Those pearls wouldn’t last a minute in a bouncy house with my kids.

Earlier this week I made the rather heartbreaking decision to retire my yoga pants because, as stated in my post entitled: Yoga Pants & Prescription Pills, they had become the dominant piece in my lazy mom uniform. This difficult, albeit necessary, decision forced me to re-assess mommy style as a whole, and actually got me thinking about how drastically our uniform, lazy or not, has changed over the years.

Take for example, the quintessential 50’s mom, June Cleaver. Her impeccably tailored house dress and matching apron was, from what I understand, a fairly accurate representation of motherhood for the time and what I would consider her uniform.  Compare that to a head-to-toe velour sweat suit with the word “pink” across the ass and you can see just how much we’ve evolved, or how far we’ve fallen, depending on your opinion of sweats.

Now, I understand that times have changed and we as a society are not dressing as formally as we did in the 1950’s and 60’s but I can’t help but wonder, is some of why the mom uniform has changed so much because the way we are interacting with our kids, has also changed so much?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I feel like today’s society is putting far less value on domestic perfection and instead valuing stay-at-home moms and dads who spend their time getting down and dirty with their kids.  Whether it’s volunteering at school or rolling around in a bouncy house, we as parents are no longer watching from the sidelines with a Tom Collins in our hands and our uniform may be a reflection of that.

So the question for today is: Do you think that the decision, made by so many moms today to ditch the dress and instead choose active wear, is a conscious choice for the sake of our children or as I originally claimed, the result of laziness?