sexualisation of children vs slut shaming

[bikeandrun]

My DD is y6, having a great time with a fancy dress parades and final party. Being having lots of discussions with other mums and my mum about what the girls have been wearing. Finding my responses to this difficult
" cant believe mums let their daughters out of the house dressed like that" response to crop tops, mini skirts, lots of slap high heels etc

"girls don't understand the effect they have on men when they dress like that" this was aimed at a girl in dds year who has obviously gone through puberty and has a woman's body
Are just a few quotes I have heard
As a young single woman i used to enjoy dressing in an extreme and sexual way and felt empowered and confident.BUT

These girls are not sexual beings yet but is it slut shaming or just protective parenting to not want 11 year olds to dress like this.

I persuaded dd to wear converse rather than high heels mainly cos I know she wanted to jump around like a manic but I also really didn't like how she looked in those heels.
Help me find a feminist way through these feeling as I support my daughter as she grows into a woman

pearpotter yes there's an interesting and important point there I think that as fashions change clothes which were once shocking are now mainstream and don't attract any comment (generally - dickhead blokes aside who will comment whatever is going on!).

So actually pushing the boundaries frees women and girls up in terms of the attire, not the reverse. For instance, look at swimming costumes and tennis outfits in Victorian / earlier days. For women (and for men to a lesser extent with the swimwear) the clothing that they had to wear in order to meet prevailing ideas around modesty meant they were extremely uncomfortable, the garb was not fit for purpose. The fact that women can now wear clothes for tennis they can move in and swimwear they can swim in, is positive. Yes the press and some parts of society will sexualise some of the women doing this / the attire can be used in pictures that are meant to be sexually provocative. But given that all of those negatives will happen whatever women wear, the moral anxiety about an ankle showing or a bit of hair showing through a veil, that wouldn't stop. So we are left with positives, aren't we?

And again I would say, even the shorts linked earlier - I have seen some pics of pop stars in clothes that reference bondage. But still, if a 10 yo girl (or boy!) wears a pair of shorts like that to a disco, any sane, normal person will think "there is a child wearing a fashion item" and some will think "I'm not very keen on that look but hey kids will be kids and wearing stuff their parents don't approve of is as old as the hills" and anyone who genuinely thinks "aha that 10yo is indicating their desire to find a partner for some hardcore BDSM sex tonight" I would think there was something very seriously wrong with them.

I want normal decent people to stop pretending that female clothing is causing men to be lecherous and commit sexual assault

My eh is from a culture where men do wear 'skirts'. We live in an area where men wear 'skirts'

No one's seeing my knickers, I'm covered from top to toe in layers and layers of chintz

Of course then they might see one of the petticoats

Technological and I think every woman of course can make that call for herself.

It's when people make value judgements about other people based on their attire that the problems come. And when people make excuses for men who behave badly / illegally towards females by imbuing harmless pieces of clothing with the ability to inflame otherwise calm law-abiding men. And when they imagine that a young girl has the same thought processes as an adult woman who is looking for (male) sexual partners AND has chosen to dress in a certain way to reflect that. And let's face it, how many of these women even are there, apart from in popular male fantasy? Most women who go out in skimpy clothes on a Friday night do so because that is the "look" in their area, for their age group, on a Friday night. I would further hazard that you'd be hard pressed to find many women who put on clothes with the intent of signalling "I am up for street harassment, groping and sex with anyone who fancies a bit". I mean, again, this is a male fantasy, not reality.

You want to get that ankle covered there technological!

Did you slide even part-way down the fence on either side yet?

Got my italics in the wrong place there on post one from last. Never mind!

TBH the way women "invite" sexual partners is generally by looking at them in the eye, and smiling. And responding positively when they engage in conversation with them. Leaning in, touching their arm, that sort of thing. Some more forward women might even approach a man they like the look of if they've had a bit -of dutch courage--.

The clothes are irrelevant to this process also.

The more I think about it the more I think the whole converse argument is a load of flimsy bollocks.

I'm trying to think of a joke about flimsiness and bollocks now and can't

I was wolf-whistled at age 13 onwards wearing school uniform, clumpy shoes and a long coat. So, newsflash, people will behave inappropriately towards young girls and women whatever they wear.

There are, I think, two quite different types of basis for 'wolfish' behaviours, though they will project in the same way. One is an expression of dominance/power which only requires you be female and vulnerable/not worthy of respect and another which requires you to step outside of peer conventional dress code/behaviour.

Someone needs to tell me what is considered to be appropriate for my 13 year old

How short are her shorts allowed to be, top of thighs, mid thigh, knee length

What about t shirt? Sleeves to elbow, mid arm, sleeveless, spaghetti strap

That's a basic CHIlLDS summer wardrobe...suits boys and girls (though boys would probably wear a vest top no hold on...they may even be topless)

One of those all in one swimsuits on the beach? Not my boys obviously they can wear budgie smugglers (please no)

If I asked my daughter why did she think short skirts were sexually empowering she would be

Can anyone direct me to a floor length netball skirt?

A burka, Rufus, or a sack, otherwise men like DWH won't be able to stop themselves thinking sexual thoughts about them, apparently.

Might be best to keep them inside at all times. In the dark. So they don't get called sluts at the age of 5.

Like this then baking?

"TBH the way women "invite" sexual partners is generally by looking at them in the eye, and smiling. And responding positively when they engage in conversation with them. Leaning in, touching their arm, that sort of thing. Some more forward women might even approach a man they like the look of if they've had a bit -of-- dutch courage.

The clothes are irrelevant to this process also."

Clothes can make someone look more or less physically attractive, by enhancing or muting certain things. The level of one's physically attractive appearance can can help in such matters as increasing people's interest.

tech have you considered Islam as your spiritual home? Flesh of girls and women suitably covered and men in frocks...win win

You're sliding back to the vitriol again I see. I am not, now or ever, trying to make excuses for men. I would like to see our culture become less gender-stereotyped, less sexualised and less driven by the pursuit of power and domination, more equal in all matters. I don't see how promoting impractical clothing emphasising gender divides (what's wrong with netball shorts?), designed specifically for sexual appeal, or copying those styles in youngsters, will help in that aim. Anyway I have more things to think about, thank you (I think: I'm tired now).

Ignoring the obvious goads, have you considered, marmalade, that since you live in a different culture it might be a different culture, with different values and rationales, requiring different solutions? Or are you thinking of this one?

'This one', I should add, being Britain, since I am british and in Britain. It was just a thought.

I wasn't intending to be toady or mean. I thought I was being funny

I do live in Britain. The area I live has a very high Muslim population and a lot of men in frocks, albeit not short ones

The culture dh is from, the men are as likely to have short as long skirts depending on activity. Women always long skirts

Then I'm sorry for being so touchy.

Islam... another religion/ culture with a whole boatload of meanings around dress. I don't think you are ever going to simply strip cultural meaning out of dress entirely, we are a cultural species which looks for meaning and social cues in everything. The question would then become what values do you want to promote, and how.

Answers on postcards please, so my brain doesn't explode.

""TBH the way women "invite" sexual partners is generally by looking at them in the eye, and smiling. And responding positively when they engage in conversation with them. Leaning in, touching their arm, that sort of thing. Some more forward women might even approach a man they like the look of if they've had a bit -of-- dutch courage.

The clothes are irrelevant to this process also."

Clothes can make someone look more or less physically attractive, by enhancing or muting certain things. The level of one's physically attractive appearance can can help in such matters as increasing people's interest."

In the context of what I said, your response only makes sense if it means that the man should be wearing something that shows off his physical attributes, if he wants to maximise his chances of receiving interest from a woman.

Note the interest here is a look and a smile. An attempt to engage them in conversation might be appropriate in some circumstances, not usually on the street, except when the approaching party is pretty damn sure of mutual interest.

The interest being talked about on this thread is whistling, shouting, groping, following, wanking at, and so on and so forth. Towards children.

So in summary. What normal people do to be normal, ie trying to chat up an adult who looks interested (or at least not disinterested) in an appropriate setting, and leaving them alone if they ask you to = fine, really.

Following a 10yo down the street telling her you want a blow job, and not going away when she looks worried and distressed, and then when anyone asks saying "I thought she was older than that mate she's well tall and look at her legs" = not fine.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many men (and it is invariably men) claim to have zero ability to gauge the age of other people to the extent of not being able to differentiate between a 10 yo and a 25 yo, and zero ability to read quite standard human cues which mean you're making me uncomfortable, go away. And are yet strangely more than able to function in all other fields of human contact, in the workplace for example.

It's interesting isn't it. Almost as if they have a "blind spot" when it comes to interacting with females they want to fuck. Suddenly they can't be expected to understand quite normal standard things because they are blinded by a short skirt (or a medium skirt, or some long hair, or some big breasts, & so on). Even more interestingly, many of these men feel moved to interact with females that they don't want to fuck as well. And insult them. And even weirder, when a female from the first group has the courage to tell them to fuck off, they swiftly move her from group A to group B, seamlessly, and realise that they "don't think she's all that anyway". Funny, isn't it.

WhirlpoolGalaxyM51
"TBH the way women "invite" sexual partners is generally by looking at them in the eye, and smiling. And responding positively when they engage in conversation with them. Leaning in, touching their arm, that sort of thing. Some more forward women might even approach a man they like the look of if they've had a bit -of-- dutch courage.

The clothes are irrelevant to this process also."

In the first case where it is the man who approaches the woman, the clothes she is wearing may have had a hand in this, making him notice or find her more appealing in some way. Not always but sometimes.

Of course this does not mean that the woman (or man) choosing what to wear or how to alter about their appearance when going clubbing say, necessarily has the motive of attracting others to them, or "inviting" attention. Surely some do though, and then it is part of the "process".

tech but the reasons being cited on this thread, for girls not wearing short skirts etc are the exact reasons for the burqa

I wonder if in some part these problems stem from where certain clothing has become fetishised (is this the word) in porn/adult entertainment?

Though this is no excuse for mens behavior and they should just not be pervs.

But is the only answer to the burqa to promote clothing that copies adult's sexually revealing clothing, and then to say well we just don't want those reasons to be read in? When you have tshirts with 'little tease' and 'sex kitten' on them?

I'd rather promote gender neutral clothing that emphasises practicality for weather and playtime.

I know this is kind of indirect to the discussion and it's one of the bees in my bonnet ... but, when I hear somebody using sexualised language about a child or her clothing, I tend to think that person may have been sexually abused as a child. The majority (not all by any means) of abusers persuade themselves and each other that their child victims are willing participants. Wilfully misreading 'signals' and using inappropriate language are part of the self-justification package. An abused child, who's been told she was inviting the abuse, will often internalise that message even if she later realises she was being used.

Rather than trying to stamp out certain kinds of clothing, I'd like to see the whole "asking for it" lexicon stamped out. A child in PVC shorts is just a child in an item of clothing. The language is the thing that changes the meaning.

I think t-shirts like that are very different to a short skirt, or a belly top. And they are very wrong; they have a sexual message, written on them