Gisele Bundchen Pierces Baby’s Ears, Angers Mommy Bloggers

Supermodel Gisele Bundchen didn’t do anything overly transgressive by piercing her baby’s ears, but the internet is not known for being circumspect about which things it chooses to heap outrage upon.

It probably doesn’t help that Gisele Bundchen’s fame and fortune is largely predicated on furthering the “beauty ideal,” but millions of baby girls have pierced ears and lived to tell the tale.

Reading the outrage, however, one might think Mrs. Tom Brady opted to amputate her daughter’s ears rather than create tiny holes from which to dangle glittery bits of metal and stone.

While the decision to pierce eight month old baby Vivian’s ears has been controversial, The Stir’s Ericka Souter says that culturally, Bundchen is likely more acclimated to baby pierced ears.

Souter explained:

“I think what a lot of people don’t realize is that this is something that’s very popular in Gisele’s culture. She’s Brazilian and in Latin America, it is very common to get your infant daughter’s ears pierced.”

Good Morning America covered the outcry over baby ear piercing, and one commenter shot back:

“People have been piercing babies ears 4 years. As long as it’s done safely, it’s fine! Baby gets over it & so should these busy bodies!”

Another said:

“Pierced ears showing on an ultrasound might be too soon. Get over it! In many cultures, babies have [earrings] b4 going home from birth!”

One tweeted that the Gisele Bundchen earring issue was a non-starter, saying:

@GMA calling shenanigans on the Gisele baby ear piercing. That’s a cultural & individual decision. C’mon moms, focus on what’s important.

— popcultureparent (@pcparent) July 30, 2013

Another reported surviving infant earrings:

@GMA I got mine pierced at 6months. I think its good bc then the child doesn’t remember the pain. I’m thankful that my parents got it done

— Jess Torres (@jess_rubyxo) July 30, 2013

Do you think Gisele Bundchen’s baby got her ears pierced too young?