Got a problem with topless toddlers?
Should toddlers cover up in public?
My wife and I discussed the issue the other day after a snorkeling trip in Key West. A little girl on the boat with us, no more than 4 years old, was with her father on the same excursion, and she wasn’t wearing a top.
I’ve never raised a toddler daughter; my stepkids are in their teens, and the younger of the two was 11 when I met them. But I did ask my wife whether she ever allowed them to be in public without a top, and until what age. Her response: no way. Not in public.
Clearly, the issue has a cultural component. I heard the toddler’s dad speaking a language I didn’t recognize, so it’s likely they were from someplace less inhibited than the United States can be. But still, this trip was in the United States. Should this dad have recognized that? You know, put the other half of the bathing suit on the kid?
Topless toddlers raise a slew of questions, of course. Like why did I think she should have a top on when I wasn’t wearing one? Why is it okay for little boys, and big boys, but not big girls? And when is a little girl big enough that a top becomes a necessity?
Paranoia about pedophiles comes into play as well, but that doesn’t address the gender imbalance here. I mean, do pedophiles really distinguish between a topless boy and a topless girl?
Would you have said something to the dad? None of us did, and we all survived the “trauma” of being on the same boat as a topless toddler. I’m really just raising the question for conversation’s sake. At what point do we need to tell our little girls to cover up in public?

Previous entry:
Next entry:
Gretchen Day-Bryant has a son in high school and a daughter in middle school. She’s lived to tell about the struggles of juggling little kids and work...
Joy Oglesby has an infant daughter and a sister 13 years her junior, whom she babies to the now-adult...
Cindy Kent Fort Lauderdale mother of three. Her kids span in ages from teenager to 20s...
Rafael Olmeda and his wife welcomed their first son in Feb. 2009, and he's helping raise two teenage stepdaughters...
Lois Solomon lives in Boca Raton with her husband and three daughters...
Anne Vasquez is the Online Editor in charge of overseeing SunSentinel.com. She is the mother of a 5-year-old boy and a newborn daughter.
Georgia East is the parent of a five-year-old girl, who came into the world weighing 1 pound, 13 ounces...
Brittany Wallman is the mother of Creed, 13, and Lily, 6, and is married...
Chris Tiedje is the Social Media Coordinator, and father of two boys and a girl all under the age of seven.



Comments
Topless 4-year old! This sounds scary!!! I had to go through years of therapy after seeing a topless statue in the Metropolitan Museum, and it wasn't even alive!
I am really sorry for your trauma. Hope this is the last topless mammal you ever have to see in your life.
Posted by: Olivia | September 1, 2009 11:22 AM
It's a form of insanity, individually or culturally, to think that a little toddler girl's nipples are any different that a boy's at that age. To insist on covering them up only serves to further sexualize an innocent child.
Posted by: nudiarist | September 1, 2009 11:57 AM
Well put, nudiartist. +1
Posted by: Elsi | September 1, 2009 12:01 PM
PS The sidebar ads on this page are far more inappropriate than a toddler's upper body. Your sense of propriety could be better applied to the Sentinel's ad department.
Posted by: Elsi | September 1, 2009 12:05 PM
Nudiarist,
I think you have a very good point, and that's probably why neither my wife nor I (nor anyone else on the boat, far as I could tell) said anything to the girl's father. It really was none of our business.
Olivia, I hope therapy continues to help you. :)
Elsi, we must be seeing different ads.
Posted by: Rafael | September 1, 2009 12:33 PM
Really? You're offended by a naked baby? I don't get it. The last thing we need to do is bring more shame to our girls about their bodies. The family did nothing wrong and only an American would try to sexualize something so innocent.
Posted by: Lois_Lane | September 1, 2009 1:25 PM
No, Lois, I'm not offended by a naked baby. I just wonder at what point do we stop saying "aw, cute baby" and start saying "you know, it might be time for the kid to wear a top." We can agree that there is some point, can't we? I mean, you wouldn't feel comfortable letting your teenage daughter do that, would you? How about 10 years old? Ok, how about 5? All I'm asking is, where's the line? And why?
Posted by: Rafael | September 1, 2009 1:30 PM
Where's the line? There's no line that I know of. Why not leave it to the person or people involved?
If a teenage girl decides to sit without a top, presumably with others around, why do you have to say anything to or about her? If someone unknown to her is staring or doing something else inappropriate, who's the one misbehaving?
I know it may make some people uncomfortable, but if there's nothing wrong with it, why do we have the right to interfere?
How long should it take to get used to it? That may depend on the context, admittedly. A boat is a good place indeed to get used to it, if necessary.
Posted by: Paul Rapoport | September 1, 2009 1:51 PM
It's quite scary how sexually restrained the American mentality is, the fact that a young is noticed and sexually identify is sick... don't you think is about time to grow up?
Posted by: Elioz | September 1, 2009 3:05 PM
Paul,
I think you'd agree that in general, most people think there IS a line somewhere. Maybe "line" is the wrong word, but put us all on that same boat, with children, and have a 21-year-old woman take her top off, and I suspect the boat captain might have compelled her to cover up, rightly so in my opinion, though you are free to disagree. Yet no one said anything about the toddler. So even if you conclude that there's no line for yourself, can you agree that others may feel there is a line, even if we don't all draw that line in the same place? Am I making sense?
Posted by: Rafael | September 1, 2009 3:06 PM
Elioz,
I don't think there's anything childish about an intelligent discussion that confronts U.S. Americans' mores on public child nudity. I think it's a fair question: we all agree that it's a non-issue for infants. I think many people would agree that it's inappropriate for an older child to wander around half naked. So it's a fair question to ask: when is the kid too old to run around without a top?
Posted by: Rafael | September 1, 2009 3:11 PM
Tops are used to conceal breasts, right? No breasts, no problem as far as I am concerned.
Posted by: Eve, after the Fall | September 1, 2009 3:30 PM
This section of the Sentinel seems to write the most bizarre articles.
The answer to your question is simple... WHEN THE PARENT DECIDES IT IS TIME. Obviously, your wife is more prudish than other mothers. But what she think is appropriate is all that is important... for her children. And the same goes for other parents. It doesn't matter what other people think. Its none of their business.
Another thing to keep in mind is the setting you were in. It is far different to have a child take her top off at the beach, a pool or on a boat than other public locations. Its not like the little girl was dining at a nice restaurant or shopping at a mall.
Posted by: Joe | September 1, 2009 4:09 PM
A lot of good points, Joe.
I think my wife would have a hearty laugh if she saw someone called her "prudish." I think she's a little less trusting of strangers that the folks who've commented here.
Various issues factor into the decisions we make as parents. As a reporter, I'm frequently writing or reading about some pretty unsavory behavior by society's predators, and my caution might seem paranoid to other folks.
Thanks for weighing in.
By the way, looks like the folks at Cafe Mom hit on the same topic last week. Take a look:
http://www.cafemom.com/dailybuzz/toddler/6959/Tot_Girls_Too_Old_to_Go_Topless
Posted by: Rafael | September 1, 2009 4:21 PM
I believe that making a fuss about topless females (young or old) in this country is really a problem itself and does not do any good for this society. I have been to places where the women go topless during their daily lives just as men do, and seen school functions where the girls were topless and grown women at the schools topless. This was in places where bare breasted women have been a part of the culture as far back as anyone knows and to them it is just normal. I have seen no evidence it has harmed the children or the society. Ultimately it could be the same here, but the people who make a big fuss about it and condition people from a young age are creating issues where they do not need to exist.
I believe that the female should be allowed to be topless where ever males are, and that most people would adjust quickly. If that causes individuals to misbehave they are the ones we need to work at changing. This country is one of the most obsessive if not the most obsessive when it comes to preventing girls and women from being topless, but I do not see where that has made this country a better place.
Posted by: Michael | September 1, 2009 9:36 PM
The church is the driving force behind the morals in this country. So go ask a priest where the line should be drawn.
Oops.
Posted by: Bob | September 1, 2009 9:49 PM
I am in SE Virginia, a very conservative area, and I have seen parents allow their four and five-year-old daughters to play in the front yard topless. At a local park, I saw a four-year-old girl and her 7-year-old brother both walking topless with their mother.
Anyone who is upset at seeing a topless or even naked child is uncomfortable at seeing the child for what reason?
This is what I call the pedophile society. Pedophiles are the current monster even though children are safest today than at any point in our country's history. People view the children as a pedo would just as it happened in Salem, Mass during the witch trial era and as some did during the McCarthy era.
We have perverted our own selves.
Bob
Posted by: Bob | September 1, 2009 10:34 PM
While I understand your point about being concerned about pedophiles and predators, the fact of the matter is you really can't begin to guess what it is about your child or the way he or she is dressed (or not dressed) that will attract the attention of someone who preys on children. The bottom line is you will drive yourself crazy if you think you can dress your child in such a way that it will repel pedophiles. These are sick people. You can't begin to imagine what's going on in their minds and to make yourselves and your children prisoners by worrying about this is doing them a disservice.
Posted by: Stop the Madness | September 2, 2009 6:25 AM
I agree with Bob, Stop the Madness and others above. I know there are sick individuals out there, but they are not so great in number that we have to live in constant paranoia and teach our kids that the human body is shameful.
Check out "No Bikini" on Youtube, about a 7 yr-old girl who doesn't want to deal with a bikini top and so spends her summer swim class topless, where she is mistaken for a long-haired boy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWOfcQ4O_yY
I have no problem with topless or even nude children, teens, adults or seniors.
I even let my dog outside naked.
Posted by: Arnabas | September 2, 2009 9:16 AM
As long as you don't shave the dog before you send him out hairless. Naked bald dogs are scary. :)
Posted by: Rafael | September 2, 2009 4:24 PM
Rafael, that most people think there is a line somewhere is part of the problem. Many Americans are sex obsessed, finding immorality and danger where there is none, and unhappy if there isn't something they can attach sex to.
Pedophile crime is down 53% between 1992 and 2006, according to one reputable source. The attitude of many people in this subject (not saying you, or anyone specific) is connected to why the USA has the highest rate in the Western world of sexual pathologies of various kinds, including body dysmorphic disorder of girls who are made to think their breasts are bad from a very young age.
Posted by: Paul Rapoport | September 2, 2009 7:17 PM
Nudiarist, Paul, Arnabas, Stop the madness, Bob, Michael and Lois_Lane you are all on the right track. I agree with everything all of you have said. It should not be a problem for anyone, young or old, to dress or not dress as they like in the appropriate places with n fear of being arrested or verbally assaulted. Appropriate places are their home AND yard, the beach or swimming pool and the park. Maybe someday it will be okay to go nude in public everywhere.
If you don't like seeing a person naked don't look (stare) at them.
Posted by: Mike | September 3, 2009 12:09 AM
Could I just point out the obvious -- everyone has breasts. A good argument might be made for covering the hairy ones. Requiring female breasts to be covered is just a vestige of a chattel mentality toward women. Covering kids is clearly a projection of skewed adult sexuality. Covering only girl kids is both blatant gender discrimination and an explicit signal that you are sexualizing them. So in terms of "lines", I think, as dads and parents, we should draw the line -- today! right this minute! -- on treating our girls in such a perverse way! Let them be as comfortable as the boys are, and to whatever age they feel comfortable, hopefully forever. Then, in the meantime, maybe we old guys can also work on treating all women as we do our daughters. Neither our breasts nor theirs signal an invitation to intimacy.
Posted by: Guy | September 3, 2009 7:31 AM
You men who are offended by bare breasts... Okay so maybe you're gay, or maybe you're a right-wing extremist... Not that there's anything wrong with that, but you may be more comfortable if you moved to Iran. There you wouldn't have to look at women period!
Posted by: Lynda Lane | September 17, 2009 12:50 AM