Underdeveloped Children Wearing Two Pieces? Why?

[Dezzie]

Some of you probably saw my post here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...0-how-much-bareness-nudity-7.html#post2848415

If you did, you also may know I was going to create a topic in regards to the title.

I am curious to know what everyone else says... Why do some parents have their 1-5 year old baby girls wearing two piece bathing suits, when they aren't even developed yet? What is the point?

Is it still considered "public indecency" even though they are not developed? If it is, why?
If it isn't, why are we bothering to clothe our young, undeveloped, children at the beaches, or even in public for that matter?

I have seen pictures of me as a baby at the beach and I was only wearing a diaper. The only reason I had the diaper was just in case I had to go potty. Seems like times have changed since 1988-1993. What is the reason for this change? Is it just for "style"... because they are cute? Or, to keep those "private parts" covered for public decency reasons?

 

[Dezzie]

Moderators: Can I have this topic moved to the General Debates section? After thinking about it, it may be more interesting over there...

 

[elmarna]

I am not a fashion follower.
I do realize that the young see what "big girls" are doing.
I also know parents are fashion conscience or wanting to be part of the times.
What we put on children is a matter of personality of a parent and when a child is old enough to consider and speak of it -the child's "want".
I would never describe a 2 piece on a young child as "indecent".
I find nothing wrong with a simple diaper.
The young have nothing within them to consider what indecent is!
They would not" choose " anything more than that which was inspired by the world which they wished to be a part of.
You may find -if mommy is wearing a 2 piece; "where is mine?"
It is simply looking at their world and trying to figure it out. Not as much as "expressing", but, in a eyes of a child - learning their world and shareing in it.

 

[Panda]

*MOD POST*

Thread moved to general debates​

 

[ChristineES]

When I was stationed in Italy, I noticed the girls went without tops at the beaches. A lot of the adult women, go without tops, too, though.

 

[Skwim]

Dezzie

One of Your OP questions was probably phrased in error.

You said

"I am curious to know what everyone else says... Why do some parents have their 1-5 year old baby girls wearing two piece bathing suits, when they aren't even developed yet? What is the point?
​

Is it still considered "public indecency" even though they are not developed? If it is, why?"
​

Your second question implies that the public may consider wearing a two piece bathing suit to be indecent, and I think you meant a one (bottom only) piece.

In any case, as has been pointed out, some parents may consider a two-piece to be more fashionable, and maybe the child herself feels the same or doesn't want to appear different than her peers. Then of course, are those who simply feel that a bare female chest is inappropriate (indecent perhaps?) in public regardless of age. Whatever the reason, other than pointing up the prudishness that is no doubt behind some of the reasons, I don't see much to make an issue of.

What I find more disturbing is the silly modesty with which the US public treats bare female breasts, particularly at beaches and other places of relaxation.

 

[lunamoth]

I just prefer one piece bathing suits (Maillot style) for myself and my daughters because I think they are attractive and more functional than two-piece suits. However, I would not let my girls go to a public pool over the age of two in just the bottoms because it is important to educate kids early about 'private parts.' Sadly, there are people in the world who would sexually assault even todddlers, and those kids who are educated about personal privacy are better protected.

 

[Skwim]

I just prefer one piece bathing suits (Maillot style) for myself and my daughters because I think they are attractive and more functional than two-piece suits. However, I would not let my girls go to a public pool over the age of two in just the bottoms because it is important to educate kids early about 'private parts.' Sadly, there are people in the world who would sexually assault even todddlers, and those kids who are educated about personal privacy are better protected.

Not sure how wise it is to tell your girls they must where a top while at the pool because if they don't someone might sexually assault them.

 

[lunamoth]

Not sure how wise it is to tell your girls they must where a top while at the pool because if they don't someone might sexually assault them.

Right, like that's just what I would tell them. :sarcastic

I would bet that you do not have kids.

 

[Valjean]

Perhaps it's the idea that's offensive. People are much more moved by symbolism than reality. An uncovered female chest a violation of American ideas of propriety.

 

[Skwim]

Right, like that's just what I would tell them. :sarcastic

Well, you're the one who said,

"Sadly, there are people in the world who would sexually assault even todddlers, and those kids who are educated about personal privacy are better protected"
​

so what I see here is that you would educate your girls about not going topless and why (personal privacy because of possible sexual assault).

 

[beenie]

Well, you're the one who said,

"Sadly, there are people in the world who would sexually assault even todddlers, and those kids who are educated about personal privacy are better protected"
​

so what I see here is that you would educate your girls about not going topless and why (personal privacy because of possible sexual assault).

Well, reality isn't exactly pretty, is it?

Until we have a huge change in how women and yes, even little girls, are viewed as sexual objects, parents will be obligated to protect their girls no matter what you think is "wise" or not. I wish my daughters could walk around in whatever they'd like, but we live in a world where there are sickos who get off on that.

I've never told my daughters about sexual assault, just how to be smart and aware...no matter what clothes they are wearing.

 

[ChristineES]

You have to think about it. Most of us don't look at babies and little children in a sexual way. The sad and disgusting thing is that there are people out there who do. You never know where the pedophiles are so we have to teach our children even at an age where there is nothing there yet, to cover themselves. We wish it wasn't like that, but it is.

 

[Valjean]

So a top on a six year old would re-inforce the impression of her as a sexual object and encourage pedophiles.

 

[Draka]

My daughter's swim suit last year was a two-piece. Little panty-like bottoms and a sort of tank top that tied around the neck. Barely any belly showing. Now, I don't see putting little girls in bikini like suits as I do think that those types of suits should really be reserved for older girls/women as the main point of them does appear to be sexualization. But whether a one piece or a modest two-piece, I look at it more for what looks cute and girly than anything else. My daughter (3 y/o btw) likes to look "princess pretty" and likes the frills and ruffles and flowers and so on on her clothing, including her swimming suits. It really doesn't have anything to do with covering her "private parts", it has to do with a very girly little girl.

 

[lunamoth]

Well, you're the one who said,

"Sadly, there are people in the world who would sexually assault even todddlers, and those kids who are educated about personal privacy are better protected"
​

so what I see here is that you would educate your girls about not going topless and why (personal privacy because of possible sexual assault).

Because of various volunteer works that I am involved in, I have had above average education in protecting kids from sexual assault. It is backed up by data that kids who understand that some parts of their bodies are 'private' are less susceptible to being victims of sexual abuse.

I educate my kids about their bodies, personal health, and sexuality in a positive and straightforward manner, and in an age-appropriate manner. I feel that open, honest, and positive information about these issues is the best way for them to develop healthy and positive attitudes about themselves.

The message that I convey is not that they need to be ashamed of their bodies in any way, nor that they are responsible for the weaknesses of others. As they mature, the message I want them to get is that they, and no one else, get to make decisions about their own person.

 

[Sunstone]

Our society should just accept public nudity -- like the Japanese and ancient Romans did -- and be done with these pointless debates.

 

[Skwim]

Our society should just accept public nudity -- like the Japanese and ancient Romans did -- and be done with these pointless debates.

Or even the British, of all people. i just came across a site describing the nude bike ride they have through various cities each year---Brighton and London for example. Hundreds and hundreds of naked bicyclists join in.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Well, reality isn't exactly pretty, is it?

Until we have a huge change in how women and yes, even little girls, are viewed as sexual objects, parents will be obligated to protect their girls no matter what you think is "wise" or not. I wish my daughters could walk around in whatever they'd like, but we live in a world where there are sickos who get off on that.

I've never told my daughters about sexual assault, just how to be smart and aware...no matter what clothes they are wearing.

Exactly. I don't generally try to be mean, and especially here, but there are people out there who find that, you know. I can't even say it. But we have another problem in the States, and I think the two are related in some way, and that is parents who put their little girls in beauty pageants. I feel the same way about a little girl in a two piece as I do about little girls in beauty pageants: I don't mean to offend anyone by saying this, but as a father of a 6 year old girl, this is how I feel, and I feel strongly about it: their parents are idiots. I don't see why fashion should be more important in children than safety. It's preposterous. There's no excuse for it.

 

[Sunstone]

Exactly. I don't generally try to be mean, and especially here, but there are people out there who find that, you know. I can't even say it. But we have another problem in the States, and I think the two are related in some way, and that is parents who put their little girls in beauty pageants. I feel the same way about a little girl in a two piece as I do about little girls in beauty pageants: I don't mean to offend anyone by saying this, but as a father of a 6 year old girl, this is how I feel, and I feel strongly about it: their parents are idiots. I don't see why fashion should be more important in children than safety. It's preposterous. There's no excuse for it.

This might sound strange, but I find child beauty pagents only a bit less sickenning than child molestation. Maybe it's wrong to come so close to equating the two. But both involve the sexualization of children. And in that respect -- if in no other respect -- they are both highly repulsive to me.