Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!mcnc!unc!fsks From: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Newsgroups: net.kids Subject: Re: circumcision vs. infection Message-ID: <16@unc.UUCP> Date: Sat, 13-Apr-85 17:34:27 EST Article-I.D.: unc.16 Posted: Sat Apr 13 17:34:27 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 15-Apr-85 05:32:33 EST References: <1343@decwrl.UUCP> <530@cyb-eng.UUCP> <317@unc.UUCP> Reply-To: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Organization: CS Dept., U. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill Lines: 23 Summary: In article rsellens@watdcsu.UUCP (Rick Sellens) writes: >> >>Let me add that circucision is probably no more painful than ear-piercing. >>Probably less so, since circucision only cuts skin, while ear-piercing >>goes completely through the flesh. >> >>If you reject circumcision because of its pain, you probably should not >>pierce your daughter's ears, either. >> >>Frank Silbermann >I'm not sure which would be more painful, but most civilized people would >not pierce their daughter's ears until the daughter said she wanted them >pierced. I think the question is more concerned with trauma than pain. >If you want something done then the pain is reduced to simple annoyance. > >Rick Sellens UUCP: watmath!watdcsu!rsellens I do see many infant girls with pierced ears. In any case, compared with the trauma of birth, the trauma of circumcision is minor (unless, perhaps, an incompetent doctor botches the job). Frank Silbermann