Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I feel like I've entered some alternate universe or something. I can't believe folks are putting ear piercing in the same category as genital mutilation. Frankly, I find that very offensive.
The pain lasts less than a second and if the child chooses not to wear earrings, the hole is only noticeable if someone is looking for it. It's a whole lot easier to get ears pierced as a baby than to wait when the child is older.
I feel like I've entered some alternate universe or something. I can't believe folks are putting ear piercing in the same category as genital mutilation. Frankly, I find that very offensive.
The pain lasts less than a second and if the child chooses not to wear earrings, the hole is only noticeable if someone is looking for it. It's a whole lot easier to get ears pierced as a baby than to wait when the child is older.
I'm not one comparing it to genital mutilation at all, but I totally disagree with your last statement.
It's so easy and almost painless to get them pierced at any time, there is nothing easier about doing it to a baby who may decide later she didn't want her ears pierced.
Yes, fine, a piercing can be more permanent (although not always, sometimes they do just close up).
But the reality remains that parents make hundreds of decisions a day on behalf of their children. Why people get so worked up about it, I have no idea. And no I didn't piece my child's ears as an infant, but why should I care if someone else does?
I feel like I've entered some alternate universe or something. I can't believe folks are putting ear piercing in the same category as genital mutilation. Frankly, I find that very offensive.
The pain lasts less than a second and if the child chooses not to wear earrings, the hole is only noticeable if someone is looking for it. It's a whole lot easier to get ears pierced as a baby than to wait when the child is older.
No it's not. I had mine pierced when I was 13 and it was a breeze. It's not like the earlobes become so tough it's hard to get the needle through.
Foot-binding is another, but one no longer done.
Beliefs and traditions are fine, once you're old enough. But an infant or small child doesn't really have beliefs or enough understanding of traditions to make such permanent choices.
IMO, foot binding is a bad example. Foot binding crippled Chinese women. It actually impaired their lives.
Male Circumcision does, SOMETIMES become medically necessary when a boy (or man) gets older. I personally, preferred to have my boys circumcised as babies. Cause I bet any of you, had I not, and later in life, they NEEDED it, they'd be crying, asking why I didn't have it done when they were babies.
My dad was circumcised at the age of 25. My step dad was circumcised as a teenager. They both stated it was the worst pain they had ever endured, up to that point.
Now...female circumcision serves absolutely NO medical purpose, so I don't condone that at all.
I feel like I've entered some alternate universe or something. I can't believe folks are putting ear piercing in the same category as genital mutilation. Frankly, I find that very offensive.
The pain lasts less than a second and if the child chooses not to wear earrings, the hole is only noticeable if someone is looking for it. It's a whole lot easier to get ears pierced as a baby than to wait when the child is older.
But how do we know if it lasts less than a second? You also have to twist the studs on a regular basis and sterilize with alcohol until it heals (or is there a new and improved way these days?).
Why is it "easier" for the baby to have it done than to wait until she's older? Is it because it hurts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74
Neither does cutting a baby's hair.
Yes, fine, a piercing can be more permanent (although not always, sometimes they do just close up).
But the reality remains that parents make hundreds of decisions a day on behalf of their children. Why people get so worked up about it, I have no idea. And no I didn't piece my child's ears as an infant, but why should I care if someone else does?
Because it's piercing the baby's flesh. Again, I'm not worked up about it. I'm not going to call CPS. I wouldn't even ever mention it to the parents at all. It just doesn't sit well with me. To put it in a more juvenile way, to me it just seems a little gross.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sassybluesy
IMO, foot binding is a bad example. Foot binding crippled Chinese women. It actually impaired their lives.
Male Circumcision does, SOMETIMES become medically necessary when a boy (or man) gets older. I personally, preferred to have my boys circumcised as babies. Cause I bet any of you, had I not, and later in life, they NEEDED it, they'd be crying, asking why I didn't have it done when they were babies.
My dad was circumcised at the age of 25. My step dad was circumcised as a teenager. They both stated it was the worst pain they had ever endured, up to that point.
Now...female circumcision serves absolutely NO medical purpose, so I don't condone that at all.
Ears pierced? It's such a tiny blip.
Again, if they're crying, why would it be easier as a baby? Let the baby endure the pain? Or are you referring to sexual arousal? I'm wondering if people think things are easier for babies because they can't voice their experience.
Just to be clear, I for one wasn't comparing ear piercing to circumcision, foot binding, or anything else. I was just making the point that in some cultures, the "traditions" are cruel and unnecessary and done for ridiculous reasons. Again, I agree, ear piercing is not the worst thing in the world compared to other practices. I'd just rather err on the side of preventing pain rather than inflicting it in the name of... beauty? fashion? …on an infant.
Also, I'm not trying to argue with any of you. I'm asking these questions seriously, not sarcastically.
The pain lasts less than a second and if the child chooses not to wear earrings, the hole is only noticeable if someone is looking for it. It's a whole lot easier to get ears pierced as a baby than to wait when the child is older.
Easier for the parent when there is nothing that the child can do about it.
IMO, foot binding is a bad example. Foot binding crippled Chinese women. It actually impaired their lives.
Male Circumcision does, SOMETIMES become medically necessary when a boy (or man) gets older. I personally, preferred to have my boys circumcised as babies. Cause I bet any of you, had I not, and later in life, they NEEDED it, they'd be crying, asking why I didn't have it done when they were babies.
My dad was circumcised at the age of 25. My step dad was circumcised as a teenager. They both stated it was the worst pain they had ever endured, up to that point.
But how do we know if it lasts less than a second? You also have to twist the studs on a regular basis and sterilize with alcohol until it heals (or is there a new and improved way these days?).
Why is it "easier" for the baby to have it done than to wait until she's older? Is it because it hurts?
Because it's piercing the baby's flesh. Again, I'm not worked up about it. I'm not going to call CPS. I wouldn't even ever mention it to the parents at all. It just doesn't sit well with me. To put it in a more juvenile way, to me it just seems a little gross.
Again, if they're crying, why would it be easier as a baby? Let the baby endure the pain? Or are you referring to sexual arousal? I'm wondering if people think things are easier for babies because they can't voice their experience.
Just to be clear, I for one wasn't comparing ear piercing to circumcision, foot binding, or anything else. I was just making the point that in some cultures, the "traditions" are cruel and unnecessary and done for ridiculous reasons. Again, I agree, ear piercing is not the worst thing in the world compared to other practices. I'd just rather err on the side of preventing pain rather than inflicting it in the name of... beauty? fashion? …on an infant.
Also, I'm not trying to argue with any of you. I'm asking these questions seriously, not sarcastically.
Because they lack episodic memory. They don't remember it when they're that young.
Because they lack episodic memory. They don't remember it when they're that young.
But that doesn't help them at the time.
The memory of the pain that I've experienced in life doesn't hurt me now. I'm really trying to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
