Nystyle709 wrote:
Please explain to me how piercing a girls ears is considered 'not protecting' her. PLEASE explain what fucking danger am I putting my daughter into by piercing her ears. Is she going to die? Get colic? Grow a third ear? I'd like to know.
Well, I already answered this in a number of ways in the previous post. You either missed it or you are intentionally ignoring it for the sake of devotion to this tradition. I already said that it was NOT a life threatening thing and something that they will recover from. I also said that's COMPLETELY besides the point and pretending that it isn't is disregarding your responsibility as a parent because your priorities are in the wrong place. Don't take this personally (I am not talking about YOU specifically), but about "people" in general who try to justify this position. As others have already said here, ear piercing HURTS (otherwise they wouldn't cry when it's being done). Ear piercing may also lead to INFECTION in some cases. It's neither benign nor risk free and there is no benefit to the child by doing it. And by that argument ALONE, it is unethical.
Nystyle709 wrote:LOL, and I say O-M-G. So I guess if you're dressing your child up in the fru-fru clothes and colors and wanting them to look cute wouldn't be a 'gross display of vanity'? Of course ear piercing is vanity. So what? It isn't anymore vain than you dressing your baby up and taking loads of pics.
Dressing up your child in "fru-fru" clothes is also vanity on the part of the parents (which I'm not going to make any attept to defend. But to compare that with something that actually hurts them (punching holes in their ears) or could lead to infection isn't a realistic comparrison. That's when things go from being just vain and ignorant to vain, ignorant and unethical. When some kid starts crying and screaming because their parent put them in funky clothes, or they have to make a trip to the doctors office for some antibiotics because of the fru-fru dress they put them in, then you can come back and use
this as an example. Otherwise, the two things aren't really comparable!
Nystyle709 wrote:
And honestly, you ain't coming up with a logical reason why they shouldn't do it. "Gross display of vanity". That's an opinion. Because I am positive you'll be indulging in your own 'gross display of vanity' with your own baby. "You're not protecting your daughter". A ridiculous assumption. I didn't know piercing her ears meant throwing her out to the wolves. "It hurts". Well, taking her to doctor to get her shots hurts. Sticking a long ass needle in her arms every 6 months hurts, but you do that don't you? And don't even try to come back with "she will need her shots so that's different" bit, because that is so besides the point if you're trying to argue the pain factor.
First of all, while "vanity" may simply be "my opinion", there is no doubt in my mind that ear piercing on babies represents a form of vanity to everyone else on this forum (including you). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong by arguing that it is NOT a form of vanity! It would be different if I was the ONLY one with this opinion, but EVERYONE thinks that this is vanity (including the people who DO IT). So my "opinion" is not only an opinion, but it's a valid FACT according to everyone else on here (unless you'd care to argue that).
Secondly, and here is the part you obviously don't understand Nystyle: causing pain to a child for a NECESSARY reason (were the benefit outweights the risks) is ethical. Causing pain to a child for an unnecessary and superficial reason (where there is no benefit to the child) is unethical! Therin lies the difference. Ear piercing cannot be compared to something done for the benefit of the child! And until you can prove that ear piercing a baby improves her life in some way, you can't justify doing it, PERIOD! And that's why the "needle" argument doesn't work here.
Nystyle709 wrote:You wanna protect your baby from pain? Lock her up in the damn house so she'll reduce the risk of getting any childhood diseases before it's time for her to start school."It's unethical" Says who if it's a tradition? Who are you to dictate tradition and determine if it's wrong or right? And quite frankly, this tradition is so tame. I find it hilarious when people try to over analyze shit.
That's funny, because that is exactly what YOU are doing by digging to find a defense to this "tradition". But rather than answer this pretty ridiculous line of reasoning you've presented here, let me just ask you a simple question here. You want to use the notion of "tradition" as a defense for this right. So let me ask you: "What justifies any painful tradition?"
Nystyle709 wrote:Sure, it's not something that is going to kill them and if they want to take them out when they're older they can. But is that really even the issue?
Yup..
No it's NOT. That's why it was a rhetorical question (that I went on to answer and explain why myself).
Nystyle709 wrote:Is that really a justification for doing it in the first place? I don't think so. Ear piercing is tradition for the sake of tradition! Nothing more and nothing less. And it's the same argument with circumcision on boys (although admittedly that is much worse).
And if it is, you just answered your own question. Really, what is the point of getting upset over someone else's TRADITION if it's not harming you or the baby? It's not yours. You're acting like it's being forced upon you to pierce YOUR child's ears.
You're still not getting this are you? IT IS HURTING THE BABY, and that is the point! Have you ever taken an ethics class before? Judging by your responses I'm going to guess no, and if not it's something you should probably consider if you have the time. It's really an interesting class that I found often makes people think in a way that they haven't considered before.
In any case, I don't understand your logic here. Whether or not something is being done to ME or to MY BABY doesn't mean that I should ignore the ethics of it (because that would make me unethical). If you saw someone abusing their child, should you NOT care because it's not you or your child? Bouding up the feet of Chinese girls for years was a "tradition" too. It was also a ridiculous tradition and a form of abuse by most people's standards today! Should you not care that children are being abused because it's "someone else's" tradition? You keep trying to use tradition as if it's a defense but what you need to realize is that tradition alone does not justify causing harm to someone else against their will (regardless of HOW MUCH harm is being done to them), unless you can demonstrate in some way how such a tradition is beneficial to that child. This is simple ethics!
Nystyle709 wrote:Exactly. That's your opinion darling. Not FACT. And like I said, all you're doing is describing your preference. You are doing nothing but trying to justify your PREFERENCE.
Negative. That's not what I'm doing at all because my only "preference" is that it's the child's preference that should matter, not the parent's. It is YOU who are trying to justify your PREFERENCE at the expense of the child (which is unethical because your preference should be irrelevant, particularly when it doesn't benefit the child).[/quote]
Nystyle709 wrote:You'd be up in arms if someone decided and try to dictate to you that not circumcising your sons is "unethical" because it's been proven that it's easier and healthier to be circumcised. Which is the main reason people feel the need to have their boys circumcised. You'd be mad if someone told you uncircumcised dicks looks like anteaters because it's your 'gross display of vanity'. However, who is dogging you for not wanting to do that?
I'm not really sure what you are trying to say here because you used way too many double negatives. Maybe you can rephrase this so that it is clearer? By my point has always been the same about circumcision as it is about ear piercing. I view it as equally unethical (if that's what your question was).
Nystyle709 wrote:I'm still getting her ears pierced. Better to do it now so I (and she) won't have to worry about it.
It's obvious that we have a fundamental disagreeance on this issue and that being the case it's probably best that we agree to disagree. I see no benefit to getting a baby's ears pierced and knowing that it is painful, potentially harmful and is of no benefit to the child, I don't see how it can be ethically justified. That is my "opinion" which you are free to disagree with. That is the nature of these boards aren't they? I'll simply add this (and you don't have to answer this if you don't want to), but what exactly is there to "worry" about by NOT doing it?
Have a blessed day!
Anything else?
feeds
» NEW ADDRESS: http://conversationchamber.ipbhost.com/
» New project
» st pattys day
» White smoke signals cardinals have selected a new pope
» Red?
» Do You Look Like a Celebrity?
» Canned Foods
» English Muffins or Toast?