• Rhoeri@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Ears are predominantly pierced when age of consent is reached and no place will do it without that consent.

      Parents doing this to their children without consent- are abusing their children.

      So in a way, yeah- like ears being pierced.

      Additionally, pieced ears heal back if left alone. Circumcision is permanent mutilation.

      Man I love blowing up false equivalency fallacies! Thanks for this!

      • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Not from what I’ve seen in n America - most girls under 16 already have their ears pierced. And such ear mutilation of girls without their ability to consent seems to be culturally fine.
        Of course the two situations aren’t identical, that’s how analogies work and it’s still a useful part of critical thinking.
        The point is that it’s not quite as black and white as many people think. If these boys at 16 want their diicks cut and it’s part of their culture and done properly, I’m not going to say it’s bad. Obviously in the case of this article, it was not done right. Circumcision just after birth is a separate issue; but I’m not particularly against it having had it done to me and not feeling that I am lacking anything as a result.