Butts in the Park

[LongLiveRafiki]

@Veronique In regards to modesty, there are other places to view an example besides Western Europe. For example, in Singapore, it is illegal to offend the modesty of a woman. This means that it is illegal to call her a slut, etc or to to hit on her in an unwanted manner. Therefore, if modesty is a bs notion, then you are saying it is okay for people to slut-shame them, since that law prevents slut-shaming.

The majority does not agree that it's okay to walk around with your butt hanging out, and the fact that there's even a debate shows that plenty of people have a problem with it.

*Above written by my DH who wanted to share his thoughts, having been in Singapore

 

[mom2rtk]

@Veronique In regards to modesty, there are other places to view an example besides Western Europe. For example, in Singapore, it is illegal to offend the modesty of a woman. This means that it is illegal to call her a slut, etc or to to hit on her in an unwanted manner. Therefore, if modesty is a bs notion, then you are saying it is okay for people to slut-shame them, since that law prevents slut-shaming.

The majority does not agree that it's okay to walk around with your butt hanging out, and the fact that there's even a debate shows that plenty of people have a problem with it.

*Above written by my DH who wanted to share his thoughts, having been in Singapore

I'm pretty sure there are lots of good examples of why we don't want to hold Singapore up as an example of the legal system we want to emulate.

 

[lovewdwfun]

OP here! Didn't realize this thread was still going until I checked. To clarify a couple of questions, the person in question was definitely a minor. She was there with parents and younger siblings.

Alas, it was not just a peek of the cheek. A very large portion of her butt cheeks were exposed.

To those saying it is slut-shaming, I disagree. There is a time and a place for certain behaviors and exposure, for both men and women. I have no problem with this girl having relations with her boyfriend, for instance, but that doesn't mean she should be having them in the park in front of kids. It's important to have respect for others.

We have certain rules and expectations in our society. The line gets drawn somewhere. Is it OK for a man to walk around without clothes at the park? Most people would agree it is not. How about a man walking around in a thong? A woman in a thong? Where is the line drawn? 1/3 or a cheek? A half of a cheek? Bare breasts? There has to be some line in a family theme park.

I also believe shorts that leave a large portion of the buttocks uncovered are designed to be provocative and sexual. I know many of our photos have people in the background. Call me a prude, but I think it would be pretty gross to post a picture of our family in front of the castle and have a young girl's butt hanging out in the background. At some point of exposure, it borders on child pornography. Maybe not at half a cheek, but there needs to be some line drawn.

 

[Klayfish]

There has to be some line in a family theme park.

I also believe shorts that leave a large portion of the buttocks uncovered are designed to be provocative and sexual. I know many of our photos have people in the background. Call me a prude, but I think it would be pretty gross to post a picture of our family in front of the castle and have a young girl's butt hanging out in the background. At some point of exposure, it borders on child pornography. Maybe not at half a cheek, but there needs to be some line drawn.

Sure, there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and sure it's a family park (on a sort of related note, I'm actually against alcohol being served at WDW for similar reasons) but it's not an easy solution. Like you said, is it a half a cheek, 1/4 cheek, 33.333%? Who's going to measure that? Imagine the issues that creates. Some have more cheek than others. It's purely subjective. And sure, plenty of people have an issue with it. But obviously plenty of people don't, because plenty of people wear them...and if they're minors, they're parents/guardians allow it. Yes, I agree they're designed to be "sexy"...call it provocative, call it what you want. But so are some of the tops women wear. They don't leave much to the imagination either. Ever been to a water park, even the WDW ones? I've seen both men and women wearing things that make me go and want to find some bleach for my eyes. It's a very difficult matter to police, at best. I get the concept of the annoyance with it, but some of it is a value judgment and if we wanted WDW (or any other place) to enforce everyone's value judgments then nobody would be allowed in the parks. What about tattoos? I personally despise them. I have nothing against someone else who wants to get them, that's their choice and their body. But just like you'd hate to have a picture with a girl and a butt cheek hanging out, I'd just as much hate to have one with someone covered in tattoos. Is that a value judgment I'm making? Sure, and I'm allowed to have that value in my own beliefs. As long as they're not against the law, the clothing someone is wearing is simply a subjective value judgment.

For the record, I wouldn't let DD10 do it, but when she's older, that's up to her.

 

[mjkacmom]

I just remembered something about our last trip! My oldest was in 6th grade, and grew. It was the beginning of November, surprise trip, so I packed their bags when I put the summer clothes in bins. When we got to WDW, all of dd's shorts and pants were too short! I joke about her "diaper shorts" in the pictures. That was her last growth spurt, she is still the same size, and she's 21.

 

[tzolkin]

I have to laugh at everyone complaining about seeing butts. Try spending your time in a wheelchair. You get up close and personal with butts!

A few years back we took my grandfather to Epcot for his 80th birthday and pushed him around in a wheelchair. There were numerous times that he decided to verbally acknowledge the butts that he was enjoying at eye level. Early Alzheimer's (so no filter of what's socially appropriate) plus losing his hearing (so he was super loud) made for a slightly embarrassing day.

 

[wellesleyprincess]

OP here! Didn't realize this thread was still going until I checked. To clarify a couple of questions, the person in question was definitely a minor. She was there with parents and younger siblings.

Alas, it was not just a peek of the cheek. A very large portion of her butt cheeks were exposed.

To those saying it is slut-shaming, I disagree. There is a time and a place for certain behaviors and exposure, for both men and women. I have no problem with this girl having relations with her boyfriend, for instance, but that doesn't mean she should be having them in the park in front of kids. It's important to have respect for others.

We have certain rules and expectations in our society. The line gets drawn somewhere. Is it OK for a man to walk around without clothes at the park? Most people would agree it is not. How about a man walking around in a thong? A woman in a thong? Where is the line drawn? 1/3 or a cheek? A half of a cheek? Bare breasts? There has to be some line in a family theme park.

I also believe shorts that leave a large portion of the buttocks uncovered are designed to be provocative and sexual. I know many of our photos have people in the background. Call me a prude, but I think it would be pretty gross to post a picture of our family in front of the castle and have a young girl's butt hanging out in the background. At some point of exposure, it borders on child pornography. Maybe not at half a cheek, but there needs to be some line drawn.

OP, I'll be honest, I have no problem with making a comment ("Looks like someone forgot their pants today") or eye-rolling. I have no problem with not letting yourself or your own daughters do it. I do have to kind of eyeroll at your initial references to calling security. I mean as someone else said earlier mini-skirts and dresses can cause the same problem. Do you want Disney issued jumpsuits for everyone. I guess my frustration/laugh is not the "kids these days" exasperation, but the idea that you think that Disney authority should remove or force your views on another guest.

Regarding the photos, I mean how closely are you looking at it. If someone is truly in the background, I can't imagine the average person zooming in on everyone in the background and if someone is close enough in your photo that your seeing their butt, you may want to crop edit that one anyway. And I'm sorry I honestly don't believe someone was walking around naked enough to make it fit the legal definition of porn.

 

[maxiesmom]

We have certain rules and expectations in our society. The line gets drawn somewhere. Is it OK for a man to walk around without clothes at the park? Most people would agree it is not. How about a man walking around in a thong? A woman in a thong? Where is the line drawn? 1/3 or a cheek? A half of a cheek? Bare breasts? There has to be some line in a family theme park.

I also believe shorts that leave a large portion of the buttocks uncovered are designed to be provocative and sexual. I know many of our photos have people in the background. Call me a prude, but I think it would be pretty gross to post a picture of our family in front of the castle and have a young girl's butt hanging out in the background. At some point of exposure, it borders on child pornography. Maybe not at half a cheek, but there needs to be some line drawn.

Disney has a dress code. I guess you could go to the effort of pointing someone out to a CM if their clothing is that offensive to you. But at that point you are allowing what someone else has on to affect your vacation, which is ridiculous imho. Why give what someone else has on that kind of power over you?

 

[Cinderella94]

I'm not sure why we're wondering about a line of how much butt cheek is acceptable at all. The answer is none. In a public family friendly theme park, anyway, IMO. If any part of your butt isn't covered, then your butt isn't covered. It's not subjective to look in a mirror and say "I can see some of my butt, these shorts are too short" or "Can't see any butt, I'm good."

 

[Hikergirl]

I'm not sure why we're wondering about a line of how much butt cheek is acceptable at all. The answer is none. In a public family friendly theme park, anyway, IMO. If any part of your butt isn't covered, then your butt isn't covered. It's not subjective to look in a mirror and say "I can see some of my butt, these shorts are too short" or "Can't see any butt, I'm good."

Because as this thread shows not everyone has the same opinion about how much is too much. A little cheek hanging out doesn't bother me. I'm not even bothered by more than a little. Obviously the girls wearing them don't have a problem with it either, so yes it is subjective.

Wondering if you feel the same about breasts? If the top curve of a breast shows from the neck of a shirt is that OK? Is it just butt cheeks you have an issue with?

 

[Cinderella94]

Wondering if you feel the same about breasts? If the top curve of a breast shows from the neck of a shirt is that OK?

Nope, I don't. An average v-neck shirt (say, the kind that Disney sells in their parks) is perfectly fine IMO. (I realize that an average v-neck shirt will expose a different amount on different sized women - that has nothing to do with it). Seeing butt cheeks is just less appropriate to me.

 

[Hikergirl]

Nope, I don't. An average v-neck shirt (say, the kind that Disney sells in their parks) is perfectly fine IMO. (I realize that an average v-neck shirt will expose a different amount on different sized women - that has nothing to do with it). Seeing butt cheeks is just less appropriate to me.

Fair enough but I that makes zero sense to me. Why is one "private area"(as you said in your pp) OK to be partly exposed but another isn't?

 

[nicatene]

Woo hooo! Look it's the mining relief crew for the next shift of 7DMT!

.... okay for everyone protesting, suggest what Disney SHOULD do! Should they...

1) Have Security haul anyone showing skin into a different line where they can be humiliated and groped at, while they are shamed for their choice of clothing? That doesn't sound like a magical start to the day
2) Have a gift shop tent placed at Security and force these guests to BUY a different clothing item? Disney is already a money-suck as it is, I would be horrified to be told that I also have to buy a $40 t-shirt because "someone doesn't like" what I am wearing
3) Where are you going to make these guests forcibly disrobe and change? A changing tent also by Security? Requiring yet more Security guards...
4) And where will they PUT that offensive article of clothing? If Disney confiscated it from the guest, there would be serious backlash and their Lost and Found department is ALREADY overflowing!!! Also not everyone can afford a locker and Disney certainly will not be giving those away for free!

I am just wondering how one could logistically control what other people wear in public... because thankfully we don't have the Fashion Police anymore. Nobody is going to jail because they wore a coat priced outside of their income bracket or livelihood ; because remember, society USED to do that!

Many years ago when I was a teenager in WDW for my senior trip I wore a body hugging, halter style half top. I was stopped at the gate and told I was not allowed into the park wearing my shirt. They held me at the gate while another member of my party entered and bought me a shirt. Only after they returned with the shirt and I put it on was I allowed to go through the gate.
So yes, in the past they have enforced a dress code based on what the cast member deemed inappropriate for the park. I was showing only my stomach and shoulders, no "offensive" areas were even close to being exposed. Of course this was in the 80's when people didn't seem to be so quick to lawyer up for such things.

 

[PrinceOfPeace]

Kid

So when your sons go out in public do they actually physically look away from someone? Shielding your kids seems pretty extreme, and the truth is it doesn't matter what you do, your son's are going to look. They just are going to hide it from you.

Kiddos are still young. I prefer in certain circumstances for them to look away, as not to make a big deal (laughing etc). Protecting is one thing. Sheltering is another. Thankfully my kiddos tell us their heart...the good the bad the ugly. Think I'm extreme if you want...but I know who I am and who we are as a family. Peace

 

[PrinceOfPeace]

Wow. Going way too far, but they are your kids to raise. Hopefully you don't end up teaching them to be ashamed of their bodies, or that a girl is asking for it if she dresses a way you deem wrong. Which seems to be what this is all saying. Guys should be able to look and still control themselves.

No not at all ashamed. Unfortunately those are words you said. Honoring our bodies is different then flaunting them. One can still be modest (not saying head to toe covered), and still be stylish, and still be body confident. What's sad is...the moment modesty is brought up...I'm accused of teaching my kids to be ashamed of themselves. That's just sad. But you're also entitled to your opinion. I simply understand the OPs post.

 

[PrinceOfPeace]

How do you know the ages of the teenagers you "went full mama bear" on? How threatening where you? That's pretty concerning actually. I hope you didn't raise your voice at a perfect stranger. And, even if they were underage? They certainly didn't have to listen to you...I seriously can't imagine how that went down, nor can I ever imagine telling a child who was not under my care how to behave unless they were physically in my space, but otherwise there's tons of crap I'd love not to see in public - diners eating with their mouth open and so loud I can hear it come to mind - but its not my place to tell them to use a napkin, not smack their mouth, whatever.

I don't need to explain myself to you. Peace

 

[maxiesmom]

No not at all ashamed. Unfortunately those are words you said. Honoring our bodies is different then flaunting them. One can still be modest (not saying head to toe covered), and still be stylish, and still be body confident. What's sad is...the moment modesty is brought up...I'm accused of teaching my kids to be ashamed of themselves. That's just sad. But you're also entitled to your opinion. I simply understand the OPs post.

Having to wear shorts is the pool does flirt with teaching your daughters she should be ashamed of her body. There are plenty of modest swimsuits out there. Extra covering (to me) says that she has to cover herself so that she doesn't draw attention from boys. Boys should be able to control themselves without girls having to wear shorts in the pool.

And yeah, you don't need to explain yourself. But then, you joined a conversation on a message board, and that is kind of how it works.

 

[Hikergirl]

Kid

Kiddos are still young. I prefer in certain circumstances for them to look away, as not to make a big deal (laughing etc). Protecting is one thing. Sheltering is another. Thankfully my kiddos tell us their heart...the good the bad the ugly. Think I'm extreme if you want...but I know who I am and who we are as a family. Peace

Protecting them from seeing a body part? IMO That IS sheltering and shielding them from reality, the reality that a body part is just that, a body part. You are teaching your children that there is something wrong with seeing a body part, something to be ashamed about.
And yes I think that is extreme and unhealthy.

 

[amberpi]

I don't need to explain myself to you. Peace

If you went "full mama bear" you'd be explaining yourself to far more than me.

 

[LadyCerri]

I just have to interject that I love that this thread is still going. Such a hot button topic that has zero to do with the Happiest Place on Earth. Thank you