Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

for being angry with school for describing DD's trousers as 'sexy'?

165 replies

EccentricaGallumbits · 21/09/2009 15:22

They have a very strict new uniform policy.
Policy states classic black trousers. No loose weave or casual trousers.

DD is wearing black trousers (admittedly from new look but they do long lngth ones)

she is tall and very skinny. To get trousers to fit her they are narrow - because she is.

Girls pulled out of lessons and their trousers jiggled to see if they are lose enough

a selection of girls told their trousers are not suitable because they are 'sexy'

My daughter is 11.

I do not appreciate anyone describing her or her clothes as sexy.

I am cross.

OP posts:
dogonpoints · 21/09/2009 15:46

anything from new look ain't gonna be 'classic'

TAFKAtheUrbanDryad · 21/09/2009 15:47

Ah.

Still gonna HE my 2 though. I hate school uniform with a violent passion, loada crap if you ask me, especially ties - talk about H&S hazard!

YANBU, by the way. There's no way an 11 year old should be described as "sexy", tis wrong wrong wrong IMO.

GetOrfMoiLand · 21/09/2009 15:48

Not necessarily - DD got her trews from NL this year, they are loose fitting, not tight at all.

dogonpoints · 21/09/2009 15:49

are they hipsters, though?

posieparker · 21/09/2009 15:51

What are the point of near skin tight trousers aside from being figure hugging and sexy. At eleven buying her school trousers from new look I wonder what look you were trying to achieve?

posieparker · 21/09/2009 15:52

THe trousers were described not the child.

Original poster
EccentricaGallumbits · 21/09/2009 15:52

not hipsters nor particularly tight even. just normal black school trousers.

OP posts:
GetOrfMoiLand · 21/09/2009 15:53

Any trousers on dd would look like hipsters to be honest, she is 6 foot and very long waisted. But to answer your question, no, not particularly.

Posie - New Look has a young range for 9-13 year olds, I am sure tha Eccentrica wasn't buying adult fashions. And not all trousers sold there are spray on style.

TAFKAtheUrbanDryad · 21/09/2009 15:53

posie - the OP is quite clear on this; the dd is very skinny and has little to no hips or bum, so getting trousers to fit is difficult. Hence, the trousers which fitted were a little bit tight, otherwise they would have fallen down.

That's how I read it, anyway.

FWIW, I buy a lot of my work clothes from NL (have to be smart/office style) and I wouldn't describe it as sexy. Smart, and practical, and reasonably priced, yes. Sexy, no.

posieparker · 21/09/2009 15:54

Tammy Girl sold padded bras and g-strings. Cheap high street fashion for young girls is pretty vile and too old in the main.

posieparker · 21/09/2009 15:55

Has the OP heard of a belt? Sorry, I'm with the school.

dogonpoints · 21/09/2009 15:55

my dd's trousers are from new look, I am aware of their styles. If dd's school had a very strict policy and stated 'classic' black trousers, I wouldn't buy them from NL. But that is why I think the school needs to be much much clearer about what is acceptable and I would want the school to suggest the best places to buy such trousers too.

I am very very glad the dds' schools have no such policies.

GetOrfMoiLand · 21/09/2009 15:55

Yes, but we are not talking about underwear, are we, just plain old non-fitted black school trousers. >sigh>

hullygully · 21/09/2009 15:56

It's taking it a bit far to belt her daughter over this, surely? Perhaps a light slap.

booyhoo · 21/09/2009 15:56

OP has already stated that because of her dd's height and small frame, that NL was the only place she could get trousers to fit. she was trying to achieve what the school has requested. she did not purposely pick trousers that would make her 11 year old look 'sexy'.

dogonpoints · 21/09/2009 15:56

posie, p;osie, posie. You are verging on ridiculous now

Original poster
EccentricaGallumbits · 21/09/2009 15:56

Ahem.

The trousers from New Look come in long length.

They are not figure hugging. She is 11. tall and skinny and has no 'figure'

They are school trousers.

The bloody school are being picky because they have a new policy whuich I have just reread.

I believe there are a number of alternative threads where people object to the use of the word sexy for their baby and toddler.I object to the use of the word sexy to describe my 11 year old child.

OP posts:
campion · 21/09/2009 15:57

It'd be better if the school had a couple of styles from a named supplier. Saves a lot of hassle.
Tight trousers can split in no time at school - often because they weren't designed as school wear.

Original poster
EccentricaGallumbits · 21/09/2009 15:58

Hully I prefer the use of a big stick.

Yes she also wears a belt because her hip bones jut out at the same level as her non existant waist. perhaps braces? although there isn't a mention of them in the policy.

OP posts:
DillyTantay · 21/09/2009 15:59

i can tell you girls go to school wiht SUCH tight stuff on.

one place near us has banned skirts on girls

hullygully · 21/09/2009 15:59

A burkha?

DillyTantay · 21/09/2009 15:59

get over the word and buy some non tight trousers

Tidey · 21/09/2009 15:59

Sorry EG, I know you're angry and I don't blame you, but LOL at hullygully

MovingOutOfBlighty · 21/09/2009 15:59

Agree with posie on the word Sexy. Its the trousers, not the child. Perhaps the word inappropriate would be better.

GetOrfMoiLand · 21/09/2009 15:59

It would help if people read the OP who has stated severla times that the trousers are not 'tight' on her daughter, only narrow fitted out of necessity.

Lol at belt