Thoughts on 'modesty' shorts please

[getoffthesofa]

A few girls at my DD2's primary school seem to be wearing these She has asked if she can have some too as she really likes to wear her school summer dresses and is also quite active, running and climbing and leaping and cartwheels etc (also I suspect there may be some karate style kicks going on!).

I strongly object to schools (or anyone) suggesting, or insisting that girls wear these shorts under their dresses, as I do not believe that the knickers of small girls should be funny/sexy/rude/offensive etc (it is essentially victim blaming and the conversation always seems to revert to the excuse that men and boys are able to help themselves being aroused). But she has asked, and if it makes her feel more confident, able to move around as freely and vigorously as she likes, then that can't be a bad thing? My DD1 (yr 8) has also requested them - she wears her skirts short as many of the girls do and now we are out of the tights season I think she too feels exposed (she wears black shortie-knickers anyway).

Yes I know she could just wear, culottes, trousers or shorts, but she refuses too. She loves her summer dresses and I think they are comfortable (the modesty shorts seem rather to defeat the point of feeling cool and breezy round your legs, but there we are)

I hate that they are called "modesty" shorts - what decade are we living in? I hate that small girls can't just dress as they like without feeling looked at and sexualised (though they may not it express it that way). I hate that there is a product cashing on this and I hate that the intention is that girls should cover up instead of men wearing these bloody things on their heads if they can't manage not to objectify or be "offended". And I hate that there is never a suggestion that in a gender neutral uniform boys could wear the dresses too and then everybody's pants would be waving around. But also I want my girls to feel safe and happy.

Do I buy them or do I help my girls blaze a trail for short-free pant freedom? (also do these things go over your usual knickers or do they replace your knickers??)

But, if and when boys wear skirts then to be honest the same thing applies, I wouldn't fancy seeing men's pants flashed up from under a kilt! Most men's 'skirts' or 'dresses' are not so flimsy and tend to be longer (think cassock and sarong).

I don't think it does. I've never heard of any men being considered "immodest" if their underwear is visible under a kilt at any point. Also there's long been a fashion amongst some men and boys originating in America of wearing jeans/trousers low enough to display underwear, this isn't considered amusing and neither of these are sexualised as it is for women and girls - if underwear is visible under clothing or "flashed" it'd be laughed at by many onlookers, not to mention the regularity of "upskirt" images of women and girls being taken by on public transport, escalators and even reported at schools.

I'd prefer it if summer uniforms were just shorts, tbh. Obviously a trouser option as well for colder days like today, and for those with cultural requirements, or children with scars or prosthetic limbs (for example) who aren't comfortable enough to show them to the world yet.

Unfortunately there are many schools which still insist on trousers for boys and skirts for girls all year round.

NoLoveofMine sorry I replied badly, I know what you are saying is true. But for me personalyl I don;t want to see men's underpants either. I saw a bloke the other day and his trousers were almost falling down to reveal his pants.

You are right that generally men's underwear is very much viewed differently. But I guess I feel it shouldn't be and for me it isn't.

I am very sorry that schools still stick to trousers or skirts for one sex, just let them both wear either!

I'm not particularly keen to see anyone's underwear either, but as you pointed out there it's viewed differently. A glimpse of a woman's (or girl's) can be sexualised and deemed immodest, laughed at, whereas men and boys could go around with it intentionally on show and few bat an eyelid let alone make such comments on them. All part, in my opinion, of the general sexualisation and objectification of women and girls.

I concur on uniform; it's ridiculous they're still rigidly enforced depending on sex by many schools.

I have just seen the shorts, is anyone not worried about their Dd getting thrush because it will be worn in the summer on top of nickers, even without knickers they look very hot?

My sisters (11 and 12) wear shorts like that but the tight cycling type ones under their school skirt/dresses! I think it's completely up to them.

Yes, young girls' underwear shouldn't be sexualised, however there are disgusting people out there who do sexualise it.

I do think we should listen to our kids too, even if we do not agree with their choices. I don't mean tattoos and piercings, just clothing! My dd hardly ever ever wears dresses or skirts, her choice.

Dd has yet to complain they are too hot but tbh she's so used to wearing them now....

As I said she wears them under jeans too. And she sleeps in them

She just likes clothing to be tight/fitted and hates the feeling of flappy clothes and shed wear then under uniform trousers too as the waist would be uncomfortable for her so she wears skirts as they are more comfy and then has the shorts.

She's just like me tbh I hate baggy tops you will find me in a vest all yr round and although I wear boyfriend jeans they have to be tight enough around the arse or they just aren't comfy for me.

And if i wear a skirt I have leggings or bikini bottoms which helps stop my thighs rubbing too

All the girls in my DD's school wear them. DD had them yr 1 onwards.

Not so that the boys don't look! But so that she can swing around like a monkey without her labia falling out of her pants!! Her and her friends tend to be performing some major acrobatic moves in the playground!

I'd be exactly the same for my DS if he was wearing a skirt. If he wears briefs his scrotum soon falls out.

They are called netball knickers in Australia.
My girls have always worn them beacause they are skinny and undies sometimes can be a bit loose.
No one gives a care if girls wear them or not unless they are wearing nothing but the netball knickers as happens in the night of summer.
Calling them modesty pants is a bit odd though.

the name is just poor.

When I started primary school over 30 years ago we had to wear those big PE knickers under our uniform. Probably for the same reason I'd imagine!

I've been doing a bit of googling and M&S are the only ones using that godawful name for them. I have a recollection that they weren't the only ones using that description a year or two ago when I first read about the phenomenon so that's progress if my memory is correct.

I'm going to email Marks this afternoon to protest the name.

Oh and I came across this whole googling;

www.undieshorts.com

Not UK, but it demonstrates that all that is really needed is good sturdy underwear, not flimsy cheap cotton and an extra garment on top. Also "underwear shorts" works perfectly well as a name. I think I'll borrow that as a suggestion to put to M&S.

Performance pants or performance shorts as a previous poster mentioned is a good name.

The word performance has positive connotations.

Those Undieshorts look like they have seams right where you wouldn't want a seam, though.

Plus they do actually describe them as Modesty shorts in their writeup. Still some way to go, I think.

Its a ridiculous name for them, but I have to say they look exactly like the sort of pants we used to wear when I was in primary school many many years back.

In fact, in my first primary school you wore pants in uniform colours - bottle green IIRC - and then did PE in your vest and knicks. (I only remember this because of one mortifying day when aged maybe 5 or 6 I had forgotten to put my pants on and only realised when it came to PE time )

I bought similar from Debenhams online and they were called dance shorts. After thinking about it, I realised that I was not going to win this particular battle with the after school club, and dd1 does a LOT of handstands and cartwheels.
While I agree that 6-9 yo (my dds' ages) underwear should not be sexualised, I don't think that was the club's intention - more just a level of discomfort at seeing their knickers, and seeing them a lot.
They should not be called "modesty shorts"; something more active (dance, sport) would be much better.

nothing wrong with "sports shorts" for a name...

If they just look like substantial pants, why can't they just wear substantial pants?

I am baffled at the need for two layers.

I would like to make a stand for the skirt. I absolutely always wear skirts and when I was at school would have hated having to wear trousers. Trousers only fit me comfortably when I am borderline underweight.

Skirts / dresses with substantial cotton pants are perfectly practical for everything that children want to do, and are cooler in the summer than trousers and shorts. School uniform trousers tend to be poly and especially in the summer can cause crotch-rot (technical term). If boys envy the freedom and want to wear nice cotton dresses too, let them.

If the "substantial cotton pants" have to be sold separately from skimpy "normal" pants then that's pathetic but.... at least they exist.

i doubt anyone would care if there was nothing under these. It's more that i wouldn't want to have to have a new clean pair for the dc every day as they are more expensive than knickers...
Same as wearing opaque tights over underwear, leggings, shorts or jeans - most of us prefer 2 layers even if our friends and colleagues wouldn't know the difference.

It's the "normal" pants that are the problem. There is a creeping trend in female clothing for everything to be less substantial and reveal more of the body. When I was 8, female Blue Peter presenters (for instance) wore things that anyone could wear. Now they wear things that you have to be worked out to look good in. It is very hard to buy "normal" clothes that don't enable everyone to know an awful lot about your body. Why is this? I hate it. I don't blame Nigella for saying "fuck it" and buying herself a burkini that one year.

And like there's something wrong with you if you don't want to play.

My dd wears boys shorts or trousers or small cycling shorts under her skirt or dress. I used to think it was ridiculous but when I thought about it I concluded it was my responsibility to teach her that's it's not acceptable to show your underwear in public and if she wants to do gymnastics at playtime she should wear them!