Children, Piercings, Ethics, Opinions.

Former Member · September 2007

I had my ears done when I was 5 - birthday present from my Mum's friend, my Mum didnt know at the time that this was going to be done.. I can honestly say that had I been given the choice - I was too young to argue basically - , I would have said noo. Because it was sore, caused me endless problems with piercings going septic (eeurgh) and turning of posts etc until I was 12 and they finally closed up.
With body piercings i think it is up to the individual. Although maybe under 13 is pushing it a bit far.
Also dont believe intimate piercings should be allowed - can't be good for you lol!

Former Member · September 2007

katralla wrote: »

Automatic circumcision of young boys is an interesting topic. I'm sure you're taking the piss though.

I had my ears pierced when I was very little- maybe 2, can't remember. My 7 yr old wants hers done, which I think is fine. I went to my piercer who says he doesn't do under 14s though, which is what prompted me to bring up the debate. I will be taking her to get them done, just not with a gun, and not from somewhere dodgy like Claire's. I thought about gettin gher ears done when she was younger and though I didn't see anything wrong with it really (hypocritical, but based on the cultural experience of having mine done young perhaps) I didn't get around to it, and thought I might as well wait until she asked. One of the issues will be sports though- she'll have to wear plasters over the piercings during PE, games, and dance too maybe? That'll be a pain in the arse.

I know someone with a ring in his willy, and a set of little ball inplants under his foreskin on the shaft too, te he.

I'm not taking the piss at all it's my opinion, I thought the point of this forum was opinion...

Former Member · September 2007

I was 17 when I had my eyebrow pierced for the first time. I didn't tell my mum, she wasn't happy when she saw it but I told her it was perfectly legal and that I can do what I want to my body. She accepted that after a couple of days and now she actually kind of likes it.

Former Member · September 2007

Piercing a child isn't for the child's benefit, it's for the parent's. It's so adults can ogle at how 'cute' their baby is with it's earrings in. I think it's a form of assault on a child - there's no way a child could consent to it below a certain age and when they can talk, they still can't comprehend what a piercing is.

Therefore I believe that piercing children under 14 should be illegal, and children over 14 should only be allowed basic lobe piercings with parental consent. Any other forms of body mod should be 18+. IMO.

Former Member · September 2007

Asta wrote: »

Circumcision is an awful lot more painful for a grown man, they have to avoid erections for several days afterwards.

Being circumsised is much more hygenic.

I suspect it's just as painful for a baby, and certainly more distressing, as it has no idea what's happening to it.

The hygiene argument is only valid if you've got a man who is incapable of locating his dick to clean it. And the hygiene argument certainly doesn't hold any weight when you compare it against not mutilating an infant.

Former Member · September 2007

I had my ears done at 3 and my sister was 18 months when she had hers done. I don't agree with it and think that when the child is old enough to understand, then they should have the choice.

Former Member · September 2007

Asta wrote: »

I'm not taking the piss at all it's my opinion, I thought the point of this forum was opinion...

Ok, fair enough. It is an interesting topic, and lots of people have opinions on it, someone should start a thread...

Former Member · September 2007

Ilora-Danon wrote: »

Piercing a child isn't for the child's benefit, it's for the parent's.

Whoah, far out- I completely disagree.

Ilora-Danon wrote: »

I think it's a form of assault on a child - there's no way a child could consent to it below a certain age and when they can talk, they still can't comprehend what a piercing is.

Therefore I believe that piercing children under 14 should be illegal, and children over 14 should only be allowed basic lobe piercings with parental consent. Any other forms of body mod should be 18+. IMO.

Your "therefore" doesn't make any sense, you start with a quite good argument about how a baby can't communicate by talking, then go on to conclude that under 14s can't consent. I think kids start being more than verbal enough about their wants and dislikes after about 2, though I forget- was a long time ago.

Former Member · September 2007

I think the age for piercings should be no lower than about 7.

Former Member · September 2007

Ilora-Danon wrote: »

Piercing a child isn't for the child's benefit, it's for the parent's. It's so adults can ogle at how 'cute' their baby is with it's earrings in. I think it's a form of assault on a child - there's no way a child could consent to it below a certain age and when they can talk, they still can't comprehend what a piercing is.

Therefore I believe that piercing children under 14 should be illegal, and children over 14 should only be allowed basic lobe piercings with parental consent. Any other forms of body mod should be 18+. IMO.

Agree with the first part. Don't agree with the 2nd though. I got all mine done under 14 and really wanted them. I don't regret them. I think when the child asks and when everything is explained to them and they still want it, then let them. If it goes wrong you can always take it out.

Former Member · September 2007

i think 10+ for ears
16+ for belly/nose
17+ for nipples/genitals etc

I wanted my nose done at 12, and if my mum had said yes, i'd have had it done, and now I am soooo glad I had no choice in the matter!

Children, Piercings, Ethics, Opinions.

Comments