Girls wearing shorts under school dresses

[eandemum]

When DD (5) started wearing her summer school uniform (the usual- checked summer dress) I got her shorts to wear. Not Bobby Charlton style really baggy ones, more like black cycling shorts in T-shirt material - we call them "modesty shorts"!!

Anyway, DD comes home on Thursday with a note re: this (all got this note not just her) - saying such shorts were not part of the uniform and shouldn't be worn (leggings were ok in certain cases).

She doesn't wear them for religious reasons - just 'preserving her dignity' - we have practised sitting in a ladylike fashion but I know this goes out the window once she is in school.

I wrote back suggesting a compromise; white shorts that don't come below the hemline (her black shorts would be at the hemline) so can't be seen.

What do you think?

[LawrieMarlow]

Haven't noticed hazardous dresses when climbing either - if they get caught up in things I don't see how wearing shorts underneath would help tbh.

[post]

dd wears boden's lovely big solid knickers under summer dresses, proper old-fashioned undercrackers; I don't like the flimsy ones that seem to be standard everywhere else, but these are fantastically reliable

[mrz]

bluebobbin I once taught a small golden haired cherub who frequently had her hands down her leggings and went red in the face until the sweat stood on her forehead ...I think you might have minded

[mrz]

post some of our very young children are wearing thongs undermodesty shorts under skirts!

[RatherBeOnThePiste]

My DD couldn't have cared less about anyone seeing her knickers, until the boys started making crude and suggestive comments, and they were only in Year 6. That's when she wanted cycling shorts!

[TrinityIsAShreddingFatRhino]

dd2 wears leggings under her skirt or dress at the mooment becasue its too cold for just the skirt or shorts and she has no trousers and we may not have tights clean

I would go in and say she is in uniform end of

an added pair f black shorts is silly to be getting told off about

as long as your colours are somehting and black

having said that dd2 wears all sorte of coloured legginsm the same as all sorts of coloured tights (when they are clean)

[Portofino]

We are talking little kids here though. I am a bit confuddled as to why this is even an issue. It never used to be. There is all this talk of not prematurely "sexualising" our children in terms of inappropriate clothing, but now everyone seems to be paranoid about them wearing totally normal clothing too. Pants is pants. Who cares if other children the same age see them?

[Dilligaf81]

My DD will be going up to juniors in September and they insist that if you wear a skirt you must wear cycling shorts.
I think this gives the wrong impression, fine if people chose to wear them but insisting.
FGS its like the threads about being suspious of old men near parks who clearly dont have kids with them Why cant they just be kids anymore.

[TrinityIsAShreddingFatRhino]

but the op has stated very early on that it is about GAPING not seeing her pants

[piprabbit]

My DD had some pants that tended to gape... so I bought her better fitting pants. Problem was solved.

[TrinityIsAShreddingFatRhino]

I'm with piprabbit

the girls all own some pants that aren't overly good fitting but tons that do fit well

[mrz]

Actually I can understand it in Y6 because some girls are starting to develop I can't understand it when children are 5 years old good pants should be enough and cheaper than modesty shorts

[SoupDragon]

FFS, DD is 5 and it never crossed my mind to make her wear shorts under her school dress.

Madness. Utter madness.

[FionaJT]

My dd wore calf-length cotton leggings (in the colour of her dress) under her dresses last summer, as she has always had excema on the backs of her knees, and it frequently flared up when hot bare legs were rubbing on chairs. The school weren't terribly keen, but let it go, although the TA made lots of comments about how hot she must be getting. I would've prefered her to wear cotton trousers but she was desperate to be in a dress like the other girls.
This year her skin is much better and she is so pleased to just wear a dress. If modesty/practicality was an issue I would tell her to put on trousers, as I do when she's going to the playpark etc.

[mynameisplonker]

My eldest (y6) wears her PE shorts under her school skirt.

She's always doing handstands and cartwheels on the playground but is very aware that the boys can see her knickers (and yes they do look), so wears shorts. Her choice. Very sensible I think.

The school have no problem with this ...I really can't see why they would

My second (y3) also does handstands and cartwheels but couldn't give a monkeys about whether the boys see her knickers (and neither could they, which I think is the key!) so doesn't wear shorts. Again, her choice.

It seems such a non-issue to me as to whether a little girl wears shorts under her dress ...particularly if they can't be seen.

[sarahfreck]

"I was considering getting MIL to run up some loose shorts in matching gingham"

Gosh - don't some things come round in full circle - that's the sort of thing my grandmother would have made for me in the 1970s but would have been thought of as old fashioned then!

[fairydoll]

I really don't think it is any of a schools business what a girl wears under her dress.

'Pants aren't something "dirty" - they're pants.' My 5 yos pants are often skiddy or a bit wee stained.If she is cartwheeling or hanging upside down on the bars i think it is better she wears shorts than display grubby underwear

[mummy68]

To be honest it really is no-one's business what is worn under a skirt or dress unless it is visible below the hemline of the dress or girls are purposely lifting the skirts/sprawling legs to show the shorts. I recently saw a girl in a blue gingham dress with blue shorts that were exactly the same length and could be seen with any movement. Otherwise who cares. My youngest DD at 9 is a bit funny about this as well, but it is her business. We (adults) don't comment on knickers under a skirt as that would be inappropriate so why shorts?

As a side note I agree about showing knickers. They are to cover a girl's private bits after all so why is an extra layer needed?

[Oakmaiden]

Tell the school they are not shorts, they are big knickers.

[seeker]

Modesty shorts - WTF????

You do relaize that next year they'll be wearing longer shorts to cover the short shorts that they wore to cover their knickers which they wore to cover their bottoms.If an older gorl wants to wear shorts une her skirt then that's her choice. But I can't begin to imagine the mind set that puts shorts over the pants under the skirt of a 5 year old.

[jabed]

I am a man so I really should not comment - forgive me ladies. However even in the prep where I work the school uniform does not extend to under wear.
I know our Head of Prep did ban thongs and those crop top things for girls on modesty (or lack of) grounds.

I think in todays society where there is so much more secual awareness at much younger ages, wearing shorts under a summer frock is a good idea. Have you asked the school why they object?

[kreecherlivesupstairs]

Modesty shorts? peculiar choice of name. I second the H+M knicker suggestion. DD wears them and she is very thin. No gaping or banjo flashing in her knicker area.
I may change my tune, her new school has a uniform and they are a bit strict about dresses etc. OTOH, she isn't bothered who sees her girl pants.

[seeker]

I just find the whole thing seriously worrying.

"Modesty" in my experience is a word only ever used by people who want to curtail the freedom of women and girls to do and wear whatever they want.

[singersgirl]

What an extraordinary idea. We are making little girls into sexual objects by trying to hide their pants. There is no 'modesty' issue; they are little girls and so what if their pants are occasionally visble when they're on the carpet? They don't sit on the carpet by the time they're in Y6.

I realise that the argument "We did it" is no argument against progress, but I really don't think hiding our daughters' bodies is progress; it seems to be a regressive and repressive step. It's the start of the argument that takes us to full body coverage (because, you know, girls shouldn't show their legs or their arms....)

A separate issue is whether they should also be allowed to wear shorts and a polo shirt in the summer rather than a dress, which is sensible, particularly if they prefer to wear trousers in the colder weather.

[singersgirl]

Posted at the same time as Seeker with the same observation.