boxer knicker is made of cotton and is intended to be used as underwear. Whereas a cycling short is synthetic and is gross as underwear, and not very healthy.