AIBU to think a toddler should not need to cover their top at a swimming pool?

[Blues321]

Went swimming in our local pool with DS aged 18 months and DNiece 16 months. DSis had forgotten a swim nappy so gave her one of DS's.

We're happily splashing when a lifeguard approached us and asked if DN is a girl and if so, she has to wear a swimming costume that covers her top half.

We ended up having to leave early as apparently it's 'the rules' that all females, even 16 month olds, have to cover their chests!!

Please reassure me that this is crazy and we weren't BU to refuse to buy a swimsuit and therefore be asked to leave.

Manager was involved and said rules are rules!

I know, think they probably meant 6 😂

I got told off at a pool last week. Took toddler swimming, took costume and nappy off to shower and told not to let them walk round naked. It was about six steps to the cubicle and the changing room was almost empty, two other people I think.

So you’d not allow any child who wasn’t reliably toilet trained in a pool?

It’s atrocious. It implies that babies are sexually active! And that girls should be more modest. Awful.

How ridiculous. I have photo’s of my dd when she is around 6 running around the beach in just a pair of swimming shorts.

Pre pubescent children do not need to cover up their chests

This is what I think. You probably shouldn’t have been taking her in with just a swim nappy on.

Me too. I can’t work out what the motive of the poster is though. There isn’t a person in the land who is saying a 16 month old baby girl should have her chest covered.

This has to be a man. Urghhh

That’s what I assumed it was about and the lifeguard wasn’t clear/ didn’t think through what the rule was for?

What nonsense. 🙄

But men in women's changing rooms are not a problem.

Humanity has lost the plot.

I think sexualised is in the eye of the beholder.

Regressive nonsense. If all the children dressed the same how on earth could the female children even be identified ffs.

16 month olds don’t need to be in anyway visibly gendered, and disturbing that some people think they should.

I'd be absolutely disgusted at them sexualising a 16 month old. Let us know how they defend such a ridiculous policy!

OP I’m sure you cba and have better things to do but can you complain? Because that’s incredibly problematic behaviour not only sexualising a literal baby but subjecting her to misogyny because of that’s persons internalised sexualisation of a child. Disgraceful.

Difficult to be “creative” when confronted with something so batshit. 🙄

Perfect, try that next time @Blues321 😂

I have never in my entire life seen a young girl who had started growing breasts going topless at the pool or beach (or park, or any other place where it is deemed acceptable for people without breasts to be bare-chested). I think this is a "problem" that doesn't exist, because generally girls naturally start to want more privacy before their breasts even start growing, and if for whatever reason they do not, their mothers almost invariably tell them they need to wear a top.

@Blues321 this happened to me! Albeit 20 years ago! I was a young mum and not very confident at all. It was the first time I took my DD to the leisure centre and had her bottoms but not the top, life guard came over and said as you’re already in I’ll let you stay but don’t bring her here again without appropriate swimming costume.

It actually devastated me, so I cannot believe it’s still happening!!

Well, we've had an email reply from the General Manager, she confirms that they do have a policy that girls must wear swimsuits that cover their tops but acknowledged that the pool staff were 'overzealous' in applying that to such a young child. She said they would be providing some additional training in this matter for all pool staff.

She apologised that we had to leave and offered us vouchers for a free swimming session.

So common sense seems to have prevailed and as far as we are concerned, the matter is closed.

I wonder if they had an incident with an exhibitionist at some point, wanted a rule, and decided a blanket one is best as then no discussions about what age said rule should kick in. These rules are often there to cater to the unlikely yet possible scenario. Like when there are stunts or experiments on TV and they add a disclaimer saying "Don't try this at home." 99.9 percent of people wouldn't dream of it, but there's always one...

shame a total stranger had to protect your child instead of their own parent

At that age, completely unreasonable to make a fuss. I've seen ones much older(up to 4-5) topless and no one cared. The chests of boys and girls are identical at those ages.

My 40 year old brother walks around the house naked because he refuses to be sexualised at his age.

Protect from what?