"Parents accuse schools of body-shaming as girls are told to wear shorts under skirts"

I’d be very sad if this was ever enforced for primary children. Yesterday I watched my Gdd (6) performing all sorts of contortions on playground equipment, inc. ‘monkey bars’ in just her blue gingham school summer dress with ordinary pants underneath.
She was not in the least concerned about showing her knickers and IMO nor should she be, at that age.

There is more than enough sexualisation of children already.
Padded bikini tops for 9 year olds! I swear I saw something about those the other day.

image.uniqlo.com/UQ/ST3/WesternCommon/imagesgoods/434581/item/goods_21_434581.jpg

I searched everywhere for girls pants without cut away legs - (even the shorts style were not comfortable) and found some at Uniqlo . As I said earlier my gd thinks they are really comfortable

PaperMonster

Theworriedwell, I used to wear boxers in my late teens, early twenties but I think they’d be more revealing than knickers on a cross-legged ten year old sitting in an assembly hall. Not that they have assemblies at the mo! I just don’t understand where people are seeing all these revealing knickers on children!! I buy knickers for my child - I’ve never seen any that are vaguely revealing! But modesty shorts are just flipping ridiculous!!

The ones my DD had weren't loose on the legs, and DD was skinny.

Girls knickers are definitely skimpier than they were in the 1950s, well the ones I see are, I have 2 GDs and they have clothes from all sorts of shops but I know one DIL buys alot from Next but I think they also have M&S and supermarket ones.

Oh Paper I have a well built leg myself but sadly my weans are like spiders…. all long skinny limbs!! Never had a problem filling out pants myself so this is all a bit unexpected for me! My granny always said with pride I had “a forearm like a blacksmith” shame that fashions in body shape changed eh!

Muffinthemoo - my girl’s ten and has inherited my chunky thighs! So no worry here about wide leg openings!! I bought her the adult ones as she kept nicking mine to wear at bedtime!!

PaperMonster thanks! I have tried M&S, Primark and Tesco but they all seem baggy around the leg openings?? At least they cover the bum. She’s a small six year old so I don’t think I could try adult sizes yet but that might be the answer once she’s a bit bigger. I also feel like all her pants are sort of low in the back - I seem to remember my pants as a kid coming further up my back?? I will give Morrison’s a bash next.

Muffin the Moo - my daughter has a selection from Morrison’s (these are her preferred ones as the material is very soft), Primark, Tesco and M&S. She has been given those short-type ones from both M&S and Tesco but isn’t a fan of them as they ride up her bottom!! I’ve also bought her some from the adult section of M&S which she likes to wear in bed! They’re a bit baggy around the bottom and she says they’re comfy to sleep in!!

My co-ed Scottish school, both primary and secondary, did not require us to wear uniform, except on special occasions. Most of us did wear our royal blue blazers most of the time, and my mum expected us to wear the white shirt and school tie as well. Of course, we had gym slips for hockey- blue sashes for inter- school matches and house colours for inter-house games. I don't think big navy knickers were specified but we all wore them for PE. In the 1970-80s, my sons, in primary school, had no compulsory uniform, so it came as a shock when we had to invest in high school uniform, and again when we moved north.

Please, if there are big pants for small girls, tell me where you are buying them. I have tried I think every one of the big high street chains and all the supermarkets.

Baggs the headmistress is a bit… off beat

At grammar school we wore skimpy knickers under our navy blues so in fact we were almost wearing modesty shorts! Seems a good idea to me.

Theworriedwell, I used to wear boxers in my late teens, early twenties but I think they’d be more revealing than knickers on a cross-legged ten year old sitting in an assembly hall. Not that they have assemblies at the mo! I just don’t understand where people are seeing all these revealing knickers on children!! I buy knickers for my child - I’ve never seen any that are vaguely revealing! But modesty shorts are just flipping ridiculous!!

Also we use to wear navy blue knickers, remember them, what boy would want to look at them

Harassment b boys is nothing new, its just that now they have social media to pass photos on. I can remember in my days going to school on the school bus with boys who try to pull you onto the back seat, try to u undo your bra etc etc. We girls use to retaliate with some pretty hefty wacks around the head and some would even indulge in a fight. Once we decided to get our own back and picked on the bully and got his trousers off. It all calmed down after that. These days I am afraid you can't do that which to my mind is a shame.

Baggs

I'm amazed the school uniform rules don't allow girls to wear trousers, muffinthemoo. Most schools have allowed it for decades.

I think all our local schools do, primary/senior/grammar. I assumed it was normal, if shorts are on the uniform list can they discriminate against girls? Doesn't seem fair.

Sad it's come to this.

PaperMonster

My daughter would find the cycling shorts uncomfortable- there’s no way she’d wear them! And I manage to find her perfectly adequate knickers! She’s not a fan of trousers and we have trouble finding shorts that are suitable for her. She manages to sit on the floor/play without showing her knickers off and she’s at an age where she’s just starting to like a bit of privacy. The idea of modesty shorts really doesn’t sit well with me.

When my DD was at school, say 15 or so years ago, there was a craze for girls wearing boxer shorts, just like boys underpants. They seemed ideal but maybe they have gone out of fashion. All the girls in her circle of friends seemed to prefer them, said they were more comfortable than the skimpy ones.

I wonder if they do more traditional pants in the sort of shops Kate Middleton would use?

My daughter would find the cycling shorts uncomfortable- there’s no way she’d wear them! And I manage to find her perfectly adequate knickers! She’s not a fan of trousers and we have trouble finding shorts that are suitable for her. She manages to sit on the floor/play without showing her knickers off and she’s at an age where she’s just starting to like a bit of privacy. The idea of modesty shorts really doesn’t sit well with me.

yes, agree. are there no other schools you could send her to.
it seems wrong to force children to wear totally uncomfortable clothing, just to get an education.
could you lobby about it.

I'm amazed the school uniform rules don't allow girls to wear trousers, muffinthemoo. Most schools have allowed it for decades.

I have this problem currently. My eldest started school this year and is currently well miffed with me as I make her wear white cotton cycle shorts under her school summer dresses. She is also annoyed that I bought her new ones which are knee length instead of the ones she started school in, which are now thigh length. She complains that her friends are not wearing shorts or knee length skirts - and indeed they are not - but I am simply not happy with her going in only her pants. I see enough of the shorts when she is playing at pick up time to gather that the children’s undergarments are almost always on display.

My middle one starts school in the autumn and is very upset that she will be required to wear skirts and dresses every day, as she only agrees to a dress on special occasions and does not feel comfortable in one for ordinary wear. There have been many tears over this issue but there is nothing to be done over it.

If the accursed uniform rules allowed shorts and trousers for girls, I would slap both in trousers/shorts depending on weather and think no more about it. But it doesn’t, so rows about skirt length and undergarments will go on and on.

Re children’s pants: they all come in a practically identical cut. Believe me, I have looked for a full brief or ideally a full brief with some leg coverage to absolutely no avail. I have to buy what is available

trisher

^I defy almost all the grans and grandads on this site to swear that they never acted or dressed in ways to "turn heads" at some point (or all points even) during their lifetime^
I agree Baggs but what we didn't do was blame the person who was tempted to look. Now it seems the ones you fancy are allowed to stare but the ones you don't can be shouted at and accused of being "pervs".

Yep. Complete damnfoolery. Hopefully sense will prevail eventually.

ShropshireLass
One girl was showing the cheeks of her bottom when she was walking along and very tight blouse that looked at least a size too small. Why, when schools have a uniform policy, isn’t it enforced?
School uniform is the bane of teachers' lives, especially skirt length. Of course they wouldn't be allowed in school like that. I assume it was Leaving Day. The Y11s usually bring in a spare shirt to sign.

As for Yammy's comments about teachers looking up girls' skirts and male teachers' problems with their flies, maybe that was the strange things kids think. I went to an all-girls' school, we were obsessed with who was gay. Perhaps it's the same thing

I defy almost all the grans and grandads on this site to swear that they never acted or dressed in ways to "turn heads" at some point (or all points even) during their lifetime
I agree Baggs but what we didn't do was blame the person who was tempted to look. Now it seems the ones you fancy are allowed to stare but the ones you don't can be shouted at and accused of being "pervs".

It is sad that parents of even small children are being asked to make sure their kids' bottoms are properly covered but it isn't body-shaming.

I suspect it's not really about the very young children though, just a cover all (non-deliberate pun!) so that schools can't be accused of the wrong kind of discrimination (NB not all discrimination is bad but that's another issue).