>

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.
/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)