or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › I peirced my DDs ears yesterday....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I peirced my DDs ears yesterday.... - Page 12

post #221 of 433
The point of my post was not to say there are certain times that it's ok to pierce a baby's ears and other times when it's not. I think I made it clear that while I think piercing a baby's ears is silly, I don't think it's abusive, and I don't think standing on principle alone is wise in this dynamic and everchanging world. I don't wish to get drawn into a long discussion on this topic. I stated where I stand, and I feel that the tone of your post was that of someone wishing to have a point to argue rather than one wishing for genuine information. If I have misjudged your tone, I apologize.

Namaste!

Ps. Just because a child is too young to verbally consent to something doesn't mean they are nonconsenting. I think that many people here assumed that the child was dissatisfied with the whole ear-piercing experience, but nothing that the OP has said has indicated that. I sometimes have to "restrain" my child even for things she wants me to do, like using a Q-tip, so that her wiggling doesn't cause a problem.
post #222 of 433
Again, I woyld say that the whole idea of what is "elective" and what is "necessary" is opinion.

We can debate the necessity of ear pircing babes (that would make for an interesting thread and might cause possible piercers to rethink thier plans), but we can't just condemn it with the statement that no unnecessary and unintentional pain should be inflected on kids; it is the rare mama that causes her child no unnecessary and intentional pain.

You child doesn't "necessarily" need his choc. syrup smeared shirt changed (for example, if he resists clothes changing, cries loudly during them, has to be restrained - gently as possible of course). But in our culture, a kid wearing a fairly clean shirt to grandmas or preschool etc is loosely necessary. I can understand that, in another culture, a baby girl wearing earings would be loosely necessary.

Still don't think it a "good" thing (changing the shirt or piercing the babe). But I baffled by the hyperbole in this thread. Are we really discussing murder and child abuse and circ and spanking in a thead about baby earings?
post #223 of 433
dharmamama, I liked your post, even though I didn't agree 100% with everything you said, you are obviously an intelligent person and your words were kind and well thought out. However, I can't resist pointing out the irony of the following statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by dharmamama
When I was a social worker I had a 9-year-old client whose father nailed his foot to the floor. He intentionally chose to inflict pain on his child by drilling a hole in his child with a piece of metal. Who is seriously going to equate ear piercing with that?
Isn't that EXACTLY what happens when you pierce a child's ear? I know that is not at all the point you were trying to get across, but like I said... I couldn't resist.
post #224 of 433
Thanks for your kind words, famousmockngbrd. Actually, I chose those words deliberately because people used similar words to describe the ear piercing. I was trying to highlight the irony.

Namaste!
post #225 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamawanabe
.. But I baffled by the hyperbole in this thread. Are we really discussing murder and child abuse and circ and spanking in a thead about baby earings?
I too am baffled that ear piercing is being compared to such things as changing a child's shirt. I suppose that is where we differ. One camp seems to believe that ear piercing is on the same continuum as circumcision and another camp believes it is more equatable to clean clothing.
post #226 of 433
Ah. I see.
post #227 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by boingo82
I too am baffled that ear piercing is being compared to such things as changing a child's shirt.
No, it is compared to forcibly (though gently) restraining a loudly crying child while you change a shirt when a clean shirt is not a medical necessity but only a cosmetic preference.

It is as inaccuarte an analogy as circing.

But I agree that it would be much better all around if we'd let go of inaccurate anologies and discuss the issue at hand - which is not shirt changing or circing.

I really am coming to think that anaolgies (though I've always relied on them myself) are to logic and civil discourse what vinegar is to . . .
post #228 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamawanabe
..
I really am coming to think that anaolgies (though I've always relied on them myself) are to logic and civil discourse what vinegar is to . . .
Salad dressing?

No, I agree. As I've participated in the circ debate for quite a while, I am very aware that there are certain procedures for which there is no suitable analogy. A debate is better without them, as they usually end up as red herrings anyhow.
post #229 of 433
well I can tell you this.

I'd rather someone forcible change my dirty socks, than forcibly pierce me anywhere.

But hey if you'd rather be ambushed by a couple of piercings than a pair of clean socks...well, I'd stay away from laundromats
post #230 of 433
And I do agree analogy is a slippery slope.

But the shirt will eventually be changed. It is inevitable. Even if it's a matter of waiting till they outgrow it

The same can't be said for the circ, or the piercing, or the spanking. Which is one reason it didn't work for me as analogy.
post #231 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama

The same can't be said for the circ, or the piercing, or the spanking. Which is one reason it [restraint during clouthes changing] didn't work for me as analogy.
But spanking doesn't work as an anology because no adults (unless they are mentally ill) spank/hit themselves. Actually very few adult men choose to circ themselves either. Adults do peirce their ears and in large numbers.

Now I'm not for piercing babes; I'm for not discussing this issue using inflammatory anologies.

Liked the image of gangs of clean socks roving laundromats for prey, BTW
post #232 of 433
Okay now you lost me *LOL*

I don't understand what you meant about people not hurting or piercing themselves. I wasn't thinking they did either.

Geez, if you'd just STOP with your analogies. You are addicted to them!



Kidding obviously.

Anyway...just to make my last post clear...

I meant the shirt (the baby's shirt), doesn't represent something invasive. I mean unless you are going to let them freeze in the winter (or in an air conditioned Kroger!), or burn in the sun~it's not exactly life saving medicine...but, I don't know that it's completely a matter of arbitrary parental preference. There is an aspect of the baby's overall comfort when it comes to the necessity of a shirt, right?

I think the problem is that you need a more inflammatory analogy to point out the faulty logic of analogies.

Like, say, using *carseats* to make your point about restraint...

Now THAT would have been interesting!

post #233 of 433
What is being discussed here is called "false logic", highly discussed and studied in physics. It can be likened to a discussion that goes like this:

Julie says, "It is best to allow the child to be scratched by the cat and learn for themself the consequences of rough play with a cat."
And Joe's response is, "Maybe you would let harm come to your child, but I am not going to let my child play with the dangerous pitbull next door just to learn that pitbulls will maul your face if threatened."

False logic. Joe jumped from a cat scratch to a pitbull mauling as though one were equal to the other. Julie is left feeling like a bad parent underhandedly, as her good method of consequences now seems evil and cruel. This false logic is applied to many arguments all the time in an effort to overstate a case. If Joe had stuck to the topic at hand, he would have had to sit there and argue that a cat scratch was a big deal - and that is much harder to defend.

There are many things between cat scratches and dog maulings. And there are still many others who would be against allowing a cat to scratch their child intentionally. But the point is the topic is cat scratches, not dog maulings. And in this case, the topic is ear piercing, not circumcision or spanking. However, a discussion on restraint of a child is true logic, as the restraint and the piercing are two separate issues. Then one must break down restraint - for the good of the child; and then for entertainment or other unnecessary reasons. One must be careful then not to use the false logic of equating holding down a screaming child to have its finger cut off to holding down a screaming child to put a diaper on. Earpiercing is an entity on its own, so the only true logic would be to equate ear piercing with having a small piece of metal driven into one's ear.
post #234 of 433
I meant ear LOBE in that last sentence.
post #235 of 433
Its obvious that you (the OP) felt that you were doing the wrong thing. That feeling you had is your MATERNAL INSTINCT. It is your guide. Your beacon. And beyond the debate about ear piercing, I see a greater need to address the fact that you did something that you felt was not quite right. I think its important that you follow your intuition - that still small voice that leads us in the right direction. The voice that tells us we need to do things differently - or not.

This is MDC - we advocate NATURAL family living. Dont be surprised to find (a whole lotta ) mama's here who dont think its NATURAL to pierce your dd's ears without her consent.
post #236 of 433
Calm - cat scratches can end in some very nasty infections.

While it is true that people sometimes use analogies that don't work, analogies themselves are not, IMO, entirely useless. Many things in life fall along a continuum, differing not in kind but in intensity.

You could argue that the cat scratch and the dog mauling are both kinds of natural consequences related to pestering animals. They differ greatly in the severity of the consequences. It is not unreasonable for people to choose a point along the continuum and declare "This is my limit. I accept cat scratches but not dog bites." On the other hand, it is not unreasonable for someone else to say "I reject that continuum, because I don't believe animals should be put in that position." (Or whatever other reason they might have. I myself am a big believer in protecting animals FROM children. Animals have the right to be unmolested and not put in a place where they feel the need to get violent.)

This is similar to what is going on in this thread. (Oh no! Another analogy!) Some people are willing to draw their line on the continuum of cosmetic-procedures-done-to-young-children, and other people are arguing the entire spectrum is no good.

My personal opinion is that one shouldn't perform invasive cosmetic procedures on children too young to consent, but I do not consider it abusive to do so. I feel it is wrong, but not tragic.
post #237 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamawanabe
But spanking doesn't work as an anology because no adults (unless they are mentally ill) spank/hit themselves. Actually very few adult men choose to circ themselves either. Adults do peirce their ears and in large numbers.
First, some adults do choose to spank themselves (or have others spank them) and they're not necessarily mentally ill. They have a fetish.

Further, I'm not seeing what bearing your point has on the discussion? It doesn't really matter whether or not an adult would do something to themselves - what matters is whether or not the child is choosing to do it when it's done. If not, the child's autonomy and bodily integrity is not being respected, regardless of whether a not an adult would make a specific choice.

I'll say it again - I don't believe that the circ analogy is at all inflammatory. It's analogizing two body modifications that are visited upon children for the sole reason of other people's preferences.

Yes, it's an uncomfortable analogy, but no less legitimate.

Dechen stated it very well above.
post #238 of 433
Personally I hate the way babies look with pierced ears, and I would never pierce a babe's ears even if I did like the way they look. (unless they were old enough to ask for it) Unlike circumcision I'm 100% positive ear piercing hurts (although i'm 99.9% sure circ ddoes) So why would I want to put my babe through pain because I think it will look good.
post #239 of 433
Another thing is the way a lot of mamas on here are saying ear piercing is no big deal reminds me of all the mainstream parents who say circ is no big deal.
post #240 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
.

Further, I'm not seeing what bearing your point has on the discussion? It doesn't really matter whether or not an adult would do something to themselves - what matters is whether or not the child is choosing to do it when it's done.
Yes, it's an uncomfortable analogy, but no less legitimate.

Dechen stated it very well above.
I was showing how the anaology breaks down - how piercing and spanking (circing) do not just differ in serverity but in type.

I actually read Dechen's post as a balanced assesment the difference between the many posters who reject circing and spaning and child abuse as anologies for peircing and the many posters who think they are legitimate anaologies.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › I peirced my DDs ears yesterday....