AIBU to question a pool asking my four-year-old daughter to cover up?

[ChampagneLassie]

I took my two daughters, aged two and four, swimming at Nuffield Health. My four-year-old was wearing swimming bottoms but no top.
A staff member told me she needed to wear something “more appropriate” — apparently a bikini top or one-piece. I asked why, as a four-year-old boy would presumably be allowed to swim topless.
I said I felt this was sexualising a pre-pubescent child. The staff member replied, “I’m a mother. I’m not sexualising children.”
When I asked about the actual policy, she could only say that children had to wear “appropriate clothing”. I’m planning to contact Nuffield for clarification, but I’m interested in other parents’ views.
AIBU to question this? Would you expect a four-year-old girl to have to cover her chest?
I used AI to help make this post more readable.

Maybe it's about time those"social norms" are challenged though?

I'm retired, I have never really thought about swim wear for kids. My DD wore a swimsuit and my boys wore shorts, however this thread has opened my eyes. I think OP is absolutely right that by making little girls dress differently to boys it is implying their bodies are sexual and to be hidden.

@Kalioko In Europe most girls don't wear tops until they're 8-9-10yo. Why would they? They're chests are no different to the boys.

Right.

I’ve always found bikini tops on small girls icky personally.

For young children in the west, these particular societal expectations did not exist in the 1960s or '70s, as shown by some of the adverts of the time.

OK so 4 year old willies and bums get covered, so do little girl front and back bottoms. Little boys nipples don't get covered, why do little girls need their covered? At 4 yo u can even tell the difference

Aren't we meant to teach children that the parts that a swimsuit cover are private? That they shouldn't be touched or photographed by other people.

The whole point of it being a swim suit being that it usually covers a girls top half too.

Whether a girl is developed or not I'm sure there's still plenty of weirdos out there that get a kick out of nipples on a child. I don't see what's wrong with protecting girls from that.

At what age do breasts become sexual? I mean, they’re only there to feed babies and women are (rightly) allowed to breastfeed wherever they want. Does that mean I should encourage my 12yo niece to be topless in Tesco? No, of course not. Because if I want to make a stand against cultural norms I should do it myself and not use a child to further my agenda.

Interestingly was it bikini style bottoms or shorts. No judgement either way but I noticed this year for my daughter all the swimsuits were bikini style bottoms with a rash vest rather than shorts style or a one piece that included shorts. I found the bikini style bottoms felt like sexualising the girls. Why do the boys get shorts and the girls have half their bums out. Whereas last year there were loads of more gender neutral styles around (as in unicorns and pink etc) but not made to be shorter and more exposed than the boys

This 100%.

why not - at it’s heart that’s what ‘modesty’ specifically female modesty is built around. Cover up your breasts because breasts are sexual and can lure men.

You may not realise that’s essentially what it means but the female body is morally dangerous!

@PinkWaffleMaker Whether a girl is developed or not I'm sure there's still plenty of weirdos out there that get a kick out of nipples on a child. I don't see what's wrong with protecting girls from that.

But not boys.

If the leisure centre insists on a four year old girl covering her chest, I would demand to be told their reasoning

I don't they're obliged to give any reasons. They can make their own rules.
Like it or lump it.

What on earth does a hijab analogy have to do with Ops post ?

What’s the difference and why does it matter?

How do you know you haven't seen a girl in just bottoms?

At the same level theoretically there is no real reason why men can’t walk around in something akin to their boxers in the high street or women don’t wear bralet tops to work - there is a societal expectation of what is culturally acceptable.

As for hijab sometimes younger girls (more like young pre teen age) make the choice themselves? They understand the reasons why - they know what sexualisation is and decide to make their own decision of what to show or cover of their own bodies. Just like all the pre teen girls who want to wear micro shorts or hot pants - it’s their choice too.

as for the younger girls I probably would just see it as girls imitating older women in their lives. Much like wanting to wear their mothers make up or choosing a two piece or bikini swim wear.

This is one of those things that has changed massively in my lifetime. When I was a kid, it was very common for little girls up to about age 5? to wear just bottoms at a pool (and it was pretty normal for all little kids up to age 3 or so to be completely naked on a beach!)

I very rarely see naked kids on the beach these days, and I've never noticed a girl of any age wearing just bottoms at a pool (although if she had shortish hair and neutral bottoms/shorts than I probably wouldnt notice the)

A girls swimsuit that’s actually fitted properly doesn’t leave half their bum exposed. If your child is bigger than average, you have the option to put them in shorts, certainly.

Her child is more comfortable wearing just bottoms so why would you make a point of teaching a child that her comfort doesn't matter because others may find her body offensive?

In fairness, she's going to have to get used to it one day if she wants to frequent public swimming facilities. Or do one piece swimsuits become more comfortable as you grow up?

But not boys? Because psedos don't like boys or because boys grow into men so it doenst matter as much?

I hope i made it clear that I don't agree with young girls wearing hijabs. I just understand that the reason behind it is an (in my opinion very unnecessary) idea of female modesty rather than sexualisation.

Similarly this staff member has an (arguably unnecessary) idea that girls' chests are private. One can disagree with that (I do) but it is not sexual. Just as my dh wouldn't have confronted a male stranger topless, through an (I'd argue, unnecessary) idea of modesty, not because of any idea of sexuality in that moment.

People can have different ideas of modesty without it being sexual. I don't agree with the staff member, but her views, that girls' chests are private, are within the norms of our british society and are not sexually perverse.

Why are boys wearing shorts in that case?

I remember being around 4 years old and having to wear only bottoms, I hated it and wanted to wear costume/top, but had to wear hand me down boys trunks.

Sorry how do you tell young girls and boys apart? Other than by their name or asking them? They do not look inherently different at all

I don't understand this. I find it quite easy to tell girls and boys apart.

Perfectly normal for them to ask you. I have never seen a child of 4 just in bottoms in a pool.

I agree - things can be seen as culturally inappropriate without being sexualisation. Eg asking a man to put a shirt on when coming in to a restaurant.

i don’t think there is a right answer and i have no opinion either way. I wouldn’t care if a 4 year old girl isn’t wearing a top. I also would put mine in a top. I certainly remember in the 90’s/2000’s young girls (up to 8 ish) walking around with tops off in the heat just like the boys but has become more unacceptable now.