to wonder why on earth HQ chose a mahoosive photo of a baby with pierced ears to head the new home page?

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

I can't think of a single topic which has caused more bun fighting on here than baby ear piercing. The vast majority (I'd guess at least 80% ??) of Mumsnetters have really strong feelings against this practice.

What an odd choice!

They probably used it because a lot of children have their ears pierced and just because someone makes a different choice to you it didn't mean their choice is less valid then yours.

I wouldn't pierce a babies ears but then i don't really care if someone else does to theirs. None of my business.

If you're going to inflict pain on a tiny child for your own aesthetic reasons you need to be prepared to take some flack for it IMO.

Yes yes that's the standard mumsnet poster opinion, its been done to death. You've yet to explain why that means photos of babies with their ears pierced shouldn't be used in advertising/on mumsnets front page. Lots of parents disagree with you about earpiercing.

Perhaps the choice was made to show that Mumsnet is also a place for mothers from cultures where ear-piercing is seen as more culturally acceptable? I imagine it might have been quite deliberately selected with the view of trying to broaden and diversify the site's userbase.

They probably used it because a lot of children have their ears pierced and just because someone makes a different choice to you it didn't mean their choice is less valid then yours.

Yes it does

It's just a stock image, I doubt that much thought went into it, and I certainly doubt the baby's mother knows what happens to the image once it's Out There (let alone stalking it around the internet!). It was probably taken years ago.

If she is a MNer she'll probably be more upset by the image being used as an example of a fat baby, than the ear piercing thing.

Because it's a beautiful picture of a cute baby and reflects the cultural diversity of the people who use MN.

Isn't it a clip on?

Damn you WorraLiberty I've just had to dream up an explanation to my respectable middle-class open plan office for why I am PMSL over my phone!

It's MN being right on, isn't it?

the fact that most MNetters want mutilating babies to be illegal is an irrelevance

I don't get it either. I never look at the home page but saw the thread about it being new and improved so went to look.

Strange choice of picture. I didn't like any of the topic pictures before either, the spaghetti dog andd the pregnant water woman were meh.

Here's my suggestion.

i think they should replace it with a picture of someone clutching their pearls tbh.

I hate that pregnant water woman picture.

Why anyone thinks a creature as perfect and beautiful as the baby in the picture needs enhancement with a bit of gold is beyond me and many thousands of other users on this site. It IS something that parents feel incredibly strongly about. I dont buy the cultural diversity argument but I guess that's the closest thing I can think of for a reason for it. I wonder if it actually crossed the mind of whoever at HQ chose it.

Isn't piercing babies ears a cultural thing sometimes?

I can't get worked up about this. For as many as think it is inappropriate there will be the same amount again for whom it is part of their culture or just something that they like and see no wrong with.
If you don't agree with it don't do it to your baby. Otherwise - well - not really your business.

i think the op is wrong, why assume 80% disagree with baby ear piercing, it more like 50/50 on mumsnet and in some areas it would be 80% for and in other areas 80% against.

Like others have said its a vaild choce, dont judge those who chose not to pierce and dont judge those who chose to pierce.

I will judge anybody that puts holes in children unnecessarily.

It's more than 50/50 against from the threads I have seen on the subject on MN.

Looking again at the home page the picture seems to tie in with Discussions of the Day involving bonny babies. Maybe MNHQ thought the baby was bonny?

Hello!

The honest answer is that we thought the baby was gorgeous, we actually didn't consider the earrings in it at all.

Those images will be updated as soon as we have fixed a slight technical error with the new homepage and we'll certainly make sure we look a little closer to avoid any issues in future. Although it's pretty difficult to avoid offence all of the time, we do try our best to.

I don't think it's necessary to avoid babies with pierced ears.

Also, as earrings for babies go, those are a bit dangly and could easily get yanked by the baby herself or another child.

Is that technical issue the ad popping up all the time everytime you click anywhere?

Are you taking down the photo because babies with pierced ears aren't in the spirit of the site ? Seriously??

I think the photo is lovely.