>

Okay. I don't know if this will change your mind because I think you have a valid point, but if you're looking to understand what parents are thinking, I suspect it's less 'let me risk my child's health' and more 'I love/loved wearing earrings with my mom and want to share a bonding moment with my child.' And on top of that, there arent many dramatic instances (to my knowledge) of babies being hospitalized because of ear piercings gone wrong, so people who had their ears pierced as a kid might be less likely to think of it critically or as a big deal when it comes to their kids. 
Not saying that people shouldn't interrogate and re-evaluate whether common cultural practices/traditions should be continued, but I don't think it's done maliciously or to force girls to comply with a specific gender norm.
/u/JarJarNudes (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >

For reference, do you feel this same way about circumcision on infant boys? >

Absolutely. >

How do you feel about abortion? >

I'm pro-choice. Mainly because I don't believe a foetus in early development stages is equivalent to a baby.
But that's a different CMV and I'd rather not talk about it here. >

I'm pro choice as well, not trying to change your mind on that. 
Just curious what happens in a few months time span where at one point you're okay with mom making a decision to terminate a pregnancy, making a final and permanent decision on that potential humans life, and then a few months later you're not okay with mom (or dad, or grandma, etc.) making a temporary and reversible decision that has little to no effect. (For babies it generally isn't painful beyond a few minutes, and infection is outside the body and typically not very serious.) >

This doesn’t seem like equal things to compare. When the fetus is still inside the woman, the woman’s autonomy supersedes the fetus’s. Once the baby is born, it now has developed its own autonomy. Its not about what’s painful, its about autonomy. 
Besides, abortion is a medical procedure. Piercings are just aesthetically pleasing. Theres usually culture tied into babies with piercings, but that doesn’t change the autonomy issue >

I agree with you in terms of the point of view of the mother and affecting her autonomy.  However in terms of affecting the child or potential child's autonomy, an abortion cancels out any and all autonomy of said child, where as a circumcision or ear piercing, is really insignificant in the long run for 99.999% of people, so in terms of the child's autonomy one of those issues is far more significant than the others. 
Again, I'm absolutely pro-choice, I have zero issue with abortion, I just can't rationalize saying it's not immoral to terminate a pregnancy, but if you have a child, then it becomes immoral to make relatively insignificant decisions about that child's body. >

The mother's right to her autonomy supersedes another individual's need for her body to maintain its life. Can't force someone to donate blood or a body part just because someone else will die without it. Abortion cuts off the use of mother's body to keep the baby alive. If we had artificial placentas and/or fetal transplantation there would be an option that maintains bodily autonomy for both. But we don't have that. >

Viability outside the womb is as early as 15 weeks, hence the abortion ban rule in a few states around that mark. >

That is patently untrue