Modesty in young girls’ fashion?

[Mel15sa]

I’m honestly quite shocked at what I keep seeing lately. So many young girls from those walking with their mums to groups of older teens wearing these high-waisted, skin-tight gym shorts that are basically leggings chopped off mid-thigh. They leave nothing to the imagination.

When I was that age, yes, we wanted to look fashionable too. We wore jean shorts, maybe a crop top on a hot day, but there were still some boundaries. Now it feels like modesty has completely gone out the window.

I can’t help but think: is this really just “fashion”? Or are girls dressing like this for attention, because it certainly draws the eye? It makes me sad that such young girls feel they have to put their bodies on display like this.

I know people will say “times change” but is this really a change for the better?
Are we doing girls any favours by normalising clothes that show off absolutely everything?

For context, I’m not bitter or jealous. I get compliments, and I could wear the same if I wanted to. But I choose not to, because I believe in dressing modestly. Even in the gym, I don’t dress in skin tight clothing. What worries me is seeing younger and younger girls thinking this sort of exposure is the norm.

What on earth has happened to modesty? Am I the only one concerned about this?

I was fully prepared to agree with you op but I can't see anything wrong with the shorts you posted. Rhey are just cycling shorts aren't they? It just shows how subjective this whole topic is.

How we think about gendered clothing starts when children are barely out of the womb.
Unfortunately we still code girls into pink, tight, impractical clothing like tights and leggings from the get go and boys into blue ‘rough and tumble’ looser, more freeing shorts and t shirts.
It becomes so much a part of our consciousness that we then start to justify why women should be “ free to wear whatever they want” - but we only say that when we are justifying tight, revealing, sexually provocative clothing. We just don’t have the same debate about men’s clothing -which, if society was as equal as we often claim it to be- we should also be having because there would be swathes of men out there wearing hot pant shorts and slashed to the waist vests. But there aren’t. Because; Patriarchy.
Should women be able to wear whatever they want? Yes of course. However, we very rarely expand the conversation to ask why they want to, when the same choices/ opprobrium is not extended to men.

So your photo was taken in Knightsbridge. I don't know what it's reputation is now but at the time it was the epitome of trendy fashion. And this might have been what was acceptable in London but certainly was not what the young women were wearing in the NE of England. In the same way the fashion for topless dresses never made it to most places outside London or other cosmopolitan places. If anyone had tried wearing hotpants as revealing as those in your photo or topless dresses in most places then there would have been absolute moral outrage.

Leggings aren't impractical. Sportsmen wear what are essentially leggings all the time. And there is a growing movement of men wearing leggings "every day"

And men go topless or wear trousers so tight you can see their balls...

This reminds me that I’m watching Sons and Daughters (Aussie soap from 80s) and I’ve been really surprised by the amount of nipple on display. It seems like no one wears a bra and they wear silky tops where you can see everything!
So it seems it’s not a new thing

I don't disagree with the much wider issue you allude to. But ... this: there would be swathes of men out there wearing hot pant shorts and slashed to the waist vests. But there aren’t. Because; Patriarchy.

May I introduce you to the 1970s? 😂😂 And, believe me, the patriarchy was having a field day that decade!

The right-on guys who claimed to be in tune with women's rights or 'in touch with their feminine side' demonstrated it by wearing their hair long and loose, with billowing floral shirts and ... incredibly tight trousers. Make of that what you will 😏

I really do wish we could stop policing girls bodies, it’s depressing.

I wear very little to the gym, not to show off but because I overheat really easily and cannot run in sleeves or leggings.

I don’t see anything wrong with those types of shorts, young girls have always pushed boundaries with what they wear, it will never change. I remember wearing joggers and crop tops like sporty spice and people found that too much, times change.

My friends and I must've morally outraged most of the Black Country, then.

In fact, we got the same amount of male harassment whether we were in our trendiest outfits, school uniform or jeans and jumpers. Half of the PPs here have completely missed the point that the clothes a girl wears have no impact on a creep's propensity to hassle her.

I did manage to stop traffic in my completely transparent muslin smock from Miss Selfridge (1972), worn without a bra. The only reason I stopped wearing it was that so many other girls had the same one!

I have seen one woman in a peachy coloured bodysuit in a shopping centre here, and I did a double-take. It’s a fairly brave choice.
I have seen teens in sports bra type tops in the gym, but not out and about really, they tend to have cropped hoodie things on (which I would totally wear if I was some decade younger). Basques I have not seen. Not saying I disbelieve you but maybe these fashions are regional.

You wore topless dresses?
And hot pants showing your arse cheeks like those in the photo?
I am really surprised because certainly in the area I lived people would have been verbally berating you in the street for wearing hotpants like those in the photo. I was considered quite shocking for what I wore but my hotpants had much more coverage.

Certainly I agree back then women routinely got harassed in the street - wolf whistles, comments, cars tooting etc.

But I still fail to understand why society still encourages girls and women to go around almost naked but the majority of men dress appropriately and don't generally feel the need to expose all their flesh. It's such a power imbalance to see almost naked women alongside clothed men.

As far as I'm aware, @Whenthetimeisright, topless dresses were a tiny craze in the mid-sixties, when I was ten. Skimpy hot pants, yes - and my see-through dress of 1972, among other fashions that no doubt get you all hot and sweaty.

This summer, all the popular papers ran features on men going shirtless: is it horrible; should we stop shaming bare-chested older men; why it gives women the ick. The plethora of male Brits wearing nothing but shorts and sunburn, and the massive media coverage about them, may have escaped your notice as you were so busy staring at 'young girls' and what they left to your imagination.

Yeah that's a weird fucking comment, isn't it? (Not yours, the one you quoted)

To be fair it's not a weird comment, it's a very old fashioned comment. My mum used to say it all the time.

It's weird whether it's old fashioned or not. I'm not talking about the actual comment, I'm talking about the context it's been used in. Why are people referring to children in that way? "They don't leave much to the imagination". Why are people imagining kids in any way except for innocent?

We dressed as revealingly as this in the late 60s, tight short hot pants, and my mini dresses came with matching knickers 😂 . This was in Sheffield.......

You are taking it too literally. It's a saying. It doesn't mean the poster would be imagining what is underneath someone's clothing. Maybe it's been normalised for me as it was heard often, growing up. Same as ",you will catch your death in that,," meaning you will feel cold, not actually die.

Back to the subject. I was a teenager in the 1970s, grew up in the south, not London. I absolutely wore hot pants and very short minis.

Even in the gym, I don’t dress in skin tight clothing

Why?

Why shouldn't people wear whatever is most comfortable to work out in?

Do you go swimming?

My 9 year old likes Nike Pros because they are comfortable and practical. She plays loads of sports, she does gymnastics and trampoline. Any patch of grass we pass becomes a practice area. Baggy shorts would be much more revealing when shes doing a handstand and the splits at the same time.

Too young to remember "hot pants" then OP?

I hate this shit.

My daughter goes to theatre school 8.5 hours a week, she lives in shorts like the OP's photo. All the kids do. There's a teen boy that wears cycle shorts too because it allows them to dance without worrying about getting their arse out

All the women who would look at her and think she's seeking male attention or has been sexualised can absolutely fuck off. Go and get some therapy or something, it's a child's legs. Why is that offensive or sexy?

I used to be on the beach entirely naked as a young child, obviously the only reason for that was because I wanted people to see my arse.

Sorry, what exactly should little girls be leaving to the imagination?

IMO it's perverted to look at a little girl and think she's dressed to tantalise.

Old fashioned or not, posters need to learn that the language is unhelpful.

Same as words like slag, slut, child porn (should be child sex abuse).

It needs to be called out each and every time so that people change their language and children aren't exposed to it and growing up woth the negative imprints of those phrases.

Nobody, ever, in the history of the world, has said that a boy is leaving little to the imagination.

These words and phrases are always about women and girls and they are never OK. They are outrageously disgusting when used in the context of children.

What the fuck are you imagining about the shorts? Sportswear is in and it’s hardly the end of the world wearing those shorts. Maybe you dress your daily little girls in flowery ankle length dresses and teach them embroidery but my DD loves her Nike and Montirex stuff, it’s great for gymnastics and generally being active.