s/o - elementary girls in leggings

[Anonymous]

Looking at the thread in DC Public Schools re Deal middle school banning leggings, in which lots of people expressed disapproval of girls wearing leggings as pants.

I'm seriously confused, as the mom 5 year old who is starting kindergarten and whose fall wardrobe is half jcrew "cozy" leggings (nice, thick, not at all sheer). you really think the kids in the below pics look badly dressed?

https://www.jcrew.com/girls_category/leggings.jsp
http://www.hannaandersson.com/pdp.aspx?from=SC&pcid=393&styleid=43741&simg=43741_001
http://www.hannaandersson.com/pdp.aspx?from=SC&pcid=393&styleid=43741&simg=43741_001

My daughter has a big stomach and hates tight waistbands--and most elastic band pants slide down give her terrible plumber's rear.... Leggings are the one thing that fits her decently. Are you telling me seriously that she must only wear them with dresses?

[Anonymous]

I didn't see the other thread, but that's pretty funny if they banned leggings! WTF? They ES girls.

My 1st grade DD wears leggings all the time. I try to get shirts that cover her butt, but I don't really stress it.

If they're not banned at your school, I wouldn't worry about it, OP. Sounds silly.

[Anonymous]

I will be honest, to me, it looks funny. My 3 year old has a big belly so she always wears dresses or long tunics with leggings or elastic waist skirts, which she wears below her belly. You are in luck OP--unless your daughter is overweight, that long lasting toddler belly girls sometimes have usually goes away in Kindergarten. But whatever. Your kid would not be the only one with leggings and a regular shirt. How about the yoga pants they sometimes have at Old Navy or Gap? Those could work and look a little more like pants with the bit of flare at the bottom.

[Anonymous]

My 6 year old just spent all of K in leggings. She did start wanting to wear skirts over them, but today she went to camp in leggings and a t-shirt. It's fine.

[Anonymous]

Yes, OP if your DD has a big stomach then yes, she needs to wear a dress or tunic. Even at 5 this is unsightly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP if your DD has a big stomach then yes, she needs to wear a dress or tunic. Even at 5 this is unsightly.

Seriously? You think a five-year-old girl is "unsightly"? You're an asshole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP if your DD has a big stomach then yes, she needs to wear a dress or tunic. Even at 5 this is unsightly.

Seriously? You think a five-year-old girl is "unsightly"? You're an asshole.

amen.

[Anonymous]

Lots of leggings are plenty thick enough to be worn without something covering the butt, and it's not like pre-pubescent girls have all that much of a butt. As long as they aren't skin-tight or the shirt is long enough to cover underwear lines, I don't see the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP if your DD has a big stomach then yes, she needs to wear a dress or tunic. Even at 5 this is unsightly.

Seriously? You think a five-year-old girl is "unsightly"? You're an asshole.

+1 PP, you're a jerk if you seriously think that a 5 year old with a belly is 'unsightly'. WTF?

My DD is short so leggings work the best for her. Yoga pants are often just too long. Leggings are tight at the bottom, so if they're too long, it's still fine because they just bunch up a little.

[Anonymous]

You have a 5 year old. Please come back when your child is going into 6th grade.

Leggings are not pants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You have a 5 year old. Please come back when your child is going into 6th grade.

Leggings are not pants.

Well I think that's the question. Why do we sexualize 6th grade girls and not elementary. Equally inappropriate, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have a 5 year old. Please come back when your child is going into 6th grade.

Leggings are not pants.

Well I think that's the question. Why do we sexualize 6th grade girls and not elementary. Equally inappropriate, no?

+1.

[Anonymous]

I really hate the way girls (and women) are fashion-policed. It is so unnecessary and drives home the message that how you look is THE MOST important thing in public commentary, instead of how you act.

Leggings are fine in a casual dress setting, such as elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really hate the way girls (and women) are fashion-policed. It is so unnecessary and drives home the message that how you look is THE MOST important thing in public commentary, instead of how you act.

Leggings are fine in a casual dress setting, such as elementary school.

I agree. Thick leggings ARE pants. They are not tights. We are sexualizing 5 year olds by projecting our thoughts as adults on 6 year olds.

My second grader wears leggings, as does her friends. Nobody is worried about early promiscuity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hate the way girls (and women) are fashion-policed. It is so unnecessary and drives home the message that how you look is THE MOST important thing in public commentary, instead of how you act.

Leggings are fine in a casual dress setting, such as elementary school.

I agree. Thick leggings ARE pants. They are not tights. We are sexualizing 5 year olds by projecting our thoughts as adults on 6 year olds.

My second grader wears leggings, as does her friends. Nobody is worried about early promiscuity.

Lol yes, I posted above about sexualizing 6th graders. My follow up based on your comment is: +1 and do we really think we are going to stop puberty in middle schoolers by banning cotton pants?!?