‘How Can Shorts Be Sexist?’ 8-Year-Old Girl in UK Makes the Case
PhotoViral17:47 14.05.2018(updated 17:56 14.05.2018) Get short URL110
“At that age we didn’t have the word ‘sexism’ in our vocabulary” read one of the comments that popped on Twitter in reference to the story of a little girl in the UK who found it unfair that girls’ shorts by the clothing company Fat Face had smaller pockets than the ones in the boys’ range.
Eleanor Hanson, an eight-year-old girl Marsden, West Yorkshire, wasn’t happy to discover the boys’ model of shorts had larger pockets that could be used to store shells, sticks, eggs at her family’s farm and other useful things a child may want to keep.
The girl’s mother Jenny, who home schools Eleanor and her 10-year-old sister Lucy, said:
“It was in March we went to Fat Face and she picked up a nice top in the girl’s department. We looked at the girl’s shorts that matched the top and they were all really short with no pockets. She rejected those because they weren’t any use and had a look in the boy’s department and found some that matched the top. She was very excited about the pockets because she’s always collecting bits and pieces like shells on the beach or sticks. When she came in from collecting eggs the other day she was disgruntled about the shorts. She said ‘look I can fit seven eggs in my pockets. If we’d bought the other ones to match this top I could only fit one egg in’.”
Encouraged by her mother, Eleanor wrote to Fat Face, addressing the issue, following which she has been invited to review the company’s new short design.
Photo : Eleanor’s letter in full
Some social media users, however, failed to see how the situation had anything to do with sexism. Others suspected it was Eleanor’s parents who dragged the issue.
READ MORE: Bare Fashion: New ‘Distressed Bum Detail’ Denim Cracking Up Mood Online