This week has brought a heated conversation to the public about young girls and shorts. Are short shorts appropriate for school? Are we body-shaming our girls?
While we can go in circles around those questions, we are forgetting one of the most important questions.
Let’s back up.
The controversy started when television reporter and blogger Kristen Hewitt wrote about why she isn’t letting her nine year-old daughter wear short shorts. School is not a fashion runway, she says. She and her partner don’t want their daughter to feel ashamed of her body, but they also don’t want her bum exposed.
I understand this, and have felt the same way when shopping for summer clothes for my two year-old daughter. Yes, it starts that young.
Related: Swim Suits for Girls without the Glitter and Frills
Comments swirled and even the Today Show picked up on the story. Dylan Dreyer summed up both sides – some parents agreed and others claimed that Hewitt was body-shaming her child. Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb continued the conversation later in the show about young girls and what clothing is appropriate. They debated whether girls are ready for attention that they don’t understand. Kathie Lee said that children need boundaries or else they will “run amuck.” Next, they concluded that it’s important to be deliberate about “why” a girl is wearing certain clothing – is it for fashion or because they’re trying to dress provocatively for attention?
Hmmm… there’s still a BIG issue mostly missing from these conversations…. boys.
And no, not whether adolescent and teenage boys are going to “get distracted” by girls wearing short shorts. I won’t even get into that faulty argument.
The question is: why don’t boys face similar controversies about their clothing?
Major retailers and manufacturers have decided to cut shirts for girls much narrower in the torso, typically with shorter, capped sleeves. When it comes to bottoms, stores today mostly offer slim cut leggings with no pockets and shorter shorts to girls, while they market loose pants and longer, roomier shorts with pockets to boys.
Related: 9 Things to Say to Girls Besides “You’re Pretty”
I recently posted two shirts in the exact same size from the same exact major retailer. Notice the difference between the “girls’ shirt” and the “boys’ shirt.” I think you can guess which is which.
Who decided that three year-olds need such differently shaped clothing? Regardless of gender, children’s bodies are mostly the same until adolescence.
Below are screenshots of shopping search results using the terms “girl shorts” and “boy shorts.” Again, I think you can guess which is which.
In conversations about women and girls’ bodies, the slut-shaming critics rush quickly to admonish other adults not to make girls feel ashamed of their bodies. And that’s important.
But to them I say, why do boys rarely have to think about their bodies as kids? Why do they feel free to run and play in comfortable clothes and sneakers, oblivious to how others view their bodies?
Girls do not get this same privilege.
Why do girls need to feel that their bodies are analyzed and scrutinized on display, starting as young children, into their teens, and far into adulthood?
This is about more than making girls feel comfortable in their own skin. The inequity is glaring.
Related: 13 Ways to Raise Young Feminists
Retailers love to say that they produce according to demand. If that’s true, then why do I hear from so many unhappy parents on social media who can’t find clothes and shoes that feel sturdy and comfortable for their daughters without shopping in the “boys’ section”? For evidence, check out the photos and complaints parents post with our friends over at Let Clothes Be Clothes.
I’m a consumer and I’m unhappy.
We all need to repeat that sentiment again and again until retailers and manufacturers produce what we want. And in the meantime, support awesome shops that make clothes for kids that they will feel confident in, like Girls Will Be and other small shops that we feature on Instagram regularly.
Certainly, I don’t want my daughter to feel that her body is shameful. But I also don’t want her to feel that her body defines her.
Dress her as you feel is appropriate, and to hell with anyone else’s opinion. These people saying that girls are being “body shamed” because their parents won’t dress them like streetwalkers would be the first to ask why the girl was wearing such skimpy clothing in the first place, if she was sexually assaulted.
It’s not a logical argument, and is not meant to be. It’s all about putting women and girls into a neverending series of no-win situations, to keep them down and prevent them from developing any confidence or self-worth.
Yes! I agree completely with what you wrote. And you have brought the central issue to the front and center: there is a hugely inequitable focus on girls’ bodies and how the clothes look (meaning, what they accentuate or hide) and how girls look in clothes (including yes, infants, toddlers, and preschoolers), to the point where this becomes THE POINT of the clothes. Girls pick this up at young ages. This in turn fosters a preoccupation for girls and woman as to how their clothes look (to others) and how the girls themselves look (to others) in the clothes. WHAT? WHY? Should this be about offering comfort, weather protection, suitability for activity, ease in dressing and undressing, preference or necessity (think: allergies and sensitivities) in fabric and trim choices, creativity in color and pattern and design, and so on? Many shorts for crawlers, toddlers, and preschoolers have inseams And this does not happen for boys. This conversation and action (where I shop, what I buy, and what I say to manufacturers) must happen, but it must also include this central point as the starting point. Thank you, and keep up the good work.