So, I saw a post on Facebook today arguing whether or not circumcisions and ear piercing for babies are considered a form of mutilation.
Here is my opinion; The decisions of whether or not to circumcises your male baby or pierce your daughters ears is something that should be left entirely up to the parent. If I were having a little boy I would choose to circumcises him for many reason, one being for hygiene purposes. As for the fact that im having a little girl, when I feel she is old enough (probably around 3 months old) I will choose to pierce her ears. When she gets older she can choose to take the earrings out, but until then she will have them pierced.
For boys, its not as simple as saying that they dont want to be circumcised anymore, but the decisions the parents makes when the child is a baby is all for the good of the child or for religious purposes. Being circumcised does not make or break a male or make him less of a man when he get older.
For some, parents should be relieved that we have modern technology and medicine for when little boys are circumcised. I come from a Jewish background where little boys have their circumcisions done at home or church by a priest, not a doctor. Oh and did I mention that they don’t use any form of anesthesia for the process…yeah…So it could be worse in some cases.
To make a long story short, Circumcisions and ear piercings are not a form mutilation, the processes have been around for 100s of years, why is this such an issue today?
Just your average Air Force Spouse 