Modesty shorts recommended for 4 year olds.....

[Mumdiva99]

I know these exist. I get it. And if a girl chooses them - then her choice. But recommending them? How have we got to this point....

(Apologies if this isn't the right board for this.)

metro.co.uk/2021/06/07/school-introduces-modesty-shorts-under-skirts-for-four-year-olds-14729680/?ito=facebook%7Csocial%7Cmetroukfacebook&fbclid=IwAR28Scyyvkd8FGKXAirwgyCZLZr8sUcwYfxWAqcxVyzMQnOex2BqAc0uGUY

Absolutely the right board for this.

We got to this because everything is always the fault of the female. Got unfairly dismissed from work, your fault for having a baby / potentially having a baby. Got raped, your fault for being dressed a certain way/acting a certain way/walking home at night. Adult men staring at you while you're doing handstands at four years old? Your fault for not being more covered up.

The thing that gets me is that it will mostly it's mothers buying these. What Mum thinks her little girl needs to be more modest at 4, 5....10 etc If our school 'suggested' these to me they would get a letter of complaint.....

Wouldn’t it be easier if girls were allowed to wear trousers, ordinary shorts (or skorts even) as part of their uniform? I can’t understand why schools still mandate dresses and skirts for girls. I had to wear skirts all through primary and secondary school and I hated them.

The idea of making four year olds wear modesty clothes doesn’t sit well with me - yes, adults have to protect children from inappropriate behaviour but I don’t think making girls responsible for maintaining modesty is fair - why not take boys or adults who see girls as immodest, or as sexualised, to task rather than placing all the blame on the girls?

Why is it that things are going backwards so much?
Ironically in this world of non-binaryness and a-genderness girls are increasingly singled out and objectified.
At 4? FFS.

My three year old refuses to wear dresses in case people see her private parts, I don't wear skirts or dresses either really, they're just impractical. We tell our children this is a private area and then put 50% of them in clothing that limits what they do, maybe we should just overhaul uniform rules!

"Wouldn’t it be easier if girls were allowed to wear trousers, ordinary shorts (or skorts even) as part of their uniform? I can’t understand why schools still mandate dresses and skirts for girls."

The schools my kids go to don't segregate uniform by sex. Nor does the school I govern at. Trousers and/or shorts are allowed by all or none.

My DC's school (primary) does allow girls to wear shorts and trousers if they like. By by DD (8) likes wearing summer dresses, it's her choice. She asked for school trousers when I was buying her uniform for September but she really likes the summer dresses. I go with what she likes.

I do buy her cotton cycle type shorts to wear underneath it (and nor do I think young children should have to wear them for 'modesty'). It does make wearing a dress more practical and comfortable for a child to be running around and playing. I wear dresses a lot because I find them more comfortable, especially when it's warm in summer. I'd definitely find soft cotton cycle shorts with an elasticated waist more comfy and practical to wear with a dress than shorts/trousers with a more uncomfortable waistband and a top that the teacher tells you to tuck in all the time, so I actually think DD is probably more comfortable than her brother.

It should never be a thing that any school is 'advising' but I think they can be quite useful.

It does make wearing a dress more practical and comfortable for a child to be running around and playing
How does adding another item of clothing make it more comfortable? And practical - who cares if someone sees her knickers when she’s a child? How is it different to a bathing suit?
I also wear dresses a lot and it wouldn’t occur to me to wear shorts with them, just as I don’t wear shorts with my swimsuit. I just really really don’t get it.

My DD is 9 and has almost exclusively worn dresses and skirts since she was old enough to choose. She is also a competitive (obsessed) gymnast so spends a good portion of the day upside down doing somersaults, back handsprings etc. It was her choice at about 5 years old to wear shorts underneath her outfits so no one would see her knickers, and she still does to this day. She now says it feels weird if she doesn't wear shorts. I guess I wouldn't have though twice about 'modesty' pants had it not been for her tendency to upside down constantly.

Adult men staring at you while you're doing handstands at four years old? Your fault for not being more covered up.

At school?? What are you saying about male members of staff here? I can imagine these still being a thing in an all girls school with all female staff. Girls want to wear skirts and dresses and at the same time want to keep their underwear private when they are climbing, rolling around on the floor and doing handstands as children do. I’m sure dresses used to be quite restrictive for young girls when it came to playing. Wearing shorts changes that.
Let’s be honest it’s the word ‘modesty pants’ (what a stupid things to call them) not wearing them that’s the problem. Boycott the word and continue to call them shorts.

I also wear dresses a lot and it wouldn’t occur to me to wear shorts with them

Do you do handstands and cartwheels during your lunch break at work??

@FudgeSundae

It does make wearing a dress more practical and comfortable for a child to be running around and playing How does adding another item of clothing make it more comfortable? And practical - who cares if someone sees her knickers when she’s a child? How is it different to a bathing suit? I also wear dresses a lot and it wouldn’t occur to me to wear shorts with them, just as I don’t wear shorts with my swimsuit. I just really really don’t get it.

Because she doesn't want other people seeing her knickers @FudgeSundae, my DD is 8 and not 4. She didn't give a toss when she was 4 but now she does. And I respect how she feels.

They are thin cotton cycle shorts with an elasticated waistband, basically just like a really big pair of knickers themselves. She could even just wear them as knickers if she wanted to, although wouldn't be so comfortable without a gusset.

She likes to wear the summer dresses, doesn't want people seeing her pants. It works for her. Anyone else should do as they please.

I would personally find a thin cotton summer dress far more comfy with basically what is a really big pair of knickers far more comfy than anything with a more rigid waistband and fastening but that is me.

Part of the issue is that girls underwear isn't the same as when I was at school. We wore big navy pants (and did pe in them) that covered everything properly. Unlike flimsy white cotton. That said my DD's never wore shorts under dresses, they didn't care

@Pinkblueberry

I also wear dresses a lot and it wouldn’t occur to me to wear shorts with them

Do you do handstands and cartwheels during your lunch break at work??

No but according to some people on here not wearing shorts under a dress is scandalous! Don’t ask me why 🤷🏼‍♀️

@FudgeSundae who on this thread has suggested that it would be scandalous for girls to not wear shorts under their dress?

I said my DD who is 8 wants to wear them- if she didn't that would be just fine.

Shorts aren't on the list for my DD. I have sent her in gingham cullotes or shorts. No one says a thing. She wears trousers in winter. Her choice, she has the option.

To add. She wears shorts on their own, not with a dress.

From what I remember, both girls and boys hated showing their underwear from a pretty young age. I think this puts boys and girls on an equal footing. Personally I think shorts and trousers for both sexes are best for school uniform, but I understand the gingham dresses are still very popular, so shorts are a good compromise. I agree they shouldn't be called modesty shorts though, that just sounds cringy.

I have 4 girls. None of them have ever bothered about showing boys or anyone else at school their knickers. It's just not on their radar and nor should it be. And yes, they all knew about their private parts being private. And to the PP, shorts do not make wearing a dress either more practical or more comfortable. Completely the opposite in fact.

By year 4, then they start to get more conscious but my 9 year old is still wearing summer dresses.

I dunno how I feel about all this. I mean, I definitely hate the word 'modesty' anything and I don't think children should be forced to wear them nor do I think schools should be encouraging them. Having said that, I always wear little cycling shorts under short-ish skirts as I feel super uncomfortable with the idea of anyone seeing my underwear. I feel this is much more practical for me personally as I don't need to worry about it then and I'm free to move and sit how I please which is particularly important since I have a toddler to run about after now. I've always done this anyway though and will likely encourage my DD to do the same once she's a bit older (she's not even 3 yet). Having said that I already generally encourage/dress her in trousers and shorts rather than skirts and dresses anyway, feel they are generally more practical. E.g. I wouldn't wear a dress or a skirt or consider that practical clothing if I was doing something like climbing or gymnastics or riding a bike whatever so likewise I don't consider skirts or dresses appropriate clothing for her when she's going to the park or to toddler gymnastics and whatnot. Also at this age I have to consider ease for her to toilet independently too so she doesn't ever wear jumpsuits or dungarees and very rarely wears tights as she can't manage any of that independently when it comes to toileting. Obviously that won't be an issue for older children though of course.

*And to the PP, shorts do not make wearing a dress either more practical or more comfortable. Completely the opposite in fact.

By year 4, then they start to get more conscious but my 9 year old is still wearing summer dresses.*

In your opinion. I'd probably find the shorts my DD wears more comfortable than knickers alone as might help keep them in place and stop them going up my arse all day. I find dresses far more comfortable than anything with a rigid waistband so definitely more comfy for me.

My DD is 8 and I've noticed her becoming more conscious recently and I respect her feelings.

My DD is tall and narrow hipped enough that even with adjustable waist anything other than a dress is a bunched up uncomfortable mess (or just falls down)... Near enough six but comfortably fits age 3-4 shorts and has worn age 2-3 in a pinch. Needs age 6 (or probably 6-7) in length though ...

Not that unusual in build, so having a way not to show pants isn't a bad thing.

I can't wear a dress without shorts, leggings or tights because I'm very prone to chafing, even when slim...

I hate the term "modesty" being imposed on tiny children, but I don't particularly have an issue with this. I'd hate it more if it were easier to find knickers for little girls that actually cover them properly. The gussets are so skimpy it's ridiculous.

My three are home educated, so school uniform of any kind isn't a personal issue. If they're wearing dresses or skirts when we go to a park or somewhere to play I encourage them to wear shorts or leggings underneath solely because slides are woodchip are so damned uncomfortable.

Schools should allow girls to wear shorts instead of skirts if they wish.

I hate the term "modesty" imposed on them (I do kind of like the Gap one of "cartwheel shorts" thought) - and my kids' school lets the girls and boys wear shorts if they want to, but the girls all seem to choose to wear gingham dresses and wanting to fit in can be a huge thing at that age.

I wish supermarkets would sell gingham short/skort and tops so the fitting in factor was taken care of, but the shorts option was there without the faff of trying to get to the toilet wearing a playsuit.