Talk:Earring/Archive 1

Confused

I suppose anything can be added to Talk pages, but can we not limit the conversation to the article? Is the 12-year-old section below "About My Starter Earrings" necessary? Can someone tell me how it pertains to the article? Does anyone ever remove anything from Talk pages? It appears to be a girl's story about getting her first earrings and then a pointless response from someone who can't spell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarydaleEd (talk • contribs) 19:33, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Untitled

This page is horribly written. I can barely read it. -- Anonymous, more or less. ==Left ear/Right ear==bbb Unfortunately, the thing about L=Gay R=Straight keeps being added in by an anonymous user, so we can't contact the person doing it. It's not true now, it never really was, and it most certainly is historically inaccurate. Maybe the person will read this and actually do some research and actually see that it's not true. tooki 18:07, 26 May 2004

Since other misinformation has come from this ISP, I was ready to delete this very doubtful passage, but I see it has been put in the urban legend category already. --Wetman 23:07, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For what it's worth, in 1981 when I decided to get my ear pierced, I remember, urban legend or not, that "it was believed" that putting the ring in your right ear was a way of making a particular kind of statement about sexuality, while putting the ring in your left ear was neutral with regard to that. I also remember at that time that men piercing both ears was pretty much unheard of. Evertype 13:31, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

Well as far as I know, among young people in the U.S. and especially in the hip hop/urban *subculture* most guys wear earrings either one the left ear or both. But they're generally never worn only on the right ear, because that supposeadly means they're gay. Oh FYI im not the one that keeps adding the L-straight/R-gay thing Guanaco152003 00:31, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I live in the midwest and for most of my life I was told the left ear is the ear signifying homosexuality. Then I got the right one pierced and was informed by several that it's the other way around. Col.clawhammer 07:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I too heard frequently in the 1990s that the right side was the homosexual side. It seems that there's enough knowledge of this L/R preference to where it has some credibility. If enough people believe such a code and abide by it, even if it's unfounded, then it's true among those people. I support this rule of thumb being added into the article. -Rolypolyman (talk) 22:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I rewrote the left/right ear paragraph just to make it readable. Nonetheless, it's all blatant original research. There's probably some sources on the subject somewhere. Perhaps someone who's invested in this article can find some and fix up that section. To be honest, the whole history section needs sourcing and vetting. Unfortunately, I'm tied up on other articles. Otherwise, I'd do it myself. cheers, ask123 (talk) 06:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

- come one people that is not that hard to memorize.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.1.53.1 (talk) 04:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC) 

About starter earrings

I just got my earlobes pierced 3 weeks ago. Today I finally managed to have the starter earrings removed by a stud opener tool.

I would like to add that it is not true that one has to wait for 6 weeks before removing the starter earrings. If you discover any swelling or continuous fluid discharge from raw skin around the piercing, do consult a doctor. It may be the beginning of an infection. Most starter earrings punched into your earlobes using a piercing gun are metal (silver,gold,platinum) plated studs. Many people are allergic to plated jewellery because of certain substances that are required to harden the material.

For my case, I think I would have healed quicker if I had removed the starter earrings in the second week and replaced them with some real gold/platinum studs. After the removal, I witnessed pieces of plating scraped off from my starter studs, exposing some black material underneath. Tells alot of the durability of common starter studs.

What I have learnt: Do exercise care after the piercings, and never put off consulting a qualified personnel for advice when not all is smooth. n vn dn cw eji jusydb By: teoani (contact via blog) 17:05, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Removing jewelry early can result in infection and excessive scaring. Maybe if you had gone to a profetional piercer and had your ears done properly there would not be any continuous fluid discharge because they use sharp needles and high quality, properly sized jewelry. not the rubbish they use with guns. you get what you pay for! Also it is mainly the high quantities of nickle in the cheap plated jewelry that cause the reation. in addition it might be important to note that you cant properly sterilise almost all piercing guns and most shops don't have the correct facilities to do so anyway. Anyone fancy hepatitis? Piratedawson 15:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Prior to the 'gun and stud' method becoming universally used, the lobe was pierced by a device that was similar to a hyperdermic syringe that pushed a needle through the lobe and a hinged hoop earring known as a sleeper was then inserted into the hole, fastened up and left for 6 weeks whilst the piercing healed, The sleeper was made form pure gold and then turned daily until healed. Sleepers have been used by people when the stud has not let the hole heal properly.Paulmcg129 ([[User talk:Paulmcg129]) 19:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I would never get ears pierced anywhere that uses anything but gold or stainless steel jewelry. нмŵוτнτ 22:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

FAQ

I'm a bit puzzled what the "FAQ" section in this article is doing here. Where are these questions frequently asked? Not on Wikipedia. Our responsibility here is to present facts, not advice. There must be a way to present the facts embedded in this section more encyclopedically. The question "Does it make any difference if a man pierces his left earlobe or his right earlobe?'" is entirely inappropriate here, because it begs for an opinion (which is what the answer offers). That's a violation of WP:NPOV, and it's why I tried to remove it and replace it with purely factual historical information. Tverbeek 03:50, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. The left vs. right concept has been embedded in the article's editing for sometime. With regards to male ear piercing, it is still believed by some people and certainly has some history behind it. Therefore, I feel it deserves to be in the article someplace, but placing into the "encyclopedic" portion of the article would add more weight than it deserves. Earpol 16:43, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Of course the article should mention it, but Wikipedia policy requires that it be done in a strictly factual manner. The question and answer paragraph didn't do that, and since Wikipolicy requires the whole article to be encyclopedic (not just a portion of), I removed it. FAQ format is a handy way to write up information, but it's also a sloppy technique, which is why I'm going to rewrite the article to get rid of it, putting information like whether it hurts into a plain statment of fact, rather than an answer to some hypoethetical person's question. Tverbeek 19:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ear Whimsies/Cuffs/Clips? (Non-piercing)

Is there a standard name for a non-piercing earring that cuffs behind and around the earlobe, like certain forms of headphones? I was hoping to at least find a standardized name for it... It doesn't appear like it should belong with Ear Cuffs in particular because there's a difference between a cuff that latches onto the exterior edge of the ear as opposed to what I'm wearing.

I've heard them called clips, cuffs, or whimsies, but none of the above seem to match properly.Veled 16:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Question on sailors and earrings

"There continued to be a small male following, however, particularly among sailors, where a pierced earlobe often meant that the wearer had sailed around the world or had crossed the equator." I heard that the reason (or one of the reasons) sailors wore earrings was so that, should they drown and their body be washed ashore, the earring could be sold to pay for a funeral. Anyone know if this is true or apocryphal? --Babrahamse 21:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I would not suspect that to be logical or accurate. With his being dead, a funeral would be a dead sailor's last concern. It would be more likely, I think, that the cultural mixture found on an international commercial vessel would just be conducive to the spread of phenomenon that was socially unpopular in Europe. I mean, a ship that sails to North Africa, modern Turkey, and other regions of the Mediterranean would have taken on all sorts of individuals and all sorts of cultural influences, including the influence of cultures that consider piercing appropriate. There's also not going to be a strong push for traditional social propriety (which would bar male ear piercing) on a boat full of sweaty men, so the appeal of a vain distinguishing feature might have spread quickly. Just a few guesses. The funeral bit sounds to me like pretty fantasy and unlikely history. Fearwig 03:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of it for pirates, but not sailors, and it could just be fantasy. --64.131.39.145 (talk) 02:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The tradition is that Sailors who sailed 'round the Horn ( tip of South America ) ( not the equator - thats a differnt tradition) were entitled to wear a single Gold earing in the left ear. Goes back to the Trade and Whaling voyages of the 1800's in square rigged sailboats. It was a difficult and often dangerous passage even on the much more common eastbound passages (with the prevailing winds ). On the left side because that was the side toward land, in an eastbound passage. The earing for the right was either given to (or taken by ) Posiden/Neptune in tribute for safe passage. ( Makeing the passage on a modern cruise liner doesn't count ) Naval vessels or sailing ships only. 24.218.178.149 (talk) 04:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I was told by some who practice fencing/sword fighting that it is traditional/practical for men to wear their ear rings in their left ear because the vast majority of sword/fencers in the old days were right handed thus the left ear ring was less likely to get ripped off or snagged. This also ties into the sailor/pirate story and burials. Septagram (talk) 07:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge

Conch piercing should not be merged here. Whoever added that template should write something here and explain their rationale, rather then let people wonder at whether someone just forgot to take the notice off. Anyway. This article is long enough, and conch piercings are so very different to earlobe piercings, both in technical terms and culturally. Perhaps there could be a centralised page on ear cartiliage piercings, and it could get merged there. --Qirex 13:33, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Ear piercings

"Earring" and ear piercing should be differentiated, with this article left essentially as-is while the latter is adapted to be more like the page for body piercing, outlining in its body the varieties and linking to them individually. There are probably more varieties of piercing for the ear than for any other body part (save the genitals, perhaps), and there's really no reason to merge them all into this deficient (or at least relatively unrelated) article. Consider also the fact that barbells and other sorts of body jewelry aren't really ear "rings" at all--it's just not logical that this article would cover such a broad topic. Fearwig 02:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Not to mention that there are lots of non-pierced earrings, especially these days... clips, cuffs, slip-on hoops, etc. "Earring" and "pierced-earring" are by no means interchangeable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.189.152 (talk) 05:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Image

I removed Image:Littlegirlearspierced .JPG, because the focus of the shot was on the girl, rather than the earrings. In fact, the earrings are rather hard to see. Joyous | Talk 15:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Earring trend did not start in the 20th century

Earrings didn't start becoming a trend in the 20th century. Someone needs to do research and put in the pre-historic/pre-20th century role of earrings.

Too many images of children

I commented out several recent additional images of children's ears provided by User talk:Belginusanl because this article is about earrings and not children, and the earrings weren't that notable anyway. Earpol 23:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

hong kong hip hop culture

Took the entire section out, because it has more to do with hip-hop than earrings, and its quite out of place.

Healing Over

Should we add a brief mention of whether or not the piercing hole ever completely heals over so there is no hole anymore?? I've often wondered that myself and I think it's a valid piece of information that should be included. --Promus Kaa 01:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• Oops, sorry, it's already there... --Promus Kaa 01:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Pirates earpiercing

The reason some sailors and pirates pierce their ears is because a certain part of the ear,when punctured will reduce the thirstiness and hungriness you get from malnutrition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.206.245 (talk) 21:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any supporting evidence of this? --Tylerdmace (talk) 06:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

huggy

Huggy earrings seem to essentially be a subcategory of hoop earrings, in which the hoop is significantly wider than the piercing bit, thus appearing to "hug" the earlobe much like ear cuffs.--AaronRosenberg (talk) 03:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Laser

Does anyone know if a laser, or something instantly healing, has been used or considered? Maybe I don't know much, but it seems like it would make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.102.224.187 (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a very common way to get ear pierced in China (usually offered in hospitals). I really haven't seen it anywhere in the US. 130.126.75.181 (talk) 07:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)cecikierk

cecikierk: Do you think you can find any information about this and put in the main article? Sounds interesting. Pipatron (talk) 14:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, there isn't many "official" documentation on ear piercing with laser, let along in English. Here's an article in Chinese: http://www.ntmrmfw.com/Article/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=863 cecikierk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.75.181 (talk) 06:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

History

I don't think ear piercing started in the 20's in the US, since the vast majority of Victorian earrings are for pierced ears. --cecikierk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.75.181 (talk) 06:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Fish hooks vs. French hooks

I've usually considered a plain wire hook for dangle earrings to be a "fish hook"Left is right and Right is wrong
and a hook with a flattened section on the outside of the ear to be a "French hook".
It appears that some consider any kind of hook to be a French hook.
Could someone clarify? Temblast (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Left is right and Right is wrong

Oh, yes, I was in a culture that said that too. I am a male. And, at this point, I have 21 piercings. 11 left, 9 right, 1 in my right nostril. And what does it mean? It doesn't mean ANYTHING. I don't even wear more than 2 earrings at a time. Left is right and right is wrong? Why? I pierced my ears myself. So, like the majority of people, being right-handed, it was easier to pierce my left ear myself. Since 90% or so is right-handed, what does that prove on the topic of "Left is right and Right is wrong"? 97.103.80.222 (talk) 02:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Biblical piercing

The Bible makes no reference or mention to earrings-only to the piercing, and that was only performed when the servant chose to remain with the master and forgo the automatic emancipation after six years. Regardless, come the Jubilee, the servant would have to leave. In any event, this should be in Body_piercing#Ear_Piercing, not here, as there is no reference or mention of rings, and the purpose of the process was to create the hole, not to have it filled. -- Avi (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

That is incorrect about the Bible not making mention about wearing earrings. Read Exodus 32:1-4 and you note that Aaron tells fellow complaining Israelites to bring the earrings from their sons and daughters ears and bring them to him, so that he make a god for them, since they were complaining about how long Moses had remained up on the mountain talking to God. [user: William Crockerham-- 15:00, 30, July 2009 (UTC)

I was referring to the piercing regarding the servant choosing to remain with the master. Earrings in general are of course mentioned (Aaron, Eliezer bringing presents for Rivka, etc.). -- Avi (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh hello again Avraham, how nice that you feel moved to follow me around and revert any edit I make. Ear piercing redirects here, hence it belongs here. Note that the source I linked it describes how the hole is filled. Please provide reliable sources for your other claims; they are interesting. Blackworm (talk) 22:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that is an error. Ear piercing should redirect to Body_piercing#Ear_Piercing, not here. I will correct that anon. -- Avi (talk) 01:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've fixed the redirection and the hatnote, and brought a source at Body_piercing#Ear_Piercing. -- Avi (talk) 01:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

You will correct that anon? What are you, 500 years old? :D Blackworm (talk) 08:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe the answer available here and on quick search via Google and others in regard to this question ("When were clip earrings first available?") are wrong. I am in my mid-seventies and was in the jewelry business (as a designer)for many years. I well remember that clip earring backs as we know them today did not become available until after the end of World War II. They may have been invented in the 1930's ... but they were not commonly available until the late 40's ... and even then, they were rarer than the screw back type. Screw backs (these do not "clip," but hold a double-headed bolt that screws to tighten against the earlobe) were readily available into the early 50's, when clip backs finally replaced them.

New screw backs are still available, but mostly as findings, occasionally from the Orient or Africa, and very rarely, in precious jewelry. They were almost entirely replaced in popularity by clip backs for three reasons. 1) Screwing the bolt securely against the earlobe (and unscrewing it to remove the earring) takes time. 2) In order to fit securely, the end of the bolt must turn against the earlobe, an action that is uncomfortable and tends to pinch. 3) Since the bolt must be adjusted anew every time the earring is worn, and since the action of tightening the bolt is uncomfortable as it turns against the lobe, security of the fit may be compromised.

Randall76 05:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Spanish newborns

I have recently found out that in Spain it is extremely normal for newborn baby girls to have their ears pierced. I was rather surprised by this fact, and noted that it is not included in the article. Maybe someone could add some facts about this? I don't have any references for it, just some personal observations/conversations with Spanish people. It would appear to be something considered culturally "normal".Jimjamjak (talk) 09:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello. You'll find some informations in this book : Bijoux à secrets, Patrizia Ciambelli (ISBN=978-2735109456) read online. If you need it, I can help you to translate some extracts.Please forgive me if I make some mistakes, I'm french... --Démosthène (talk) 19:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Holes disappear?

"After healing, earlobe piercings will shrink to smaller gauges in the prolonged absence of earrings, and in most cases will completely disappear."

Will completely disappear after how many years of disuse?

I was under the impression that earlobe piercings, unlike many other body piercings, are for life. I knew somebody who was in her 40s and showed me the holes that have remained in her ears although she hasn't used them in years. This might have been not enough for the hole to disappear, though it had probably shrunk.

In any case, it would be nice to have some ball-park figures on how long it takes for a disused ear piercing to shrink to the next smaller gauge, for a small hole to be reduced to a dent, and for this dent to eventually disappear (if it ever does).

There are a number of Google hits, but I'm not sure which to believe.... -- Smjg (talk) 23:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Another kind of piercing

I've just seen a kind of ear piercing that isn't shown in the picture. Vertically through the lobe, starting in the dip between the tragus and the antitragus. Any idea what this is called? -- Smjg (talk) 12:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Closure of holes

Not everyone wants to have holes in their ears forever, for whatever reason. Although there is this line: "earlobe piercings will shrink to smaller gauges in the prolonged absence of earrings, and in most cases will completely disappear" related to straight earlobe piercings, what about the upper-ear cartilage piercings? Are they permanent or will they close and disappear over time too? I did a quick google search and did find a cosmetic surgery site where they talked about methods used to close holes (sometimes due to distension or other issues, and often in such a way that the ears can be repierced later). I think this info would be useful to have. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Earring/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

NEEDS REFERENCES but otherwise comprehensive and well-organized. Daniel Case 04:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 04:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 13:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Earring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120607023525/http://www.cdc.gov:80/hiv/resources/qa/transmission.htm to http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/transmission.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Hoops controversy

It's too soon, methinks, to know whether or not this is Wikipedia-worthy, but there are rumblings of hoop earrings getting caught up in the culture wars. Thmazing (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2017 (UTC)