Allowance for clothes

Cat501

Dunroamin wrote: »

I'm afraid that this really proves the point that was being made that if children are dressing in an extreme fashion when very young then they'll be doing permanent damage to their bodies at an unacceptable age.

.

not always.....:)

I should point out that I also have an older daughter.

She also wore all the goth/emo stuff although she was slightly older when she started - getting on for 13 I'd say. She has never had a piercing, and has one tattoo which she got done very recently and for a very specific reason (she's 19).

Mumps, that's funny, I think things often work out that way

Anyway I have a football match to watch so I'm calling it a night

terra_ferma

Lotus-eater wrote: »

My 8 and 3/4 DD has been into fashion and her clothes for as long as I remember.
Not luckily which clothes/labels are in fashion now, but just the way she looks, she really cares how she looks and which clothes she wears.
She gets lots of 2nd hand clothes from friends of ours and has no problem with that (she actually loves it), but loves shopping with my DW for clothes.

My DW is thinking of giving her a clothing allowance of £10 a month, not in her hand, but virtually in a book, so she can then choose what to buy and when.
Her shoes and school clothes would not come into this money.

It seems a good idea, it will make her grown up and get her more used to what things cost.

But I'm a little hesitant, I myself spend next to nothing on clothes, only replacing them when they are falling off me. Now I'm not saying she should be the same, we are who we are, but it she a little young to be given this freedom?

The thread has kind of gone off on a tangent, but I would like to say that your girl sounds lovely , nothing wrong with letting her make her own choices, with parental guidance (not like she's wearing high heels and make up like some little girls you see around...).

Personally I would not give her an additional allowance, I agree with people that say not to give too much importance to external appearance.
Things like good reading books, sports and other interests should be encouraged, just to make sure she doesn't focus too much on clothes and her appearance.
(not saying you are not already doing that, just a general comment).

poet123

Kimberley82 wrote: »

But that happens alot, children who are given no room to express themselves or make any choices can often end up really rebeling, not always but it does happen

I would agree with that, but there are lots of ways of expressing yourself which do not involve mutilation or dressing to cause a sharp intake of breath.

Cat501

poet123 wrote: »

No, I am not obsessed, but for the life of me I can't see why as a parent you would assist a child to limit their career ops by decisions made when they were very young.

As for teachers, the same applies, one or several, may have got jobs with visible piercings, but many more won't, and for every teaching job there are a lot of applicants. I know because I sit on a governing body and regularly interview teachers.

I do hope that you would not deny children the chance to be taught by an excellent teacher on the sole basis that he or she had tattoos or piercings?:eek:

mumps

poet123 wrote: »

There is always an example of the other side of the coin.;)

I've got three more so more examples are available. I always felt that it was worth picking my battles, did it matter if I didn't like the style of trousers my 12 year old picked? No. On the other hand I wouldn't have let them get tattooes or piercings before they were 18 and none of them have got them after they were 18 even though two of them thought it was the end of the world when they couldn't have piercings at 13 or 14.

I did let them experiment with hair colour if they wanted to as I knew it would soon grow out. I suppose you could sum my philiosophy up as letting them experiement with clothing when it really didn't matter but I didn't let them do anything permanent. Three of them are graduates with good careers, youngest is still at university. All dress smartly but no extremes. I am happy with the results.

I grew up in the 50s but was still allowed a say in clothes, I thought every one was. I don't think I have ever been clothes shopping with my kids without asking them what they thought and I always heard other mothers doing the same.

I think mine got to the stage where they felt it was more individual not to have any tattooes or piercings at all as virtually all their friends have one or more.

wendym

Sorry if this has been suggested - my computer is being awkward.

I started sewing at that age, just to have a very limited influence on what I wore. Is there anyone who could encourage her to have a go at that? Perhaps customising things from charity shops?

I have sewn ever since - I thought I was so cool when I was 17 when I made a dress from a remnant of funky 60s curtain fabric. I wore it to a party where the sofa was covered in the same fabic, and spent the evening with people begging me to sit down so I would appear to disappear.

I now have a granddaughter of that age, and although we don't live near each other we are starting to enjoy small sewing projects.

Dunroamin

Cat501 wrote: »

I do hope that you would not deny children the chance to be taught by an excellent teacher on the sole basis that he or she had tattoos or piercings?:eek:

I think that. all things being equal, a teacher without tattoos and facial piercings will have the edge in being offered a job.

Also, many college courses such as childcare, beauty therapy, travel and tourism will require students to remove facial piercings and cover all tatoos, regardless of the weather.

As parents, one of our responsibilities is to help our children to open as many career doors as possible, not the opposite.

mumps

Cat501 wrote: »

I do hope that you would not deny children the chance to be taught by an excellent teacher on the sole basis that he or she had tattoos or piercings?:eek:

I recruit staff and have to let people know at interview that their facial piercings will need to be taken out at work on Health and Safety grounds. It isn't really a problem. Tattooes are generally fine unless they are offensive and need to be covered, we do insist the offensive ones are covered at all times and I do feel sorry for them in very hot weather but I haven't had anyone object to that. I know several health professionals with heavy tattooes but can't remember any teachers, mine or kids, who had tattooes on show.

poet123

Cat501 wrote: »

I do hope that you would not deny children the chance to be taught by an excellent teacher on the sole basis that he or she had tattoos or piercings?:eek:

Not on the sole basis, no.

However, all else being equal, and trust me, there are very many excellent young graduate teachers out there, then they would not be first choice. I consider teachers need also be role models, and I also have to consider what the majority of parents would consider to be the characteristics of such a role model for impressionable kids. I know that most parents don't aspire to their kids having piercings or overt tattoos, so wouldn't consider that a teacher who did have those things to be a role model.

I am sorry if that sounds harsh, but that is the reality, and why I know that such things are career limiting.

Cat501

mumps wrote: »

I recruit staff and have to let people know at interview that their facial piercings will need to be taken out at work on Health and Safety grounds. It isn't really a problem. Tattooes are generally fine unless they are offensive and need to be covered, we do insist the offensive ones are covered at all times and I do feel sorry for them in very hot weather but I haven't had anyone object to that. I know several health professionals with heavy tattooes but can't remember any teachers, mine or kids, who had tattooes on show.

Can't see why anyone would have a problem with any of that

Depending on why the tattoos were offensive, I might very well not feel sorry for them at all!:p

Dunroamin, honestly, what would have been the point in insisting she didn't get tattoos at age 16 in order to keep open a few "opportunities" that were pretty much closed to her anyway due to a distinct lack of the necessary interest and personal attributes anyway? At 16 in Scotland, as you know, the law treats them very much as an adult in that they can move out, get married - and there's not a damn thing we can do about it! I can't be the only one who finds it a bizarre anomaly that they are deemed mature enough to decide to wed but not to decide to get a tattoo!

Not that I would have tried to do it anyway, but I can't really see how you can lay down the law to a 16 year old about something which only affects them. What would you all have done if you had a young adult go behind your back and get tattooed - throw them out on the street?