Bullshit. Check the line of sight from the lens center. Those shorts have loose leg openings which means more is visible from that angle, like a dress.

Someone sitting, child or otherwise, would have to work to see up her shorts because when sitting on a bench you don’t see at bench level. You still see at eye level which is going to be roughly 2 feet above bench level. That’s going to be slightly above waist level for most people. Not down, where the center point of the lens is roughly at knee level with a line of sight that radiates from that center, including slightly up.

Further, some child is not going to be scarred for life from seeing somebody’s butt. They might be from seeing someone who didn’t do anything wrong being jerked around and publicly humiliated by a pack of uniformed cretins.

You’re entitled to think it’s inappropriate dress, even to what most people would consider ridiculously prudish standards, like the Amish or Victorian era, or cults. You don’t get to decide for everyone.

As I already stated, regardless what anyone else’s opinions are, the business has the right to set the standard for their property. And anyone who breaks the guidelines can and should be asked to leave. They should also be given a chance to correct the problem or get, at least, a partial refund.

Businesses do NOT have the right to harass people or terrify children. Let’s not forget this GIRL is also a minor. Discretion is the better part of valor. This issue could have easily and should absolutely have been handled discreetly.

Without the side dish of public shaming and frightening a teenage girl with mental health problems. (I forget what the article stated at this point, autism spectrum?)

Interesting that you’re so quick to pull the "for the children" argument but so quick to condemn one in the same breath. And heap on more shaming. Very interesting indeed.