>

It is believed that Piercing ear has gives the kid a headstart in controlling the body movements.. they end up speaking faster, walking faster and it spurs the body growth in infants.
Ayurveda is a much older and much developed practice as compared to normal medications and it has been beautifully laced into the lifestyle of normal Indians through culture.  You'll find several such practices and their meaning through experts in ayurveda.
/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 >

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. >

I also agree that OP has a valid point but if any argument could sway me, it’s the idea that the piercing provides an important cultural/traditional link between the baby and her parents. However, I still don’t think that link should outweigh the future personal autonomy of the person being pierced. 
It’s also simply false that the holes will just close up. If you pierce a baby’s ears and keep an earring in them for more than a year, there is a good chance that they will never close up. >

Idk about that last part, im sure there are instances where the holes might not close but overall i think most of them do. I know lots of people with piercings that are years old and still start closing after a few months lol including myself. My ears have been pierced for 20+ years and i still have to make sure i put some earrings in every once in a while so they dont close >

Certainly, there are some people who will be able to close the holes but it’s definitely not the case for everyone and I don’t think it would be a valid argument for piercing unless it could be guaranteed. >

"Weird" is relative. It's only weird in North America.
It's not a weird practice at all in South Asian countries and communities. In my culture, baby girls are adorned in all kinds of gold jewelry (necklaces, bangles, anklets, earrings) on their first birthday, so it's typical to get their ears pierced beforehand.
At the end of the day, piercing a baby's ears is purely for vanity purposes, but there is cultural significance to doing it in some areas of the world. In India alone, that's ~12.5% of the global population, so I guess it depends on how many people need to consider something "not weird" for you to consider it not weird. >

Same for me I'm mexican and this has always been something everyone in my culture has done as well, I still have my gold earrings and necklace from when I was a baby >

Yea, I had a feeling it wasn't uncommon in Mexican culture as well, but I didn't want to make an incorrect assumption, so I only wanted to talk to what I'm familiar with. Glad I could learn something about another culture, so thank you! 😊 >

And thank you as well! Our cultures are beautiful and I think we are lucky we get to be gifted such beautiful jewelry as babies that we can keep, I have my baby bracelets I plan to gift to my children when I have some >

Agreed! That's actually a good reminder for me because I don't have children yet, but will be having them soon so I should start collecting slowly similar to what you've done! >

As a parent who did this that had reservations prior to doing it. Here’s what convinced me. 
A 6 month old is less likely to play with them and is less likely to do things that will get them dirty. 
Rates of infections for babies is much less than for preteens getting their ears pierced. 
There’s a lot less mental trauma for the kid. Both for the actual piercing and for the cleaning. 
I’ve seen what happens doing it both ways and having to help a crying and terrified eight year old with an infected ear to take out their earring and clean it is horrible for them. I mean I saw my friends go through that and I felt such heartache for their kid. >

My parents got my ears pierced when I was just days old. Same with my brother. Neither of us are mad about it, in fact quite the opposite. Because I’ve had them for so long they will literally never close. I’ve gone years and years with out putting anything in them but when I do, I don’t have to fight through the pain like others who haven’t had them as long. 
A parent might have an easier time keeping a babies fresh piercing clean rather than a child’s. Children are dirtier and can mess with the piercing easier than a baby.  By the time they are a child, the piercing is fully healed and can take them in and out as they please without experiencing pain. >

Or they can just not pierce a baby? Because why do they have to? In case they want piercings when they're older? I just don't get it. It's something that carries risks and has 0 benefits. >

Did you have your pierced as a baby? >

No. I'm a woman and my lobes are not pierced. I got helix piercings in my 20ies. 
I'm low-key glad I have intact lobes. I know "I probably wouldn't care" if I had them pierced as a baby, but hey, turns out it's a decision I wouldn't have made. >

Obviously everyone’s opinion will differ but as someone who did have them pierced as a baby, I’m glad. I’m glad I never had to ask and my parents didn’t see it as some weird rite of passage from getting older. I’m glad I don’t remember the pain. I’m glad I can take them in and out depending on how I feel, without worrying they will close. >

I didn't get them as a child and ended up choosing to get them so I honestly could've went without the pain >

I do wonder how many people had it done as babies and don’t like that their parents did that to them. And vice versa, having to do it when you’re older wishing it was just already done. 
I actually almost never wear ear rings. But the tiny holes in my ears make absolutely no difference in my life. >

A lot of people are acting like it doesn't hurt when you're a baby,  or it doesn't matter because you can't remember it. But of course it would hurt. And we don't even understand how important that is. Maybe pain influences how our brains become wired, and can influence your mental/emotional health indefinitely.  We're all going to experience some pain as babies,  and many will be much worse off with their natural causes than this would probably do, but I still feel like it's a crappy thing to do to your child just because you think it looks cute. >

I'm in the camp of I'm glad my parents had it done when I was a baby. I got my cartilage pierced as an adult and it got so infected. I finally gave up and let it close. At least as a baby someone else was managing my piercings and keeping them from getting infected. I don't see it as a disfigurement. I was probably going to get piercings anyway, and why not get it while someone can clean the piercings for me and when I don't remember any pain? >

I can see that everyone has their own opinion on it. Some are glad it was done, or wish it had been done. So deciding should be left to the parents best judgment, and I'm okay with that. I do understand it more now than I did before. I wouldn't do it or support having it done,  but I'm not interested in wearing jewelry of any kind anyway,  so I don't relate to that being a factor or something worth having pain at ANY time of your life for.  But, to each their own. >

This is a very specific example but I recently saw a video on it. What is your opinion on a mother who started her baby on laser removal treatments to help get rid of a birthmark that covered like 75% of its face? Arguably it is something that is easier to do when they are a baby since they won’t remember it, will not have to worry about bullying in school because of it, low self esteem, etc. thoughts? >

That's not comparable because you are preventing great harm through the procedure. Non-essential procedures that vastly improve your standing in life are no-brainers.
The harm being avoided is, as you said, not being stigmatized for having an obvious cosmetic defect. >

There’s always a risk of cosmetic procedure ending up in real health harm. Also parents’ assumptions aren’t a reality yet. Kid can grow up in an environment where nobody cares at all, but results of a fix can’t be undone. >

I think you're taking things to a bit of an extreme when you say piercing a baby's ears is "risking their health". Seems like there is a risk of infection, but at least according to one study people are less likely to develop keloids (scar tissue in the form of a lump that can grow over time) if they're pierced before age 11.
But I feel like it's probably likely that the minor health risks aren't really what bother you. After all, parents do wayyyy more risky things with their babies all the time, but ear piercing is a common controversial topic, at least on reddit.
In some cultures it's important and common to pierce a baby's ears. I think you're being a bit dismissive by calling it a weird gender norm. We also tend to dress little girls in bows and not boys, but most people accept that as benign. If it's something that is important to the parents and their culture, and it has minimal risks, why not? I think it's pretty disingenuous to compare it to things like circumcision, permanent genital surgery to remove skin that is proven to change sexual function later in life is a lot more serious than a piercing. Plenty of people stop wearing earrings and let their piercings close up later in life.
I think the consent argument also falls a bit flat. Parents make literally 100% of the choices for their children at that age. And I'm assuming you're not arguing that children should't be allowed to get piercings, period. What's the difference really between a baby and an 8 year old getting their ears pierced? Both are legally and from a common sense perspective unable to give informed consent. >


After all, parents do wayyyy more risky things with their babies all the time

I concur with /u/GoldAppleGoddess that this reasoning doesn't make sense but wanted to make you both aware that this is a formal fallacy, relative privation.

I think the consent argument also falls a bit flat. Parents make literally 100% of the choices for their children at that age.

The difference is whether those decisions are reversible.

What's the difference really between a baby and an 8 year old getting their ears pierced? Both are legally and from a common sense perspective unable to give informed consent.

Consent is more informed at 8 than 1. >

From the perspective of the daughter to someone's mom who did this to all her daughters, I'm kinda surprised in retrospect I don't mind it. My mom got it done soon after birth and in a hospital. Obviously I don't remember the pain or inconvenience, but doing it at a hospital seemed to be very safe and efficient and my earholes have never closed, even when I go years without earrings. Meanwhile, the ladies I know who got it later on in their life had to do research or else they'd get a messed up piercing and never be able to wear earrings again.
I don't consider myself super feminine/fashionable, but it is convenient I have always had the choice to wear earrings when I wanted to without having to risk a messed up operation because my mom basically did it for me. So yes, my mom is assuming girls are going to conform to their assigned gender at birth by wearing earrings and I agree it's unethical to unnecessarily modify a baby's body when they can't consent. But I will say it is one of the more harmless things and my mom is extremely likely to be right that, as women, we're probably gonna wanna wear earrings at some point. Again, disagree with the ethics but I am just saying it was pretty practical.
To summarize, I think circumcision and ear piercing a baby are both unethical, but the ear piercing one at least has more value if you're gonna impose your beliefs/culture on a baby. >

I've had my ears pierced as a baby and I'm pretty neutral on it. I don't feel glad to have it or upset. It's just something that's there that I didn't choose lol. But I don't understand why parents are so obsessed with this stupid tradition and inflicting unnecessary pain on a baby however minor it is. I don't even change my earrings I've only ever wore studs never anything else. I don't even like jewelry lmao even if the studs look nice on me and are stylish lmao >

On the scale of harmful decisions a parent makes for cosmetic reasons for their child, ear piercing is fairly low on the consideration  scale.
Parents make more decisions like should they be vaccinated, should they be treated homeopathically, should they be forced to drink breastmilk, should they be vegan, should they be socialised in a school etc, etc that has shown the potential for more harm than good, but we aren't in the business of making it socially acceptable to judge parenting methods. 
It's clearly legal because it would be immoral to make illegal things that involve an adults decision making.
We make it illegal to kill babies, but there are no restrictions on what babies can be fed, just lots and lots of forwarning and education that feeding babies x may result in death. >

I think this is an interesting CMV because it’s pretty clear that an infant ear piercing is almost completely harmless but also completely unnecessary. I think the answer on this comes down to how much authority you think parents should have over their children. >

I had 3 daughters, 2 of them I had their ears peirced at age 3 months and 1 I didn't. I know for a fact that they are less likely to mess with them being pierced at such a young age than my oldest, who was 5 when hers were pierced. The comment about easier to take care  of when an infant is true, toddlers and older mess with them and in turn keep them infected or hurt. My daughter at age 5 was much harder to take care of than my other 2 as infants. Plus, it's just a tiny hole that can close up if they don't want them pierced when they get older. Or simply don't have to put earrings in them. >

I chose to get my ears pierced when I was 12. My mother felt I was old enough to provide my informed consent (to her), and I took care of them. I haven't had earrings in them for 3 years and I just checked the other day and they are not closed.
Why did you feel your children needed to have their ears pierced as young children? (No judgement, this is a cultural trend in my wife's family, I'm just curious to hear your personal reasons.) >

This line about the holes just closing up is not true. The holes definitely do not close up (I was also older when my ears were pierced) if you keep earrings in for a few years following the initial piercing. >

What law, specifically, do you think prohibits this? What makes it "iffy" if it's legal? >

Whilst I disagree with OP on the stance of ear piercings there are many things that are "iffy" even though they are legal.
Like in the UK a 16 year old girl can legally have an orgy with 10 sixty year old men.
It's legal but something seems wrong with that. >

That's not what we're talking about. Part of Op's view is that this is "legally iffy." If it isn't, that view should be changed. Other types of "iffy" are not relevant to my point. >

Op never said it was "legally iffy"
He said it was iffy and acknowledges that it's legal.
Again something can be iffy and legal at the same time. >


Op never said it was "legally iffy"

It's in the title. >

As a woman who had her ears pierced as a baby, I never minded having the holes themselves, only that they got uneven as I grew up (and that I was allergic to anything that wasn't gold or silver, so I couldn't wear most earrings I got as a gift on party days). I was particulary more pissed at adults telling me "You must/can't do XYZ because you're a girl" >

How are we the minority? Absolute madness forcing a cosmetic choice on your child. >

I don’t think it’s unhygienic. In my culture every single girl has this done within months of birth and I’ve yet to hear about a baby girl losing an ear due to an infection.
Look this isn’t permanent, if she wants to let them close she can. I myself had to get mine done 3 times before it took. And even now, in my adulthood, if I go too long without wearing earrings, I have to partially re-pierce the ear because some of it starts closing up again. >

It’s clearly legal in many countries. Is this a point you would actually have your view changed on? Or are you just focusing on the morality or weirdness of it? >

Should be illegal. Wait until the kid can talk at least. >

Hey there.  Interesting post.  I was actually only six months old when my mother had my ears pierced.  In fact, she actually measured to make sure the the dots, where the holes were to be made, were in perfect places so they don’t look weird.  She’s anal like that. As for afterwards, she did what any normal parent would do; clean the ears as often as needed.  And, no, there were no infections.
My mother was super excited, though, because it was for my baby picture.  Grown up now (37), I don’t see an issue with it.  I think it’s obviously because I do not remember any of it but I don’t feel violated at all.  In fact, I love my earrings.  I may get a second setting along with a constellation piercing at some point.
Honestly, I do not think having a baby’s ears pierced is a big deal.  It’s very quick and they won’t remember.  
And, as for the health or cleaning issues, well, I don’t want to be an asshole here, but… 
“babies aren’t particularly good at being clean.”
Um… Well, you were stating the OBVIOUS.  That’s what a parent is for.  Parents are supposed to do the cleaning.  My mother said my piercings went great and she cleaned them for a week, then went on about our lives.  I hold no grudges against her, at least, for piercing my ears at age six months, lol.
However, I do understand it’s not for everyone.  My parents didn’t have sensitive skin and they didn’t have any health issues.  In fact, my father is as healthy as a horse and I get my immunity system from him, so my body, even as a baby, recovers quickly.  Yes, I did cry.  I was a baby. Lol. To be perfectly expected.
Would I do the same to my child? Hmm, I’m not sure, but it’s not such a horrible thing, especially if they have no memory of it.  And, I must admit, my baby picture, I’m proud of it😅🤷🏽‍♀️ call it vanity…
Edit:
I didn’t answer your question.  What was going through a parent’s mind?
The answer is this: my mother simply thought I’ll look more beautiful with earrings.  That’s pretty much it.  They were 14K gold earrings studs.  Perfectly sized for a six month old girl… my dad did roll his eyes at the idea because I was already beautiful, but didn’t see any reason to disagree. >

I had my ears pierced when I was a baby. Doesn’t affect me at all. If I wanted to wear earrings, I could just wear them. If I don’t wanna wear earrings, I could have the option of not wearing them. The holes will never close and I will still have the option to wear/not wear whenever I want it. I’m actually kind of grateful that my parents made that decision for me. I’m not sure I would have had the courage to get them pierced myself at this age - probably would be too nervous to do anything about it even though it might be something I would have wanted for myself. >

Yeah I don't understand the comments about 'what if they don't want to wear earrings!?' like. The person can just choose to not wear earrings. It's not like lobe piercings are even noticeable if you don't have earrings in. Nobody is looking at your earlobes. >

I think that the consent argument does not work for kids, especially babies.  Babies cannot consent to anything.  They can't consent to clothes.  They can't consent to diaper changes (and in my son's case, he would dissent violently, but dude had poop all over his butt).  They can't consent to choice of food.  They can't consent to the education their parents give them.  As they get older, they start being able to consent to more stuff, but when my 5-year-old daughter does not consent to getting her vaccine, well, that's too damn bad.  WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE AN ANTI-VAXXER IN THIS HOUSE.  (Turns out the pre-vaccine fighting and flailing about is far more painful than the actual shot that lasts a moment or two, and she knows it, but you know, little kids gonna little kid...)  It doesn't matter if the kids consent to go to school; they still have to go.  It doesn't matter if the kids consent to going to bed; they still have to go.  It doesn't matter if the kids consent to being part of religious ceremonies; they still have to go.  You can probably see where I'm going with this.
I see ear piercings as pretty much equivalent to this.  They shouldn't get a choice, and causing pain to a baby that won't remember it the next day is definitely preferable to scarring an older kid for life.  In this case, it's being done in the interests of the child -- she will need to have those ears pierced in the future, so better to do it now.  I don't believe that my daughter does need to have hear ears pierced, but you know, some people do.  It's not up to me to decide, as long as it's not brazenly awful for the child.  You bring up the point that the hole could get infected or whatever, but that's not a useful objection: the danger is far too small to be problematic, especially since the parents are the ones responsible for keeping the area clean (a lot easier when the kid can't even move her arms to her face yet).  And in the unlikely event that there is an infection, that's treatable anyway.  Everything the kid does carries some risk.  Put her in daycare?  Well, there's a chance that some bad people might work there and do bad things to her.  Are you going to keep her home on that off-chance?  Put some cream on her?  There may be a violent allergic reaction.  Etc.  But you don't, for example, carry her in the car without a car seat, because that is legit dangerous.
So I wouldn't pierce my kids' ears -- and I haven't; my kids' ears remain unpierced.  I don't think it's necessary.  It's going to be a much harder sell to them when they're older to let someone drill a hole in their ears, and you know what, good.  I don't want them to pierce their ears, ever.  I think it's a bad thing, and I'm deliberately setting things up in their early lives so that piercing their ears doesn't seem like something they'll want to do.  The consent argument conveniently ignores the fact that not doing something is a choice that the kid can't consent to either -- I could, for example, say that my kid can't consent to a vaccine so I'm not going to vaccinate her until she's old enough, and obviously that's dumb as bricks because she'll probably die before she's old enough if I'm being that negligent a parent.  But it's the same thing here.  By not piercing her ears, I am deliberately choosing to not give her the childhood experience of having pierced ears.  It's a choice that I have made, without my daughter's consent.  It's not up to her.  She can make her own choices when she's older -- she already old enough to make many choices herself -- but when she's a baby, it just isn't up to her. >

Same as circumcision for baby boys >

It’s not weird. It’s much better to pierce your ears when you’re that young than to do it when you’re older, in terms of pain and healing. 
In my culture, both girls and boys ears get pierced when we’re new born babies. Boys only wear their earrings until they’re 1-2 years old, then they remove it. When my brother was around 16, it was in to wear studs. So he started wearing them, no problem. His pierced ear from when he was a baby opened right up, no pain. I don’t wear earrings. Maybe once every few years. The holes don’t close. I find it convenient honestly. I got my nose pierced when I was 13, that will close right up if I don’t wear my piercing for a couple weeks >

Talk about this once circumcision is illegal. >

I grew up in a culture where baby ear piercing is the norm. My parents thought that I should make that decision though so they didn't do it and instead waited until I was old enough to voice an opinion on the matter. They didn't have to wait long, by the age of 3 I had started to ask for earrings. Even at that young age, I had noticed that my peers all had pretty earrings and I did not, so when I was four, my parents took me to get it done. Naturally, it was painful for 4-year-old me, and I remember it. I would not have remembered a piercing as an infant. 
The thing about cultural norms is that if you don't participate in them, it will be noticeable, even to a young child. Maybe especially to a young child, because as children and teens we want to be like our peers. 
I can see that in some cultures, not making certain decisions for your kids and waiting until they get older will likely result in just doing it later. The downside to waiting is that kids remember things that infants don't. The upside is that your kids will get to make their own decisions - although it wouldn't be "consent" since that is a legal term that applies only to adults, with a couple of rare exceptions (in the US). The term that applies to kids is "assent". 
That said, ear piercing is pretty low stakes and low risk. There are other procedures commonly done to infants that are higher risk. If you're choosing a hill to die on, circumcision might be a better one. This is probably a very controversial thing for me to say, but I'd also add that there are some life-prolonging surgeries done on infants that are perhaps morally wrong. For example, procedures that simply prolong a child's suffering, allowing them to live (with great difficulty) for four years instead of four days. Doctors don't typically refuse parents who just want their kids to live but I've seen some cases where I really wonder whether denying extensive surgeries might be the more ethical decision. >

Omg… it’s literally just a piercing. People think too hard about everything these days. My parents pierced my ears as a baby and I was fine and still wear earrings to this day. If the child gets older and decides they do not want the piercing anymore then that’s fine. >

I'm very grateful my parents pierced my ears when I was a baby, and honestly I wish they pierced it even more. While I can go for years without using earrings in the hole I got when I was a baby (there were more than five years of my life when I didn't wear earrings) and it never closes. Meanwhile, the helix piercing I got was ""removed"" by my dog. I tried putting it in again less than 5 minutes after, and just couldn't. 50 dollars wasted because I didn't get helix piercings when I was a baby xD
I also like that I don't remember the pain of getting them pierced when I was a baby, and I didn't have to take care of it. So... I am very grateful for it, and I wish I got more piercings when I was a baby. That's all I have to say, lol. >

I’m sorry you had this experience, those stores with piercing guns are brutal and really fuck with healing. They also give you bad healing advice and not the highest quality of jewelry. My lobes are uneven because I went there. I want Claire’s piercing services to be shut down. 
I don’t think babies should get their ears pierced, but if parents do want their kid’s ears pierced then they need to take them to a professional (a tattoo shop or a cultural figure with expertise) >

To /u/JarJarNudes, Your post is under consideration for removal for violating Rule B.
In our experience, the best conversations genuinely consider the other person’s perspective. Here are some techniques for keeping yourself honest:

Instead of only looking for flaws in a comment, be sure to engage with the commenters’ strongest arguments — not just their weakest.
Steelman rather than strawman. When summarizing someone’s points, look for the most reasonable interpretation of their words.
Avoid moving the goalposts. Reread the claims in your OP or first comments and if you need to change to a new set of claims to continue arguing for your position, you might want to consider acknowledging the change in view with a delta before proceeding.
Ask questions and really try to understand the other side, rather than trying to prove why they are wrong.

Please also take a moment to review our Rule B guidelines and really ask yourself - am I exhibiting any of these behaviors? If so, see what you can do to get the discussion back on track.  Remember, the goal of CMV is to try and understand why others think differently than you do. >

While I agree with you here’s the real world case as to why we are both wrong:
My wife had her ears pierced by a pediatrician when she was a baby because her mom kept getting compliments on how handsome her baby boy was. Needless to say she grew up to be a hot female. But it worked out fine for her as the downside was limited and my wife loved having pierced ears as a kid.
Our kid started asking for pieced ears at 4. We relented and told her she could get them pierced for her 5th birthday. She kind of freaked out after her 1st ear but was dedicated and willingly took the pain for her 2nd ear. We spared no expense for a professional and top end earnings for a 5 year old. All in we dropped $600. Yet STILL she had issues with her ears. After 6 months of issues we took them out. No positive way to confirm but I’m fairly certain it’s due to her dirty kindergarten hands touching them. She is very distraught about not having earrings. She refuses to go to school without sticker earrings covering her holes. I don’t like a 5 year old being so self conscious about something.
If she had it done as a baby we wouldn’t have to go thorough this. >


If she had it done as a baby we wouldn’t have to go thorough this.

If she had done this as an adult you wouldn't have had to go through this either. I don't think you need to be an adult to be ready but 5?! My mom felt I was ready when I was 12. I never had a single problem and I go years without wearing earrings and the holes don't close. >

Yes, 12 is a good age to decide. So is 23. So is 6 or 7 I suppose. Hard to say really. Depends on the person really. >

Let's say we polled every adult and find everyone to, on average, rule in favor of them having had a piercing as a newborn. Would it then not be immoral not to, given we find this action to be the greatest good? >

No. Because our opinions are not evidence of the greatest good, they're just our opinions.  We don't actually know several things that would affect the answer, and everyone will be different. So there IS no one right answer for everyone. >

Then what would justify forgoing the piercing if opinion did not matter? >

You don't need to justify it either way,  as long you made the decision thoughtfully, with your child's best interest in mind. >

oh yes mb i thought you were the opposition >

My parents pierced my ears when I was three months old, as my ears lobes were still developing and my cartilage was soft; so it didn't hurt. But, I am completely with you! I ended up never wearing my earrings anyway and it's just a waste of money. If kids want earrings (with their parents permission) they can do so, but they don't NEED earrings to reaffirm their assigned gender. >

My daughter’s doctor pierced her ears when she was 4 months old.  She recommended it because they feel only a moment’s pain before they completely forget about it, and that it is much simpler for parents to easily apply alcohol and watch for signs of infection when performing other baby care routines.  There is zero risk.  The worst thing that could happen is a minor superficial infection that clears up in days.  My daughter  has loved her earrings from as soon as she was self aware about her appearance >

Parents make decisions for their children. This is not a consent issue any more than getting your child vaccinated is. >

Getting your child vaccinated is done to prevent harmful infections in the future. Getting your child’s lobes pierced is purely cosmetic. Comparing them doesn’t make sense >

Just because something doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. Just because something is purely cosmetic to you doesn't mean it's purely cosmetic. Stop assuming that your culture and way of life are the only ones. >

It is literally purely cosmetic. The fact that you're trying to say otherwise to everyone tells me your head is too far up your own ass to understand how a cosmetic body modification is still a cosmetic body modification no matter how delusions the parents are making that decision. It's a selfish decision done so the parents can say "aww look how cute". >

Again, you're just looking at something strictly through your culture. >

You're clearly not coming to this argument with any real arguments. Culture can be wrong and not saying so is what perpetuates this shit. There's no need for circumcision but you probably want to defend that too, right? Also, you didn't talk to me before, so "again" doesn't apply here. >


Culture can be wrong 

Wow. Tell me more about the supremacy of your culture. 

There's no need for circumcision but you probably want to defend that too, right

There are a number of medical benefits, and the consensus of the medical community is that it should be performed as those benefits far outweigh any risks.

you didn't talk to me before, so "again" doesn't apply here.

I don't have to be talking to you the entire time to repeat myself. >

Clearly you like repeating yourself.
I never said anything about a supremacy of "my" culture. I'm white, white people have no culture. It's all stolen or appropriated. >

I don't like repeating myself, but when people like you don't get it the first 12 times, I have to.

white people have no culture. It's all stolen or appropriated.

Oh look, another ridiculous statement. Tell me you don't know anything about history without telling me you don't know anything about history. >

"We dont put piecings on infant boys." 
Some people do, especially black families.
Other than that, the idea, i believe, is that the child will have no memories or care that much about the pain. Babies cry over everything. Papents eem to think that equal amounts of crying between piercings and falling over means that babay cares just as much. 
Also, babies dont really get a lot of infections. They get temporary immunity to nearly everything through breast milk. I know this through experience taking care of many kids.
((Also, you'd probably have a field day once you find out about circumcisions))
EDIT: Also, babies consent to nearly nothing that happens in their life. Consent really is a moot point unless you're talking about a permanent change. I can see how a piercing might be seen as a more permanent change, but piercing holes close and the piercing in and of itself is not permanent >

Not every person wants pierced ears as an adult, and by doing it as a baby the parent is depriving the child to choose not to have it.
Once you have them, especially since a young age, they don't close. Permanent. They can close if you do them as an adult and don't wear them. >

It's obvious legal, I'm not sure why that is part of your title. I think when an issue is small enough, you just shouldn't care about it. I struggle to understand why anyone would care about this. >

I had my baby girls ears pierced a couple of months ago. 
None of the arguments supporting the OP have made me think twice about the piercing. She's a beautiful little girl with cute diamond earrings and adorable bows. 
Also, the piercings were done at her pediatrician's office. Safe and clean. >

Keeping a baby’s (who doesnt even walk/crawl yet) ears clean is much easier than a childs, 
plus they wont remember the pain. I got mine pierced at 6 years old and i got so anxious of the pain i threw up and cried a lot (but still wanted it done so i could wear earrings) i remember yelling at my mom “why didn’t you do it when i was a baby? Did you just want me to remember the pain?” She laughed it off but i remember being genuinely angry. >

i went through some horrific shit as an infant.  don't remember it at all.  infants don't experience pain in the way older kids do because they have not learned to fear it.  they experience discomfort, they cry, they get comforted.  wash rinse repeat. 
as for "body mod" and consent - meh.  it's a tiny hole that will close if the kid doesn't want them. and minors can't consent to anything but their parents can - from circumcision to home schooling, to being a member of whacko church to vegetarianism, kids are frankly at the mercy of their parents for all kinds of things.  it's all a ludicrous slippery slope that ends with idiots suing their parents for not consenting to being born.  
and the consent thing is that way for a reason.  if you have sex with a child it is rape because a child cannot give consent.  an adult cannot have sex with ANYONE who can't give consent.  but an adult can have their ears pierced.  therefore a legal guardian can consent to have their child's ears pierced.  
this is not to say that sex with children is only about consent - it's also sick and creepy. but consent it is a huge part of how we've formulated our laws around statutory rape. 
anyway - until their is a law about what parents can and can't consent to on their kids behalf that spans all legal and illegal activity it's up to the parents.  
You can low key judge them - i low key judge other parents all the time.  But whatever, you are entitled to your opinion. >

It's disgusting and immoral. It's a purely cosmetic and unnecessary thing to do. >

The topic you posted about and circumcision have been discussed at length numerous times by the way.
Your opinion on this subject is a strong belief that has a very minimum if at all chance on changing your mind regardless of how open your mind is about the subject. >

I had same thought when I saw my filipino niece had been pierced in the hospital after birth.
It's a cultural thing. My fiance and I had a good conversation and what she said made some sense in that they won't remember the pain at that age. 
A good comparison we came up with was circumcision.  She was telling me boys don't get theirs until they are older there and well that's one procedure I am glad I don't remember and I feel bad for any little boy getting his cut when he knows what's going on. >

I already mentioned how I feel about circumcision in another reply.
I think it's borderline criminal that the US just allows that to happen on such a scale. 
But even then, if you squint really hard, you can come up with shaky reasoning for circumcision - easier to clean, or whatever.
Piercing are there solely for the satisfaction of the parents. The only benefit there is that... your baby girl won't be mistaken for a boy? >

Western culture often assumes that doing nothing is the same as having no impact. This is a misconception when applied to culture. To remove someone from their culture by requiring them to not participate and instead “do nothing” is actually an act. Body alteration through piercing, scaring, circumcision, tattooing, etc. can be as crucial to a culture as language, clothing, food, music, and art.  By interrupting a traditional practice because it doesn’t conform to contemporary or traditional western values, you can form a schism between a person and their community or, worse, a schism within the whole community. Many indigenous people have experienced attempted or successful cultural erasure based on the western belief that their is no harm in ending a practice the west sees as harmful or valueless. Worse, the west frequently pushes assimilation as a result of the implicit assumption that western culture is some sort of baseline or foundational culture that people can then build their culture in parallel or on top of.  For these reasons, interfering in someone else engaging in a traditional cultural practice based on western cultural practices around what requires consent verses parental assent for children can have a larger impact than just doing nothing. >

!delta
People have tried to argue that a cultural norm is a valid enough reason to do something like this and I will give a delta for this comment simply because it was articulated nicely.
However, I still tend to think that just because something has been done for a while traditionally, doesn't mean that it's worth looking at again. So it's more of a half-delta? Like, I understand why parents do it, yet I still think there's no reason to. If culturally there was no expectation for little girls to have pierced ears, parents wouldn't feel the need to pierce them. If they weren't piercing them, there would be no cultural expectation. 
Wanting your child to conform to cultural norms is valid, but sometimes, I feel, those cultural norms can be examined closer. >

I think my argument aligning with OP here would be that only some little girls get their ears pierced, and thus is it really culturally relevant? I don’t think any less of a baby girl without her ears pierced (or that she’s any less of a little girl…) >

Just because it's not culturally relevant to you doesn't mean it isn't to other people with different cultural backgrounds. That's how culture works. >

Valid, but from a western cultural perspective I very much disagree with piercing babies’ ears as being culturally relevant. >

Piercings hurt about as much as a vaccine (maybe slightly more) which are also given without the baby's consent. But vaccines are necessary and piercings are not. However, earrings are also not necessary. If the child does not want to wear earrings, they don't have to. If they do, they can. Plus, the responsibility of keeping the baby's piercing clean falls on the mother, an adult. If a child wants their ears pierced, later in life, they will have the responsibility of keeping their ears clean, and likely do a worse job than the mother. 
No real harm is dealt to the baby, in fact it may actually be easier to have ears pierced as an infant rather than as a child or teenager.
As for gender norms, there's no reason why we can't just pierce everyone's ears. If you want to pierce your baby boy's ears, do it. After the piercing is healed nobody is forcing him to wear earrings.
Edit because I was a little bit silly when I originally wrote this reply:
So the problem is that you are gambling that the piercing will be useful, meaning that if the child doesn't want to wear earrings then you have harmed them for no reason. Also, even if the child expresses a desire for piercings later in life it's better to wait until their ears are fully grown to decrease the chance of asymmetry. I still believe the mother would do a better job cleaning the piercing than the child, but the mother unnecessarily put her child at risk for an infection. 
The weird vaccine comparison I made was just to point out that OP's arguments of "the baby can't consent" and "it hurts" are not actually enough to prove abuse since babies frequently have to do things they don't want to for their own good. However, there is no way to tell whether a piercing would be worth it for the baby, so while it could prove to be useful that's not a guarantee. >

why would they likely do a worse job than the mother at keeping them clean later in life? >

because unless the wait until adulthood to get a piercing, the person in charge of keeping the piercing clean is a child, who probably won't be as careful as an adult would >

i wouldn’t say that’s always the case, a responsible teenager or older child could be more careful than a parent of an infant who might have a million other things to do >

I had my babies ears pierced and trimmed like a pit bull. Then had it circumcised. On their first birthday I had their knuckles tattooed “thug life.”
Where we are from, this is all perfectly culturally appropriate. >

Not really any more existential dread than any other decision parents have to make for their children. Babies and young kids can't always articulate what they want and even when they can you as a parent often have to veto that and tell them what's best for them.  Would also probably be healthier for them to shave their heads and not give them candy, but theres no objectively good person who should get to make the calls for someone with no agency. >

Not giving a kid candy has very clear health benefits, while getting a piercing has none whatsoever. >

I would've rather got it done when I was so young that I forget how it feels after 5 mins of crying vs getting it when I'm older and retain a general sense of the pain for a longer time because I'm more conscious of the feelings in my body at that point. >

If you had asked me a year ago I would have said that almost every single little girl ends up wanting her ears pierced, and getting a jump on that to avoid a 4 yr old in pain that they'll remember, and doing it before they can remember it. However now, I know that they can remember it unconsciously and it potentially affect them.
I had my ears pierced before I was a year old, I'm happy with them and continue to get body mods on my own accord, but honestly we just don't know the outcome. I think personally, that it if it's not your body and they can't communicate it's best to leave it be. Will it scar them for life? Probably not, but you just don't know. >

Thank you for mentioning that not every single girl or woman wants pierced ears, and by piercing them as babies they're depriving them of that choice.
My mom never got hers pierced ever, she's almost in her 60s and never regretted it. The shape of her lobes is kind of unusual, so I suspect they would've come out crooked if done as a baby, too (which happens way too often, and I don't see it being discussed here).
I honestly only felt ready to undergo this almost permanent body modification - because that's what it is, and people should call it that, like tattoos and septum piercings - recently, at the age of 20. And I'm glad I waited, but I understand that may be just me.
Basically, I think people just don't understand that a pierced lobe isn't comparable to a bow on a baby's hair, or a pink shirt or whatever; it's honestly more comparable to a small tattoo. No one would tattoo a baby, then why do we permanently poke a hole through their lobes without their consent? >

No need to change your mind, you are right. Another thing i don't understand is that they pierce their daughters ear lobes at 2 yo, but when they are 14 yo and they want another pierceing the answer is "No, i'm not gonna let you mutilate yourself" like tf >

💯 >

To ban something like this the risks have to outweigh the benefits. 
The benefits are: cultural, less pain (later in life), the difficulty adapting which comes with changing anything
The risks: extremely small increase in infection (remember the baby would be taken care of by their parents so messines wouldn't really work for this as a good argument)
The risk is so small (like lightning bolt when going outside small) to actually harm the child (not every infection = death) that it doesn't really matter. Benefits clearly outweigh the risks here by a lot, its not even close. >

"Less pain later in life" assumes that the child is going to pierce them as an adult, but not every adult wants them pierced. My mom is almost in her 60s, never got them pierced and never regretted it; same for my grandma. Therefore this doesn't count as a benefit.
"Culture" doesn't mean it's okay. There's loads of stuff we only do because of culture/tradition, and we should stop doing it because it's not compatible with modern values. Traditionally, people had slaves; doesn't make it right. Traditionally, husbands owned their wifes and could ask them whatever; doesn't make it right. Therefore this doesn't count as a benefit.
This makes all the risks, no matter how small, not worth it, since there are no benefits.
But let's discuss the risks too:
Exposing a child to infection - no matter how small - willingly and for literally no reason is something only an irresponsible parent would do.
Another risk you didn't mention. Since people seem to be so obsessed with the beauty of a literal baby, I will remind you that a lot of piercings done to babies will end up crooked/slanted in the long run, since baby's ears are so small and it's easy to make mistakes while piercing. So guess what, now it's permanent (when done as a baby, a piercing is basically impossible to close) and even crooked. >

It’s a cultural thing, I know when I have a daughter, her ears are going to get pierced just like mine were when I was a baby. I don’t really care about changing your view, if it don’t like it, that’s not gonna stop me or anyone else from doing it, when it’s been done for generations in our families. >

A lot of parents make the decision to get their daughters ears pierced while they are under anastesia for surgery.  So the piercing is done in the sterile OR. Decreased risk of infection + good pain control.
Im honestly much more mad about my Mom's decision to give me a curly perm + bangs in elementary school than i am about her getting my ears pierced. >

How many babies get surgery? I've never heard of that. >

Not sure of exact numbers, but that's what my parents did for me. I had to get ear tubes removed (which I believe is a fairly common procedure for kids) when I was 2, so my mom just asked the doctor to pierce my ears while I was under. Made it less painful - or at least I don't remember any pain. >

My parents waited until I was ~2-3 to pierce my ears. I distinctly remember being carried out of Walmart screaming. I LOVE earrings. I personally would have preferred to have them as an infant and not remember this happening. So maybe waiting a few years isn't best..IMO. negative memories and all. >

I think the question is where is the line? A piercing that is not permanent, so safe that I honestly couldn't tell you the last time I heard of a serious injury, let alone death, to a baby from getting ears pierced. I would assume if it happened it was either complete neglect (in which case they shouldn't be trusted with a child in the first place) or a complete freak accident or something. 
There are loads of things we do to children without their consent. While I agree that consent is important, that kind of falls off the wayside for kids. What if they don't want to take a bath today? Odds are they aren't going to suffer some serious health issue from skipping it, but nobody would even blink if you made your kid bathe anyway. >

Not every adult wants pierced ears. By piercing them as a baby, the parent is depriving the child of the choice not to pierce them ever. >

"Body mod" is pretty extreme language for something so reversible. If you get a star embedded under your face skin, it's going to be very complicated to reverse.
So really you just don't want a baby to endure pain for the sake of a cosmetic change. 
Compare how a baby feels about getting its ears pierced to how a baby feels about getting a first or second haircut. I'd argue the child feels more strongly negative emotions in a bad case for the first haircut, with more generalized trauma affecting their life, than they do for a bad case with the piercing. Very young children don't get up to as much infectious mischief as ambulatory children. They're already completely at the mercy of their carers for hygiene and every other thing in their life. I don't judge parents who take their young child to supercheapcuts for the first haircut, so I can't judge them for a different cosmetic change just because it's pain. 
You're privileging pain above other kinds of discomfort, and you're judging someone for something no worse than a bad haircut (experience). >

If you don’t like what they do to the ears, Wait until you hear what they do to the penises! >

I had it done as a baby and I'm really grateful. I can go a long time without wearing earrings without worrying the holes will close up. >

Some cultures find it bizarre if your ears AREN'T pierced as a baby. Alot of babies here get them pierced before they turn 6 months. I'm a bit of a black sheep that way considering I only gor mine at 9 months. What's more insane is piercing their noses as well before they can process any of it. Absolutely agree with OP. >

I mean, idk what to say. I got my ears pierced a few days after I was born. After I grew up, (and could consent to things) I didn't want to use them, I never use them, I just pass a needle every now and then to clean the holes, but that's it. Though my stepdad used to force me to wear them to the point that I cried, and my grandma forcefully pierced my sister, even though she's allergic to piercings, idk. 
But I do think that they shouldn't do it so early in life. Let the kids choose if they want to or not. Or just buy clip ons, it's a lot safer than piercing someone >

Have 3 girls and got all their ears pierced when they were a baby. They look so darn cute😊😊😊 >

I agree. Same with circumcision. >

I can't change your mind, I'm with you entirely. We didn't circumcise our son because it's literally snipping off part of his penis for a esthetic purposes (the whole argument regarding cleanliness isn't sound). Piercing a baby's ears is the same thing, body modification without consent. Its cruel and immoral if you ask me. >

Not that it matters as much as a guy but I wanted mine done since maybe mid or so elementary school age but wasn't able to til moving out I'm still glad it was 100% on me to decide. Let them ask about it and show some level of responsibility for taking care of the piercing, it's that easy. >

There are magnetic earrings that don't require holes so this makes even less sense. >

Circumcised men have entered the chat >

I had my ears pierced as a baby and I’m glad my parents did it. >


I just want to know what goes through a parents mind when they decide to risk their baby's health at such a young age all to conform to.. a weird gender norm

It's pretty simple. Parents do it because it was the norm when they were a kind, and so on. It's not just a weird gender norm. Jewelry is part of our culture, particularly on women. So through that lens, the parents are thinking "they're going to be pierced anyway. Do it when they're too small to remember the pain." 

decide to risk their baby's health at such a young age

Ear piercings are very easy to keep clean. An infant isn't out playing in the dirt. They are with their parents, or an adult 24/7. I can't see many scenarios where an infants ears, or ear wounds would be exposed to many harmful germs. 
Now, do I think its a good or necessary practice? Nah. >

I got my ears pierced when I was a few months old it's not that deep plus it didn't even hurt 😭 >

I live in Costa Rica and when I have my first daughter I didn't piercing her ears bc yes is weird and cruel... and everybody was shocked lol and call her "him"... >

Noone should ever do that for any reason. >

ctrl+f: circumcision >

I begged to get my ears pierced at 6, my dad took me to fuckin Walmart. I wish now that they had explained it better to me about what exactly getting your ears pierced meant. They also used the piercing guns rather than needles so it hurt really bad and I never wear earrings in my ears anymore. They healed bad and they hurt to hold earrings. I wish I had been told to wait longer until I fully understood what was going on. >

there are many reasons for this, such as it being a culture in many african countries and etc. everything has its risk, you have the same risk as getting an ear infection when you pierce your ears whether your 20 or when an infant pierces there ears young.
i agree that we should be making the same practices on boys as well, but unfortunately many people these days still don’t think it is an acceptable practice for men and will not allow it, and unfortunately we cannot control that >

My daughter was born in 2003 and many a jaw dropped when we explained that she would get her ears pierced when she asked to get her ears pierced. >

If a child has a cleft palate that is ultimately a cosmetic flaw and won't change their quality of life would a parent be in the right to make the decision to have their appearance altered? The decision puts the child in a socially more accepted position as our society values "cuteness" and aesthetically pleasing. So even considering the future of a child going to another child's party or sleep over and being able to participate in things like playing with jewelry, including earrings, makes their social acceptance easier based on purely cosmetic reasons. >

You could be like my parents and wait until I ask for them to be pierced and then they had to force the earrings  through because I kept playing with them and taking them out. It’s better to do it young so they’re used to it and they don’t touch it >

I agree 💯 , mine were pierced against my will when I was 4 because I 'looked too much like a boy'. I hated it and they hurt all the time. I never wear them now and I do not like the look of the holes on my lobes. >

I got my ears pierced as a baby and now I’m grown and do not care whatsoever. I’m doing the same to my daughter if I have one. There’s nothing wrong with it. >

No not iffy.  Putting a hole in someone with out their consent is illegal >

Exactly. Babies can't consent to that. I'm personally really glad my parents never did that because I would have hated it. This is not even about the baby's health, fun or anything, this is just about parents wanting to show off their kid. Annoying. >

Mom pierced my ears, and my sisters ears. I hate earrings now but as a kid i LOVED them. really never complained about my ears being pierced in infancy. It was as simple as just not wearing them. My sister loves earnings and got more piercings in her ear. Its really not a big deal, at-least i never got to feel/ remember the pain of having my ears pierced. >

I agree with you. I think it should be the kids decision. If my daughter had asked at 3 or 4 to do it, fine. I don’t care what age she asks, I just want her to ask. It’s not my decision to make for her. She’s 6 now and still doesn’t want her ears pierced, so I’m glad I didn’t have them done when she was younger. 
Another big reason for me not to do it is the scenario where I finally get my baby to lay down for a nap, but then her earring pokes the back of her head and she’s up and screaming. >

Wait till you hear about male circumcision >

Imo it's more for the way their pierced then age. We know that a piercing gun can not be sterilized right and I'm pretty sure that's how all young babies get them pierced? Personally I waited until my daughter asked and she had her pierced 6 weeks ago by a professional piercer at 5 years old. My younger daughter will get her done if she asks the same way. >

It’s definitely legal. Nothing iffy about it at all. So that part of your cmv is obviously flawed. Nobody has ever or will ever face criminal penalties for getting their baby’s ears pierced. >

We had our daughter's ears pierced because when she was little she was bald and everyone thought she was a boy. No hair for bows etc,. She really didn't have decent hair until about 2 yrs old, our son was the same way.
I remember being frustrated about people at her daycare/public thinking she was a boy. She's now an adult, I asked her if she minded that her ears were pierced early. She said "no, why would I, I love my pierced ears." So for us it wasn't vanity, was more practical and to remove confusion. Would we do the same today? Probably. 
There are so many larger issues to be up in arms about, like FGM, or bindings so their daughters don't get raped. This CMV seems shortsighted as many have pointed out in some cultures this is the societal norm and what is "weird" to OP is not for their location. Travel more, judge less. >

Not here to change your mind because I agree with you, I'm just here to say how sad it is so many people in the comments are okay with putting holes in their baby essentially because the baby cant say no.
That's what I'm getting here from a lot of people. 
The amount of people saying a baby cannot consent and for some reason that means its okay to make a decision for them about their body that isnt health related is actually sickening.
Consent is always important, especially with children. Taking away their choice when it's not a matter of safety or health can lead to severe trust issues down the line. >

Just a correction: some cultures - in my life, the Azorez Portuguese - do pierce the ears of infant and very young boys. It's a cultural thing. >

When I was an infant my parents took me and had mine done (1982) this was extremely common then. When I was in high school and junior high my friends were starting to get theirs done and I would see how badly infected they got from not being taken care of. A few had to have earrings medically removed from ear trying to grow around it from not being cleaned and turned, or too tight. It’s something quick and easy to do with an infant, that the parents can keep clean and take care of easier at that age. Now parents are using piercing needs and going to tattoo shops to get their newborns done versus the gun we used when I was a baby so that changes things for multiple reasons and opinions. I think it’s something that heals and will close if the child doesn’t like it later in life with a small mark that looks like a large pore at worst. In my opinion to each their own. The child can remove later if they don’t like them. They aren’t forever. >

It is 100% legal where I live (canada) , so I suppose you’ll award a delta and change your view that it is “iffy”
If it is legal? >

"Iffy" has many different meanings.
You could interpret OP as meaning.
"It is uncertain if it is even legal"
Or 
"It is wrong that it is even legal"
Ironicly the word "iffy" is a bit iffy to use in this context. >

I gave birth to my daughter in Mexico, and it is common practice there to pierce a baby girls ears in the hospital before you go home. I cleaned her ears, and ensured they never got infected, and her ears healed in two weeks. She is one of the few girls in her grade that has hers ears pierced today (she’s 10, in 4th) however, I know most of them are about to get their ear pieces for their 10th birthdays. For me, it was getting something over with obviously far sooner than later, and she won’t have to experience the pain and longer healing process at her current age, especially with going to school, where other kids can be jerks and harm a piercing, or her harm her piercing on the playground. She also has always had the option to or not to wear earrings, and she always chooses to wear earrings. >

Do you ask permission before you change a diaper? 
Have you named your child yet? >

Since part of your argument is that it's painful, and you said in another comment you don't have your lobes pierced, I just want to point out that lobe piercings really don't hurt, like barely at all. I've done lobe piercings for a lot of adults and even people who are really worried about the pain have ended up fine and surprised by how little pain there is. Often it doesn't hurt at all. >

Same thing is said about Circumcision but its does have its benefits for when the child becomes an adult. Doing it later in life actually causes damage and loss of feeling in that area >

I'm so happy mine were done. I suck at letting peircings heal >

Wait til you hear what they do to baby boy’s foreskins >

Raise your kids how you want. Seems like a pretty simple solution to this "outrage." >

I insisted that my daughter could only get her ears pierced when she was able to speak clearly enough to ask for them herself.
In truth, it had almost nothing to do with consent or any high-minded ideals like that. I just didn't want to deal with changing diapers and all the other messy bodily issues with a baby on top of crappy infected ear holes. Once she was out of diapers and mostly capable of avoiding ripping out her ears on things, she got her ears pierced. >

I agree. I’m thankful that my parents didn’t do that for me as a baby, because it turns out that I have kosmemophobia. So if they had done that, I would not have liked that. >

I love this. I got my ears pierced when I was 2 and I hated it
 It was painful when she swapped earings and Im Sensitive to certain metals so my ears would ways get infected and be really uncomfortable. I have so many unpleasant memories of my ears hurting and my mother not caring because they looked cute.
People just need to wait until kids are older >

i understand where you’re coming from cause it is hard to think about a baby getting pierced. but my main concern would be someone’s cultural reasons to pierce their babies ears. i know it’s important to a lot of communities and cultures. also, i am SO grateful my mom pierced my ears because i don’t remember any sort of discomfort or pain even though i was a toddler, and any piercings i have gotten as an adult have become severely infected and i had to let them close. so the only way i can adorn my ears, is with the lobe piercings my mom had done for me. 
something else too, my dad had his ears pierced when he was a lot younger, and now in his late 50’s his style has evolved and he wanted to start wearing small gold hoops again. he was happy he already had the piercing and didn’t have to do it all over again! >

Its legal. Yeah...i am not sure bout this one either. I couldn't do it for my own. My mom did for my first daughter. My second i waited until she was older...but i will say, after the initial peircing, shw didnt cry and they never bothered her. My oldest one has actually had more issues having to go twice to get it done due to a hole closing. Its almost better when they are younger because they are too little to remember. I got my upper earlobe pierced at 15 and i tell u that was the worst pain! Still hurts to this day and im 43 now! Lol  cant wear earrings in it too long and cant sleep with any in. I guess if parents want to, they can! The baby wont remember it thats for sure. I didnt. But i remember when i was 15! Lol >

The same should also apply to circumcision and other unnecessary procedures regardless of gender. Leave the darn kids alone! >

I’m glad my parents didn’t think like this cause I would have been mad if my ears weren’t pierced. I don’t have to go through the pain as I’m older and now that my mum won’t let me get other piercings it doesn’t bother me that much since I at least have the basic lobe piercing. >

I think it’s for the parents pleasure, certainly not for a baby.  If that’s acceptable, then nose and tongue piercings on babies shouldn’t be a problem either >

Wait till you hear about circumcision. >

It's actually not that harmful probably when it happens and the parent can make sure the baby stays clean so there's no infection. Also if the child doesn't want it later on in life they can literally wait until it closes. >

in all honesty if the child didn’t like the ear piercing they can let the hole close up >

I don't think so. So I can't change ur opinion. U seem pretty stout on how u think. I've had mine pierced since I was 4, probably younger because idk, and I was circumcised. I didn't feel a thing, it's like getting a shot/vaccine. Who gives a shit. 
I want to know what u believe is so harmful? Lmao >

True >

In some cultures piercing is a religious thing, in others it signifies rank or status within the culture, in others it sorts the males from females. Not all the world is run by western culture or beliefs. >

There are a million preventive measures to take to keep from carrying an unwanted baby and to be perfectly clear there are exceptions in my opinion. Fetus still has a heart beat at 8 days. Proof of life. Pretty sure that living babies get pierced by pretty sharp needles and what have you against their consent during abortions sooo. Using the It's my body argument stops when it's no longer your body. If your baby had a penis do you too? If it has two heads does it mean you have three? No sounds absurd just like this post. >

While I completely agree there’s a lack of consent for the procedure, think about it from the kid’s perspective. I like piercings but im hella scared to get one lol, but luckily my prents got mine pierced when i was a kid and I dont even remember the pain🤷🏾‍♀️now i have my piercing without having to go through the pain. 
Now on the flip side, lets say i DIDNT like piercings…its as simple as taking the earring out and letting the hole close, with little, if any, visible change. 
Either way its painless and the decision is still in my hands, even if its just later down the road. If my parents hadnt done it, whos to say i wouldve ever worked up the nerve to get it done myself? >

I got mine at 4 which is way better than being an infant even if they are going to do that's they should at least wait a few years into the child's life.. >

I agree completely, and also believe that circumcising your baby should be 100% illegal in all circumstances without exception. Obviously there are situations where it is necessary to violate a child’s agency in order to promote their wellbeing, but violating their agency in both of those circumstances is completely unnecessary. Obviously piercings aren’t irrevocable in the same way that circumcision is but still, why subject your child to a solely aesthetic procedure they can’t say yes or no to? Gives me the same vibe as dressing a reluctant dog up for Halloween.