I tried to access those swimwear websites, and my internet filter wouldn’t let me look at ohanaswimwear. But then it won’t let me access pureloveclub either. Ha!
For modesty reasons, I no longer allow bikinis for my daughters. Hopefully, with this early introduction of the idea, I won’t have to argue about this in their teenage years. I wear a “skirt-kini”, tank top plus skirt with attached panty. No midriff shows, but I don’t recall ever checking the fingertip test for skirt length. My daughters asked for tankinis for ease of using the restroom, and I had a HARD time finding tankinis in girls’ sizes. We finally found some at
www.lioninthesun.com. My two oldest girls now wear tank tops (no midriff showing) and boy-cut shorts. For those wishing even more coverage, this place also sells one piece suits covering from just above the knee to the neck to elbow length; they look like short surfers’ wetsuits in a lighter, prettier SPF50 fabric.
I bought SPF50 “rashguard” shirts for my sons ($13 at Target), and someone asked me if it was for modesty. Umm, really it was for sun protection; I didn’t even consider bare chests a modesty issue for my sons. What do others here think? Does age of the child make a difference in dress standards?
A friend bought her daughters’ suits at
www.swimmodest.com. Their suits are one piece bodysuits covering mid-thigh to neck to cap sleeve, with an attached sarong. But my friend tells me they sell out early in the season.
The Duggar family links to
www.wholesomewear.com, which sells swimsuits that are basically dresses with kneelength bodysuits underneath.
I agree that modesty is an important virtue, but where to draw the line of what is necessary for modesty vs. unnecessary coverage seems to vary so much with the “eye of the beholder” individual opinion. Sigh. Can’t please everyone, I know.