I don't put leggings on my girls unless they're under dresses. I do not wear leggings. It's not about how old a person is, or whether they have an ass. They're NOT PANTS.

I work at a school with adolescents and our school has a similar policy. I had a similar response as the OP when I first heard about the rule. Unfortunately, a number of girls (often unknowingly!) wear see-through leggings to school with short tops. You really have to see it to believe it. After seeing a few instances where adolescents were wearing molecule-thin leggings (thin girls, big girls, whatever), I started to understand where the administration was coming from. It's not that the school is worried about boys being distracted, it's a distraction for everyone (except for the poor kid wearing the see-through leggings...)

Anonymous wrote:Your kid can wear anything they/you want during non-school hours. I don't see what the big deal is. The problem may not be your child but how other kids wear it and they have to make a standard rule for all kids or parents like you will complain. Instead of complaining, tell your child, those are the rules. We do not have to agree with them or like them but we do have to respect the rules at school and you can wear them after school and on weekends.

This. And made even more obvious by PPs pointing out "not all girls are rail thin" as a reason why leggings shouldn't be allowed. It's shaming the female body.

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem - Leggings, unlike say tube tops or crop tops, are now a totally normal part of pre-pubescent clothing these days. To have them be ok on 8 year olds and then suddenly not ok on 13 year olds can mean only one thing- they become "revealing" only when the girls' bodies have changed and matured. By definition we are saying that it's the more mature girls' bodies that are unacceptable -- which is sexist and silly.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem - Leggings, unlike say tube tops or crop tops, are now a totally normal part of pre-pubescent clothing these days. To have them be ok on 8 year olds and then suddenly not ok on 13 year olds can mean only one thing- they become "revealing" only when the girls' bodies have changed and matured. By definition we are saying that it's the more mature girls' bodies that are unacceptable -- which is sexist and silly.

My DDs don't have this problem because the leggings as pants look ended when they got potty trained.

Here's the problem - Leggings, unlike say tube tops or crop tops, are now a totally normal part of pre-pubescent clothing these days. To have them be ok on 8 year olds and then suddenly not ok on 13 year olds can mean only one thing- they become "revealing" only when the girls' bodies have changed and matured. By definition we are saying that it's the more mature girls' bodies that are unacceptable -- which is sexist and silly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.victoriassecret.com/toprated/all-styles/the-most-loved-yoga-legging?ProductID=253131&CatalogueType=OLS&srccode=cii_17588969&cpncode=45-76692963-2&cm_mmc=CI-_-Google-_-KNIT%20PANTS-_-SW-2902907QUM.L

These are the brand most girls wear, and they're thick like yoga pants. I don't see the problem. I can understand not wearing the super thin ones that are meant to be worn under skirts or dresses and are see thru, but these are made to be worn alone.

The problem is more there are many leggings and hedging a that are thin. It's a lot harder to police thickness of leggings that to ban them all together. There are plenty of more appropriate for girls. Personally, I do think they are inappropriate and always watch boys turn and look at a girl's ass when they walk by. I don't know why parents of middle school girls think it's ok.

So then the problem is the girls' clothing and not the boys' actions?

PP, your brand of feminism is so stupid that it gives us a bad name!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.victoriassecret.com/toprated/all-styles/the-most-loved-yoga-legging?ProductID=253131&CatalogueType=OLS&srccode=cii_17588969&cpncode=45-76692963-2&cm_mmc=CI-_-Google-_-KNIT%20PANTS-_-SW-2902907QUM.L

These are the brand most girls wear, and they're thick like yoga pants. I don't see the problem. I can understand not wearing the super thin ones that are meant to be worn under skirts or dresses and are see thru, but these are made to be worn alone.

The problem is more there are many leggings and hedging a that are thin. It's a lot harder to police thickness of leggings that to ban them all together. There are plenty of more appropriate for girls. Personally, I do think they are inappropriate and always watch boys turn and look at a girl's ass when they walk by. I don't know why parents of middle school girls think it's ok.

So then the problem is the girls' clothing and not the boys' actions?

Anonymous wrote:Some parents take it too far and do not consider the material nor the way their child looks in the leggings. Not every person wearing them is stick thin and shapeless.

And not everyone has a booty either.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/05/am-i-wearing-pants_n_858179.html

An handy flowchart

Anonymous wrote:Here is a teenage girl in leggings:

http://picture-cdn.wheretoget.it/i7qnwj-l-610x610-blouse-skater-skater+girl-blonde-model-skinny-leggings-yoga+pants-boots-brown+bag-brown+tote+bag-grey+beanie-beanie-grey+scarf-scarf-bracelets-friendship+bracelets-friendship+brace.jpg

What is not "good?"

The fact that she forgot to put pants on?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.victoriassecret.com/toprated/all-styles/the-most-loved-yoga-legging?ProductID=253131&CatalogueType=OLS&srccode=cii_17588969&cpncode=45-76692963-2&cm_mmc=CI-_-Google-_-KNIT%20PANTS-_-SW-2902907QUM.L

These are the brand most girls wear, and they're thick like yoga pants. I don't see the problem. I can understand not wearing the super thin ones that are meant to be worn under skirts or dresses and are see thru, but these are made to be worn alone.

Why is a middle schooler wearing Victoria's Secret anything? Let kids be kids and don't rush them into clothing meant for adult women.

Victoria's Secret PINK line is very standard for middle and high school girls.

I see no problem with banning leggings. Sorry---they may look fine on prepubescent middle schoolers, ballerinas and rail-thin models. On girls/women with big butts and hips, they just look whorish. (And I am a woman with a big butt and hips). It's all that Nicki Minaj crap.

This is the problem:

http://www.sawfirst.com/kylie-jenner-in-leggings-out-at-sugarfish-in-los-angeles-2015-02-04.html

http://www.ameriesblog.com/2015/03/kylie-jenner-steps-out-with-no-makeup.html?m=1

http://www.buzzfeed.com/amyodell/23-reasons-leggings-are-the-worst#.jj8YGzyMv

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.victoriassecret.com/toprated/all-styles/the-most-loved-yoga-legging?ProductID=253131&CatalogueType=OLS&srccode=cii_17588969&cpncode=45-76692963-2&cm_mmc=CI-_-Google-_-KNIT%20PANTS-_-SW-2902907QUM.L

These are the brand most girls wear, and they're thick like yoga pants. I don't see the problem. I can understand not wearing the super thin ones that are meant to be worn under skirts or dresses and are see thru, but these are made to be worn alone.

Why is a middle schooler wearing Victoria's Secret anything? Let kids be kids and don't rush them into clothing meant for adult women.

Victoria's Secret has branched out. They sell plenty of clothing that is suitable for anyone:

https://www.victoriassecret.com/clothing/sweaters/hoodie-cozy-sweaters?cm_sp=&ProductID=254213&CatalogueType=OLS