# Anti-circ, pro-piercing?



## tommynomad (Apr 12, 2010)

I suspect there's a certain amount of selection bias posting this here, but I'm interested in hearing opinions. Another thread revealed to me the passion with which many parents (and parents-to-be) oppose circumcision--some to the point of disowning friends.

I am anti-circ, both female and male. I think it's rooted in superstitious nonsense and questionable from a perspective of human rights. Lots of parents around me agree with me. But...these same people have pierced their children's ears, an equally permanent alteration. I think this reeks of hypocrisy (but most of us--myself included--are hypocrites about something). Some of these parents still spank their kids, which may or may not have just as severe, long-lasting, and societal effects as either of the body-altering procedures in the thread title. And yet many people--even some anti-spankers--believe it's still up to each individual parent to make that kind of decision.

Public condemnation and shunning of people based on their parenting decisions seems to me a boomerang that will likely come back on us (I've already felt it, being anti-vax & anti-spank).

So my question is threefold:

If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?
How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?


----------



## zinemama (Feb 2, 2002)

I wouldn't break up a friendship over circing and I don't know anyone outside of MDC who would. I could care less if someone pierces their kid's ear or eats meat. As for smoking, I don't know anyone who does it anymore. And spanking - how would I even know?


----------



## Raine822 (Dec 11, 2008)

I would not pierce my children either, for me it is the same idea-they cannot give consent. I would not break off a friendship for circ or piercing though. I want others to respect my right to make decisions for my children so I will respect theirs even if i disagree. I will though try my hardest to educate them. As for spanking I do keep myself and my children away from parents who do. 1) parents who spank their children may consider it OK to spank mine(I once saw someone hit another's child IN FRONT OF THE MOTHER.) 2) I don't want my children to be around it.


----------



## just_lily (Feb 29, 2008)

I am anti-circ and anti-infant-piercing. But I feel that circ is a human rights violation. Ear piercing, on the other hand, I think is rather ridiculous - why would I put an infant through a painful experience so that they look "cute"?

I can't see breaking off an existing strong friendship over either though. I would have a really hard time with circ and would do my best to talk them out of it.

I did stop pursuing a friendship after a lady I knew pierced her six month old's ears. We had met at a local baby playgroup and she had invited me out a few times, but I was already getting the feeling that we weren't very well matched as friends, and the ear piercing was more the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. But I still saw her around from time to time as we are in a smaller community and was friendly to her.


----------



## hippiemommaof4 (Mar 31, 2008)

***I am anti-circ and anti-infant-piercing. But I feel that circ is a human rights violation. Ear piercing, on the other hand, I think is rather ridiculous - why would I put an infant through a painful experience so that they look "cute"? ***

I'm against it as well however
piercing could be considered a human rights violation too it can leave a permanent scar or hole in the body part...some people circ because of looks some people pierce for looks...all just depends on your perspective. I've seen things other cultures do that would be considered human rights violations by me as well but other people accept it.I think that was the whole point for this post is how far are we willing to take this whole situation about disagreeing as parents and shunning eachother. I could get really upset over all of these matters all of which I pretty much disagree with but I know people who do them and even when I give them the info and they dont take it to heart I just have to learn to accept I cant change everyones minds and go on with my life comfortable and happy with my own family and our choices


----------



## Katielady (Nov 3, 2006)

I wouldn't break off a friendship over circ or piercing. Circ does change how I feel about a parent though, and I definitely feel I have more in common value-wise with parents who leave their sons intact. I feel the same kind of disconnect with ear-piercing parents, but to a much lesser extent.

I haven't ended any friendship over one parenting issue, but have backed away from moms who have made lots of choices that are not only different from mine but, in my view, harmful to children. At some point I just end up feeling like our values are so different that there's not enough to sustain the friendship; plus, I don't want my kids exposed to certain things.

I don't feel that circ _should_ be a parental choice, so I guess that makes it different in my mind than other issues. But around here it is so incredibly common, even amongst the crunchier crowds, that I'd have few friends left if I cut out everyone who circed. I try to look at the mom as a whole, look at where her heart is, and go from there.


----------



## beru (Nov 19, 2007)

I would never set out to end a relationship because of circumcision. But, I think it has happened anyway. I couldn't help it. I can't be around my friend or her sons without thinking about what she did to them. I really do try to let it go but it nags at me. It has changed how I see her and I have lost respect for her. It stings a little when people here condemn some of us who have lost friendships over this...

I am not being recalcitrant or punitive. I am not trying to punish her for what she did. I have just learned, through the decision that she made, that we are not as compatible as I thought. I don't enjoy her company as much anymore or trust her advice.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

I am anti-circ and anti-infant piercing. However, piercing doesn't alter function or destroy body parts, and circ does. I see piercing more as a presumptuous imposition than a human rights violation.

I have not and would not end a friendship over circumcision, though. It's a legal and promoted procedure in this country, and most parents do what they think is in the best interest of their babies. And really....there are lots of little boys in my extended family and at least half of them are circed. I can't imagine shunning my kids' aunts, uncles, and cousins over it.

I don't think I've lost any friendships because of differing parenting choices.


----------



## kittywitty (Jul 5, 2005)

I am very anti-both. I don't consider them equal, but both are wrong. I wouldn't say I would break off a friendship for circ'ing (that implies I have friends, lol). But I was raised Jewish and circ'ed my son and deeply regret it. I am now anti-circ. I think if I had a friend who was very outspokenly PRO-circ, then we probably had enough other differences that I can't see us being friends to begin with. I have lost one friendship (a childhood friend I remained close to for years) for parenting/lifestyle differences, but it was extreme-abusive relationships, beating the children, drug use, CIO to an extreme, etc.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

I do look down (very much so) on people who circ-- esp this day in age where information is so readily accessible.

I would not pierce my baby girls ears (in my culture, much more against the grain than leaving my son intact) but...

Removing the foreskin is more like removing your babies little toe, than piercing ears. Ear piercing many times is reversible, and does not compromise function of the ears. It also is a much less risk procedure.


----------



## hippiemommaof4 (Mar 31, 2008)

I just want to point out that piercing can def cause malformations too in accidents etc earrings getting caught on things and ripped out its more common than you think too







.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

I wouldn't lose a friend b/c they circ'd, and I wouldn't lose a friend if they pierced their kid's ears, spanked, smoked in front of them, or didn't allow them to eat meat.

I think an infant with pierced ears looks funny, and spanking is detrimental - and I might even voice those opinions if it was a close enough friend







but I wouldn't cut them out of my life for any of the examples listed.

ETA: I also don't know anyone IRL who would lose a friend over circumcision. As I said in the other thread, it's not a common thing to even know what a friend's DS's genitals look like - or even their stance on it. It's just not something that comes up in everyday conversion, for most of the population.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

Quote:

I am anti-circ and anti-infant piercing. However, piercing doesn't alter function or destroy body parts, and circ does.
Agreed. It's a much lesser evil, so my feelings about it are much less strong. That isn't hypocritical.... it's rational. If you wouldn't end a friendship over circ, does that mean you'd be hypocritical to end a friendship with someone who cut her baby's arms off? No, it means you decide what level of wrongness outweighs the friendship. Same thing here.

Personally I wouldn't consider ear piercing a definite dealbreaker, but it'd be a red flag and I'd certainly encourage a friend not to do it (like circ, it's not common here). I don't putit on the same level as genital cutting, but that doesn't mean I'm a fan.

As the thread you're referring to shows, ending a friendship over circ isn't necessarily a dispassionate decision but one based on moral revulsion and sadness in a circumstance in which the intactivist friend knew for a fact that the parent _was aware of what she/he was doing to the baby_. Nobody was talking about a circumstance where two people had been friends for twenty years, when one party suddenly broke off the friendship upon finding the other let her son be circed 15 years ago without knowing anything about intactivism.


----------



## Katielady (Nov 3, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beru* 
I would never set out to end a relationship because of circumcision. But, I think it has happened anyway. I couldn't help it. I can't be around my friend or her sons without thinking about what she did to them. I really do try to let it go but it nags at me. It has changed how I see her and I have lost respect for her. It stings a little when people here condemn some of us who have lost friendships over this...

I am not being recalcitrant or punitive. I am not trying to punish her for what she did. I have just learned, through the decision that she made, that we are not as compatible as I thought. I don't enjoy her company as much anymore or trust her advice.

I know exactly what you mean. I feel the same way when someone circs. I hope my post didn't make you feel condemned. It's such a personal thing and so complicated. More laterl baby fussy.


----------



## tommynomad (Apr 12, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smokering* 
Agreed. It's a much lesser evil, so my feelings about it are much less strong. That isn't hypocritical.... it's rational.

But I think a lot of people would say their opposition to:
- piercing
- veil-wearing
- meat-eating
- vaccination
- smoking
are all based just as solidly in rational thought. Certainly the last 3 are significant health issues, and in three others to some degree, community/government already transgress on parents' ability to make decisions. I know lots of people who are just as zealous about their support/opposition for the above issues as some of us are about circumcision. I don't think we can write off their concerns, lest they write off ours the same way.


----------



## serendipity22 (Sep 19, 2006)

Circ and piercing are similar in that they both cause injury and both are human rights abuses.

Its a question of degree though, circ is 1000 times worse than having ears pierced. Mentioning together tends to trivialize circ.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

Quote:

But I think a lot of people would say their opposition to:
- piercing
- veil-wearing
- meat-eating
- vaccination
- smoking
are all based just as solidly in rational thought. Certainly the last 3 are significant health issues, and in three others to some degree, community/government already transgress on parents' ability to make decisions. I know lots of people who are just as zealous about their support/opposition for the above issues as some of us are about circumcision. I don't think we can write off their concerns, lest they write off ours the same way.
OK, but... so? Obviously every parent has issues she feels so strongly about that she would break off a friendship over them. That's fine. I eat meat, but if someone found that so morally repellent she couldn't be around me... well, fair enough.


----------



## arihillfarm (Nov 1, 2007)

I would not break off a friendship either over circumcision or ear piercing, no matter how I feel about each one. My personal feeling is that any non-medically necessary body alterations should only be done with the consent of the person involved at an age and maturity level befitting the procedure being considered. With that said, I will likely allow my DD9 to get her ears pierced within the next year or two if she keeps asking to have them done. I would not allow my son to be circumsized if he asked at the same age simply because one IS worse than the other as far as long term effects on the body. Ear piercing is a small hole and does not affect bodily or sexual function. Something more analogous would be if my DD wanted to cut off her earlobes in which case she'd have to wait until she's 18, as would my son if he wanted to be circumsized. Piercings and tattoos don't bother me so much because they are literally only skin deep and don't change function of the body, but I would never force them on my children either.

-Astrid


----------



## momasana (Aug 24, 2007)

This thread has got me thinking...

Ear-piercing and circ make me very, very sad, but I would not end a friendship over it.

_However_, I would, and have, end a friendship with someone who spanks their children.

Now I need to do some thinking to figure out why I feel this way and what the difference is...


----------



## mlec (May 29, 2005)

I am anti-circ, and anti-ear-piercing of a young child.

However, to compare these two is ridiculous. Leaving a small scar on the earlobe? A more apt comparison would be if the piercing was instead the removal of the outer ear, which woud affect hearing, and be irreparable mutilation.

I mean, c'mon! Circ-ing kills, as often as SIDS . Can you really put that on the same level as a small hole or scar on the earlobe?

And of course hitting another human being in your care is wrong, but can you really compare it to genital mutilation and possible death?

As far as friendships go, I am friends with many people whose decisions I do not agree with, and whose beliefs I do not share (even those who might compare meat consumption to maiming newborns). But I do believe there is potential for a deeper friendship with those whose values I share.


----------



## KaylaBeanie (Jan 27, 2009)

*If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?*
I am not anti-piercing. If I ever have a daughter, I'd get her ears pierced sometime around 4-6 months, by a needle with proper jewelry, none of this gun business. To me, the difference between the two is astounding. With circ, a sizable part of the body is removed that forever alters the way the genitals work. With piercing, the pain isn't comparable and no function is lost. I think it's cute (not a valid reason to most MDC moms, but I think it is, and if she hates it when she gets older (unlikely) she can take them out. A lot also comes from my own experience...a bad reason? To a lot of people, probably, but part of parenting is pulling from your own experience and that's one area in which I intend to do so.

*Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?*
Well, since I will be one of those ear piercing parents, obviously not. What other body part would possibly be pierced on an infant or child (realistically)? No idea how I feel about spanking. Not something I'd do, after the psychology classes I'd take, and I hope my friends are smart enough to realize the downsides to corporal punishment. I'm a strict vegetarian and will raise my kids as such, so once again, it would actually be awesome if I had friends who also raised their kids strict veg. Smoking in front of their kids would be a huge issue with my, but none of my close friends smoke, and I can't picture myself ever being friends with someone who would do something so damaging and stupid.

*How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?*
To be honest, there are many things that shouldn't be parental decisions, but are. Where do you draw the line? We can't exactly say when it interferes with the child's autonomy, because that's not a precise line. Not breastfeeding alters the child's body from the way it's supposed to. Not allowing a child to wean themselves alters their body. Vaccinating alters them. Not co-sleeping is unnatural, and could have consequences. Pushing them in a stroller is unnatural, what if it causes psychological problems?

I'm sure that 99% of MDCers agree that natural birth, long-term (1 year or more) breastfeeding, intactness, etc. are the ideal for a child. I happen to be one of them. However, it is entirely my decision to go that route. My opposition to circ has little to do with the issue of my future son's choice (because yes, it is a legal parental decision and has been a societal parental decision ever since circ originated), and everything to do with me choosing intactness for him, which is what I believe to be the best choice. If he has an issue with that as an adult, I'll believe I made the best choice in his interest. Therefore, it's not hard for me to justify being an anti-circer who will pierce DD's ears...as it stands in society, it is my decision. Just like in society, it is my decision to choose my DS's circ status. Ethically, should it be? That's a different debate. There are all sorts of intactivists.


----------



## MommytoB (Jan 18, 2006)

Anti-circ and if I had a daughter . I would leave it up to her to say I want my ears pierced but for "her wants" not just because her friends have them & she wants to be like them.

I used to wear earring but oh they were such a pain for me it turned out I was actually allergic to a metal that had my earring hole continue to get infected that I hated wearing earrings.

Plus my sil whose the mother of my niece I think my sil may have her ears pierced but I'm unsure . So far everytime I take a peek at makayla ears to see if they are pierced and they are not.

When I was at Brendan's dr appt two weeks ago I saw a wee little baby proably about 8 wks old she had pierced ears said that the mall place did that so I was like oh wow speechless feeling.


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

*If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?*

No, all of my kids can have their ear pierced when ever they ask for it (thus far, only Janelle, she asked every day for a year before we said yes though...actually we said "as soon as your potty trained you can have them pierced" without even thinking about it since we hadn't even TRIED to potty train her or even offer it as an option yet at that point...and she right then took off her diaper and said "ok I'm potty trained" and she was, not a single accident, even overnight, in over 6 months, and even then, it was wetting the bed post-op while on codeine)...if they want something other than their ears pierced they have to wait till 16 (at least, that's what we told Janelle when she asked for her eyebrow to be pierced when she was 3...), and if they want something more dangerous, like clit, tongue, labia, penile piercings, they are going to have to wait till they are old enough that I legally have no say in it. But if my sons want to be circ'd and ask us to have them circ'd and they are old enough to have researched and understand it we will allow that as well, it is their body and their choice, which is one of the biggest reasons we didn't do it at birth.

For what it's worth though, I hate ear rings for myself...haven't worn them since my wedding in 2001, and before that it was prom 1996.

*Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?*

no, maybe...I don't see spanking as harmful the way most parents do it, I just see it as a very ineffective form of discipline that I completely disagree with., no, maybe, it's never come up, none of our friends with kids smoke... but I do not break off friendships over circumcision either.


----------



## mama2soren (Feb 12, 2009)

I agree with some of the PP's. I would not end a friendship over ear piercing, even though I would not do it to my own child until s/he was old enough to consent to it. But, I would seriously question a friendship if said friend had her child's earlobes surgically removed at birth (and likely without sufficient anesthesia) because she thought normal earlobes looked gross.


----------



## shishkeberry (Sep 24, 2004)

I don't know what I'd do if one of my friend's circ'd after knowing my feelings on it. I'm very lucky that all of my *close* friends with children have had girls so I haven't had to cross that bridge yet. I hope that I wouldn't cut them off over it, but I really don't know. I might distance myself, though. Because I know that if a friend of mine was having a boy, I'd be talking to them about leaving their sons intact. If a friend could still do it after having info....I just don't know.

Piercing is a whole other ball of wax. I agree with a PP who said that comparing the two trivializes circumcision. I wouldn't do either, but I think that circing is a million times worse. I think I'm pregnant with a girl right now and she would have to wait to have her ears pierced until she could ask for it and I could trust her to take care of them on her own.


----------



## newmum35 (Aug 16, 2007)

piercing ones ears may be a permanent alteration but it does not affect the normal functioning of the ear the way that circumcision affects the sexual function of the penis. No tissue is removed or cut away, no anesthetic needs to be used, the child does not need to be forcefully restrained since it literally takes just a few seconds; it is not a major surgery in the way that circumcision is and in my opinion there is NO comparison whatsoever between the two.

Having said that, I have a son, but IF I had a girl I would NOT pierce her ears until if/when she was a teenager and expressed a strong desire to do so. I think I would wait until at least age 12 or 13 when she would be old enough to make that decision herself, and we could discuss the pros and cons. Since its not a major surgery I feel that would be an appropriate age. Maybe even as early as 10 if I felt she was really mature for her age. If it were a boy who wanted circumcised I would probably say not until you are an adult and can make this decision for yourself (and do not need parental consent)

I would not break off relationships for any of the reasons you mention. Although it would be nice if everyone had the same values as me, I don't want to live in a world of robots where we all dress the same way, eat the same way, and all do the same exact things at the same time. We're all different and we need to respect that. I do not believe in being prejudiced and what you are describing (breaking off friendships if you don't agree with the parents choices) is a form of prejudice. However if it affected me personally in such a way so that my own health was affected (worrying about the child for example) I would feel the need to limit contact as much as possible without actually ending the relationship because the other parent was "different" than me. I would hope before that point however that I gave my best try to educate the other parent if I truly felt the child was in harms way (breathing in 2nd hand smoke on a daily basis for example)


----------



## yara1 (Feb 11, 2010)

After I came to extremely painful realization what I've done to my son by allowing to circumsize him, I will let my daughter to make her own choice whether to pierce her ears (belly-button...e.t.c.) or not, when she will be like 13, or so and be able to make such decisions...
The reason for that is - I want her to realize and internalize the whole idea "_my body - my choice_".


----------



## tommynomad (Apr 12, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *newmum35* 
piercing ones ears may be a permanent alteration but it does not affect the normal functioning of the ear the way that circumcision affects the sexual function of the penis.

This is one of the anti-circ arguments that--as an intactivist myself--drives me batty, for several reasons.
1. There is no real way to measure this.
2. It makes the penis way more important than it really is in terms of sexual satisfaction: brains are way more vital to good sex than penises, but no one's suggesting that not giving kids Omega 3s is interfereing with their sexual happiness.
3. My personal experience as a proud slut (and that of like-minded libertines) does not support this. Indeed, among my friends who are the...recipients of penises, there is a strong preference for cut.

None of the above is an argument _for_ circumcision, but I cannot see how sexual function can be an argument against it, since there's no way to know either way. I think we do our cause a disservice when we use such arguments, which I think are easily refuted.

Quote:

I would not break off relationships for any of the reasons you mention. Although it would be nice if everyone had the same values as me, I don't want to live in a world of robots where we all dress the same way, eat the same way, and all do the same exact things at the same time. We're all different and we need to respect that. I do not believe in being prejudiced and what you are describing (breaking off friendships if you don't agree with the parents choices) is a form of prejudice. However if it affected me personally in such a way so that my own health was affected (worrying about the child for example) I would feel the need to limit contact as much as possible without actually ending the relationship because the other parent was "different" than me. I would hope before that point however that I gave my best try to educate the other parent if I truly felt the child was in harms way (breathing in 2nd hand smoke on a daily basis for example)
QFT.


----------



## mama24-7 (Aug 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
This is one of the anti-circ arguments that--as an intactivist myself--drives me batty, for several reasons.
1. There is no real way to measure this.
2. It makes the penis way more important than it really is in terms of sexual satisfaction: brains are way more vital to good sex than penises, but no one's suggesting that not giving kids Omega 3s is interfereing with their sexual happiness.
3. My personal experience as a proud slut (and that of like-minded libertines) does not support this. Indeed, among my friends who are the...recipients of penises, there is a strong preference for cut.

None of the above is an argument _for_ circumcision, but I cannot see how sexual function can be an argument against it, since there's no way to know either way. I think we do our cause a disservice when we use such arguments, which I think are easily refuted.

okay, at the risk of being snarky, how could it function normally when it is no longer normal? to me, it's just a given that it doesn't function normally. and if it was normal, why do so many need extra lubrication so many men need erectile dysfunction meds? and, yes, there is a way to test it, although i don't think intact men will necessarily sign up for this kind of testing.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
QFT.

what is this?

sus


----------



## ursaminor (Mar 28, 2009)

Circumcision does in fact change the way a penis functions, and circumcision does in fact have a sexual affect. The intact penis has moving parts. Circumcision removes thousands of nerve endings, the ridged band, in many cases the frenulum and much of the mucous membrane, and what mucosa is left becomes keratinized and dry. basically what is left is a rod with a ball end - No gliding action. When this gliding action of the penis in and out of its own skin shaft is taken away, it loses it's own self-lubricating effect.

In my experiences, sex with circumcised partners became very uncomfortable and abrasive after awhile. There was more of a need for lubricant.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

You've turned a piston into a stick - of course it's not going to function as designed.


----------



## ramama (Apr 13, 2007)

As far as friendships are concerned, it would depend on how much else we have in common, and whether we can both keep our views to ourselves. I will not berate a mother for circing or piercing, and I expect the reverse to be true as well (as in, no comments about how intact penises are "gross" or whatever). Now, if a parent circs, smokes, spanks, AND is, say, anti-breastfeeding (not simply FFing, but ANTI-BFing) then I really don't see how we would even have the opportunity for friendship in the first place. I know for a fact that some moms in the neighborhood thought of me as the local weirdo for BFing toddlers, cloth diapering, bed-sharing, baby-wearing, and for my staunch refusal to BEAT my children (literally, one mother suggested I use a belt on my DD and lock her in her room, when DD was FOUR years old!). I suppose I tend to repel some people, so I never have to cut off friendships for the above reasons.


----------



## Monkeygrrl (Oct 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?

I am anti-circ. For my kids.
I am anti-piercing until the child has asked for it. For my kids.
I am anti-spanking. For my kids
I am ok with meat eating. For my kids and family.
I am anti-smoking. For my kids and family.

What other people choose for their families is their business, as long as it doesn't infringe upon my rights to choose what I think is right for my own family. I will not break friendships with families that do these things (or don't do them) - that's not what I base my friendships on. My friends and I might have discussions about these things, and why we do or don't do some things - but they are not deal breakers for me.

peace...
Margaret


----------



## mamadelbosque (Feb 6, 2007)

I'm anti-circ, and anti-piercing, but I don't have girls so its easy







Of course, I didn't get my ears pierced till I was in college (and it was halfway a joke on DH - would he notice when we came back that my ears were pierced? Nope.







), and I still only rarely wear earings (of course, *THAT* is largely cause' my boys are still in the 'oh look, sparkly!' stage and its way freaking obnoxious to keep telling them 'no' or have my earings pulled out and lost!!).

But, neither one is anything close to a 'make or break' issue with friends. I honestly don't have a 'make or break' issue. We're around people who spank, people who circ, who pierce ears, etc all the time. If we weren't, we wouldn't have any friends around here. Maybe its possible to be that selective of friends if you live in a city, but around here its just not. Not if you want friends, anyhow!!


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
This is one of the anti-circ arguments that--as an intactivist myself--drives me batty, for several reasons.
1. There is no real way to measure this.
2. It makes the penis way more important than it really is in terms of sexual satisfaction: brains are way more vital to good sex than penises, but no one's suggesting that not giving kids Omega 3s is interfereing with their sexual happiness.
3. My personal experience as a proud slut (and that of like-minded libertines) does not support this. Indeed, among my friends who are the...recipients of penises, there is a strong preference for cut.

1. There may be no real way to "measure" it, but there are a growing number of men doing foreskin restoration, and I've never heard of one who was unhappy with it. Yes - I've heard of men who have chosen to circ as adults who preferred that - but I've also heard the reverse (had a circ, and hated it), and I've never heard a guy talk about how he feels about his adult circ several years after the fact. So...aside from the simple fact that a nerve-ending rich, functioning, piece of the penis is removed, the anecodtal evidence tends to suggest that circ does, in fact, affect sexual satisfaction for the man.

2. Giving the penis too much importance? I don't have one, so I can't say, but the vast majority of men I meet find their penis pretty freaking important in terms of sexual satisfaction. And, I don't buy this argument, anyway. I don't know what the nerve damage from circ is like, but I've experienced the effect of nerve damage on my sex life, and it has nothing to do with putting "too much importance" on my vagina or clitoris. It has to do with the fact that those body parts simply weren't _capable_ of functioning properly, and that affected my sexual satisfaction.

3. That's interesting. I've heard that online before. However, every woman I know irl who has been with both _vastly_ prefers intact. They all say the sex is better. Those women I've talked to - all online - who say they prefer cut are almost always basing that purely on appearances (and they find cut more attractive, because that's what they're used to) or on _one_ experience with an intact guy who had poor hygiene. If I were going to use that as my barometer, I wouldn't go near a cut guy, yk? I have no opinion on the matter, as the rampant cutting of newborn genitals in the late 60s/early 70s didn't leave a very large pool of intact men to choose from.

Quote:

None of the above is an argument _for_ circumcision, but I cannot see how sexual function can be an argument against it, since there's no way to know either way. I think we do our cause a disservice when we use such arguments, which I think are easily refuted.
I've never seen/head those arguments refuted, except by "we can't know". In an objective sense, there is evidence that circ makes a difference, as the function of the intact penis is pretty well documented. I already mentioned the subjective/anecdotal side of it above.

[quoted]QFT.[/QUOTE]
Since someone asked, I believe this is "quoted for truth".


----------



## treeoflife3 (Nov 14, 2008)

I am anti circ and anti piercing.

I am also anti smoking and anti spanking. I hope to eventually move my family to a mostly vegan diet but I can't really say I am anti meat... I just strongly prefer no meat most of the time.

I wouldn't end a friendship for any of these things but I might change how much time I spend with friends who do these, specifically spanking and smoking. I don't want my daughter to see spanking nor do I want her near someone who might still have smoke clinging to them even if they don't smoke in their house or are at my house. It also depends on how much, how often, etc.

If I am just getting to know someone and deciding if I want to be friends with them, any one of these (except the meat... I'd have more issues with mostly processed packaged food diets actually) could be the straw that makes my decision for me or if most or all of these are present among other things I as a parent don't support that might change my mind from 'she seems nice!' to 'well maybe we have little in common, so is it worth it?' but if an old friend or someone I already enjoy spending time with and talking to does any one of these things, then so be it. I won't keep my opinions secret but I won't make my opinions a source of stress either.

I'd rather not let something like circ or pierced ears make a good friendship go to nonexistant. If they ask, I'll tell them I don't like it and won't be doing it with my kids and why, but unless it is someone I'm deciding on friendship or not, that'll be the end of it. Both are legal currently and both have sources of culture and religion on their side so my opinion ultimately doesn't matter. I don't like either of them and circ brings me to near tears but I don't get a say and ending a good friendship over something legal isn't worth it to me.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

I'm totally unconcerned about boomerang effect. It's a free country, and I don't care if people agree with my parenting decisions, nor do I seek their approval.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
You've turned a piston into a stick - of course it's not going to function as designed.

best analogy I've read here in all my time posting.


----------



## KGB (Jan 30, 2010)

I am ANTI-infant circ and ANTI-infant piercing.

For me, it all boils down to consent. Parents should NOT have the right to alter the bodies of their sons or daughters without their consent (barring any type of life or death emergency procedure).

People can argue that ear piercings aren't nearly as bad or traumatic as a circumcision, but that still doesn't make it right. Body-altering procedures are mostly done for the parent's benefit, not the child's. (I want him to look like his daddy or my daughter will look cute in those earrings). It's all COSMETIC.

Why stop at ear piercings? What if parents want to do lobe stretching with their infant's ears? What about tattoos? Those would be frowned upon or illegal here, but for some reason ear piercing is still OK even though it causes pain, inflicts an open wound, and has risks of scarring and infection.

If I have a daughter, I will wait until she wants her ears pierced and she is at an age where she's brave enough to sit through the procedure. I see it as a right of passage. Something that she and her mother can share when she's old enough. I don't want to take that away from her because I wanted her to look like a doll when she was a baby.


----------



## Carlyle (Mar 31, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?
How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?

Fascinating question, and interesting comparisons.

I think both circ and spanking should be illegal, but wouldn't (and haven't) shunned friends who do either (although I do tend to feel closer to friends who don't circ or spank...largely because thinking about it makes me really really sad). Sometimes it's just lack of resources or knowledge that make a parent do the things that they do.

Ear piercing I couldn't really care less about, strangely enough (even though I will wait for dd to ask me for it before doing it to her). It's so not-comparable to circ in my mind that I don't find it hypocritical at all. Circ is cutting off an *irreplaceable* and functioning body part in your child's GENITALS. For me, that increases my horror. This is kids' "privates" and people are not only touching it without permission, they're cutting a piece of it off. Yikes! Even if someone cut off their child's earlobe because it was the cultural norm somewhere, I'd probably think "gross," but I'd get over it faster than the sadness I find with circ. Their ear would still work the same, and it's not a piece of their genitals for goodness sake.

Circ is somehow the worst though...it's just so ... so wrong in my mind! It's not a slip up of "ack, I have this bad habit and it's hurting my kids (smoking)" or "oops, I got really pissed off and spanked my kid because nobody ever taught me other ways of dealing," etc.... It's choosing to deliberately and permanently cut off a functioning piece of a child's genitals because ... well, WHY? I'll never understand that. We certainly need better information out there for many families in making this decision, but frankly, it's just bizarre to me that it is even an option....it wasn't started to increase men's "beauty," it was started as a way to discourage masturbation!


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KGB* 

If I have a daughter, I will wait until she wants her ears pierced *and she is at an age where she's brave enough to sit through the procedure.* I see it as a right of passage. Something that she and her mother can share when she's old enough. I don't want to take that away from her because I wanted her to look like a doll when she was a baby.

At 2.5 years old Janelle's only reaction to getting her ears pierced (and no one held her down) was a gasp and then "Janelle is SOOO pretty"...I do wonder where in the world my 2 year old got the idea that jewelry makes you prettier (I wear NO jewelry, not even wedding ring, and NO makeup what so ever...) but figure it's the same way she knew to ask Santa for a pink barbie at 15 months old...when we'd never told her who santa was or who barbie was...I'm convinced the kid has been able to read since birth and just didn't clue us in till kindergarten (she read on the first day of K...when the teacher brought it up that she was a good reader I said "Janelle can't read" so when I got home and inquired about it she said "ohh, well, I can read at school"







)....


----------



## craft_media_hero (May 15, 2009)

Hmm, interesting thread.

I am anti-circ with (so far) only a girl child, so take that as it may be. If we have a boy (I'm pg right now and not finding out the gender til birth), he will not be circed tho my partner is (another post, for later).

I am opposed to infant piercing because, well, it's done on an infant who has no choice in the matter, and I just have a gut reaction against it. BUT as soon as my daughter decided that she wanted her ears pierced, I took her right down and let her get it done because it was her choice, she was excited about it, seemed like a life milestone, and both dp and I (as well as dd) felt like she had the maturity to "handle" it, which she did (she had no fear at the piercing place and was really calm, just asked to hold my hand while they did it). I dig her pierced ears, and so does she. She was I think 5 when she asked us if she could have her ears pierced and we've never had any problems with her being old enough to care for her piercings. I would never pressure her to have a piercing but would "allow" her to get any other piercing/body modification that she wanted if she took the initiative to ask.

I wouldn't drop friends/family for infant piercing or circ, even tho I disagree with both. I just figure that they are not in the same place as me and it's sad but not within my control and my values for unconditionally loving my loved ones don't line up with angrily dropping folk because their decisions are different from mine. Ditto with spanking and other gentle parenting choices.

*eta* btw I am vegetarian, and my daughter chooses to not eat meat. I made a point of asking people not to give her meat while she was littler because she didn't know what she was eating and imo it seemed kind of deceptive to feed it to her *shrug* that's just me I guess. Now that she's older, she knows that meat comes from animals and has "informed consent" to choose whether or not to consume it. Every once in a while she will go for a nugget or a bite of her dad's hamburger, and that's okay with me, it's her choice. She loves seafood, and again, I don't have a prob with it coz it's her choice.

I guess for me it's all about them being old enough and aware enough to know what their choices really mean and protecting them in the meantime before they are ready to make those decisions.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

I don't have time to re-tell the story here right now but if you click on this link and scroll down to post 23, you'll see that the issue of a pierced ear was what made the light go on in a young man's head.
http://www.mothering.com/discussions....php?t=1199414


----------



## rockportmama (Jun 24, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?
How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?

NAK

I am anti-circ & also anti-pierce because they both hurt the child and neither helps the child. For the record, I have a boy & a girl. Their bodies will be theirs to modify @ will on their 18th birthdays.









Would I break off a friendship: like some PP, I seriously doubt I would attract a lot of people who do all of the things you mention.









Where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves: this is a sticking point for me.
It's legal to mutilate a boy's genitals, but not legal to mutilate a girl's genitals. You could argue that FGM is worse than MGM, and I'd agree. But I also think the only real reason FGM is not allowed and MGM is is that MGM is popular in our own culture (here in the US), and FGM originated largely outside our culture. I think it's easy as a society to say "What *they* do is wrong & parents do not have the right to choose that for their children." It's much harder to say "What *we* do is wrong & parents do not have the right to choose that for their children."
In my mind, my instinct says either it should be legal to cut both boys & girls, or neither. My personal preference is neither. But at the same time, I'm a big believer in parent's rights, & don't want to argue for a precedent that would allow someone else to come along and pass laws restricting my ability to legally homebirth, homeschool, unschool, cosleep, breastfeed, not vaccinate, eat meat or not, etc. I haven't quite reconciled this one yet.

Oops! Baby's up. Good questions!


----------



## GinnyMama (Jun 27, 2008)

Hmmm. Good thread!

I am extremely anti-circ, and also anti-pierce (until they're old enough to understand what's going on and take care of it themselves). We don't spank, either. I wouldn't break off a friendship IRL over this stuff, because if I did, I would have no friends. I live in a very backwoods area.









I'm vegetarian, and my children will decide what they eat. I am torn about this for my daughter, who is 2... she doesn't know where meat comes from yet, and I feel it would be unfair to her either way to influence her. Kinda sucks. My son Finn is 7 months old, and as of yet has had no meat. Not sure what we'll do when we cross that bridge. My DH is an omnivore, so we do occasionally have meat products in the house. Mostly we eat vegetarian though.


----------



## petal-sky (Sep 7, 2009)

I agree that it is the same idea. Though. I consider ear piercing a much, _much_ lesser extent of the same thing (permanent modification) , because of the overall pain and implications of it. Circ'ing I consider to be long lasting and irrefutable physical and psychological damage. Ear piercing, not so much...

That said, I am *not* planning on piercing my daughter's ears until she is old enough to 1. understand and 2. consent and want it done. I do believe in the right for someone to have control over what happens to their own body and I believe in respecting my child and not compromising her body for my own, selfish desire of seeing something 'pretty.'

It is a good post and a good point though...

I am actually more confounded by the opposite of what you posted. The parents who do not want to pierce ears but circ their sons. My own mother is one of those people who always talked about how sad it was to see poor baby girls with pierced ears. But, then when I was pregnant, before I found out the gender I talked about not wanting to circ and gave me gasp and almost shouted 'you are not going to circumcise !??!' like I said I was going to give birth in outer space.

It would be a case by case basis about defriending the circ'ing. I would not ask all my friends if their sons are circ'ed and then say 'Sorry, you aren't my friend anymore you evil monster!' but if they were planning to have it done I would provide research and try to talk them out of it. Now, If they really seemed apathetic about the whole issue that is another story. I do not know if I could continue friendship with someone who simply did not care about their infants pain.


----------



## Carlyle (Mar 31, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *petal-sky* 
I am actually more confounded by the opposite of what you posted. The parents who do not want to pierce ears but circ their sons. My own mother is one of those people who always talked about how sad it was to see poor baby girls with pierced ears. But, then when I was pregnant, before I found out the gender I talked about not wanting to circ and gave me gasp and almost shouted 'you are not going to circumcise !??!' like I said I was going to give birth in outer space.

Yeah, this amazes me. Somehow this seems hypocritical (circing, but being horrified by pierced ears), but opposing circ and allowing pierced ears seems fine to me.


----------



## KaylaBeanie (Jan 27, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Carlyle* 
Yeah, this amazes me. Somehow this seems hypocritical (circing, but being horrified by pierced ears), but opposing circ and allowing pierced ears seems fine to me.











I think that's the only way that this argument is valid (ear piercing versus circ). If a pro-circ person realizes that circ is a cosmetic procedure, still wants to do it, but opposes ear piercing because of the pain/girl's right to choose, that is insanely baffling. I can see that it gets less clear if someone is misled by a doctor/society into thinking that circ has medical benefits though. In that case, they could argue "Ear piercing is cosmetic, while circ has benefits." They'd be wrong, but I can see the opposition to ear piercing in that case.

I've said before, it all comes down to why you oppose circ. I don't oppose it because it takes away a boy's right to choose. I'll be making plenty of life-altering decisions for my kids anyhow. I oppose it because of the damage it does. So, in my case, it's not the slightest bit hypocritical to be anti-circ but pro-piercing. I do fully realize though that there will be AP parents who judge me and make assumptions over the fact that I'll have future DD's ears pierced as an infant, and many of them will probably assume my sons are circ'd.


----------



## ~adorkable~ (Nov 7, 2007)

i strongly believe it should not be up to us to permanently change another persons body and both these thing do that, albeit in very different ways, both ar an invasion into their rights to decide your own future. my anti circ views have many reasons but one strong one at the heart of it is this very belief.

as a professional piercer with 12 years working in the industry i want to address some things about the ear piercing

it does hurt, many folks seem to think that earlobes act different than other parts of the body and that is simply not true in any way, anyone that tells you something different about how the earlobe feels heals, gets infected, bleeds or scars differently to the rest of the body is not educated on the subject. some kids are good at dealing with the pain and yes it is short lived, but why cause your child pain when there is an easy option? and an infected piercing witch is very common with small children can hurt very bad for a long time.

any piercing puts a child at risk for infections like hepatitis, staph others. and since it is going to itch as the heal process, it will also be nearly impossible to keep their hands off it, increasing infection risk many times over that of a older child that can understand the need to leave them alone

many piercing done on young children will not be in a ascetically pleasing or side to side matching location when they are an adult. i have seen this literally thousands of times.

the vast amount of responsible professional piercers will not do very small children for all the above reasons, if you shop around till you find someone that will, i would seriously question the rest of their judgment and choices on cleanliness.

body piercing has ben a part of human culture for eons and wonderfully so, in most ancient cultures it is a right of passage, most folks that i saw in my career also used it like that, why take this special part of growing up away from your kids?let them decide to do it when they are old enough to understand what the process is going to be like and take responsibility to at least be a helpful participant in the healing process.

piercing guns can not be clean properly and the locations that use them are almost never clean, in most states they are exempt from the laws if there is any that oversee "profession piercing shops" and the big ear piercing gun manufacturers have a strong lobby (who would a thunk it) that lobby is making sure the folks that use their guns dont need to get training or even wash their hands, it is completely out of hand. i spend years helping write and lobby for state laws when i owned a shop and i could not believe that the ear gun lobby, in my state and others, actually got included in it that the ear lobe was not formally part of the body and there for did not fall under any of the laws that we passed.

here is a great resource to learn more about safe body piercing in general and in regard to this conversation ear piercing gun in particular (since 99.9% of babies and very children will be pierced with a gun)

http://www.safepiercing.org/piercing/faq/#guns

ok getting off my soap box here now, as you can see this is something i have thought a lot about both professionally and personally. its another case of something with risk and side effects that is often routinely done and glosses over because of the shear commonness of it.


----------



## tireesix (Apr 27, 2006)

Anti circ, anti pierce.

I just don't like taking things away from kids and doing things to them without their consent (unless it is a life or death situation).


----------



## NaturalMindedMomma (Feb 5, 2007)

I am very anti-circ. I look down on those who circ and have a hard time being friends with someone who I presented valid proven information to prior to their childs birth and they still circ their child. That is just ignorant.

I think comparing piercing ears and circumcision trivializes circing. You are removing an entire region of important protective erogenous, and vital tissue, forcefully.

That said, I did not pierce my older dd's ears and said I would wait until she asked. She asked at 2 for earrings. she saw another little girl with them and asked. I explained to her the procedure and that it would hurt (yes at 2 she got that). She said she wanted them still and we went ahead and did it. I have to say, I LOVE them. The care was easy and I deligently took care of them. I have a 10 month old DD and I have been thinking about getting hers done soon. I am still not totally sure about it. But I am leaning towards no until she asks or is a little older as well. She is not vaxed and honestly they will not pierce them without vaxes anyway in MA (Tetnus), so I think she just might have to wait until she is older and can go to an actual piercing shop which specializes in the art of body piercing.

The pain you feel when you pierce an ear cannot even be remotely paralleled to having a part of your genitals crushed and cut off without pain relief. There is NO comparison. My kids do not need their ears to be hole free to experience a normal sex life. The hole is teeny and if left to close is almost invisible. It just isnt the same.


----------



## KGB (Jan 30, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaturalMindedMomma* 
There is NO comparison. ... It just isnt the same.

As an anti-infant circ and anti-infant piercing father, I'm NOT trying to equate the following:

1) The procedure of circumcision and piercing.
2) The pain of circumcision and piercing.
3) The future effects of circumcision and piercing.

What I AM trying to equate is:

*** The lack of CHOICE the child has in the modification of his/her body no matter how big or small the procedure. ***

For that fact and that fact alone, I think parents should NOT have the right to alter the bodies of their children except in cases of life or death situations.


----------



## mariekitt24 (Nov 8, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 

If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?
How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?


That is an interesting question, and I've never actually thought about the correlation until now. But I am anti-circ, and anti-pierce (for babies that can't speak for themselves). It makes me sad to see parents inflicting pain on their babies for something so trivial as a piercing. Heck, I wasn't even planning on making my baby get the PKU test at birth until my home birth turned hospital birth and they said they "HAD" to do the test.

I would not break off a friendship if other parents did things I disagreed with such as piercing or spanking. I wouldn't have any friends left. Most of the people that I know make poor parenting decisions (in my opinion). It's difficult to watch, but I hold my tongue unless asked because I know that's how I want them to treat me. I try to just live by example and readily offer my two cents IF ASKED. I get very upset when other parents try to tell me how to do my job, even if they DO think they have the child's best interest in mind.

I am all for having a village to help raise my kids. and I understand that in by doing so, some unsolicited advice will always come my way. But at the end of the day, the way I parent my children should still ultimately be my decision as is the way others parent their's. Who among us doesn't care about our own children? I think the only time a line needs to be drawn legally is when a parent is being abusive, like beating their children. I love children, and I want the best for all of them, but at the same time I think we already have so many laws and people are so outspoken that we are losing our freedom as parents and that sometimes families are more hurt by things like "Child Protection Services" than they are helped. We can't protect everyone from everything, because in doing so we would lose all freedom.


----------



## TCMoulton (Oct 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mlec* 
I mean, c'mon! Circ-ing kills, as often as SIDS . Can you really put that on the same level as a small hole or scar on the earlobe?

The website you quoted states that only 115 boys die of SIDS each year - sadly that is a ridiculously low number and completely inaccurate. A quick google search shows that a more accurate number of SIDS deaths in the United States is closer to somewhere between 3,000 and 7,000 babies yearly with more boys dying than girls. While one death because of circ is way too many it is really inaccurate to compare the stats to SIDS.

http://www.sids-network.org/facts.htm

http://www.sidsfamilies.com/index.php?sec=sidsstats


----------



## ~adorkable~ (Nov 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KGB* 
As an anti-infant circ and anti-infant piercing father, I'm NOT trying to equate the following:

1) The procedure of circumcision and piercing.
2) The pain of circumcision and piercing.
3) The future effects of circumcision and piercing.

What I AM trying to equate is:

*** The lack of CHOICE the child has in the modification of his/her body no matter how big or small the procedure. ***

For that fact and that fact alone, I think parents should NOT have the right to alter the bodies of their children except in cases of life or death situations.


This is stated perfectly, I very much agree that they are not really comparable. I think they both are wrong for at least a few of the same reasons. And each is wrong for some reasons that are unique to that procedure.


----------



## rockportmama (Jun 24, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KGB* 
As an anti-infant circ and anti-infant piercing father, I'm NOT trying to equate the following:

1) The procedure of circumcision and piercing.
2) The pain of circumcision and piercing.
3) The future effects of circumcision and piercing.

What I AM trying to equate is:

*** The lack of CHOICE the child has in the modification of his/her body no matter how big or small the procedure. ***

For that fact and that fact alone, I think parents should NOT have the right to alter the bodies of their children except in cases of life or death situations.

Very well put! I completely agree ... up to the except in cases of life or death part. Maybe... hmm... how to say. An example: if there were a removeable growth threatening my child's sight (but not their life), I should have the right to have the growth removed. Perhaps that was assumed as obvious? I think with many (most? all?) medical procedures it's beneficial to search out the least invasive way to safeguard our children's health. With genital mutilation, the costs obviously far outweigh benefits. To my mind, ear piercing an infant is just silly.


----------



## KaylaBeanie (Jan 27, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KGB* 
As an anti-infant circ and anti-infant piercing father, I'm NOT trying to equate the following:

1) The procedure of circumcision and piercing.
2) The pain of circumcision and piercing.
3) The future effects of circumcision and piercing.

What I AM trying to equate is:

*** The lack of CHOICE the child has in the modification of his/her body no matter how big or small the procedure. ***

For that fact and that fact alone, I think parents should NOT have the right to alter the bodies of their children except in cases of life or death situations.

I don't disagree with you, but where do you draw that line? It is my opinion that eating meat is harmful, especially for young children. Formula feeding permanently alters the body. Vaccines permanently alter the body. Anything other than a perfectly healthy diet alters the body. Not allowing children to wean naturally alters the way their body would have worked normally. Not co-sleeping is unnatural, and surely has some effect on the baby. Not keeping a child rear-facing endangers their very lives, but most people don't do it.

Circ stands out in the crowd because it makes a HUGE difference in the body of a child and totally changes the way sex works, in addition to being hideously painful. I get that, and I agree. However, if someone feeds their toddler processed crap, meat and weans them early, I find that infinitely more harmful than a small hole in an ear. Parents make choices every single day that permanently alters the bodies of their children. I'll nurse for over two years because it is what is best for my child. I'll co-sleep because I am from a co-sleeping family and can attest to how awesome it was as a child. I'll follow a selective/delayed vax schedule because it's the best option. I'll birth at home to prevent my child from being born all drugged out. I absolutely would never circ. My kids will be raised strict vegetarian, for their health. However, I will pierce, and I feel that the risks of piercing don't even compare to the risks of other parental decisions people make every day, that alter the body in more profound ways than a hole in the ear that easily closes.


----------



## KGB (Jan 30, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KaylaBeanie* 
I don't disagree with you, but where do you draw that line? It is my opinion that eating meat is harmful, especially for young children. Formula feeding permanently alters the body. Vaccines permanently alter the body. Anything other than a perfectly healthy diet alters the body. Not allowing children to wean naturally alters the way their body would have worked normally. Not co-sleeping is unnatural, and surely has some effect on the baby. Not keeping a child rear-facing endangers their very lives, but most people don't do it.

That's a very good question and you make valid points. I draw the line at COSMETIC procedures. Infant circ and piercing have no health benefits and can be done later in life when the child is old enough to decide for themselves.

The things you listed could be viewed as types of "internal" modification and are generally reversible. They're not done for cosmetic reasons and they are not immediately apparent to observers. You won't hear someone go up to you and say, "Oh, I see your baby doesn't eat meat." or "I see you didn't get your child vaxed." People can visibly see that a boy is circumcised or a girl's ears are pierced.

So we are comparing external cosmetic procedures to internal health choices. It's difficult to relate the two.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

Kayla, I think we have different ideas of the definition of "parental decisions."
Yes, I will be making many decisions for my children that will affect them for life. However, I only make those decision for them that HAVE to be made WHILE they are still children. For instance, a child MUST be fed; therefore it is a "parenting decision" to decide what will be the best food for the child, (within the confines of what the parents are able to provide.) The child MUST sleep somewhere, so it is a "parenting decision" to decide what the child's sleeping situation will be. Children MUST be educated in some way, so choosing public/private/home/un-schooling is a "parenting decision." Children WILL be exposed to certain illnesses WHILE they are still young children, therefore the decision of whether/which to vaccinate is a "parenting decision." Medical issues and accidents WILL come up while the children are young, therefore the choice of appropriate medical care for the specific issues is a "parenting decision." For instance, one of my children had bad cavities in the baby teeth. There were a number of options for treatment, including the option of no treatment, and it was up to me to decide which treatment would be best for my child. That was a parenting decision. There was something _wrong_ with her tooth; I HAD to decide what to do about it. On the other hand, my son has _nothing_ wrong with his penis. Therefore, NO decision needs to be made about "what to do with it." It is fine and normal, therefore nothing needs to be done, therefore there is NO "parenting decision" to be made. My daughter (and son for that matter) have no problem with their earlobes; therefore nothing needs to be done with them, therefore ear piercing is NOT a "parenting decision." I had my ears pierced as a tween and it hurt for several weeks. (No, it was not infected, it was just sore for that long.) I gladly put up with the pain because I WANTED pierced ears. I think it would have been very unfair of my mother to force me (at any age) to have my ears pierced because *SHE* wanted me to have pierced ears. Just because there is no law against a parent circumcising a baby or piercing a baby's ears, and just because parents do it all the time, does not mean that it these are actually "parenting decisions." We do not own our children's bodies, we are only responsible for caring for them the best we can until they are old enough to do it themselves. To me, that means a parent has a responsibility to only alter a child's body with knives or needles or drugs when it is clearly medically necessary.

Jen


----------



## KaylaBeanie (Jan 27, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jenP* 
Just because there is no law against a parent circumcising a baby or piercing a baby's ears, and just because parents do it all the time, does not mean that it these are actually "parenting decisions."

The thing is, they are. They have been forever. People have been piercing, tattooing and circumcising for thousands of years, probably since the early days of humanity. All it takes is the parent saying "do it" and it's done. What else is it but a choice? Circumcising a son might be the *wrong* choice, but it is a choice. Just like not circumcising is a choice that most parents here have made.


----------



## Frootloop (Aug 10, 2007)

For children, I'm 100% completely anti-circ. If for some reason they feel the desire to be circumcised, I don't feel it should be allowed until they can fully understand the procedure and how it will affect them for life.

I'm also completely anti-pierce, but only until the child asks for it and is capable of caring for them on their own.

The bottom line is that I don't feel that parents should be allowed to alter their childrens' bodies until that child voices their wishes.

I was in Walmart a few months ago (don't shoot me, I was there with DH!) and as we were walking near the jewelry counter, heard a shriek from a baby and then hard crying.. I know that shriek.. it means sudden pain. I turned my head to see what on earth on happened. There was a mom holding her little screaming baby girl's head still while the worker held the gun to her other ear. I had to walk away immediately.. like, basically run away. My heart was pounding, my face turned bright red and hot, I was shaky and sweating, and felt sick.

It was the exact same passionate response my body had when I first watched a video of circumcision. It was the same shriek.

The procedures may not be the same in severity, not by a long shot, but they both cause pain, they both alter their bodies, and they're both done before the child gives consent. It's just not ok with me.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

When I was referring to "parental decisions" I was referring to those decisions which _inherently_ rest with the parents, such as how best to feed, clothe, and educate their children.
Other "decisions" which parents may have been getting away with doing for centuries are actually decisions which they have stolen from their children and have no inherent right to make. For instance, parents have been cutting children's genitals, sticking metal through certain body parts, and selling their children into slavery for thousands of years. Doesn't mean it is a parent's right to make those decisions. It just means they have been getting away with violating the human rights of their children. Getting away with it, or having a government that ignores it, does not make it right and does make it the parent's "right" to choose.
I make this distinction because many parents, who would never circumcise their own children, nevertheless feel that it is none of their business to interfere in any other parent's "choice," lest they themselves lose their freedom to, for instance, choose a vegetarian diet for their child or to homeschool. I say the two are unrelated. We as parents are obligated to provide food, medical care, and education for our children, and therefore we inherently have the right to choose for them (until they are old enough to choose otherwise for themselves) what will be the best food, medical care, and education for them. Because these decisions are inherently the parents' to make, there should be no interference from outside forces (except in cases of gross neglect or abuse.) On the other hand, the right to bodily integrity belongs to each of us as human beings and interference with that right, even by our parents, is a violation of our human rights. I just don't see how standing up for human rights of all persons, regardless of age or gender, can be interpreted as wanting to take away parents' rights. Nobody has a right to violate another person's human rights in the first place, so stopping infant circumcision actually does not take away anyone's rights, it only restores the rights to where they really belong (the person whose body it is.)
Really, the rules for proxy consent of medical procedures are very clear, and if doctors actually followed them there would be no routine infant circumcisions by doctors anyway. According to the rules for medical ethics, parents do NOT have the right to choose amputative surgery for a child when no medical condition requiring such surgery exists. So people who have been ignoring these rules have been simply violating medical ethics and human rights, NOT exercising their own "parental rights," because no such right to do harm to a healthy child ever existed, anyway.
I hope that clears up my point.

As for piercing, I do believe it is a violation of the child's rights, but it is so much less harmful that I don't put any energy to fighting it. Circumcision is really much more important. Nonetheless, for me, seeing an infant with pierced ears is like it is wearing a t-shirt that says, "My mom and dad don't care about my human rights."
Last week a friend of mine was at the mall and witnessed a mom with two young boys forcing them to get their ears pierced. The mom and the piercer told them it would not hurt at all. They did the first one. He cried and protested that it did indeed hurt, badly. Now the second son did not want to be done. He was physically forced to by his mother who insisted that since she paid, he was getting it done. (It seems that at some point in time the boys had asked for pierced ears, but when they saw the pain involved changed their minds, but were not allowed to back out.) I see no difference between forcing an unwilling school-age child to have his ears pierced and forcing an infant to have it done.

Jen


----------



## SmtmsAlwys (Jan 31, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tommynomad* 
<snip>

If you are anti-circ, are you also anti-pierce? If not, why not?
Would you break off a friendship if the other parent pierced their child's ears (or other body part)? What about spanking? What about not letting their kids eat meat? Or smoking in front of their kids?
How much of a village does it take: where do we draw the line on what parents must be permitted to decide for themselves?

I am anti-circ. I am also anti-piercing until the child is capable of giving consent. I gave in to my daughter's pleas to get her ears pierced at the age of four and, looking back, that was pretty young. I'm pretty sure I'd wait a few years if I could go back and redo it.

I would not break off a friendship with someone because they had different beliefs than I did. If I did, I wouldn't have many friends left.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

JenP,
Love your post.


----------

