I admit it, I judged (big time) AIBU?

[luciadilammermoor]

Walking through a shopping centre at lunchtime (endless search for shoes to fit DD1), we heard a loud and paniced screaming coming from somewhere. It crescendo'ed as we passed the hairdressers where 4 adults were pinning a little girl of c.2years old against a woman (her mother?) to enable one of them to pierce her ears.

I admit it, I stopped short, held by the sheer panic and fear that this child was shouting out for us all to hear. I judged, I hoisted big judgy knickers up to about my forehead (in my head): just how the hell could someone do that to their child and why the hell didn't the person do it ask whether this really was a good idea/would they like to rethink?

As I say, I judged. I feel guilty now because everything in my body was telling me to go and say 'really? this is so important? why exactly?' and yet I knew I should not get involved. Not my child etc.

But wtf?

Well if you'd seen this being done to an adult, you'd have been witnessing a fairly serious assault, wouldn't you? I don't see that the fact that the victim was a 2yo whose mother wanted her ears pierced makes this any less of an assault.
Poor kid.
(There's a really good post over in the feminist section about making sure our small DDs realise their bodies are their own, and know they are entitled to their own space, don't feel obliged to be pulled and pushed around, etc. That post is so, so sane.)

totally agree talkingpeace2. I know babies feel pain. I also know people of any age experience 'pain' very differently depending on their environment and preparation

Piercing babies is cruel imo but I don't think putting an arbitrary age such as 12 on it helps. Why not 11?

For me once a child can a) understand that it will hurt b) understand it might get infected and hurt a lot and c) understand the concept of permanence and that the holes will never fully close they are old enough.

My 4 yo dd fits all these criteria and I would have no problem with her getting them done but she doesn't want them.

Ears, foreskins, clitoris, none should be fucked with by anyone else unless it's for medical reasons.

They ought to refuse in cases like that. Not the same I know, but I used to be a face painter in a big theme park...some kids just DID NOT want it done and their parents would be trying to hold them down etc....I used to say "Sorry...no it's too dangerous...I could poke their eye with the brush if they're struggling."

They all looked at me like I was mad! I also used to get asked to do tiny, newborn sleeping babies....i used to say no to that too.
I'm not slapping face paint on a newborn to satisfy the whims of the parents!

The brushes were rinsed between uses but that's it! I could give it Impetigo!

talkinpeace - I totally agree, as I stated in my post, i didn't think the op was unreasonable, I would have felt the same seeing something like that and there is no way I would subject my daughter to something like that. What I'm objecting to is the big brother attitude of setting an age limit- I knew at 4 that I wanted my ears pierced and so did my DD. That might seem young to some people and I respect that, but it was okay for us. And I also object to the 'chav' stereotyping comments, that's all.

I think i would be making a complaint to the manager of the shop actually. how much were they being paid to hold down a screaming toddler??

my kids have never had their faces painted, and now gumballcharm i don't think they every will!

Sorry but I don't think what OP saw is acceptable regardless of class, race or cultural norms. Mutilation of a body part for cosmetic reasons of a child aged 2 should not be allowed. The fact that she was obviously frightened out of her wits and it was being done against her will makes it worse and the parents and shop staff should have been ashamed of themselves.