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.

I’m all for women doing whatever the hell they want for the sake of feminism but why would you want to draw any type of attention to a 4YO girl? Whether it’s sexual or just plain ‘oh that’s weird’, because it’s clearly uncommon in a UK public swimming pool, why would you want that sort of attention for your child just to make a point?

Why would you expose your child like this? FWIW my boys also wear swimming tops or all in ones.

Most little girls I see in the pool wear a one piece costume. I very rarely see a little girl in a bikini.

I would find a bikini on a 4 year old strange but for a pool would probably expect a one piece swimsuit. But I see you got shorts and rash vest for holiday and then left the top off for pool and that actually makes perfect sense.

In fairness those zip up almost wet suits but made of swimsuit material kids suits are what all pre school kids round here wear, boys and girls

How would you feel if your child got into difficulty and required a male life guard to intervene would you have any issue with them touching her naked chest. Also perhaps it's protecting the staff from any accusations of inappropriate touching.

Same in Germany. Bikini bottoms are fine for a toddler/very young girl.

That's a fair point in the other direction, thinking about firefighters or mechanics etc struggling to find uniforms that fit as they've been traditionally designed for a male physique.

Don't like seeing young girls wandering around in just bottoms in a beach/swimming setting. Also dislike them with a bikini top on as that is totally inappropriate!

What a fine example of contradictory logic. And it only took two sentences.

You either see very young girls chests as having sexual characteristics, or you don't. You can't have it both ways

I remember reading a similar story with a young girl at the swimming pool. Strange common sense has gone out the window.

The member of staff was being ridiculous, and I agree with your comment it is ‘sexualizing’ a prepubescent child, there is no difference in body type at that age. I can see from many comments of here that most people haven’t questioned why small girls are in bikinis and I really think they should have a think about it as it is extremely odd.

Exactly, it's such an illogical mindset that saus that treating girls and boys differently in any way is "sexualising".

Girls and boys are different and have different societal expectations. Yes, some of them are shit, like girls being expected to help with chores more (nb not in our house). Some of them are harmless, like girls having long hair or wearing skirts or indeed one piece swimsuits.

None of those need to be sexualising.

Are you for real? If my female child was in difficulty, would I have a problem with a male lifeguard touching her chest?! Presumably to give chest compressions?! No, funnily enough, I would have no problem with the man saving the life of my child 🙄🙄🙄

This approach leads to a total nonsense, like the mum a few weeks ago, who was asked whether her 18 months old toddler is a girl (based on name or something like that) and than asked to cover the year and half old's chest!

Is there a real issue with girls with developing breast being topless in swimming pools that needs rules/intervention?
If it is just a precaution, setting the cut off age at something like eight or even six would make more sense than say "every female, no matter of age".

Having spent a significant amount of time wearing uniforms that were designed by men and were supposed to be unisex, the male trousers simply do not fit many women (the women have hips) and uniform shirts cut for men you often have to go up several sizes to accommodate boobs in which case you have loads of shirt left below the boobs which you then have to tuck in and which isn’t great.

i do think that men and women genuinely are significantly different shapes, and I don’t see how accepting that and asking for comfortable clothing that accepts that a woman is not shaped like a man is a bad thing.

I fucking rejoiced when they introduced women’s cut trousers in my uniform!

OP is not making a point. 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?

can you get skin cancer from an indoor pool?

As long as it would have been fine for you to send your son to ballet in pink leotard and tights, and your daughter in black shorts and a white t-shirt if they so chose, there is no problem here at all. The problem lies with the enforcing of those uniforms to conform to society’s stereotypical expectation of what boys and girls should wear.

The OP’s point is that pre-pubescent boys and girls have identical chests, therefore there should be no requirement for them to dress differently in the swimming pool. However, because society is still bound by old-fashioned notions of what’s “appropriate” for girls, the OP’s daughter has to cover up her non-existent nipples even though the boys don’t - it’s important to make sure she is aware from the start that her chest area is somehow shameful and immodest. What is that if not sexualisation? As we can see by the responses on this thread, these notions aren’t going anywhere very quickly!

Huh?

The age at which girls start puberty isn't fixed, therefore having a rule like "girls over 7 need tops covered" wouldn't work as some girls start puberty before 7. Therefore a swimming pool is perfectly reasonable to say "all girls need tops covered". On a beach, out and about etc if a parent decides their child doesn't need a top on, that's up to the parent (and the child). But a pool has rules which if you don't like, you don't have to go to.

I think it’s fine to be without a top at the beach but a suit in the leisure centre is appropriate much in the same way I’d expect to see topless sunbathing on the beach but not at the local Rec. Will you insist on a top at 5, 6, 7, 13? At what point do you flip the ‘inappropriate’ switch?

The attendant asked you to put your child in conventional clothing in order to follow policy (which is designed to suit the majority) in a public place.

Pretty reasonable policy and I think you should have followed it. If you wanted a debate about sexualisation of children take it up directly with Nuffield Health not the attendant.

This is some imagination you have. Am pretty sure any male life guard would be thanked if they were saving a young girls life and am pretty sure that a flat chested toddlers body wouldn't be first in their mind when trying to help a child in trouble in the water.

When we get to the stage that people who rescue others are then accused of inappropriate touching then society is doomed.

Because look at what it is prioritising …looks for girls, more restriction, less freedom for girls… less ability to run jump and climb in a dress at PRIMARY school.

The idea that physical jobs are not for girls, bold jobs are not for girls (communicated through their restrictive clothing) …looks must be prioritised for girls (and paid extra for) this road leads to less for girls and women by sexualising them. Women are treated less seriously because of all this unequal nonsense

Did you know that women are far more likely to die from a sudden heart attack than men are? And that that is because people are much more reluctant to do CPR on women because it means compressing their chests?

And no, if a lifeguard had to rescue my child who wasn't wearing a swimming top, I wouldn't care how they got them to safety.

It’s usual for boys of 8 and over to be required to change in the men’s section. Perhaps it would be equitable to use that age as the cut off point at which girls were required to cover up?