suki@reed.UUCP (Monica Nosek) (04/11/85)
In article <1223@watdcsu.UUCP> rsellens@watdcsu.UUCP (Rick Sellens - Mech. Eng.) writes: >In article <317@unc.UUCP> fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) writes: >> >>If you reject circumcision because of its pain, you probably should not >>pierce your daughter's ears, either. >> >> Frank Silbermann > >I'm not sure which would be more painful, but most civilized people would >not pierce their daughter's ears until the daughter said she wanted them >pierced. I think the question is more concerned with trauma than pain. >If you want something done then the pain is reduced to simple annoyance. My mom told me that around the time that I was born (1965) ear-piercing at birth was quite popular. I suppose the theory behind it was that the baby girl would not remember the unpleasant feeling and would grow up with ready-made earring holes. It's not the actual piercing that bothers me, though; I question the wisdom of allowing infants and small children to wear little sharp posts or smooth, catchable hoops in their ears. I don't think I'd let my daughter pierce her ears until I was sure she wouldn't eat the earrings :-). Kids can find enough trouble to get into without having their lobes shredded by catching their earrings. Monica p.s. Mom also told me that one doctor she knew used to tell new parents who wanted their infant daughter's ears pierced that he'd only do it if he could pierce her nose, too. They usually didn't ask him about it again.