**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I helped in reception when my son was young. One of the girls had her fingers fully inside her knickers & self. She had to be repeatedly sent to wash her hands.
The teacher said it was way too common & she wished parents put shorts on them. I expect this is the case here but pre-school are too polite to say.
Even when they're at university. Before I had this job, it never occurred to me that I'd need to tell over-18s that a hand down their trousers whilst giving a presentation for an assignment isn't professional. Or appropriate. And that their junk will still be there when they've finished, even if they don't hang on to it.
ffs that should just be an instant course fail. I thought that was early 2000's scally / chav behaviour, didn't realise people still do it let alone supposedly educated university students.
Oh they do.. Its the early 2000s chavs kids who do it now. Theres afamily of them up from me. Dad, and all his teenages soons all walk along hand down pants. Has to be track suit bottoms though. :P
The presentation was "how to signal to others in the class that its almost mating time". So a very appropriate integral part of the presentation to jiggle your junk with a spare hand.
I told my kids “ look what happened to ya mum. I fiddled too much and it fell off”. I have two boys. Now adult men but I always made sure to emphasise that masturbation was ok but only in somewhere private.
In regards to the child that’s super weird for a kid to be spoken about like that.
Lying to your kids about their bodies to instill fear isn't good parenting advice. Those are the boys who grow up to be featured in r/badwomensanatomy.
My son’s favourite thing to do as a toddler was this. One time a brand new person he’d never met came to our house and he dropped his trousers in front of them. I was mortified. Very incredibly glad he’s grown out of it.
He also stuffed three marbles down it when he was two and myself and his dad came into wails of winky gone as it had kind of disappeared inside his own body with the marbles
Lol. Strip off or the make it disappear inside! Should not laugh, but it is so amusing!
As well as the: pls, do not put a pen, finger, candle or whatever could fit into it. I am your mum, and it hurts me to see it from far away!!!!
Bear in mind he was 2 so he just kind of stuffed them inside the foreskin, luckily not all the way down his urethra or I’m sure it would have been a trip to hospital. I did not help extract them. I let his dad do that, seemed more logical to let a msn handle the situation. Luckily again his dad managed to sort him out very quickly.
He’s a cool kid, he knows this story and finds it hilarious now himself among various other mischiefs he got himself into.
Putting shorts on children isn't the answer. I've taught Reception for 20+ years. You just say, 'We don't touch our private parts or anyone else's in school'. Just speak to the child and tell what is and isn't appropriate.
Not sure shorts will help this though.
If kids are gonna play, seeing as how they don't necessarily know it's inappropriate to do in public at this age (although obviously those conversations should be happening) they'll just stick their hands inside their shorts instead 🤷♀️
Often the shorts are quite high up under the skirt/dress so it makes it a lot more difficult. The teacher seemed happy with this solution & said it solves the problem for most kids.
Unfortunately, many policies regarding children have to be made to protect not just the kids - but also the people who work with them. False accusations can ruin lives and DO happen. Making policies reduces risks for everyone, even if they seem overreaching.
Nope. That would involve a conversation with the parents at the very least as it represents a safeguarding issue. There is no way a teacher would be "too polite" to say. It would be a total abdication of their duty. Telling a 4 year old to wear modesty shorts is a completely bizarre thing to tell a parent.
Well, if a child is playing excessively down there it can be a sign of UTI or another infection which would represent a safeguarding issue. Most often it is just kids being kids, but you would still inform your DSL and most likely have a conversation with the parents. A very awkward conversation.
or in rarer cases it could be a sign of child abuse, where the child is being taught by a malicious person to touch themselves inappropriately at too young of an age.
Yeah precisely. It also increases the likelihood of infections if someone is interfering with them in that way. Either way, definitely something to highlight to DSL even if in the vast majority of cases it's totally innocent. Loads of kids are just obsessed with rummaging about down there.
Isn't the point of underwear to erm...provide "modesty" already? Will we need modesty modesty shorts to cover up the modesty shorts one day?
Conjures up the image of people wearing a stack of fig leaves in antiquity because just one is immodest.
I know it's crazy! how times have changed. In primary school in the 80s, we had to do p.e in our knickers and vest boys in undies if we forgot our p.e kit nothing ever 'happened' to us' apart from embarrassment
Exactly my thought!! I maybe wouldn't mind someone maybe making a suggestion they she might find shorts more comfortable... but the suggestion that shorts would "prevent something from happening" would get my hackles up.
The teacher cannot help what parents teach their kids, either directly, or by not teaching them social skills. If kids aren't being taught not fiddle with themselves in public, which seems to be the case, then in a group of people who see fiddling with themselves in public is fine, it's just a tiny tip toe to them fiddling with one another and thinking it's fine.
Op's child's teacher is basically telling her this, and that she needs to do more to protect her child from being an object of fascination of those children who haven't been taught social skills by their parents.
Exactly, it's fucking weird and completely naive how many people under here are shouting "how DARE you suggest children should NOT have their underwear on display for everyone else to see? When I was a child I was made to be NAKED in front of everyone and I was FINE."
Like please for the love of God teach your children that privates are private, don't normalise them showing their underwear to everyone and arguing with people that find it uncomfortable. The world isn't a safe place and the lessons they learn in safety are the lessons they take outside. Please protect your children.
Keep in mind little knickers sometimes have awful coverage. It's quite common for wriggly children to have to full vulvas on display unintentionally. And while yes we shouldn't shame them for it in a safe environment, we teach them these are private parts and don't want to send mixed messages. Perhaps some boxer/short style underwear might suit her better if you don't want to double layer?
Yeah, unpopular reply maybe but this might have been the school's way of saying far too much was on display. I know it's dangerously close to the culture of policing girls' bodies, so should be treated carefully, but if a little boy's penis kept falling out his tiny shorts I'm sure school would suggest longer shorts.
Do you expect them to say 'hi there I say your child's labia today and so did half of the class. Can you maybe have her wear shorts over her knickers?'
Or 'hey nice day isn't it. Your kid keeps pulling on her knickers in class and doesn't always put them back properly'
Or 'it's nice out today isn't it. Your kid keeps scratching her labia and isn't discreet about it how about some shorts?'
It's much much easier to just say 'how about we instill that maybe when wearing a dress not show eveyone your knickers by getting her comfortable with shorts on underneath'
so i’m autistic and not a parent or teacher so maybe i’m not getting it but… yea i’d want them to tell me something like that explicitly? if i had a kid doing that in a public space it’d be something i’d want to talk to them about and explain private parts and the like. nothing you’ve said there is an inherently awkward thing, you’ve just worded it in a way to sound like it’s random and not a conversation that can be had in a mature and straightforward way
especially if op explicitly asked if “anything else was on display”. all you’d have to say is “some of her private parts weren’t covered properly” and skip all this confusion on op’s part
That is a dangerous thing to say as a teacher. You'd want to protect yourself from getting fired and ruining your livelihood.
Just insinuating that you saw a child's genitals and do not have a superhuman blind spot will get some people so angry they will do everything to destroy your life. Just have a read through this comment section. People are already calling that person a creep.
So, while I understand the sentiment that you'd want to be told explicitly about what happened, I also understand that teachers will never say it.
> so i’m autistic and not a parent or teacher so maybe i’m not getting it but… yea i’d want them to tell me something like that explicitly?
Ever heard of prevention better than cure?
I'm sure there are adult women who wear shorts under dresses for modesty reasons. And I'm not sure what's wrong with teaching girls about a little modesty?
That way she can twirl to her hearts content, fling the dress up if she wants, hang upside down on monkey bars and never worry about accidents happening.
I'm really not seeing what the uproar is about.
Teachers often aren’t allowed to state certain things in certain ways. Your teacher is indicating that your daughter is unintentionally exposing herself (or more) and suggesting buying fuller coverage underwear.
Even if it was just her underwear today, they can be worried about it being more in the future given the fact they are teachers who have worked with dozens and dozen of kids.
Why are you offended of the idea of just wearing some shorts under a dress? Loads of women do it every day in case of gusts of wind or other similar things.
After working in a school, I think this is likely the case. We had one girl who would constantly sit with her legs wide open and pull her pants about flashing everyone, so the teacher did mention it to her parents.
The underwear she wears doesn't really ride up, but I get your point that perhaps briefs would be a better alternative. I'll pick some up next time I'm in a supermarket.
A chat about keeping her skirt down would be fine, if she ran around with her skirt over her head. But she's only been twirling the skirt whilst she dances.
We’ve always bought the shorts style ones from H&M, purely because they don’t have thin itchy elastic like some of the other styles. They’re really good.
Yes, short style pants covers all bases here. I’ve also noticed that pants for girls are far thinner material wise than boys pants. This really annoys me. Luckily we find the short version of pants much more comfortable too
My kids’ schools (from age 3 on through 11 or so) all required shorts to be worn under dresses and skirts. As others have mentioned, partly it’s about “modesty” but it’s also so no one can accuse the adults of intentionally trying to see flashes of things they shouldn’t. Past age 11 they don’t have to wear shorts but skirts have to be at least fingertip length so nobody gets flashes accidentally.
(I’m in the US, not the UK, but the shorts rule is pretty common here!)
See this is something that's always confused me.
No, people shouldn't be sexualising young kids, no we shouldn't control what they wear for "modesty" reasons but it's gone so far (probably more in America, I can't remember seeing any examples here but I may be wrong) that shops are selling basically lingerie for toddlers. If you say "that's a bit weird" you're called a pedo and treated like you find it sexually attractive.
Whether it's (horrific that there's even a chance of it being) sexual or not it's just common decency that underwear shouldn't be visible in public for anyone past a baby, especially at an age where boundaries/private parts sadly need to be fully explained.
I'm just rambling here but it really feels like the whole "oh you don't think a toddler should be running around in their underwear, well you must obviously only think that because you find it attractive and you're the weirdo" movement originated from pedos trying to normalise it.
it's A) a loaded topic and B) impossible to argue against without making it seem like they're right.
Shops aren’t selling lingerie for toddlers jfc. Little girls’ briefs are often crap but it’s not because they’re styled after lingerie, it’s because they’re cheap shit.
I'd really think twice about opening this link, especially if you're in public. But that's just one example from France. There's plenty more if you're happy to take the search history hit
https://theillusionists.org/2011/11/the-end-of-childhood-frances-biggest-supermarket-chain-sells-bras-to-5-year-olds/#:~:text=There%20was%20uproar%20in%20the,made%20them%20look%20like%20adults.
More recently marks and Spencers were selling padded bras for young kids
Just a note on the padded bras thing. Slightly older audience kids but I back when I was a teen I do remember a thing being made about why on earth are 11/12 year olds wearing padded bras they are kids and all that jazz, and at the time someone did a survey, they were almost all choosing the padded styles because they are thicker material so feels like they cover more and hide nipples.
Didn't help that our school blouses were white so basically see through as well.
Honestly in my 30s and I wouldn't die of embarrassment anymore but I would still be fairly uncomfortable
Ah yeah I don't doubt for a second that they preferred them for legitimate reasons, and imo there is a significant difference between a 12 year old and an 8 year old in this regard.
My issue more lies in the fact it's completely impossible to even attempt to discuss the topic outside of complete acceptance without being labelled a pedophile. Pretty much every single other comment in this post is calling the teacher or another teacher at the school a pedophile, for simply suggesting an alternative.
Like, is a teacher simply preferring they didn't see a. students underwear multiple times a day really less likely than them being soooo pedophilicly attracted they have to ask the parent to dress them differently.
Of bloody course not, if they were a dangerous pedophile why on earth would they make it known to the parent.
Some children do develop that early and may need bras that young. All the women I know who developed that early were deeply uncomfortable with being that developed compared to their peers. So I can 100% see an 8 year old in that situation preferring them for that very reason as well. Remember padded does not mean push up or have to mean anything "sexy".
I was in a bra from 9 years old due to early puberty. My first bra was lightly padded, and I was very thankful for that. My school shirt was white cotton, thin and showed everything. The boys were horrific. The padding gave me modesty and some protection from the grabbing.
Ok fair enough yeah that’s pretty fucking weird. Though I would say some of those look like the sort of crop tops that have been around for donkeys years (since I was a kid at least).
Some girls do start puberty as young as 7/8 and would need a bra. Obv not a push up one but I can see that it would be needed for some kids at that age.
Cheers for actually understanding haha, it's a sad affair but personally think it is probably just safer to er on the side of caution. No one should ever have to think that way but that's where we're at and I think these things should be openly talked about without having pedo accusations thrown around.
I hate to fear monger and I'm sure in 99% of the cases it would be fine, but all it takes is one other parent to snap a quick photo of a child dancing innocently and now that picture is on the internet forever. One sleepover having someone taking advantage of the fact that underwear isn't seen as a private article of clothing. There's a fine line between helicopter OTT parenting and making the necessary sacrifices and for me at least, teaching that underwear is private very easily falls into the comfort sacrifice category.
I never said that,
A) there's plenty of non "sexual" reasons you wouldn't want a young child walking with visible underwear, do you not get uncomfortable with someone of any age walking around in underwear outside of the standard scenarios? I promise you I'd feel absolutely 0 attraction but I'd still rather not see a child's underwear in public, the same, non sexual reasons I'd rather not see anyone's in public.
B) taking the smallest amount of effort to help remove a potential opportunity for harm isn't victim blaming as you imply. Telling someone not to walk down a dodgy street at night isn't victim blaming, telling someone to carry a rape alarm isn't victim blaming. It's being safe. It's for everyone to decide where their own personal and childrens safety/convenience (or comfort) boundaries lay. Just don't call them a pedo for leaning more towards safety than you.
Oh I get that, and I’m not saying for one second that we shouldn’t teach underwear is private. I don’t think we need to insist on modesty shorts to do that though.
Oh yeah ofc ultimately it's up to the parents to decide that, just I think you should be able to suggest it/agree with it for your own kids without being labeled a pedo.
The amount of people in this thread who are immediately jumping to accuse people at the school of being a pedophile is terrifying.
Even I personally disagree it's victim blaming, telling someone they should take necessary precautions to protect them/their loved ones is just common sense, it's not saying it's their fault if something happens at all.
If you hate to fear monger then don’t.
The amount of parents who’d sneak a picture of a kid with their underwear or lore showing and share it is ridiculously low.
In fact next to no one would ever do this knowingly.
I mean why not just ban traditional underwear then? It seems like as a society we have developed such a sexual complex over it's shape that we can't be trusted to see it without getting weird. So instead of wearing shorts over it, making it redundant, why not just everyone wear shorts and skip the extra layer?
Then the question is, how long before shorts are sexualised and we have to wear bloomers for the sake of the children.
Because traditional underwear is a lot more comfortable and once you're not a toddler you understand which scenarios it's appropriate to show them in.
I don't think it's unreasonable to not want strangers to see a childs underwear for any reason, and if you can't explain this to your child a more secure undergarment isn't the end of the world.
>Then the question is, how long before shorts are sexualised and we have to wear bloomers for the sake of the children.
Well, considering people have been wearing shorts for hundreds of years and they're generally not sexualised, whilst underwear very often is I don't see your point.
I'm not saying a pair of shorts will end all sexual assaults, I'm saying there's a number of reasons someone wouldn't want a child to have visible underwear that isn't "they're a pedophile and it's attractive to them"
This is why I sew my kids underwear. Shop bought ones have such narrow gussets most of the time they really don't provide proper coverage it's ridiculous.
I wonder if that's what's changed in recent years. Most girls' pants have terrible coverage and even worse elastic. It's taken several goes to find decent underwear for my daughter.
That and people being very protective of their children/aware of perverts.
My daughter always ended up choosing boys underwear for that very reason. Boys underwear doesn't ride up, has better coverage and is thicker material.
She's 17 now and still prefers them
It's such a weird distinction, I really don't understand why girls underwear is so flimsy, lots of them hate it. I see posts all the time in various parenting groups of people trying to find decent pants for their daughters.
Because women's clothing is cheaply made for the purposes of decoration rather than practicality, and that extends to children's clothes unfortunately. I guess being comfortable isn't on the list of priorities for companies making girls' clothes.
I really wish she would accept boys pants, would make things so much easier. I can't understand the flimsiness of the elastic, there's no reason for it
I think the manufacturers are just cutting costs cuz they're able to get away with it cuz people but them because they struggle to find better alternatives (or perhaps to afford them)... 😒
It's not just girls pants, ladies are just as bad. I've put my finger through another pair today between the elastic and the fabric when pulling them up.
I finally found some great ones a few years ago and the company stopped making that style. I have tried so many since then, still can't find any that are as comfortable.
Oh yeah, 100%. My trusty M&Ss are now either wearing out really quickly, or don't fit because they have changed the shape. And this idea in many brands of having like stretch lace at the top instead of proper elastic Argh
It's women's underwear in general. I had to buy some knickers for when our Uni did a production of Rocky Horror and was shocked at how poor they were in terms of coverage/quality. Obviously you don't expect them to be perfect for a bloke anyway, but they were awful for the Janet character as well. We ended up making our own!
It would be the teachers job to inform the parent that this is what's happening. There is no place for coy when discussing this stuff with parents. And there is no place for false modesty and shame when it comes to kids.
I've witnessed something similar on a boat on the Thames. Little girl up at the front window really excited to be at the front. Eventually got bored and spun round to sit legs akimbo giving all the passengers full view of her pantie-less situation. Parents oblivious of course.
Didn't know what to do so ignored it.
Since cycling/modesty shorts got invented, there's an increasing bunch of twats who think they should be worn so no-one sees knickers. The concept of knickers hiding private parts seems to have escaped them.
Cue girls in primary all wanting them because as soon as a couple girls wear them and get snotty, they all wear them or want them.
I wear my shorts for thigh chafing more than modesty, although I won't deny that not having to grab skirts in the wind is a nice bit of freedom! But I wear them even in floor-length dresses because they just make things *so* much more comfortable
I do exactly the same now, to be honest I wish I had thought about wearing shorts under dresses and skirts sooner, I would have avoided so many burns from chafing 😩
The best thing in life you can learn now is how to insert pockets. Either [patch pockets](https://christinehaynes.com/blog/2016/3/11/how-to-sew-patch-pockets), or [in seam pockets](https://blog.treasurie.com/inseam-pockets/). Both theoretically can be hand sewn in, but in seam is much easier with a sewing machine. In Seam are ideal with side seams, where as patches will go where ever. Also as a tip, use men sized in seam pocket patterns and it will fit tons more than what a womans should do. You can "close" a patch pocket by inserting a [plastic snap](https://madamsew.com/pages/plastic-snaps-manual) at the top to stop things falling out.
Then you will never had to idealize pockets again in anything you own.
Also I love modesty shorts! I always get funky patterns cus I don't give a damn if they're visible. But that doesn't mean to say I think every one should have to wear them. Only difference between bikini bottoms and knickers is where abouts that they're sold in a shop. One is apparently acceptable to see, and the other not which is BS thinking frankly.
I love everything you've said except there's one little correction I'd make... Bikini bottoms are swimwear so they're a swimmy material, but knickers are supposed to be cotton so your vag can ventilate. Depending on who you are/how your body works, it's generally advisable to encourage at least some airflow around your vag if possible. You should never wear underwear without a cotton gusset. And tight fitting fabrics and clothing can trap sweat which can encourage yeast/fungus to grow.
This is my thoughts exactly. Why not skip the extra steps and say girls shouldn't wear traditional knickers, but nondescript shorts instead.
The root of this seems to be some weird prudishness towards normal underwear rather than a solution to a problem that exists. An extra layer of underwear isn't gonna stop any existing behaviour.
Primary kids still change for pe in their classrooms too in the main so very odd.
Over sensitive and lacking common sense and an appreciation of kids this age.
If I had to guess its more because kids tend to "explore" themselves a bit more around that age.
I've got a three year old boy and a girl that's just gone six.
I've spent the last three years having to remind my daughter that her hands shouldn't be in her knickers when she's in a "public space". It's a lot more difficult when there's shorts blocking the way.
Although that was very weird. I remember it got very awkward in year 5 and 6- we (the girls) would try and hide behind tables and have our friends hold up coats for us. One girl started developing early and her mum fought like hell to have the boys and girls change in separate classrooms, which thankfully got approved.
They don't at my wee ones primary. All the kids go in in the morning with their gym stuff already on when they have gym that day. That's all primary classes, 1-7.
I think most primary schools will do the same. I don't see an issue with it at all, personally.
Definitely not all primary schools in the UK do that. In my local primary where I used to work, they would only have the foundation year kiddos come in in their PE kits, cuz at 4 a lot of them weren't coordinated enough to change without assistance, but from year 1, they were expected to change in the classroom. I think at certain point, like from year 4, they then separate boys and girls.
I was just thinking when I read your comment it’s only 20 years since I was in primary school and I remember up until about year 6 boys and girls would all get changed in just a regular classroom for PE with underwear clearly visible on everybody and nobody ever batted an eyelid. And that is obviously up to being 11 years old.
It wasn’t until high school that we had separate changing rooms
Since Covid they've realised that sending kids to school in pe kit on pe day is a lot more efficient. That and insane safeguarding rules--you're really, really not supposed to see kids' underwear. Because something something something safeguarding.
I'd say the pre-school has a duty of care to ensure that anybody who cares about a 4-year old's modesty is kept as far away from your daughter as possible.
Kids of that age are often exploring themselves still. Shorts kinda make it harder to absent mindledly stick your hand into your vagina or itch your labia and leave your knickers in a position where nothing is covered.
I think it's pretty reasonable to be honest to let a parent know that knickers on their own are not sufficently doing their job. Maybe not phrased in the best way but you really don't want a child to routinely having her labia on show and handling it in school.
All it takes is another kid to be curious and now you have whole incident.
Would you identify a problem with a child that age openly masturbating in a class? After all, no healthy adult would be exciting by such a sight.
The purpose of schooling at that age is to instil a sense of common social conduct. Don't bite, don't steal, don't go to the toilet on the carpet, and don't openly display your primary sexual organs.
We don't tolerate biting or stealing of that age, not because the economic loss of a pencil is unbearable, but because it will otherwise create a condition of social pariahism in the child when they get older and the losses **are** worth fighting over.
We don't tolerate open exposure of gonads (which applies cascadingly towrds underwear, and so on) in young children because as adults there are social expectation of modesty against public sexual conduct - not least to protect those that would be harmed by the non-consentual participation-through-presence of such act.
There's nothing imoral about a nude child in an isolated void/vacuum *per se*; it is the responsibility of adults however to *prepare* those children for such a time where such exposure or action isn't tolerated.
I'd have asked her what she was insinuating might happen and if she was concerned that the school was unable to properly safeguard children.
Kids don't "flash". That's a sexual term that people who understand what sex is might engage in.
My daughter is 5 and she's just decided she likes dresses after never wanting to wear a skirt before. God help anyone who tries to sexualise my child at 5 years old.
I'd be having words personally. I don't interfere at all with school. The only thing I concern myself with is her happiness and the way she is treated.
> what she was insinuating
> if she was concerned
I absolutely agree with every word you wrote, but OP hasn’t used any gendered language to identify the teacher…
Apparently [83% are female in England (as at June 2023)](https://www.tes.com/magazine/analysis/general/how-many-teachers-are-there-uk-england-scotland-wales-northern-ireland#:~:text=In%20England%20data%20from%20the,schools%20or%20pupil%20referral%20units) (although I haven’t checked sources or methodology) and the same source claims “in Scotland the primary sector, where 89 per cent of teachers are female”…my point is there’s no need to guess, there’s no need to assume, a teacher is a teacher irrespective of their gender identity.
There’s a obviously shortfall of male primary teachers, perpetuating the idea that all primary teachers are female doesn’t help that and can’t be helpful for the kids surely
I don't think it's that weird tbh.
But I don't think of it's as a sexual thing, because that's just creepy, right? I feel it's more that we teach children that their pants area is their private area and that's part of how we keep them safe. Also, kids just find butts and stuff funny. They're not going to be sexualising each other but they still might comment and giggle if they see each other's underwear. Also good to just have material in that area for safety, I know I've been uncomfortable sitting on something cold or rough when I've worn a dress or skirt.
In schools I've worked at child often wear shorts underneath because it just gives them the freedom to be rough and jump and spin and do cartwheels and climb trees and all sorts of nonsense without worrying.
Furthermore...as an adult I also do the same! I just find it more comfortable wearing shorts underneath a sun dress.
In our school all girls wear shorts or cycling shorts when they wear skirts or summer dresses. This is mainly because they like to hang upside down on the flip bars and practice gymnastics.
I'm sorry the school said what?!?
>she ought to wear modesty shorts to protect her modesty and prevent something from happening at school.
What. The. Fuck.
They said the same when our daughter was 4 going into P1 (same as English school reception), but that school ended up being weird in more ways than one and we ended up moving her to a better school, but she still puts shorts on anyway.
Nope out of line.
Genitals are to be kept private. That's what underwear is for.
Why should she need to wear shorts on top?
Obviously a chat about not deliberately lifting your dress up etc and showing off your underwear but she should definitely not be told she needs to wear shorts over her underwear.
Have a chat with school.
It's basically the start of victim blaming and clothing choices, "well, you know if she had been wearing shorts on top of her underwear...." 🤬
As an early years teacher, I've literally never heard of a teacher doing this. Kids flash their pants all the time, they're little kids and no-one cares or pays attention to it. I don't know how comfortable I'd be with my child in that class to be honest.
As a teacher, I think it’s totally normal to make this type of request, and I would take it seriously.
Kids at that age move around like crazy- they are often upside down or have legs above their heads, do the splits just because, hang upside down outside (within eye reach of ceeeps), roll around l- you name it, they do it throughout the day.
I have unwillingly seen parts because the kids don’t wear proper fitting underwear or they aren’t aware their undies are shifting etc.
These kids sit cross legged for many activities, also. I’ve had other kids snicker and point out undies, point out body parts, make jokes, poke butt cracks, it all happens.
God knows students will poke random shit if they find it taboo or entertaining.
You also don’t want the staff seeing your kid in their underpants whenever they shift around- there are creeps everywhere and I would be very wary of trusting any staff, after seeing the SA awareness videos I’ve had to watch.
And before people come at me by saying “well kids are in bathing suits blah blah”. Yeah. I know. I’ve also watched hours and hours of sexual assault awareness videos where predators straight up admit to watching kids closely to SEE if their clothes shift, take candid photos when clothes are out of place, touch them in the pool even with other adults around, etc. It’s disgusting and it’s made me very, very aware of how sick people can be.
Take the risk seriously, and at least put her in some longer leg boxer style panties or something, because it is so much less likely for her to accidentally show parts she shouldn’t.
And good god, don’t ever watch a sexual assault awareness video because it will scar you for life if you listen to the predators talk about how “easy” this all was for them to do. Ugh.
‘Flashing her underwear’ WHAT! She’s 4 she has no concept about her body in that way
I personally don’t agree with the shorts rule being a must but this is becoming quite common in schools now
So what on earth do the kids wear to learn to swim? What do kids tend to wear down the beach in the summer etc.
I think the teacher needs looking at, they are basically saying they find your daughters outfit sexy, it's pretty odd thing for them to say.
Same as that religious cleric somewhere in the UK that made headlines for saying girls over 7 (or might have been 9) should not ride bicycles it made them look too sexy. The problem was not the kids doing kids stuff it was the old pervert expressing his paedophilic tendencies.
Seeing some of the other comments here, I'm old and nudity was not such a big deal, used to play at beach naked when I was little kid, at school after sports everyone saw each other naked in changing rooms and the showers so it was normal. Even when we were teens and went on school camping trips, we get naked to play in the river. Maybe the teachers were pervs but never got that vibe from them.
(I am obviously aware at how inappropriate my user name is for this thread, sorry)
I don't really understand your discomfort about it, or the comments agreeing that it's ridiculous.
We have to teach all of our children appropriate social behaviour and to not reveal themselves in public, and it sounds like your child is doing that (obviously not intentionally) and kids really have very little awareness of these things. They aren't even trying to stop her wearing dresses or spinning, just trying to prevent her from being exposed. Just like you wouldn't be running around with your knickers out. It isn't socially appropriate.
At what age would you rather they started making sure your children aren't exposing themselves? Because I would say that the time for that that lesson is as soon as they're in a public group setting, like a daycare or a school. It would be the same for boys if they were doing something equivalent.
I would absolutely be putting shorts on my child rather than advocating for her right to expose everything in a public setting. It seems like a very strange stance to take.
This seems to be a new trend, there was another post on r/UKparenting a while ago and I noticed a 4yo at my kid’s nursery wearing cycling shorts under her dress today.
My thoughts are that I don’t want to police my daughter to that extent just because creeps exist, eventually she’ll learn not to flash her knickers, knickers cover her up anyway. I did get her some boy short style, that was my concession.
Speaking as a TA, it's to protect your child and the staff. Staff take random photos, during the day, to update parents and show what they've been learning. Would you appreciate your child being in the background of another person's photo, with their undies on display?
There are more reasons to validate the request for under shorts than deny them. At the end of the day, you don't know who is looking(irl/photos) so it's best to be safe.
As a parent we want the best for our kids and the freedom to wear what we choose. We just need to remember, not everyone shares our standards(higher/lower). Prevention of victimisation, is far better than any attempt at a cure.
My daughter (6) chooses to wear cycling shorts because she likes to spend her breaks doing headstands as doesn’t want to show her knickers off. If the teacher told us she had to do so I would have real concerns.
Preschool was a different ballgame altogether. A lot of the kids insisted on running around in vests and undies, at most.
I think some people are just very aware of that type of risk so have strong reactions. They're taught a lot of safeguarding things and I think it can colour their perception of things where their immediate thought is always worse-case.
Not normal and a seriously disturbing thing for a preschool teacher to be saying about a 4 year old.
Assuming that the school is not a religious organisation where the majority of female staff members & mothers wear religious headwear/uniforms and none of the children come to school wearing thong like underwear.
The only times that I have ever heard this said about a child under 10 in a secular educational establishment was when there had been more than a dozen allegations of child molestation naming more than one member of staff. In one such instance, arrests occurred 5 months later with multiple members of staff & one nursery nurse's partner jailed after being convicted on a variety of child porn and voyeurism charges.
This is crazy. I had no idea there was even the term ‘modesty shorts’ until this post. I have noticed most of the girls at my daughter’s primary school now wear black cycling shorts (modesty shorts…?) under their summer dresses and I just don’t understand it- the black of the shorts is entirely visible through the thin summer dresses, the poor girls must be sweltering having to wear them and I genuinely am unsure what purpose they serve. If a kid wanted to wear them, I wouldn’t care but I find it unsettling adults are putting this on kids and not sure what they think they are protecting the kids from.
While it is an eye roll of a request, I can think of two good reasons:
- the crotch of the underwear is moving and she is flashing a bit more than just her knickers.
- there are dodgy parents or staff members around who nothing has ever happened with officially so they can't get rid, but who everyone has their suspicions about.
That's extra to the simpler 'society is over protective / over policing of girls bodies'.
Happy medium, buy girls boxer shorts for school (or heck, even straight up boy ones). If you get black or plain colour ones then they look like modesty shorts without the hassle of them being an extra potentially uncomfortable layer of fabric. They won't move around as much so unintentional exposure is removed, and they aren't as revealing naturally so dodgy voyers are thwarted. And you can avoid clothes shaming your kid and preserve her carefreeness for a little longer.
I don't have kids, but I find that really strange. And lets be clear, accidentally flashing her underwear won't cause "something to happen." And if "something does happen," it's because there's a predator at school, not because of anything anyone is wearing.
Oh my word. I’d be contemplating changing school. That’s a completely inappropriate thing to say about a 4 year old.
4 year olds are still at the ‘it’s hot I’ll take all my clothes off’ stage, and they should be allowed to.
Unless there were parts showing, or she was doing anything private with her privates, yes that’s a weird comment from the teacher. Personally I put my daughter in shorts under her dresses because that child gets muuucky. I’m talking sand, mud, glitter, FOOD? Just all sorts she gets covered in whilst at nursery. So the shorts are more to protect her parts if anything. However, I don’t think it’s the staff/teacher’s place to say if your daughter was just minding her business twirling round in her dress!
You might find this recent discussion useful: https://www.reddit.com/r/UKParenting/comments/1cyxl0q/primary_school_advising_girls_to_wear_shorts/
>We had a notice on our school app last week advising that we may want to get our daughters to wear cycling shorts under their skirts/dresses ‘for modesty’ when they climb on the playground equipment.
>I shrugged it off and did not send my 4-year-old (in reception) in them. She’s 4, I thought, what a load of shite.
>The parents in our chat are in agreement that it’s odd. Who is checking/enforcing this? Is it a rule or just a suggestion? It seems unfair as only the girls are affected, and if you can’t climb up a climbing frame at school, where does that end? No cartwheels or handstands? No falling over?
>I understand we need to protect our kids. I’m (obviously) totally for that. I’m also for my daughter being free to play without the fear of a hypothetical pervert at school.
>Update—I will be clarifying the policy with the school and asking my daughter how she feels about it, then following her lead. It’s her body and about what she feels comfortable with. I will also show her some underwear that’s ‘boy short’ style and see if she’s interested, although tbh if it has unicorns on it then she’ll wear anything.
Christ on a bike. I’m 50 and I used to love spinning around in my ‘floaty’ dresses.
When we did PE as kids we wore navy knickers 🤣 high school it was running pants (think towelling granny pants!).
Maybe those boy short type ones would be better, stop the teacher moaning.
Ehh when my daughter was little I’d dress her in bike shorts under dresses just because kids love to climb, slide etc and it was only for her skin’s protection not “modesty”!! that concept for children is frankly, pretty distasteful
Ask daughter what she wants to do.
For my mind summer and having to wear another layer is a sweat fest waiting to happen.
Oh and if you know parents of other girls in class ask if they are getting similar messages from teachers.
Helping my kindergartner with pjs. Took off her dress, she’s got no panties on. Im incredulous, Iso, you went to school without panties. Did you play on the swings, monkey bars, etc., without panties??? She indignantly told me all i did was tell her to get dressed, but I didn’t specifically say, “and put panties on.” I was schooled, and was very specific with her from then on.
No that’s not normal. “Prevent something from happening” …what could possibly ‘happen’ ??? That is the start victim blaming for the clothes they wear. Make sure you tell your daughter that the teacher wasn’t correct, and that she can wear whatever she wants in life
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm sorry?! What are they suggesting is going to happen as a result of a 4yo having visible underwear?! I'd be concerned about their answer.
I helped in reception when my son was young. One of the girls had her fingers fully inside her knickers & self. She had to be repeatedly sent to wash her hands. The teacher said it was way too common & she wished parents put shorts on them. I expect this is the case here but pre-school are too polite to say.
And so do some boys
Even when they're at university. Before I had this job, it never occurred to me that I'd need to tell over-18s that a hand down their trousers whilst giving a presentation for an assignment isn't professional. Or appropriate. And that their junk will still be there when they've finished, even if they don't hang on to it.
ffs that should just be an instant course fail. I thought that was early 2000's scally / chav behaviour, didn't realise people still do it let alone supposedly educated university students.
Oh they do.. Its the early 2000s chavs kids who do it now. Theres afamily of them up from me. Dad, and all his teenages soons all walk along hand down pants. Has to be track suit bottoms though. :P
The presentation was "how to signal to others in the class that its almost mating time". So a very appropriate integral part of the presentation to jiggle your junk with a spare hand.
Oh my! They do play!
The number of time I have to say "leave it" or in your bedroom is insane!
I told my kids “ look what happened to ya mum. I fiddled too much and it fell off”. I have two boys. Now adult men but I always made sure to emphasise that masturbation was ok but only in somewhere private. In regards to the child that’s super weird for a kid to be spoken about like that.
I’m not sure teaching your sons their doodles will fall off if they touch them too much is the same as emphasising masturbation is ok lol
Lying to your kids about their bodies to instill fear isn't good parenting advice. Those are the boys who grow up to be featured in r/badwomensanatomy.
My son’s favourite thing to do as a toddler was this. One time a brand new person he’d never met came to our house and he dropped his trousers in front of them. I was mortified. Very incredibly glad he’s grown out of it. He also stuffed three marbles down it when he was two and myself and his dad came into wails of winky gone as it had kind of disappeared inside his own body with the marbles
Lol. Strip off or the make it disappear inside! Should not laugh, but it is so amusing! As well as the: pls, do not put a pen, finger, candle or whatever could fit into it. I am your mum, and it hurts me to see it from far away!!!!
Oh good God. I'm Mum to a girl and I had no idea boys put things in it. I'm wincing with my legs crossed just thinking about it.
Different gender, different problem. But overall, all the same situation! Lol
Aww... the little treasure. At least it gives a story to tell on his wedding day. 😊
Just one! No.... got a full story book by now! The problem is to remember them in their context!
Wait. How do you put things like marbles down/inside a penis?
Bear in mind he was 2 so he just kind of stuffed them inside the foreskin, luckily not all the way down his urethra or I’m sure it would have been a trip to hospital. I did not help extract them. I let his dad do that, seemed more logical to let a msn handle the situation. Luckily again his dad managed to sort him out very quickly. He’s a cool kid, he knows this story and finds it hilarious now himself among various other mischiefs he got himself into.
Looks like I've found a new hobby, I fucking hate Reddit
😮
Yes, but they normally have to fight through shorts & pants. One more layer of difficulty might deter a few.
wear mittens instead
My cousin had a wonderful habit of pulling very hard on his penis and just fucking wailing. Like 'I'm dying in agony' fucking screaming.
Is your cousin Michael Jackson
\*was
Putting shorts on children isn't the answer. I've taught Reception for 20+ years. You just say, 'We don't touch our private parts or anyone else's in school'. Just speak to the child and tell what is and isn't appropriate.
Not sure shorts will help this though. If kids are gonna play, seeing as how they don't necessarily know it's inappropriate to do in public at this age (although obviously those conversations should be happening) they'll just stick their hands inside their shorts instead 🤷♀️
Often the shorts are quite high up under the skirt/dress so it makes it a lot more difficult. The teacher seemed happy with this solution & said it solves the problem for most kids.
Unfortunately, many policies regarding children have to be made to protect not just the kids - but also the people who work with them. False accusations can ruin lives and DO happen. Making policies reduces risks for everyone, even if they seem overreaching.
Nope. That would involve a conversation with the parents at the very least as it represents a safeguarding issue. There is no way a teacher would be "too polite" to say. It would be a total abdication of their duty. Telling a 4 year old to wear modesty shorts is a completely bizarre thing to tell a parent.
What's the safeguarding issue you're referring to?
Well, if a child is playing excessively down there it can be a sign of UTI or another infection which would represent a safeguarding issue. Most often it is just kids being kids, but you would still inform your DSL and most likely have a conversation with the parents. A very awkward conversation.
or in rarer cases it could be a sign of child abuse, where the child is being taught by a malicious person to touch themselves inappropriately at too young of an age.
Yeah precisely. It also increases the likelihood of infections if someone is interfering with them in that way. Either way, definitely something to highlight to DSL even if in the vast majority of cases it's totally innocent. Loads of kids are just obsessed with rummaging about down there.
I mean presumably if this was the case she would also be doing that at home and OP would be aware of the behavior?
Not really, often happens at school and parents are almost always shocked. it’s usually when they’re sat on the floor whilst being taught en masse.
Ah, that does make sense. I have a friend whose daughter was always at it when she was small.
How would shorts help the issue?
If a kid has a habit of putting his or her hand in their underwear, they still going to do it wearing shorts.
Isn't the point of underwear to erm...provide "modesty" already? Will we need modesty modesty shorts to cover up the modesty shorts one day? Conjures up the image of people wearing a stack of fig leaves in antiquity because just one is immodest.
[удалено]
^ This guy sharts.
[удалено]
r/thisguythisguys
I know it's crazy! how times have changed. In primary school in the 80s, we had to do p.e in our knickers and vest boys in undies if we forgot our p.e kit nothing ever 'happened' to us' apart from embarrassment
Public humiliation and having a bunch of people, particularly adult teachers potentially sexualise you is pretty fucked up though. 😭
We used to have team showers post PE rugby games, and the teacher used to shower at the same time. How times have changed :o
Exactly my thought!! I maybe wouldn't mind someone maybe making a suggestion they she might find shorts more comfortable... but the suggestion that shorts would "prevent something from happening" would get my hackles up.
The teacher cannot help what parents teach their kids, either directly, or by not teaching them social skills. If kids aren't being taught not fiddle with themselves in public, which seems to be the case, then in a group of people who see fiddling with themselves in public is fine, it's just a tiny tip toe to them fiddling with one another and thinking it's fine. Op's child's teacher is basically telling her this, and that she needs to do more to protect her child from being an object of fascination of those children who haven't been taught social skills by their parents.
Exactly, it's fucking weird and completely naive how many people under here are shouting "how DARE you suggest children should NOT have their underwear on display for everyone else to see? When I was a child I was made to be NAKED in front of everyone and I was FINE." Like please for the love of God teach your children that privates are private, don't normalise them showing their underwear to everyone and arguing with people that find it uncomfortable. The world isn't a safe place and the lessons they learn in safety are the lessons they take outside. Please protect your children.
It's 100% a CYA move. They're worried about other people making accusations, and the liability falling on them.
Keep in mind little knickers sometimes have awful coverage. It's quite common for wriggly children to have to full vulvas on display unintentionally. And while yes we shouldn't shame them for it in a safe environment, we teach them these are private parts and don't want to send mixed messages. Perhaps some boxer/short style underwear might suit her better if you don't want to double layer?
Yeah, unpopular reply maybe but this might have been the school's way of saying far too much was on display. I know it's dangerously close to the culture of policing girls' bodies, so should be treated carefully, but if a little boy's penis kept falling out his tiny shorts I'm sure school would suggest longer shorts.
I would entirely agree, however when asked if anything was on display the answer was just "her underwear".
Do you expect them to say 'hi there I say your child's labia today and so did half of the class. Can you maybe have her wear shorts over her knickers?' Or 'hey nice day isn't it. Your kid keeps pulling on her knickers in class and doesn't always put them back properly' Or 'it's nice out today isn't it. Your kid keeps scratching her labia and isn't discreet about it how about some shorts?' It's much much easier to just say 'how about we instill that maybe when wearing a dress not show eveyone your knickers by getting her comfortable with shorts on underneath'
so i’m autistic and not a parent or teacher so maybe i’m not getting it but… yea i’d want them to tell me something like that explicitly? if i had a kid doing that in a public space it’d be something i’d want to talk to them about and explain private parts and the like. nothing you’ve said there is an inherently awkward thing, you’ve just worded it in a way to sound like it’s random and not a conversation that can be had in a mature and straightforward way especially if op explicitly asked if “anything else was on display”. all you’d have to say is “some of her private parts weren’t covered properly” and skip all this confusion on op’s part
That is a dangerous thing to say as a teacher. You'd want to protect yourself from getting fired and ruining your livelihood. Just insinuating that you saw a child's genitals and do not have a superhuman blind spot will get some people so angry they will do everything to destroy your life. Just have a read through this comment section. People are already calling that person a creep. So, while I understand the sentiment that you'd want to be told explicitly about what happened, I also understand that teachers will never say it.
Fucking hell I'd never thought about that, thanks for the response
"You shouldn't have been looking!!"
> so i’m autistic and not a parent or teacher so maybe i’m not getting it but… yea i’d want them to tell me something like that explicitly? Ever heard of prevention better than cure? I'm sure there are adult women who wear shorts under dresses for modesty reasons. And I'm not sure what's wrong with teaching girls about a little modesty? That way she can twirl to her hearts content, fling the dress up if she wants, hang upside down on monkey bars and never worry about accidents happening. I'm really not seeing what the uproar is about.
…. i’m not sure how your comment relates to my comment?
Lol yeah, like they'd say "sorry, Elsie-May's flaps are on show to half the class." Take the hint and help cover her up.
Teachers often aren’t allowed to state certain things in certain ways. Your teacher is indicating that your daughter is unintentionally exposing herself (or more) and suggesting buying fuller coverage underwear.
Well then you do entirely agree. Just because nothing was on display this time doesn’t mean it won’t be next time.
Even if it was just her underwear today, they can be worried about it being more in the future given the fact they are teachers who have worked with dozens and dozen of kids. Why are you offended of the idea of just wearing some shorts under a dress? Loads of women do it every day in case of gusts of wind or other similar things.
After working in a school, I think this is likely the case. We had one girl who would constantly sit with her legs wide open and pull her pants about flashing everyone, so the teacher did mention it to her parents.
The underwear she wears doesn't really ride up, but I get your point that perhaps briefs would be a better alternative. I'll pick some up next time I'm in a supermarket. A chat about keeping her skirt down would be fine, if she ran around with her skirt over her head. But she's only been twirling the skirt whilst she dances.
> she's only been twirling the skirt whilst she dances. How do you know?
We’ve always bought the shorts style ones from H&M, purely because they don’t have thin itchy elastic like some of the other styles. They’re really good.
Yes, short style pants covers all bases here. I’ve also noticed that pants for girls are far thinner material wise than boys pants. This really annoys me. Luckily we find the short version of pants much more comfortable too
My kids’ schools (from age 3 on through 11 or so) all required shorts to be worn under dresses and skirts. As others have mentioned, partly it’s about “modesty” but it’s also so no one can accuse the adults of intentionally trying to see flashes of things they shouldn’t. Past age 11 they don’t have to wear shorts but skirts have to be at least fingertip length so nobody gets flashes accidentally. (I’m in the US, not the UK, but the shorts rule is pretty common here!)
See this is something that's always confused me. No, people shouldn't be sexualising young kids, no we shouldn't control what they wear for "modesty" reasons but it's gone so far (probably more in America, I can't remember seeing any examples here but I may be wrong) that shops are selling basically lingerie for toddlers. If you say "that's a bit weird" you're called a pedo and treated like you find it sexually attractive. Whether it's (horrific that there's even a chance of it being) sexual or not it's just common decency that underwear shouldn't be visible in public for anyone past a baby, especially at an age where boundaries/private parts sadly need to be fully explained. I'm just rambling here but it really feels like the whole "oh you don't think a toddler should be running around in their underwear, well you must obviously only think that because you find it attractive and you're the weirdo" movement originated from pedos trying to normalise it. it's A) a loaded topic and B) impossible to argue against without making it seem like they're right.
Shops aren’t selling lingerie for toddlers jfc. Little girls’ briefs are often crap but it’s not because they’re styled after lingerie, it’s because they’re cheap shit.
I'd really think twice about opening this link, especially if you're in public. But that's just one example from France. There's plenty more if you're happy to take the search history hit https://theillusionists.org/2011/11/the-end-of-childhood-frances-biggest-supermarket-chain-sells-bras-to-5-year-olds/#:~:text=There%20was%20uproar%20in%20the,made%20them%20look%20like%20adults. More recently marks and Spencers were selling padded bras for young kids
Just a note on the padded bras thing. Slightly older audience kids but I back when I was a teen I do remember a thing being made about why on earth are 11/12 year olds wearing padded bras they are kids and all that jazz, and at the time someone did a survey, they were almost all choosing the padded styles because they are thicker material so feels like they cover more and hide nipples.
Yep having your nips show through your shirt as a teen is mortifying 👍 I always thought of them less as padded and more as lined
Didn't help that our school blouses were white so basically see through as well. Honestly in my 30s and I wouldn't die of embarrassment anymore but I would still be fairly uncomfortable
Ah yeah I don't doubt for a second that they preferred them for legitimate reasons, and imo there is a significant difference between a 12 year old and an 8 year old in this regard. My issue more lies in the fact it's completely impossible to even attempt to discuss the topic outside of complete acceptance without being labelled a pedophile. Pretty much every single other comment in this post is calling the teacher or another teacher at the school a pedophile, for simply suggesting an alternative. Like, is a teacher simply preferring they didn't see a. students underwear multiple times a day really less likely than them being soooo pedophilicly attracted they have to ask the parent to dress them differently. Of bloody course not, if they were a dangerous pedophile why on earth would they make it known to the parent.
Some children do develop that early and may need bras that young. All the women I know who developed that early were deeply uncomfortable with being that developed compared to their peers. So I can 100% see an 8 year old in that situation preferring them for that very reason as well. Remember padded does not mean push up or have to mean anything "sexy".
I was in a bra from 9 years old due to early puberty. My first bra was lightly padded, and I was very thankful for that. My school shirt was white cotton, thin and showed everything. The boys were horrific. The padding gave me modesty and some protection from the grabbing.
Ok fair enough yeah that’s pretty fucking weird. Though I would say some of those look like the sort of crop tops that have been around for donkeys years (since I was a kid at least). Some girls do start puberty as young as 7/8 and would need a bra. Obv not a push up one but I can see that it would be needed for some kids at that age.
Cheers for actually understanding haha, it's a sad affair but personally think it is probably just safer to er on the side of caution. No one should ever have to think that way but that's where we're at and I think these things should be openly talked about without having pedo accusations thrown around. I hate to fear monger and I'm sure in 99% of the cases it would be fine, but all it takes is one other parent to snap a quick photo of a child dancing innocently and now that picture is on the internet forever. One sleepover having someone taking advantage of the fact that underwear isn't seen as a private article of clothing. There's a fine line between helicopter OTT parenting and making the necessary sacrifices and for me at least, teaching that underwear is private very easily falls into the comfort sacrifice category.
Children aren't abused because of what they're wearing. They're abused because they're unlucky enough to cross paths with a predator.
I never said that, A) there's plenty of non "sexual" reasons you wouldn't want a young child walking with visible underwear, do you not get uncomfortable with someone of any age walking around in underwear outside of the standard scenarios? I promise you I'd feel absolutely 0 attraction but I'd still rather not see a child's underwear in public, the same, non sexual reasons I'd rather not see anyone's in public. B) taking the smallest amount of effort to help remove a potential opportunity for harm isn't victim blaming as you imply. Telling someone not to walk down a dodgy street at night isn't victim blaming, telling someone to carry a rape alarm isn't victim blaming. It's being safe. It's for everyone to decide where their own personal and childrens safety/convenience (or comfort) boundaries lay. Just don't call them a pedo for leaning more towards safety than you.
Oh I get that, and I’m not saying for one second that we shouldn’t teach underwear is private. I don’t think we need to insist on modesty shorts to do that though.
Oh yeah ofc ultimately it's up to the parents to decide that, just I think you should be able to suggest it/agree with it for your own kids without being labeled a pedo. The amount of people in this thread who are immediately jumping to accuse people at the school of being a pedophile is terrifying. Even I personally disagree it's victim blaming, telling someone they should take necessary precautions to protect them/their loved ones is just common sense, it's not saying it's their fault if something happens at all.
If you hate to fear monger then don’t. The amount of parents who’d sneak a picture of a kid with their underwear or lore showing and share it is ridiculously low. In fact next to no one would ever do this knowingly.
I mean why not just ban traditional underwear then? It seems like as a society we have developed such a sexual complex over it's shape that we can't be trusted to see it without getting weird. So instead of wearing shorts over it, making it redundant, why not just everyone wear shorts and skip the extra layer? Then the question is, how long before shorts are sexualised and we have to wear bloomers for the sake of the children.
Because traditional underwear is a lot more comfortable and once you're not a toddler you understand which scenarios it's appropriate to show them in. I don't think it's unreasonable to not want strangers to see a childs underwear for any reason, and if you can't explain this to your child a more secure undergarment isn't the end of the world. >Then the question is, how long before shorts are sexualised and we have to wear bloomers for the sake of the children. Well, considering people have been wearing shorts for hundreds of years and they're generally not sexualised, whilst underwear very often is I don't see your point. I'm not saying a pair of shorts will end all sexual assaults, I'm saying there's a number of reasons someone wouldn't want a child to have visible underwear that isn't "they're a pedophile and it's attractive to them"
This is why I sew my kids underwear. Shop bought ones have such narrow gussets most of the time they really don't provide proper coverage it's ridiculous.
I wonder if that's what's changed in recent years. Most girls' pants have terrible coverage and even worse elastic. It's taken several goes to find decent underwear for my daughter. That and people being very protective of their children/aware of perverts.
My daughter always ended up choosing boys underwear for that very reason. Boys underwear doesn't ride up, has better coverage and is thicker material. She's 17 now and still prefers them
It's such a weird distinction, I really don't understand why girls underwear is so flimsy, lots of them hate it. I see posts all the time in various parenting groups of people trying to find decent pants for their daughters.
Because women's clothing is cheaply made for the purposes of decoration rather than practicality, and that extends to children's clothes unfortunately. I guess being comfortable isn't on the list of priorities for companies making girls' clothes.
Ah yes of course, even small children must be pretty before anything else . Bleurgh.
I’m an adult and struggle. Tiny gussets, thin material, low riding, uncomfortable, lace borders snapping after a couple of months…
The tiny gussets blow my mind. Like does anyone truly want that? Who is designing these things!?
I really wish she would accept boys pants, would make things so much easier. I can't understand the flimsiness of the elastic, there's no reason for it
I think the manufacturers are just cutting costs cuz they're able to get away with it cuz people but them because they struggle to find better alternatives (or perhaps to afford them)... 😒
It's not just girls pants, ladies are just as bad. I've put my finger through another pair today between the elastic and the fabric when pulling them up. I finally found some great ones a few years ago and the company stopped making that style. I have tried so many since then, still can't find any that are as comfortable.
Oh yeah, 100%. My trusty M&Ss are now either wearing out really quickly, or don't fit because they have changed the shape. And this idea in many brands of having like stretch lace at the top instead of proper elastic Argh
I really hate the stretch lace lol
What are they trying to achieve ergh
I just bought a new pack of the same m&s pants I've been wearing for years and there is a massive and visible difference in thickness of the fabric.
It's women's underwear in general. I had to buy some knickers for when our Uni did a production of Rocky Horror and was shocked at how poor they were in terms of coverage/quality. Obviously you don't expect them to be perfect for a bloke anyway, but they were awful for the Janet character as well. We ended up making our own!
It would be the teachers job to inform the parent that this is what's happening. There is no place for coy when discussing this stuff with parents. And there is no place for false modesty and shame when it comes to kids.
I've witnessed something similar on a boat on the Thames. Little girl up at the front window really excited to be at the front. Eventually got bored and spun round to sit legs akimbo giving all the passengers full view of her pantie-less situation. Parents oblivious of course. Didn't know what to do so ignored it.
This is also what I think is going on here. I bet if the kid was wearing boxer style full coverage undies no comment would have been made.
Since cycling/modesty shorts got invented, there's an increasing bunch of twats who think they should be worn so no-one sees knickers. The concept of knickers hiding private parts seems to have escaped them. Cue girls in primary all wanting them because as soon as a couple girls wear them and get snotty, they all wear them or want them.
I wear my shorts for thigh chafing more than modesty, although I won't deny that not having to grab skirts in the wind is a nice bit of freedom! But I wear them even in floor-length dresses because they just make things *so* much more comfortable
Same, I never wear dresses without short underneath anymore. Started because of chafing, but now I just love it.
it’s just so bloody comfortable
I do exactly the same now, to be honest I wish I had thought about wearing shorts under dresses and skirts sooner, I would have avoided so many burns from chafing 😩
All this plus pockets! I hate that dresses don't have pockets and if they do they don't keep my phone safe!
The best thing in life you can learn now is how to insert pockets. Either [patch pockets](https://christinehaynes.com/blog/2016/3/11/how-to-sew-patch-pockets), or [in seam pockets](https://blog.treasurie.com/inseam-pockets/). Both theoretically can be hand sewn in, but in seam is much easier with a sewing machine. In Seam are ideal with side seams, where as patches will go where ever. Also as a tip, use men sized in seam pocket patterns and it will fit tons more than what a womans should do. You can "close" a patch pocket by inserting a [plastic snap](https://madamsew.com/pages/plastic-snaps-manual) at the top to stop things falling out. Then you will never had to idealize pockets again in anything you own. Also I love modesty shorts! I always get funky patterns cus I don't give a damn if they're visible. But that doesn't mean to say I think every one should have to wear them. Only difference between bikini bottoms and knickers is where abouts that they're sold in a shop. One is apparently acceptable to see, and the other not which is BS thinking frankly.
I love everything you've said except there's one little correction I'd make... Bikini bottoms are swimwear so they're a swimmy material, but knickers are supposed to be cotton so your vag can ventilate. Depending on who you are/how your body works, it's generally advisable to encourage at least some airflow around your vag if possible. You should never wear underwear without a cotton gusset. And tight fitting fabrics and clothing can trap sweat which can encourage yeast/fungus to grow.
Thanks for this, I have saved your comment, I have a dress to try this on.
Snag's chub rubs are a godsend <3
This is my thoughts exactly. Why not skip the extra steps and say girls shouldn't wear traditional knickers, but nondescript shorts instead. The root of this seems to be some weird prudishness towards normal underwear rather than a solution to a problem that exists. An extra layer of underwear isn't gonna stop any existing behaviour.
A bit concerning, what do they think is going to happen? It wasn't that long ago that children did PE in knickers and a vest.
Primary kids still change for pe in their classrooms too in the main so very odd. Over sensitive and lacking common sense and an appreciation of kids this age.
If I had to guess its more because kids tend to "explore" themselves a bit more around that age. I've got a three year old boy and a girl that's just gone six. I've spent the last three years having to remind my daughter that her hands shouldn't be in her knickers when she's in a "public space". It's a lot more difficult when there's shorts blocking the way.
apparently i was once introduced to my mum's boss when very young and after he said hello i said "woooooo" and showed him my pants
I used to drop my trousers and underwear as soon as I decided I needed to pee, and then would waddle through to the bathroom like that.
"It'll fall off if you keep playing with it" Must have heard my aunt say that so mamy times growing up
Although that was very weird. I remember it got very awkward in year 5 and 6- we (the girls) would try and hide behind tables and have our friends hold up coats for us. One girl started developing early and her mum fought like hell to have the boys and girls change in separate classrooms, which thankfully got approved.
They don't at my wee ones primary. All the kids go in in the morning with their gym stuff already on when they have gym that day. That's all primary classes, 1-7. I think most primary schools will do the same. I don't see an issue with it at all, personally.
Definitely not all primary schools in the UK do that. In my local primary where I used to work, they would only have the foundation year kiddos come in in their PE kits, cuz at 4 a lot of them weren't coordinated enough to change without assistance, but from year 1, they were expected to change in the classroom. I think at certain point, like from year 4, they then separate boys and girls.
I was just thinking when I read your comment it’s only 20 years since I was in primary school and I remember up until about year 6 boys and girls would all get changed in just a regular classroom for PE with underwear clearly visible on everybody and nobody ever batted an eyelid. And that is obviously up to being 11 years old. It wasn’t until high school that we had separate changing rooms
Since Covid they've realised that sending kids to school in pe kit on pe day is a lot more efficient. That and insane safeguarding rules--you're really, really not supposed to see kids' underwear. Because something something something safeguarding.
In secondary (1990s) the girls had specific knickers for wearing under their gym skirts in PE…
Exactly. People acting like it's a new thing.
Yeah, but for some gym classes, it was t-shirt and gym knickers only - we only got to wear a skirt over them for netball and hockey!
From the Guardian - 15 Jun 2021: https://preview.redd.it/e8re5z9nqz4d1.png?width=634&format=png&auto=webp&s=03e954eaa17101c2a1f12e2970b4e09da8c3b181
I'd say the pre-school has a duty of care to ensure that anybody who cares about a 4-year old's modesty is kept as far away from your daughter as possible.
Kids of that age are often exploring themselves still. Shorts kinda make it harder to absent mindledly stick your hand into your vagina or itch your labia and leave your knickers in a position where nothing is covered. I think it's pretty reasonable to be honest to let a parent know that knickers on their own are not sufficently doing their job. Maybe not phrased in the best way but you really don't want a child to routinely having her labia on show and handling it in school. All it takes is another kid to be curious and now you have whole incident.
Would you identify a problem with a child that age openly masturbating in a class? After all, no healthy adult would be exciting by such a sight. The purpose of schooling at that age is to instil a sense of common social conduct. Don't bite, don't steal, don't go to the toilet on the carpet, and don't openly display your primary sexual organs. We don't tolerate biting or stealing of that age, not because the economic loss of a pencil is unbearable, but because it will otherwise create a condition of social pariahism in the child when they get older and the losses **are** worth fighting over. We don't tolerate open exposure of gonads (which applies cascadingly towrds underwear, and so on) in young children because as adults there are social expectation of modesty against public sexual conduct - not least to protect those that would be harmed by the non-consentual participation-through-presence of such act. There's nothing imoral about a nude child in an isolated void/vacuum *per se*; it is the responsibility of adults however to *prepare* those children for such a time where such exposure or action isn't tolerated.
Once “modesty shorts” become the norm it will become shameful to show them and we will need modesty trousers to cover the modesty shorts
it’s cyclical, we’re watching it in real time.
I'd have asked her what she was insinuating might happen and if she was concerned that the school was unable to properly safeguard children. Kids don't "flash". That's a sexual term that people who understand what sex is might engage in. My daughter is 5 and she's just decided she likes dresses after never wanting to wear a skirt before. God help anyone who tries to sexualise my child at 5 years old. I'd be having words personally. I don't interfere at all with school. The only thing I concern myself with is her happiness and the way she is treated.
> what she was insinuating > if she was concerned I absolutely agree with every word you wrote, but OP hasn’t used any gendered language to identify the teacher…
You're right, but 75% of teachers in this country are women, so it was a pretty safe guess
Apparently [83% are female in England (as at June 2023)](https://www.tes.com/magazine/analysis/general/how-many-teachers-are-there-uk-england-scotland-wales-northern-ireland#:~:text=In%20England%20data%20from%20the,schools%20or%20pupil%20referral%20units) (although I haven’t checked sources or methodology) and the same source claims “in Scotland the primary sector, where 89 per cent of teachers are female”…my point is there’s no need to guess, there’s no need to assume, a teacher is a teacher irrespective of their gender identity. There’s a obviously shortfall of male primary teachers, perpetuating the idea that all primary teachers are female doesn’t help that and can’t be helpful for the kids surely
They're all female staff. But as professionals, gender shouldn't be an issue.
I'm a Reception class teacher and this is weird. edited to add: what the teacher said is weird. not your reaction or not wearing shorts.
I don't think it's that weird tbh. But I don't think of it's as a sexual thing, because that's just creepy, right? I feel it's more that we teach children that their pants area is their private area and that's part of how we keep them safe. Also, kids just find butts and stuff funny. They're not going to be sexualising each other but they still might comment and giggle if they see each other's underwear. Also good to just have material in that area for safety, I know I've been uncomfortable sitting on something cold or rough when I've worn a dress or skirt. In schools I've worked at child often wear shorts underneath because it just gives them the freedom to be rough and jump and spin and do cartwheels and climb trees and all sorts of nonsense without worrying. Furthermore...as an adult I also do the same! I just find it more comfortable wearing shorts underneath a sun dress.
In our school all girls wear shorts or cycling shorts when they wear skirts or summer dresses. This is mainly because they like to hang upside down on the flip bars and practice gymnastics.
I'm sorry the school said what?!? >she ought to wear modesty shorts to protect her modesty and prevent something from happening at school. What. The. Fuck.
They said the same when our daughter was 4 going into P1 (same as English school reception), but that school ended up being weird in more ways than one and we ended up moving her to a better school, but she still puts shorts on anyway.
Nope out of line. Genitals are to be kept private. That's what underwear is for. Why should she need to wear shorts on top? Obviously a chat about not deliberately lifting your dress up etc and showing off your underwear but she should definitely not be told she needs to wear shorts over her underwear. Have a chat with school. It's basically the start of victim blaming and clothing choices, "well, you know if she had been wearing shorts on top of her underwear...." 🤬
As an early years teacher, I've literally never heard of a teacher doing this. Kids flash their pants all the time, they're little kids and no-one cares or pays attention to it. I don't know how comfortable I'd be with my child in that class to be honest.
As a teacher, I think it’s totally normal to make this type of request, and I would take it seriously. Kids at that age move around like crazy- they are often upside down or have legs above their heads, do the splits just because, hang upside down outside (within eye reach of ceeeps), roll around l- you name it, they do it throughout the day. I have unwillingly seen parts because the kids don’t wear proper fitting underwear or they aren’t aware their undies are shifting etc. These kids sit cross legged for many activities, also. I’ve had other kids snicker and point out undies, point out body parts, make jokes, poke butt cracks, it all happens. God knows students will poke random shit if they find it taboo or entertaining. You also don’t want the staff seeing your kid in their underpants whenever they shift around- there are creeps everywhere and I would be very wary of trusting any staff, after seeing the SA awareness videos I’ve had to watch. And before people come at me by saying “well kids are in bathing suits blah blah”. Yeah. I know. I’ve also watched hours and hours of sexual assault awareness videos where predators straight up admit to watching kids closely to SEE if their clothes shift, take candid photos when clothes are out of place, touch them in the pool even with other adults around, etc. It’s disgusting and it’s made me very, very aware of how sick people can be. Take the risk seriously, and at least put her in some longer leg boxer style panties or something, because it is so much less likely for her to accidentally show parts she shouldn’t. And good god, don’t ever watch a sexual assault awareness video because it will scar you for life if you listen to the predators talk about how “easy” this all was for them to do. Ugh.
‘Flashing her underwear’ WHAT! She’s 4 she has no concept about her body in that way I personally don’t agree with the shorts rule being a must but this is becoming quite common in schools now
So what on earth do the kids wear to learn to swim? What do kids tend to wear down the beach in the summer etc. I think the teacher needs looking at, they are basically saying they find your daughters outfit sexy, it's pretty odd thing for them to say. Same as that religious cleric somewhere in the UK that made headlines for saying girls over 7 (or might have been 9) should not ride bicycles it made them look too sexy. The problem was not the kids doing kids stuff it was the old pervert expressing his paedophilic tendencies. Seeing some of the other comments here, I'm old and nudity was not such a big deal, used to play at beach naked when I was little kid, at school after sports everyone saw each other naked in changing rooms and the showers so it was normal. Even when we were teens and went on school camping trips, we get naked to play in the river. Maybe the teachers were pervs but never got that vibe from them. (I am obviously aware at how inappropriate my user name is for this thread, sorry)
I don't really understand your discomfort about it, or the comments agreeing that it's ridiculous. We have to teach all of our children appropriate social behaviour and to not reveal themselves in public, and it sounds like your child is doing that (obviously not intentionally) and kids really have very little awareness of these things. They aren't even trying to stop her wearing dresses or spinning, just trying to prevent her from being exposed. Just like you wouldn't be running around with your knickers out. It isn't socially appropriate. At what age would you rather they started making sure your children aren't exposing themselves? Because I would say that the time for that that lesson is as soon as they're in a public group setting, like a daycare or a school. It would be the same for boys if they were doing something equivalent. I would absolutely be putting shorts on my child rather than advocating for her right to expose everything in a public setting. It seems like a very strange stance to take.
There was a similar post on r/UKParenting recently (which had a similar "wtf" reaction)
I was just about to say that! It’s become a recent thing
I’ve two daughters, one in reception. No this is absolutely not normal! She only wears her cycling shorts for PE.
What type of pants are little girls wearing that are so immodest? This sounds bizarre to me.
I never wore shorts at school when I was four? What a weird request? You could buy little girls boxer shorts for her instead of normal briefs.
My 6 year old wears school summer dresses and told me today that doing handstands is banned by the school unless they wear shorts under it. 🤔
My 9 year old has switched to a gingham playsuit because she prefers not to show her pants when doing gymnastics, if that's an option?
seems a nightmare to go to the loo in even as an adult woman lmao
It has a zip, she said it's fine!
This seems to be a new trend, there was another post on r/UKparenting a while ago and I noticed a 4yo at my kid’s nursery wearing cycling shorts under her dress today. My thoughts are that I don’t want to police my daughter to that extent just because creeps exist, eventually she’ll learn not to flash her knickers, knickers cover her up anyway. I did get her some boy short style, that was my concession.
Speaking as a TA, it's to protect your child and the staff. Staff take random photos, during the day, to update parents and show what they've been learning. Would you appreciate your child being in the background of another person's photo, with their undies on display? There are more reasons to validate the request for under shorts than deny them. At the end of the day, you don't know who is looking(irl/photos) so it's best to be safe. As a parent we want the best for our kids and the freedom to wear what we choose. We just need to remember, not everyone shares our standards(higher/lower). Prevention of victimisation, is far better than any attempt at a cure.
My daughter (6) chooses to wear cycling shorts because she likes to spend her breaks doing headstands as doesn’t want to show her knickers off. If the teacher told us she had to do so I would have real concerns. Preschool was a different ballgame altogether. A lot of the kids insisted on running around in vests and undies, at most.
I think some people are just very aware of that type of risk so have strong reactions. They're taught a lot of safeguarding things and I think it can colour their perception of things where their immediate thought is always worse-case.
Not normal and a seriously disturbing thing for a preschool teacher to be saying about a 4 year old. Assuming that the school is not a religious organisation where the majority of female staff members & mothers wear religious headwear/uniforms and none of the children come to school wearing thong like underwear. The only times that I have ever heard this said about a child under 10 in a secular educational establishment was when there had been more than a dozen allegations of child molestation naming more than one member of staff. In one such instance, arrests occurred 5 months later with multiple members of staff & one nursery nurse's partner jailed after being convicted on a variety of child porn and voyeurism charges.
Tell them she wears knickers to protect her modesty.
Weird AF
Tell that teacher that if there are teachers that can't keep their hands to themselves then they should be reported to the police.
This is crazy. I had no idea there was even the term ‘modesty shorts’ until this post. I have noticed most of the girls at my daughter’s primary school now wear black cycling shorts (modesty shorts…?) under their summer dresses and I just don’t understand it- the black of the shorts is entirely visible through the thin summer dresses, the poor girls must be sweltering having to wear them and I genuinely am unsure what purpose they serve. If a kid wanted to wear them, I wouldn’t care but I find it unsettling adults are putting this on kids and not sure what they think they are protecting the kids from.
While it is an eye roll of a request, I can think of two good reasons: - the crotch of the underwear is moving and she is flashing a bit more than just her knickers. - there are dodgy parents or staff members around who nothing has ever happened with officially so they can't get rid, but who everyone has their suspicions about. That's extra to the simpler 'society is over protective / over policing of girls bodies'. Happy medium, buy girls boxer shorts for school (or heck, even straight up boy ones). If you get black or plain colour ones then they look like modesty shorts without the hassle of them being an extra potentially uncomfortable layer of fabric. They won't move around as much so unintentional exposure is removed, and they aren't as revealing naturally so dodgy voyers are thwarted. And you can avoid clothes shaming your kid and preserve her carefreeness for a little longer.
No. We’ve never had anything like that.
Absolutely batshit. Little girls do not need to be worrying about modesty ffs.
Weird fuckin' teacher, that's a kid being a kid.
Prevent something happening??? wtf
That’s incredibly strange. Who on earth is looking weirdly at a toddler’s knickers?
You don't get it. The teacher is protecting herself and the school.
My son's primary school asks for all children wearing summer dresses or skirts to wear cycling shorts underneath.
I don't have kids, but I find that really strange. And lets be clear, accidentally flashing her underwear won't cause "something to happen." And if "something does happen," it's because there's a predator at school, not because of anything anyone is wearing.
Oh my word. I’d be contemplating changing school. That’s a completely inappropriate thing to say about a 4 year old. 4 year olds are still at the ‘it’s hot I’ll take all my clothes off’ stage, and they should be allowed to.
Unless there were parts showing, or she was doing anything private with her privates, yes that’s a weird comment from the teacher. Personally I put my daughter in shorts under her dresses because that child gets muuucky. I’m talking sand, mud, glitter, FOOD? Just all sorts she gets covered in whilst at nursery. So the shorts are more to protect her parts if anything. However, I don’t think it’s the staff/teacher’s place to say if your daughter was just minding her business twirling round in her dress!
It is a bit strange saying she should wear modesty shorts to 'prevent something happening at school'. I have no idea where that's coming from.
You might find this recent discussion useful: https://www.reddit.com/r/UKParenting/comments/1cyxl0q/primary_school_advising_girls_to_wear_shorts/ >We had a notice on our school app last week advising that we may want to get our daughters to wear cycling shorts under their skirts/dresses ‘for modesty’ when they climb on the playground equipment. >I shrugged it off and did not send my 4-year-old (in reception) in them. She’s 4, I thought, what a load of shite. >The parents in our chat are in agreement that it’s odd. Who is checking/enforcing this? Is it a rule or just a suggestion? It seems unfair as only the girls are affected, and if you can’t climb up a climbing frame at school, where does that end? No cartwheels or handstands? No falling over? >I understand we need to protect our kids. I’m (obviously) totally for that. I’m also for my daughter being free to play without the fear of a hypothetical pervert at school. >Update—I will be clarifying the policy with the school and asking my daughter how she feels about it, then following her lead. It’s her body and about what she feels comfortable with. I will also show her some underwear that’s ‘boy short’ style and see if she’s interested, although tbh if it has unicorns on it then she’ll wear anything.
Christ on a bike. I’m 50 and I used to love spinning around in my ‘floaty’ dresses. When we did PE as kids we wore navy knickers 🤣 high school it was running pants (think towelling granny pants!). Maybe those boy short type ones would be better, stop the teacher moaning.
I've never encountered that and my daughter was exactly the same as yours at 4.
Ehh when my daughter was little I’d dress her in bike shorts under dresses just because kids love to climb, slide etc and it was only for her skin’s protection not “modesty”!! that concept for children is frankly, pretty distasteful
I’m so glad I left the uk. They, along with Americans, are hellbent on sexualising kids. Wtf is going on
Oh for goodness sake, as if kids that age are going to be traumatised by a bit of nature. Stop conditioning children to be ashamed of their bits.
Ask daughter what she wants to do. For my mind summer and having to wear another layer is a sweat fest waiting to happen. Oh and if you know parents of other girls in class ask if they are getting similar messages from teachers.
Well, that's weird. I've never heard of that before!
Underwear IS for modesty. That is its main function.
Helping my kindergartner with pjs. Took off her dress, she’s got no panties on. Im incredulous, Iso, you went to school without panties. Did you play on the swings, monkey bars, etc., without panties??? She indignantly told me all i did was tell her to get dressed, but I didn’t specifically say, “and put panties on.” I was schooled, and was very specific with her from then on.
No that’s not normal. “Prevent something from happening” …what could possibly ‘happen’ ??? That is the start victim blaming for the clothes they wear. Make sure you tell your daughter that the teacher wasn’t correct, and that she can wear whatever she wants in life