Moderator: Community Team
william18 wrote:1994, when I fucked my mom
jnd94 wrote:wtf is wrong with them
Those parents are shallow and sub-consious. Everyone finds their crowd eventually, you don't need cosmetic surgery to help fit in.
Bussey said she and her husband David were motivated by love for their child and deliberated for a year before putting her through the ordeal.
Talapus wrote:I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
GabonX wrote:Keep in mind that they are doing this to try to give their child a better life. If you have ever looked at an ugly person and thought "hey, they're pretty ugly" you are part of why these parents did this. You may disagree with the parents choice here but they ARE doing it for the benifite of the child...
What's the difference between this and giving a child braces who doesn't want them? In most cases braces are not needed for any medical reason and they are extremely painful. I guess we should condem these parents as well.
GabonX wrote:So according to you it is better to make a child who cares about their image look worse than to make a child who does not care about their image look better.
This is the logic as you have presented it.
GabonX wrote:Keep in mind that they are doing this to try to give their child a better life. If you have ever looked at an ugly person and thought "hey, they're pretty ugly" you are part of why these parents did this. You may disagree with the parents choice here but they ARE doing it for the benifite of the child...
What's the difference between this and giving a child braces who doesn't want them? In most cases braces are not needed for any medical reason and they are extremely painful. I guess we should condem these parents as well.
got tonkaed wrote:... to the kid who wont want braces, because they think they could look silly.
heavycola wrote:They are not doing this for their kid, they are doing this for themselves. That seems fairly obvious.
I don't have any ugly friends and I am guessing not many people here do - nto because all our friends are conventionally beautiful, but because as soon as you get to know someone, even a little bit, their looks stop mattering. Downs kids are, in my limteed experience, a generally friendly and happy bunch. This kid will be fine - it's her parents' WASP-ish embarrassment that is the issue here.
Floppie wrote:heavycola wrote:They are not doing this for their kid, they are doing this for themselves. That seems fairly obvious.
I don't have any ugly friends and I am guessing not many people here do - nto because all our friends are conventionally beautiful, but because as soon as you get to know someone, even a little bit, their looks stop mattering. Downs kids are, in my limteed experience, a generally friendly and happy bunch. This kid will be fine - it's her parents' WASP-ish embarrassment that is the issue here.
I think what they want to avoid is the instant recognition of Down's traits and the automatic assumptions that come with it. A noble goal, but they're awfully naive if they really think that a bit of cosmetic surgery will hide their child's difference from anything more than a passing glance. The moment someone interacts with that child, they'll know they're different.
Being a parent, I tend to give parents the benefit of the doubt when they say they are doing something for the benefit of their child. More often than not, they honestly believe that. In this case, I fear they're very mistaken...it's possible that the "more normal" look could result in people having less patience and more hostility toward the child; the Down's look protects them from some of that because people KNOW what they're dealing with before they're even within speaking distance.
heavycola wrote:AYe, right enough. It's a big assumption I guess. All i have doen is read a daily mail story FFSBut inyernet assumptions are fun and easy to make.
Not sure about automatic assumptions re: down's syndrome though - that the kid has learnign difficulties? Or a lowered mental age? Pretty well-founded assumptions, i think. Which is why I think you're right about their naivety - if they have done this for the kid, they are fooling themselves. Which is why i reckon it's really about them, too.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users