Honestly, I really think this is the least of chinas citizens problems. I don't mean to sound ignorant but do they still abandon little newborn girls?

Anonymous wrote:
Interesting. What culture considers ear piercing to be a mark of the lower class? And is that just when kids have it done? Or adults as well? Just curious. Not trying to start any arguments.

There have been several threads on DCUM about this that I can remember. Some people consider it low-class to do with a very young girl or baby. To give you my cultural and SES background, I'm a white American from the Northeast who was raised middle class and I don't personally think it's low-class. I wouldn't do it myself, though, because I do feel it should be the child's choice when they are old enough to make that decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess what this story is really about:

[19th-century Chinese] community leaders say the [campaign against foot-binding] is an attack on their culture and religion.

“It’s as if the authorities are telling us that our traditions are wrong,” said [a Chinese citizen].

[Wu Ziang], secretary general of the [Chinese Cultural Ministry], was much more critical. “[Authorities] are now lecturing the [Chinese] about how we should treat our children, about the dangers of [foot binding], about how the [girl] feels pain,” he said. “It’s as if they think we are barbarians, that we are indifferent to how the child feels,” Mr. Kramer said.

Under [Chinese custom], [girls' feet] must be [bound] on [their second birthday].

“Making a decision about [foot binding] is very difficult for the family,” said [a Chinese woman], who has a [daughter]. “But I really think the state should not interfere.”

“It’s a very, very sensitive issue,” said a Justice Ministry official who spoke anonymously because the topic was so controversial. [The Chinese government], the official added, has to find a balance between principles: the rights of parents; and a person’s right to physical integrity.

Other countries are questioning [foot binding] as organizations for the protection of children insist that it is the state’s duty to shield children from physical injury.

[One country] recently proposed that [Chinese families] replace [foot binding] with a symbolic ritual. Some lawmakers also called for a minimum age of 18 so that parents could not decide. In [another country], the Medical Association has urged leaders to consider alternative rites that are not irreversible and are not painful for the child.

[Chinese families] are perplexed. They wonder whether these trends signal some kind of [anti-Chinese sentiment] that is concealed by medical and legalistic arguments.

Oops, OP. Not too many Chinese Jews....

Ha! Missed one. It's from this story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/europe/18iht-letter18.html, and of course, it's about circumcision.

To me, the parallels between the two are interesting, particularly the linked story's quote about thinking something is barbaric. I doubt anyone in China now would think footbinding was anything but barbaric now, but 200 years ago, it was low-class to have regular feet, and ladies had to have bound feet (or else they were only suitable for fieldwork like their non-foot-bound sisters).

PP has an interesting point about ear piercing. (Not car seats, though, sorry - that's not a physical mutilation). Why is it we draw the line at some permanent mutilations to our children without their consent (ear piercing, circumcision) but not others (tatoos, face piercing, foot binding, female genital mutilation)?

Is it really just culture and dominant ideology that makes some forms of this ok, and others illegal or taboo? Will people in a thousand years think ear piercing and circumcision are barbaric and pity those who thought they were ok?

OP, I'm 12:25 and 12:55. I think your parallel is interesting. BTW, I do think circumsion is debatable due to the "medical" aspect--I think that ear piercing falls soundly into the mutilation camp since it's only purpose is adornment. Having said tht, I admit to a bias that comes from having been reared in a culture that considers it a mark of the lower classes as well. So I guess you have to take that with agrain of salt, then. Anything that is permanent and done purely for aesthetics should be left to adults, IMO. And the jury is still out (or arguing) about circumcision.

Interesting. What culture considers ear piercing to be a mark of the lower class? And is that just when kids have it done? Or adults as well? Just curious. Not trying to start any arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this still practiced?
I remember that this was common at the same time when europeans used corsets to bind the girls lungs.

Someone is going to say it has to be done as a child, because nobody is going to do it as an adult.

You got to be kidding me. OP is insane.

OP is not insane, she's making a point/drawing parallels. Jeez. Didn't you people go to college, study comparative anything? OMFG.

We did go to college. If you think foot binding is any way the equivalent of circumcision, I'm afraid you're going to have to return your degrees. You're ignorant about what foot binding entailed on a day to day basis, and what it meant for women who had had it done. Debate the merits of circumcision, but I don't notice a lot of circumcised men needing assistance to get around on their hobbled dicks.

A bad community college? The point is not that footbindign is the equivalent of circumsion, dummy. The point is that society at one point made similar comments in support of it, and used similar comments in support of their arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this still practiced?
I remember that this was common at the same time when europeans used corsets to bind the girls lungs.

Someone is going to say it has to be done as a child, because nobody is going to do it as an adult.

You got to be kidding me. OP is insane.

OP is not insane, she's making a point/drawing parallels. Jeez. Didn't you people go to college, study comparative anything? OMFG.

We did go to college. If you think foot binding is any way the equivalent of circumcision, I'm afraid you're going to have to return your degrees. You're ignorant about what foot binding entailed on a day to day basis, and what it meant for women who had had it done. Debate the merits of circumcision, but I don't notice a lot of circumcised men needing assistance to get around on their hobbled dicks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess what this story is really about:

[19th-century Chinese] community leaders say the [campaign against foot-binding] is an attack on their culture and religion.

“It’s as if the authorities are telling us that our traditions are wrong,” said [a Chinese citizen].

[Wu Ziang], secretary general of the [Chinese Cultural Ministry], was much more critical. “[Authorities] are now lecturing the [Chinese] about how we should treat our children, about the dangers of [foot binding], about how the [girl] feels pain,” he said. “It’s as if they think we are barbarians, that we are indifferent to how the child feels,” Mr. Kramer said.

Under [Chinese custom], [girls' feet] must be [bound] on [their second birthday].

“Making a decision about [foot binding] is very difficult for the family,” said [a Chinese woman], who has a [daughter]. “But I really think the state should not interfere.”

“It’s a very, very sensitive issue,” said a Justice Ministry official who spoke anonymously because the topic was so controversial. [The Chinese government], the official added, has to find a balance between principles: the rights of parents; and a person’s right to physical integrity.

Other countries are questioning [foot binding] as organizations for the protection of children insist that it is the state’s duty to shield children from physical injury.

[One country] recently proposed that [Chinese families] replace [foot binding] with a symbolic ritual. Some lawmakers also called for a minimum age of 18 so that parents could not decide. In [another country], the Medical Association has urged leaders to consider alternative rites that are not irreversible and are not painful for the child.

[Chinese families] are perplexed. They wonder whether these trends signal some kind of [anti-Chinese sentiment] that is concealed by medical and legalistic arguments.

Oops, OP. Not too many Chinese Jews....

Ha! Missed one. It's from this story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/europe/18iht-letter18.html, and of course, it's about circumcision.

To me, the parallels between the two are interesting, particularly the linked story's quote about thinking something is barbaric. I doubt anyone in China now would think footbinding was anything but barbaric now, but 200 years ago, it was low-class to have regular feet, and ladies had to have bound feet (or else they were only suitable for fieldwork like their non-foot-bound sisters).

PP has an interesting point about ear piercing. (Not car seats, though, sorry - that's not a physical mutilation). Why is it we draw the line at some permanent mutilations to our children without their consent (ear piercing, circumcision) but not others (tatoos, face piercing, foot binding, female genital mutilation)?

Is it really just culture and dominant ideology that makes some forms of this ok, and others illegal or taboo? Will people in a thousand years think ear piercing and circumcision are barbaric and pity those who thought they were ok?

OP, I'm 12:25 and 12:55. I think your parallel is interesting. BTW, I do think circumsion is debatable due to the "medical" aspect--I think that ear piercing falls soundly into the mutilation camp since it's only purpose is adornment. Having said tht, I admit to a bias that comes from having been reared in a culture that considers it a mark of the lower classes as well. So I guess you have to take that with agrain of salt, then. Anything that is permanent and done purely for aesthetics should be left to adults, IMO. And the jury is still out (or arguing) about circumcision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this still practiced?
I remember that this was common at the same time when europeans used corsets to bind the girls lungs.

Someone is going to say it has to be done as a child, because nobody is going to do it as an adult.

You got to be kidding me. OP is insane.

OP is not insane, she's making a point/drawing parallels. Jeez. Didn't you people go to college, study comparative anything? OMFG.

Do Americans still tar and feather the adulteress? How awful.

Anonymous wrote:Is this still practiced?
I remember that this was common at the same time when europeans used corsets to bind the girls lungs.

Someone is going to say it has to be done as a child, because nobody is going to do it as an adult.

You got to be kidding me. OP is insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Ha! Missed one. It's from this story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/europe/18iht-letter18.html, and of course, it's about circumcision.

To me, the parallels between the two are interesting, particularly the linked story's quote about thinking something is barbaric. I doubt anyone in China now would think footbinding was anything but barbaric now, but 200 years ago, it was low-class to have regular feet, and ladies had to have bound feet (or else they were only suitable for fieldwork like their non-foot-bound sisters).

PP has an interesting point about ear piercing. (Not car seats, though, sorry - that's not a physical mutilation). Why is it we draw the line at some permanent mutilations to our children without their consent (ear piercing, circumcision) but not others (tatoos, face piercing, foot binding, female genital mutilation)?

Is it really just culture and dominant ideology that makes some forms of this ok, and others illegal or taboo? Will people in a thousand years think ear piercing and circumcision are barbaric and pity those who thought they were ok?

Are you crazy? I was born with foot problems. You have no idea what it is like to have mobility issues. To cripple a child for the rest of her life is hardly comparable to circumcision or ear piercing. And if you think it's not crippling, go read Snow Flower and the Secret Fan (one of my fave books ever)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Flower_and_the_Secret_Fan

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guess what this story is really about:

[19th-century Chinese] community leaders say the [campaign against foot-binding] is an attack on their culture and religion.

“It’s as if the authorities are telling us that our traditions are wrong,” said [a Chinese citizen].

[Wu Ziang], secretary general of the [Chinese Cultural Ministry], was much more critical. “[Authorities] are now lecturing the [Chinese] about how we should treat our children, about the dangers of [foot binding], about how the [girl] feels pain,” he said. “It’s as if they think we are barbarians, that we are indifferent to how the child feels,” Mr. Kramer said.

Under [Chinese custom], [girls' feet] must be [bound] on [their second birthday].

“Making a decision about [foot binding] is very difficult for the family,” said [a Chinese woman], who has a [daughter]. “But I really think the state should not interfere.”

“It’s a very, very sensitive issue,” said a Justice Ministry official who spoke anonymously because the topic was so controversial. [The Chinese government], the official added, has to find a balance between principles: the rights of parents; and a person’s right to physical integrity.

Other countries are questioning [foot binding] as organizations for the protection of children insist that it is the state’s duty to shield children from physical injury.

[One country] recently proposed that [Chinese families] replace [foot binding] with a symbolic ritual. Some lawmakers also called for a minimum age of 18 so that parents could not decide. In [another country], the Medical Association has urged leaders to consider alternative rites that are not irreversible and are not painful for the child.

[Chinese families] are perplexed. They wonder whether these trends signal some kind of [anti-Chinese sentiment] that is concealed by medical and legalistic arguments.

Oops, OP. Not too many Chinese Jews....

Ha! Missed one. It's from this story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/europe/18iht-letter18.html, and of course, it's about circumcision.

To me, the parallels between the two are interesting, particularly the linked story's quote about thinking something is barbaric. I doubt anyone in China now would think footbinding was anything but barbaric now, but 200 years ago, it was low-class to have regular feet, and ladies had to have bound feet (or else they were only suitable for fieldwork like their non-foot-bound sisters).

PP has an interesting point about ear piercing. (Not car seats, though, sorry - that's not a physical mutilation). Why is it we draw the line at some permanent mutilations to our children without their consent (ear piercing, circumcision) but not others (tatoos, face piercing, foot binding, female genital mutilation)?

Is it really just culture and dominant ideology that makes some forms of this ok, and others illegal or taboo? Will people in a thousand years think ear piercing and circumcision are barbaric and pity those who thought they were ok?

Anonymous wrote:Guess what this story is really about:

[19th-century Chinese] community leaders say the [campaign against foot-binding] is an attack on their culture and religion.

“It’s as if the authorities are telling us that our traditions are wrong,” said [a Chinese citizen].

[Wu Ziang], secretary general of the [Chinese Cultural Ministry], was much more critical. “[Authorities] are now lecturing the [Chinese] about how we should treat our children, about the dangers of [foot binding], about how the [girl] feels pain,” he said. “It’s as if they think we are barbarians, that we are indifferent to how the child feels,” Mr. Kramer said.

Under [Chinese custom], [girls' feet] must be [bound] on [their second birthday].

“Making a decision about [foot binding] is very difficult for the family,” said [a Chinese woman], who has a [daughter]. “But I really think the state should not interfere.”

“It’s a very, very sensitive issue,” said a Justice Ministry official who spoke anonymously because the topic was so controversial. [The Chinese government], the official added, has to find a balance between principles: the rights of parents; and a person’s right to physical integrity.

Other countries are questioning [foot binding] as organizations for the protection of children insist that it is the state’s duty to shield children from physical injury.

[One country] recently proposed that [Chinese families] replace [foot binding] with a symbolic ritual. Some lawmakers also called for a minimum age of 18 so that parents could not decide. In [another country], the Medical Association has urged leaders to consider alternative rites that are not irreversible and are not painful for the child.

[Chinese families] are perplexed. They wonder whether these trends signal some kind of [anti-Chinese sentiment] that is concealed by medical and legalistic arguments.

Oops, OP. Not too many Chinese Jews....

I think it depends on how dangerous a practice is, what the long-term effects are.

For example, piercing a girl's ears has a small degree of danger. So does circumcising a boy's penis. There are even deaths associated with both. But far more children are hurt or killed in car accidents, and I've never seen any social movement wanting to ban auto travel for minors.

I don't know much about foot-binding. But by its very nature will damage a person's ability to walk and run. I don't think it's comparable.

Is this still practiced?
I remember that this was common at the same time when europeans used corsets to bind the girls lungs.

Someone is going to say it has to be done as a child, because nobody is going to do it as an adult.

Guess what this story is really about:

[19th-century Chinese] community leaders say the [campaign against foot-binding] is an attack on their culture and religion.

“It’s as if the authorities are telling us that our traditions are wrong,” said [a Chinese citizen].

[Wu Ziang], secretary general of the [Chinese Cultural Ministry], was much more critical. “[Authorities] are now lecturing the [Chinese] about how we should treat our children, about the dangers of [foot binding], about how the [girl] feels pain,” he said. “It’s as if they think we are barbarians, that we are indifferent to how the child feels,” Mr. Kramer said.

Under [Chinese custom], [girls' feet] must be [bound] on [their second birthday].

“Making a decision about [foot binding] is very difficult for the family,” said [a Chinese woman], who has a [daughter]. “But I really think the state should not interfere.”

“It’s a very, very sensitive issue,” said a Justice Ministry official who spoke anonymously because the topic was so controversial. [The Chinese government], the official added, has to find a balance between principles: the rights of parents; and a person’s right to physical integrity.

Other countries are questioning [foot binding] as organizations for the protection of children insist that it is the state’s duty to shield children from physical injury.

[One country] recently proposed that [Chinese families] replace [foot binding] with a symbolic ritual. Some lawmakers also called for a minimum age of 18 so that parents could not decide. In [another country], the Medical Association has urged leaders to consider alternative rites that are not irreversible and are not painful for the child.

[Chinese families] are perplexed. They wonder whether these trends signal some kind of [anti-Chinese sentiment] that is concealed by medical and legalistic arguments.