Would it bother you if your child's teacher said this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a grown woman who doesn't wear pants under my dresses, and I've learned how to sit on the floor without showing my underwear. It is possible. "Flowy" skirts go in between your legs, and you sit "sidesaddle" in straight skirts.

So, I would be perfectly fine with a rule that said: you can sit on the floor as long as your underwear isn't showing. Period. No rules about what they can or can't wear.

But I would have thought the better course of action was for the teacher to take this problem to his supervisor and ask for some advice about how to address it, which would also have given him a chance to express his reasoning for seeing it as a problem. Maybe then that supervisor could have helped him come up with a policy that addressed his concerns without being so sexist. Because it is.

You have learned to sit in an appropriate, dare I say it, a lady like manner.

All the children are supposed to sit criss cross. It's part of teaching them to do what the teacher says, to do what they're supposed to do. Not argue with the teacher that kneeling or sitting with knees together or whatever is better for Larla today.

Well, they aren't all sitting criss-cross, since the girls in dresses have to sit in chairs. So either you let the girls in dresses sit on the floor with the other kids in a way that does not reveal their underwear, or you make them sit on a chair (so that their underwear is basically at eye level to the kids sitting on the floor). No visible underwear is a much more defensible rule than "girls must sit in a ladylike manner."

[Anonymous]

I got multiple demerits in elementary/middle school for sitting wrong. Girls were not permitted to cross our legs except at the ankle, and it was actually enforced (hence the demerits). Boys had no such rule, presumable because they wore pants? And it wasn't like I was sitting their with my hoo ha out, all the girls had to wear shorts under our uniform skirt.

Anyway. I'd wouldn't be furious at this teacher but I would be irritated enough to speak to him about it. I would have to ask why he can't just remind anyone in whatever their wearing to sit modestly (if need be). Girls in short dresses can do a kind of side saddle sit. Or make sure to tuck their skirts down around themselves. Boys can make sure their gym shorts don't gap so that everyone can see the family jewels. Doesn't have to be about being "lady like", that's a little outmoded...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I got multiple demerits in elementary/middle school for sitting wrong. Girls were not permitted to cross our legs except at the ankle, and it was actually enforced (hence the demerits). Boys had no such rule, presumable because they wore pants? And it wasn't like I was sitting their with my hoo ha out, all the girls had to wear shorts under our uniform skirt.

Anyway. I'd wouldn't be furious at this teacher but I would be irritated enough to speak to him about it. I would have to ask why he can't just remind anyone in whatever their wearing to sit modestly (if need be). Girls in short dresses can do a kind of side saddle sit. Or make sure to tuck their skirts down around themselves. Boys can make sure their gym shorts don't gap so that everyone can see the family jewels. Doesn't have to be about being "lady like", that's a little outmoded...

Ugh, I mean they're.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depends why. If it is a male teacher and he is concerned about accusations, no I think its reasonable. As long as girls have something under the dress like shorts, I think its ok but there is probably more to this.

Plus 1,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second graders teacher (male) told all the girls that if they wanted to sit on the floor during circle time, they could only do that if they weren't wearing a dress. If they had on a dress, they had to sit on a chair. He said something about "sitting like a lady" They had to sit on a chair even if they had on leggings under the dress. My daughter doesn't like dresses anyway so she isn't fazed but I didn't like this kind of policing (?) what do you guys think? Her friend refuses to wear dresses anymore.

Yes, this would bother me. It's fine to say that you can't sit on the floor if your underwear shows. It's not fine to say that girls whose underwear is not showing because they are wearing leggings under their dress have to "sit like ladies." Teach the kids to sit so their underwear doesn't show (sit back on their heels, sit with both legs to the same side) or to wear leggings or shorts underneath dresses, fine.

Gosh you folks are clueless. A male teacher saying "if your underwear shows" would then have a bunch of misandrist moms (e.g., several on this thread) then demanding him to be fired because ONLY A PERVERT WOULD NOTICE A GIRL'S UNDERWEAR SHOWING!!!!! HOW LONG HAS HE BEEN CHECKING THEM OUT???? and similar nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would think that prior to him saying this he had some kids making fun of girls if they could see their undies. Hence trying to prevent future incidents of such bullying. Maybe he went this route rather than say kids will make fun of you if they see your undies, and it might have come as a lesson in deportment.

So instead of telling the specific kids to knock it off, he tells all of the girls that they must sit on chairs like ladies if they wear dresses, including dresses with pants underneath?

That kind of reminds me of my daughter's middle-school PE teacher addressing the problem of boys not paying attention by telling girls not to wear short shorts.

There is just no win for teachers no way you turn it today, is there? Clearly I meant, with the previous class he might have had this experience. Plus, everybody should learn how to sit appropriately, boys and girls. If he sent an e-mail around telling parents that your little girl was teased today by five kids, because her undies were showing, he reassured the parents that he disciplined the offenders, I am sure you would find something wrong with that. What your DD's PE teacher said was very wrong, and this is not the same situation at all. Maybe he tried in the past a different route, such as put your dressed in such a way.... and well, you can see that sounds even worse now, doesn't it?

[Anonymous]

My son had a FEMALE teacher enforce this policy so no I don't have a problem with it.

[Anonymous]

I have not read the replies but I would be happy for someone to remind my elementary aged daughter how to sit on the floor. I'm a high school teacher and the girls still need reminders. Rather than make class announcements I quietly pull them aside and let them know too much is showing. I can do this because I'm a middle aged woman. Male teachers ask the female teachers to have those conversations because of over reactions seen on this thread. They can't win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second graders teacher (male) told all the girls that if they wanted to sit on the floor during circle time, they could only do that if they weren't wearing a dress. If they had on a dress, they had to sit on a chair. He said something about "sitting like a lady" They had to sit on a chair even if they had on leggings under the dress. My daughter doesn't like dresses anyway so she isn't fazed but I didn't like this kind of policing (?) what do you guys think? Her friend refuses to wear dresses anymore.

Yes, this would bother me. It's fine to say that you can't sit on the floor if your underwear shows. It's not fine to say that girls whose underwear is not showing because they are wearing leggings under their dress have to "sit like ladies." Teach the kids to sit so their underwear doesn't show (sit back on their heels, sit with both legs to the same side) or to wear leggings or shorts underneath dresses, fine.

Gosh you folks are clueless. A male teacher saying "if your underwear shows" would then have a bunch of misandrist moms (e.g., several on this thread) then demanding him to be fired because ONLY A PERVERT WOULD NOTICE A GIRL'S UNDERWEAR SHOWING!!!!! HOW LONG HAS HE BEEN CHECKING THEM OUT???? and similar nonsense.

There is nothing wrong with the rule "You can't sit on the floor if your underwear shows". Well, other than that it's hard to enforce without looking to see whether your students' underwear is showing when they sit on the floor. Which, as you say, is a bad idea. So, option 1: stop worrying so much about whether or not the underwear of second-graders is showing when they sit on the floor. Or, option 2: make everybody sit on chairs.

But don't go around making a rule that is simultaneously too broad (by including girls who are wearing pants) and too narrow (by excluding boys whose underwear is showing) and also incorporates outdated and sexist assumptions about deportment ("sit like ladies"). Because that's just silly.

[Anonymous]

I would ask all of the students to sit on chairs if underwear-showing is an issue. I used to teach this grade in an all-girls school. I always sent an email to parents asking them to send the girls with shorts under their uniform jumpers. We wanted the girls to be active and shorts helped them to do this modestly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would ask all of the students to sit on chairs if underwear-showing is an issue. I used to teach this grade in an all-girls school. I always sent an email to parents asking them to send the girls with shorts under their uniform jumpers. We wanted the girls to be active and shorts helped them to do this modestly.

You can't use that word round these parts, or crazy people tell you you're sexualizing children.

[Anonymous]

This would infuriate me. Tons of little girls that age wear leggings under dresses so they can jump and play and sit however the hell they want to at circle time. Not ok!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This would infuriate me. Tons of little girls that age wear leggings under dresses so they can jump and play and sit however the hell they want to at circle time. Not ok!!!

As this thread shows, the idea seems to be that if a child wears a dress and shorts/leggings, that she is then free to do whatever she wants, regardless of skirt of dress. That's not actually how it works. At the playground, then can jump and run. In class, they should sit properly, without showing their shorts. Or in a chair, if they can't do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This would infuriate me. Tons of little girls that age wear leggings under dresses so they can jump and play and sit however the hell they want to at circle time. Not ok!!!

As this thread shows, the idea seems to be that if a child wears a dress and shorts/leggings, that she is then free to do whatever she wants, regardless of skirt of dress. That's not actually how it works. At the playground, then can jump and run. In class, they should sit properly, without showing their shorts. Or in a chair, if they can't do that.

So it's ok for your shorts to show when you're not wearing a dress, but it's not ok for your shorts to show when you are wearing a dress? How about that.

"Sitting properly", when you're a second-grader at circle time, means sitting criss-cross applesauce and not poking your neighbor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would ask all of the students to sit on chairs if underwear-showing is an issue. I used to teach this grade in an all-girls school. I always sent an email to parents asking them to send the girls with shorts under their uniform jumpers. We wanted the girls to be active and shorts helped them to do this modestly.

You can't use that word round these parts, or crazy people tell you you're sexualizing children.

I'm not sure how "modest" came to mean "covers your body, if your body is female".

PP could just as well have said, "We wanted the girls to be active and shorts helped them to do this without their underwear showing," everybody would have known what PP was talking about, and very few people -- perhaps even nobody -- would have objected.