When
Enedina Vance shared a Photoshopped picture of her 6-month-old daughter
on Facebook sporting a dimple piercing, she didn’t think it would cause
such controversy. Her post, however, has racked up nearly 12,000 shares and over 120 comments.
Some of her friends and family have jumped onto the satirical train.
But others are enraged, labeling her a “bad mother” and even threatening
to call child protection services for abusing her baby girl — these
people clearly missed her “#sarcasm” at the bottom of the post.
“I can’t believe how many people actually believe my photo is real,” Vance tells Yahoo Beauty. “So
many people are outraged at the thought of piercing my baby at such a
young age, without her consent, and against her will. Yet, they don’t
understand how other body mutilations, alterations, and modifications
are the exact same thing for the exact same reason: aesthetic purposes.”
The
mother of six became an activist against body alterations in children
when she was pregnant for the first time. Her doctor asked whether she
wanted to circumcise her baby or not.
“I
went home and did research,” she says, “never before have I even
thought about this; I grew up in a household with only women.”
Her
first pregnancy turned out to be twin girls. However, Vance had to face
the situation when she gave birth to a baby boy a few years later. She
did more research on the subject and ultimately decided that
circumcision was not the best choice for her family.
Vance and her son. (Photo: Facebook)
“I
found out that research from around the world proves genital cutting
serves absolutely no health benefits at all,” she says. “In fact,
studies I found show genital cutting actually causes damage to the
penis. Lifelong damage. It’s only here in the U.S. that there are
claimed ‘medical reasons’ or ‘health benefits’ for genital cutting, but
they have all been proven false.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics released a study on
circumcision and its effects in 2012. The study concluded that “on male
circumcision, current evidence indicates that the health benefits of
newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks.”
The
stay-at-home mom has three boys, all of whom she decided not to
circumcise. With the newfound popularity of her baby’s “pierced” photo,
she wants to educate others on the subject. And she has done just that
in follow-up posts on her Facebook page.
“I’m
very passionate about children’s right to physical integrity. Each and
every one of us has the right to our own body, our entire body,” she
says, “Why not children? The U.S. set a law in place protecting infant
girls from cultural and religious genital cutting in 1997. Why are
infant boys not equally protected?”
Vance
says her husband wishes he had been more educated on the subject prior
to having the procedure done for the two boys he had before his marriage
to her. To him, it was just matter of hygiene — and doing it because he
is circumcised and so was his father.
“If
‘piercing’ my baby’s face is so enraging because she’s a baby without
consent, why aren’t people just as enraged over piercing any other part
of her body? Why are her ears any different than her face?” Vance says.
“Why is it OK to modify, alter, and mutilate our children to society’s
standards? And why do people get so angry when I point out their
hypocrisy?”
Despite
all the information Vance has shared on Facebook, she says that some of
her friends are still shocked when she tells them she didn’t circumcise
her boys.
“It should be each person’s choice what to do with their bodies. Not even your parents should be able to decide.”
Comments
Post a Comment