My daughter is first generation Australian born on her father's side. He is Sri Lankan born. My in-laws have bought earrings for both their grandaughters -- my daughter and her cousin -- but neither set of parents have chosen to have their daughter's ears pierced. I respect my in laws' adherance to their traditions, but our daughter will not be having her ears pierced until she a) wants it and b) is aged 12 or over. My partner and I are in agreement on this one.

Unnecessary body modification is a matter for individuals to make an informed choice on when they have the maturity to do so, not for parents to choose on spurious "aesthetic" grounds.

Exactly how I feel too.
Why not pop those beautiful gold earings away somewhere special until the child is old enough to choose to be pierced and able to look after her ears. It is still a sign of love even if it is a few years after the gift has been given---isn't it?
Just because it has been done for generations is not a reason to continue a practice that is not appropriate for the age group.

IMHO let's think about this from your 12-year-old's perspective. She's a young woman (well, kinda) and this is her right of passage. By just giving in to 3-year-old robs her of that. It takes something from her that is special and precious and makes it all about 3-year-old.

Right now 3-year-old really wants it. She probably wanted a Wiggles DVD or a Hi-5 t-shirt last month. It doesn't mean one tenth to a 3-year-old what it means to 12-year-old.

The clip on solution may be a 'if you can be trusted with these' temporary solution until DD3 forgets about the latest obsession - especially when she realises just how much work is involved and if you nag her endlessly about 'where are they' 'make sure you wash them and put them in a cup before bed' ...

My 5 year old begged to have her ears peirced a few months ago. We got there paid the money, she saw the guns and started to whimper. So now I have an unpierced daughter and a lovely little pair of gold studs we can't use! I had to tell her to cry quietly, in case all the people in the shop thought I was forcing her to get them done! Never know when an EBér might be around

My 3 DD all have their DD1 got hers at 5 (now 11). DD2 at 4 (almost 5) and DD3 got hers done about 2 months ago. All their choice. Have had no problems. DD2 and DD3 have plastic earrings apparently lower risk of infection and lower risk of people being allergic to them.

We chose to let DD3 get hers done as she was trying to poke my earrings through her ears.

They were all told it hurt and that mum has to clean them.

I dont think they look like bogans


Its up to the parents to say YES or NO. If you have a rule for one kid it should be the same for the younger one too.

Thanks for your response to my post. I appreciate hearing other's perspectives - I am new to this. I do appreciate that all families are different, and that culture and tradition are felt diversely, with meanings that change over time. All I can do is talk of my close and extended family (and of my experience of other Italians), and say that for me, having my daughter's ears pierced would be meaningful on a personal level, whilst also being consistent with my family tradition. Like yourself, I do not follow mindlessly and unquestionably along the paths of others, and believe that to find meaning in a tradition like ear piercing does not necessarily equate with 'doing things just because someone else is'. Tradition is not so simple. Like your family, mine are a strong-willed bunch, who have forged their own individual paths in life, and have not been prisoners of expectations and traditions. We do however, share certain traditions and customs because we find them collectively and personally meaningful - so not necessarily in the same ways as each other, and not through guilt or simple cultural obligation. Trust me, my family don't make that kinda woman! For me the tradition of ear piercing is cherished - no matter how it may have originally evolved begun (thanks for the info though - really interesting!).


Hi Cinnabubble, I can understand your opposition to ear piercing at a young age, and I suppose all I can say is that like your in-laws this tradition is important to me, but is not something that should be forced upon anyone. What I do find interesting though (and this is by no means a solid thought), is that at 12 years old (or even as teenagers) we are hardly mature, and that at this stage our decisions are very much shaped by the style/culture/expectations of beauty etc of that time (aka the 'the traditions'). I do respect your belief re: ear piercing at an early age, I just think that the lines are blurry re: consent, and that the meaning to families of such traditions as ear piercing are sensitive and personal - it is not just about trying to make your daughter look pretty.


Sorry, I wasn't implying that I didn't understand what 'bogan' means, am just trying to explain that from other cultural perspectives having your child's ear's pierced at a young age is not necessarily 'low class, trashy, or in bad taste', and that it would be worthwhile keeping this in mind.

Thank-you for your thoughts... for me this is a tricky one

You say it was all their choice? I don't mean to be pedantic but 2 year olds do not have the ability to understand the concept of piercing ears and just because she may ask for them because her sisters have them it is up to the parent to understand what is appropriate for a 2 year old and what isn't.
I have 4 girls, they did not have their ears pierced until they well and truly understood what it involved both at the time of piercing and the aftercare. They were between 11-13 years old.

EB Mods and Writers must have been bored this week - they should know what kind of reaction this would get.

My Bogan daughter (who had her ears pierced at 3 months) and I think your 3 year old should wait.

Why? Because it is unfair to the older daughter who had to wait. No other reason.

No for so many reasons:

1. Respect for DD1 - she had to wait so why undermine her patience by giving into the younger sister
2. Don't let the 3 year old make the decision for you - you are the adult, by saying yes you are basically saying "have a tantrum and I will give in"

3. Safety - little boys and girls aren't as careful as older children and ripped earlobes are no joke

4. Personal opinion - I don't like piercings on children, for me it is part of sexualisation of children that is so prevalent in todays society.

But mostly, show respect to DD1 and make DD3 wait.

I was actually taking the p*ss out of myself. Of course I'm aware that there are no peer-reviewed empirical studies on whether or not bogans are more likely to pierce their children's ears. Of course good taste can be a matter of opinion, with considerations of culture and traditions playing their part. But this article has requested opinions, and I gave mine. If everyone's opinion is "we all have our opinions on the matter - it's a personal decision that's different for everybody" there's no point in having a discussion at all.

I had mine done at 5 with my mother for my birthday. I STILL remember that day.

My eldest DD had her's for her 6th birthday. DD, myself and sil took her out for a girls day, we had cake and milkshakes, got her ears pierced and went to her birthday party. It was HER choice.

My youngest DD who is 4 has NO desire to get her's done. I won't offer untill she is 6, like her sister.

TO the PP who said preteens look awful with pierced ears, that's a little harsh. My DD's earrings are just small studs with her birthstones. You can't even really tell they are there.



Ok, I am sorry but seriously, get a grip! That is just such an extreme commencement. Maybe if you do the whole kit and kabboodle, with mini mini shorts (flashing bum cheeks), tight T's that say "playgir" or "my eyes are up here" with puffy hair, knee high boots etc... and big hoop earings... but if it's just a LITTLE GIRL in a dress or pj's that your comment is just off.

I agree with you pp..
Having your little girls ears pierced is sexualisation...please..that comment is not a fair or even called for...

my DD doesnt look like she is being made to look older or sexual thats just disgusting...oh and thanks to all of you out there that have called all of us you have had their DD ears pierced Bogan, Tacky, uneducated, and trying to sexualise our daughters..good on yas even if you havnt had your DD's ears pierced you could still be bogan, tacky, uneducated..

I was recently at the hairdressers where a lady had brought in her 2year old to have her ears done. After the first one was pierced the poor child was screaming and crying - she was so terrified about having the second one done, they took her out of the shop and then brought her back half an hour latter - as soon she saw the place she was hysterical. It was heartbreaking.

I think there is a huge difference between a little girl wanting earings and actually having to go through with getting it done.

No way would I put my child through that - I say 10 or 12 years is a good age for my daughter.

Let me start of by saying that I would probably make the 3 year old wait to have her ears pieced only because you would otherwise create resentment between the 12 year old and her sister. And that relationship is more important than any ears piercing.

However, before one judges mothers who pierce their daughters ears, and insults such as boganism are thrown around, has anyone considered that for a lot cultures it is acceptable (and not considered sexual) to have a girls ears pierced as a baby. My ears, my sister ears, my mothers ears, my nieces' ears, my aunts ears and my cousins ears were all pierced as babies (and I am saying between about 3 - 6 months old).

I in turn pierced my daughters ears at 6 months old. It was done by a professional, in a sterile environment and with sterile equipment. They drew a dot on both ears, and then had two women do one ear each at the same time, so there was no moving or errors made. She cried for a nano second and I cuddled her. Her immunisation was more traumatising than her ears piercing. Because she was little, I could easiely keep it clean and free from infection. I compare that experience to that of my girlfriends who made their daughters wait until they were about 10, and I think the 10 year old was more traumatised.

My daughter who is now almost 5 has never had a problem with her ears (shy of losing a pair or two - but that is my issue, not hers). My mother has now given her my earings that I wore as a child, and she is so proud to be wearing them. They are studs and therefore cannot be pulled by bullies in the playground. They also screw in from the back, which means no more lost earings.

This is my experience, and I am perfectly happy with the decision I made. If you choose otherwise, then I am sure you have your reasons. Just try to be a less narrowminded and a little more accepting of other mother's choices.

I agree with point 1 & 2.
I got mine pierced at 5 years old as a birthday present. I had been begging mum to get my ears pierced for months, and she finally gave in and said I could have them done for my 5th birthday. I was so excited, right up until mum decided that "since we are already here, we may as well get your sister done too". (We lived in the country and had made a special trip to town). My sister was only 2.5years. I was devastated, as "my special birthday gift" that I had waited so long for, was so easily ruined by the fact that my sister now had pierced ears too.
This type of thing continued throughout my life. Don't do it to your eldest daughter, she WILL resent you. Your 3 year old needs to learn to wait, just like her sister did. I like the idea of some stick - on earrings, but maybe for her birthday or a special occasion.

I had my own ears pierced at 7 and I would certainly wait until that age before I get DDs pierced, simply because I'd be worried that she could get it ripped out when she was playing. Her aunt had an earring ripped out when she was younger and it tore the earlobe so she can't wear earrings now. I know this can happen at any point, but I think its more likely with small children.

Also, as the elder sister I was always really annoyed when my younger sisters got to do something at a much younger age than I did.

In your shoes, I'd be telling your 3yo that she has to wait and let your 12yo take a step into being a grown up by herself.

My Mum told me I had to wait until I was 10 years old and despite my nagging I accepted it. It was a nice surprise to be able to get it done for my 9 year old birthday and at that time I was old enough to be able to deal with the infection that I got.

Just say no to the 3 year old.... tell her when her birthday is in "double digits" then she can get it done and be like her sister.

I understand what you were saying but DD3 was trying to do it herself and she wasnt being to gently with trying to pierce them either. I'd rather it be done in a sterile place. They all had 2 people to pierce them. DD2 was the last to get done almost 3 weeks ago.

Tattood


If your a PROFESSIONAL why can't you spell PIERCE.

IMO your 3 year old is too young to make an informed decision.

FWIW I have a 4 year old DD who during a recent discussion when I mentioned "...when you are a big girl and get your ears pierced you can buy those cute earrings" responded with - "....I dont want to get my ears pierced. I want them to stay how they are!!!!".

I was quite surprised TBH.

I personally have my ears pierced twice. The first were done as a 12 month old - in the days when it was ice cubes for numbness and a rather large tapestry type needle (or maybe that is just my traumatised memory re: needle size) and the second were done as a 5 year old with the gun. By all accounts I apparently asked for "rings like mummy". As an adult and a parent now myself I'm appalled that my parent/s not only consented but put me through that trauma (which to this day I remember - blood stained yellow parka and all).

I say make the 3 year old wait.

And the 12 year old has a point - she has had to wait, so why shouldn't the younger sibling. Fair's fair.

QUOTE (JackandAvasmummzies @ 01/03/2010, 02:07 PM)
Tattood

If your a PROFESSIONAL why can't you spell PIERCE.



Um, if you're going to correct someone's spelling you should probably check your own...

It's you're meaning "you are", not your as in "belonging to you". And were you asking a question?

LOL
I love it when some high and mighty EB spelling champ comes to belittle somebody for their spelling/punctuation/grammar and makes mistakes themselves.

Perhaps you should learn to use the English language properly before you start correcting other people's mistakes.

I think each to their own. I wasn't allowed to get my ears pierced till I was 16. My sister wasn't either. Although I will allow my DD to get hers done sooner than that, I dont think under 5 is a good age. I might consider it if she asks from about 5 onwards.

Woah, this is an interesting thread, I'm a bit scared to post but here goes!

I was made to wait till i was 10. It was so exciting knowing that for my big 10th birthday i could get my ears pierced!

My personal view on children with pierced ears (younger than 5) is that it looks a little tacky. Also, id be worried about playground accidents. Purely personal opinion though, each to their own!

I mostly agree with PP in that you should respect your DD1 and not be told by DD2. Let DD1 have that special thing that her baby sister doesn't have.

Good luck!

When I see a young child with pierced ears, it screams trailer trash.

I find it hard to understand how any remotely responsible parent could imagine for one moment that such demands from a three year old should be taken seriously. Small children have no understanding of the real consequences, risks and responsibilities of actions, and accordingly the required answer to such a demand is NO.
If a parent makes an informed and reasoned decision that piercing their small child is appropriate - well, cultural variance aside, I question such thinking anyway - but the point is, it's the parent's responsibility, not the child's.

What I can't believe is how few people on this forum have mentioned the option of not mutilating a body for fashion at all. Of course three is too young to start little girls on the road to destroying their minds and bodies in the interests of looking good. They should be spared that for as long as possible in the hope that they can get through all of that as unscathed as possible. What a strange place you inhabit.

Hi Tam,
I have a 13yo DS, 11yo DD1 and 3yo DD2 so similar to you.

My eldest girl wanted her ears pierced when she was 4yo and she was very good about it. Held her barbie doll and didn't cry. She's a stubborn girl and that stubborness helped during the process. It was done at a hairdressers and the lady doing it said how great she was as most cry.

My 3yo hasn't wanted hers done but I was thinking about getting them done but feel I will wait until she asks me which is what I did with her big sis.

Maybe with your 3yo you could suggest something else, maybe buy her a little bracelet so she can be special too. Otherwise just go with it and let it be done. 3yo's are sooooo independant and demanding.
Good luck.

IMO having ears pierced at a young age is neither bogan or tacky .. it's personal choice. Bogan to me is if you wear a flanno.

This I totally agree with! I really don't understand all of this, especially piercing a newborn! Did they ask for that to be done to them?!
Why should a young child (imo, under age 13) have their ears pierced because the parents think it will look good? That should be up to the child.

And as for little ones who think they know what they want and throw tantrums to get it... This is what parents are for... to SAY NO.
Parents should be protecting and nurturing babies and toddlers, not getting them pierced.

I also cannot get my head around why anyone would put their baby through the pain of piercing when it is so unecessary. Not to mention how ridiculous and tacky it looks.

Despite doing everything I was supposed to with clearning, etc, when I had my ears pierced when I was in my teens, they still got very badly infected and was quite painful and took a long time to clear up. I stopped wearing earrings after that. I wouldn't want to risk a small baby/child going through that, it was bad enough when I was a teenager!

I rather think the OP already has her own answer. The 'family rule' was that DD#1 wait until she was 12yo, and then could have it done. That means DD#2 should also wait until 12yo. No way would I give in to a tanty over this kind of thing, its very important.

I'm also an 'eldest' sister. My nearest sis is 1 year younger. It p*ssed me off endlessly that I was told I had to be a certain age to get X, and that I would dutifully wait - and our parents would then give my sis the SAME thing to her at the same time. She got it earlier. The message you send is that the older child is less important, or less worthy, that the younger child is somehow 'better' and more deserving because she got the reward quicker.

How to build a lifetime of resentment. Yep. I'm now 46yo, and I still remember screaming at my parents over a Christmas gift I had desperately wanted, and that they'd withheld because I wasn't old enough. Yet my younger sister was given the same thing. It was a Seiko watch BTW, and it really hurt to be so disrespected by my parents. They did give us similar gifts most years which didn't normally matter. But this did, because they set an age limit rule - and broke it for the golden one.

x 2

I don't think fear of a tantrum is a good reason to let your little one have her ears pierced. As PPs have said, children need to understand that no means no. If you want her to have it done, well, that's a different story. Personally, I think little kids look terrible with their ears pierced, but hey, that's just my opinion.

Yes, sure, I can classify it for you, the way I see it as well as how others see it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogan

BOGAN - someone of no style, no class, no finesse. Someone typically from a disadvantaged working class background, with the resulting lack of education, lack of respect for one's surrounds (littering, spitting and urinating in the public areas), lack of respect for other people around him/her (speaking loudly on the phone or to friends on the train, in a movie theatre, in the library etc), substance abuse (drugs, alcohol). The term is relatively new, but the concept has existed for as long as humans have, just under different names - hoi polloi, proletariat, chav, plebs (plebeian). Other typical characteristics of a bogan - cheap tacky clothing, lazy grammatically poor speech with a limited vocabulary and specific pronounciation, piercings and tattoos, especially in large quantities and poor taste.
Now, saying this, I must declare that I myself have pierced ears (got them done at 18) and a tattoo. I am not a bogan, but I believe anyone can have some bogan sides to them and it's not the end of the world, seeing how in any country 90% of population can be classified as bogans.
The educated upper classes minority will always look down on the bogans, that's just how it is. I am a bit of a snob myself... I laugh at bogans wearing their pants under their arses, which makes them all look like they have defecated in their nappies... so so sad. And so so BOGAN!!! Prime example.

I would like to say something about piercing one's ears in this country.
I come from Eastern Europe, where it wasn't common for young girls to have pierced ears until their teens, or even later, past 18. Only people from typical working class families and mostly in the country areas would pierce their girls' ears in early childhood.
But no matter what age, it was NEVER done with a 'gun' like they do here, as these guns did not exist in our country, and the piercing was done by a beautician at a salon, with a special curved needle, and it did not hurt at all, to the point where one could not even feel it being done.
I had it done at 17, and never had any issues with healing or infections, but when I wanted a second pair of holes in my ears, I went to a chemist in Sydney and they used the above-mentioned 'gun'... It was very painful, very unpleasant and resulted in a terrible infection 2 days after, which, despite my best efforts at keeping it all clean, never healed properly and I had to take out the earrings and forget it.
I have since investigated this and found that the specialised piercing studios (like the Piercing Edge) can pierce your earlobes with a needle, not a gun, and yes, it will cost a bit more, but most likely will be less painful and will heal quickly.
Also, I know that in my country of origin they always advised wearing special pure 24 ct gold earrings that could be moved around daily, and guaranteed fast healing and minimised an allergic reaction. Whereas in Sydney they put 'medical grade stainless steel' studs in, and I don't believe they are good for this purpose.
If I were to pierce my child's ears, I would wait till she is at least 14-15 and pay for the proper needle and pure gold, to ensure everything is pain-free and heals well. (For any other purpose in life I hate gold but for this I make an exception).

Um, I think your definition is way to broad and a bit mean. Just because you're from a disadvantaged working class background doesn't mean you're a bogan. Anyone can be a classy, upstanding citizen when they're poor (like me! ). Similarly, bogans can be rich (take the new phenomenon of 'CUBs', or 'cashed up bogans, for example).

Yes, you are correct, that is why I said TYPICALLY, which means NOT ALWAYS but OFTEN, and yes, cashed up bogans are also common - look at sports stars in australia (Leyton and wife, for example)...

It's tacky. Just wait until she's older. What if she wants a tattoo as well? You going to do that too? lol.

Oh dear, my 3 older girls had their ears pierced at 5yo, 4yo and 3yo. Now, dh & I have 5 degrees between us (me 2 undergrad, 1 post grad; him 1 undergrad, one post grad), a comfortable income and a nice home.

So I'm trying to come to terms with being either a bogan or trailer trash. Can I be both or do I have to choose? Can I look down on myself? Can I at least be a CUB? I guess being a CUB and trailer trash is out of the question. Perhaps dh & I could pick one each.

ETA:
But jokes aside. I think that ear piercing is body altering. At it's most broadest this does put it into the same category as ear plating, lip plating, tattooing and probably many other things. But I don't think that means the decision to allow a child to have his/her ears pierced is anything like letting him/her get a tatt. I feel that's a bit like saying it's the same thing to allow a child to wear a wiggles t-shirt as to allow a child to wear fishnet stockings, leopard print mini skirt and knee high patent boots - they're all clothes after all.

It is body altering so it's perfectly valid for different people to put different ages on when they feel they would allow their child to make that choice. And probably also fairly normal for people to be judgmental of others that don't make the same decision that they do.

I think that to be sexualisation of girls it has to be something of a sexual nature to begin with. I don't see how ear piercing is something of a sexual nature. It may be seen as something done for the sake of beauty. But then so are those little clips and head bands a lot of women like to adorn their little girls' hair with, and long pretty dresses. I think it would be possible for a child to wear earrings that are too adult like. Perhaps if a child wore massive hoop earrings with a leopard mini skirt etc it would be sexual in nature, but then it would be without any earrings anyway.

When I was 13 I got my ears pierced - not because I had to wait until then, my mother never had her ears pierced and I guess I never thought about it much until my best friend in year 7 talked about it with me. My daughter who is three and a half had her ears pierced a few weeks ago. The staff were fabulous who did the piercing and DD has had no issues what so ever. We're not bogans either - whatever that is these days. Each to their own I say. I hardly think it's child abuse ! I personally think tattoos and or belly piercings on young women are gross. Inevitably, people make decisions for their children based on what THEIR feelings are about ear piercing and their own experiences. The "I'm going to wait until DD can make her own choice" argument is tiring. When exactly is that these days?

[b]I wonder how a person with 2 undergrad, 1 post grad can misspell pronouns... 'At it's most broadest' does NOT require an apostrophe as it is a POSSESSIVE PRONOUN and not a noun and a verb, like IT IS.
I wonder what your degrees are in, evidently not language!

Truly, these blogs amaze me. Suddenly we enter into an off the tangent debate about the correct use of language. Bubblegummum makes a very good point anyway. I have already been put down for having DD's ears pierced at the age of 3 by a well-meaning 'friend'.
Everyone has a very strong opinion on this topic I can tell you !!

I think it's about bogans being uneducated and a lack of education being signalled by poor grammar. I agree with kriskarina and would add that something shouldn't be at its "most broadest". "Broadest" is a superlative and the "most" is superfluous and at best is poorly expressed, if not actually wrong.

Beauty and body modification is inextricably tied up with sexuality too. I would have thought that was obvious. A parent choosing to alter the appearance of a child permanently when that child is too young to give informed consent to that is also obviously the wrong thing to do, in my view - no matter what the views of the parent on what looks beautiful.

There are many things that parents "do for their children" where the child or children haven't really made the decision themselves. A mother deciding to dress her child like a mini pop star or a 7 year old wearing lashings of makeup for a ballet/dance concert. All these things contribute to beauty and body modification. Some people don't think it is but again it all comes down to perception and opinion on what is "body altering". This phrase carries negative connotations anyway and it seems that the majority of bloggers who disagree with ear piercing for young girls see it as "body altering" and and sexualising childhood. The irony here it could be argued is that those who aren't opposed to it or who have had their young daughter's ears pierced haven't considered the process to be in any way sexual or negative.

OMG, so because I've been to uni I'm not allowed typos, does my spelling have to be 100% correct in every post? And you obviously assume that it's not just a typo? That I must obviously not know what a possessive pronoun is?

Actually, kaskarina you're spot on, my degrees aren't in language (well, not English I do have a major in another language) I'm a lawyer if you really need to know. I don't put the same effort into checking my grammar and spelling on a parenting website that I put into checking my work that I get paid for (EB just doesn't pay enough ). Sometimes I might quickly read back over what I've typed and if I spot an error I might fix it. (I must confess a few wks ago I typed 'there' instead of 'their' in a post and just left it).

So don't worry, I do know what a possessive pronoun is . Considering I have four children and I work outside the home I think that one spelling error wasn't too bad. Especially as I posted at around 5.30pm which probably means I was breastfeeding my toddler and rushing to post while dinner was cooking.

To write 'most broadest' may have been incorrect/poorly expressed (I also know what superlatives are) but again, it's a post on a parenting website not a thesis! I'm not looking for a publisher for my post! I'm not handing it in to be marked. And I'd think it's arguable that as posting tends to be more colloquial in style that I was just adding emphasis by writing 'most' even though technically it's incorrect.

You may have noticed that I also started a sentence with a CONJUNCTION. I wouldn't do that if I was writing something for work or uni. But it's a parenting website. It's a post in a parenting website. It's really just not that important.

I take it my meaning was still pretty clear and the misuse of 'it's' and 'most broadest' didn't throw people too much. Sigh, there I was trying to spark some intelligent discussion about whether beautification and sexualisation are one and the same/similar/different. At least I tried!

I'm not going to put more effort into checking my posts. If I occasionally leave in some spelling errors/grammatical errors and someone out there in internet land feels intellectually superior upon spotting them, they can have that victory (although please only make a point of it if your own written expression is beyond criticism; it's just annoying when someone that doesn't write well gets all picky). My hat is off to those wonderful women that always ensure their EB posts would stand up to scrutiny by any uni level English student/lecturer. You go girls!

Sigh, and the most insulting thing is that no one seemed to appreciate my sense of humour. In case anyone missed it my point was to poke fun at the trend of taking a small amount of info and jumping up and down screaming 'uneducated bogan!' Which of course now is even funnier because someone seems to suggest that it doesn't make sense to have uni degrees and make spelling errors (I could introduce you to a few engineers/scientists/mathematicians who wouldn't be able to write/spell well if their lives depended upon it; despite being smarter than the average bear - that's a reference to Yogi for anyone that misses that one).

Unfortunately, uni degrees don't include classes in style and sophistication. (Or grammar or punctuation, incidentally, and neither did gen X or Y's primary or tertiary schooling, due to some ridiculous decisions by Education Departments in the 1980's, so I think we can all be forgiven for a few mistakes now and then).

Maybe a better test is whether Princess Mary (who's practically perfect in every way) would pierce her daughter's ears.

That's a very good point. Whilst I may naturally ooze style and sophistication, language studies was the only part of my uni degrees that contained a grammar component (and it was pretty basic). Would it shock people to know that one of my dearest friends (who is a wonderful person and successful lawyer), fresh out of high school asked me what a noun was? She can write well but her schooling didn't include formal grammar lessons.

ETA: And my dh, whose degrees are in the sciences, didn't have any grammar/writing component to his uni studies. I don't think he'd know what a pronoun was if it jumped up and squealed, 'I'm a pronoun'.



Greenbag, I love your work.

Whether it be a parenting issue or a grammatical one, let s/he who is without fault cast the first stone.

I am sure no-one is a perfect parent. In fact, I am doubtful as to whether a perfect parent even exists. As such, let's all assume that, as parents, we do the best we can to raise respectful, compassionate, free-thinking and independant members of society. That surely must be our primary objective in raising our children. I believe that it is possible to achieve that objective regardless whether the child's ears are pierced or not.

Having an opinion is one thing, but labelling people as being 'bogans', 'tacky' and 'uneducated' is disrespectful, judgemental, stereotypical and narrow-minded. Perhaps, instead of spending so much time debating the intricacies of ear piercing, this EB 'think-tank' could perhaps take some time to consider the values we all model for our children through our actions and thoughts.