Body Augmentation / Reduction Discussion

There’s a small but apparently dedicated community of folks who seek amputations, and argue that it’s no different from a boob job or a sex change operation. My opinion is that they’re essentially correct. Trouble is, society (and more importantly, doctors) don’t see it that way.

Personally, I fail to see the difference between having your genitals mutilated and your body pumped full of hormones you weren’t born with, and having a leg lopped off - whatever the motivations of those who wish such radical modifications. But for some reason, the former is acceptable (if you’re persistent about it) while the latter isn’t.

Things turn nasty when the individuals turn to underground doctors and overly confident body artists. See this old news story for example.

I mean, here we have the argument of loss of function being a guarantee. Breast implants don’t take function away generally, nor do our kind of implants.

1 Like

That’s debatable. Cosmetic surgeons routinely agree to implant huge boobs that invariably create lower back pains for the wearer. As for loss of function, sex change operations are right up there. Yet they’re allowed.

To be honest, the function is rather altered and not really lost… at least by now it’s possible to actually “use” your new genitals.

I think it finally comes to the point if changes to the body can and should be made, simply because the person who owns this body wants it - since I am quite deep into the bodymodification-area, I think that’s a simple question to answer (and yes, I’m okay with the two south-americans who got their noses partially removed, because they liked the looks of it), as everyone should be able to look and live the way he wants. Problems arise when people are not satisfied after the surgery and someone has to be responsible - usually, nobody wants to be.
Maybe one should simply sign a form that states that no doc (or bodymod artist, I’d always prefer those) should be taken responsible if anything goes wrong, provided the surgical intervention takes place in a correct environment and not a dark back alley^^

1 Like

Er… no: the functionality is seriously altered. From the point of view of procreation, Sir-turned-Madam will not be able to bear children, and Madam-turned-Sir will certainly not be able to make anyone pregnant.

As for the fun-generating bits, I understand it takes a lot of imagination for a transgender person to experience something resembling an orgasm. But I may be wrong on that one.

I think you’re right, and also the form would only be valid after:

  • You’ve proved that you’re fully informed of the consequences and risks of what you ask
  • You signed it in full possession of your wits - i.e. you don’t sign it as a passing fancy during a bar booze-up.
  • The person you elected to perform the act on you is actually qualified to attempt it - i.e. you can’t mandate a machine tool operator buddy to do a prince Albert on you.

And then I’ll go even further: if whatever you asked isn’t a recognized medical need, the medical costs incurred in case of unfortunate consequences shouldn’t be born by society. In other words, people who get their eyeballs tattooed can’t expect social security to pay for their guide dog, women who get cancer from breast implants should pay for their own chemo, and I should pay for my course of antibiotics if the body mod artist botches up my FlexNext implant in two months.

But once those caveats are understood and accepted by the requestor, they should be allowed to ask anything be done to their own body - because, well, it’s their body to dispose of as they see fit.

1 Like

Hehe, true point - to be honest, I sometimes forget what our private parts were meant for… not such a fan of a wildly reproducing humanity at all, sorry :wink:

And those points are pretty exactly the stuff I fill out when visiting my piercer or bodymodder, so at least in germany that’s just the way it works.

The other stuff… mh, I’m not so sure what to think about it. Personally, I never visited any doc because of something my bodymods “did” to me, so I was never some kind of burden for society, but I get what you’re talking about. I’m totally okay with society not paying for the removal of a f**ed up tattoo, an inflammated piercing or something similar, but especially when it comes to all that gender-changing-topic, things get more difficult - some people are in psychological treatment for a very long time, payed by society… maybe it would be a “better deal” to pay for a gender-change? And what about people who have a reaaaaally unhealthy way of living, smoking, drinking, taking drugs… it’s all stuff that’s covered by the society paying the medical bills. Dunno if that’s fair, to be honest…

1 Like

Haha, I was just typing out a similar answer and then the page updated :slight_smile:
One thing idk is if there are licenses for body mod artists.

Fair, but: I’m fine with paying for basic medical help for such people, each failed install is an opportunity to learn and improve. I think it’s good for the society if one can put all their money in an implant and be sure that someone pays the meds if something goes wrong. Bad wording but f*ck it you get the point.

1 Like

That’s just what I tried to say - I really like that system here, not because I use it much (for I don’t^^), but because… well, somehow it gives me the feeling that everyone is taken care of, at least on a very, very basic level. Don’t get me wrong - I’m fine with paying for all those smoking, drinking, drug-taking, bungee-jumping, suspension-hanging, horse-riding people, as long as they are fine to pay when something goes wrong with my stuff :smiley:


In that case, society deems it worthwhile. It then becomes a medical necessity.

In the US, healthcare providers make you pay extra when you’re obese, you smoke or you drink. I left Blue Cross Blue Shield a whole bunch of money when I smoked 3 packs a day, lemme tell you.

1 Like

Hmmm… I’m not happy with the thought that society decides if something is necessary or not, especially in such cases. It’s a difficult topic somehow…

And that makes it even more difficult, I think - where do they draw a line? Obesity, smoking, drinking, okay. But what about drugs? Most people won’t tell about them… what about “dangerous activities”? Is horse riding more or less dangerous than skateboarding? What about driving a car? Eating simply unhealty stuff without getting fat? There are so many ways to shorten your lifespan, I think that it’s really hard to compare everything…
So I think I’m fine with “yeah, do your crazy stuff, we’ll take care, and you take care about us as well”… :wink:


“Easy” to compare: Take all the medical costs created by that activity, devide through number of people who are doing that activity.

But just let everyone pay the same (taking their income into account) and treat everyone the same.
You live healthy and without risk? Fine, but you’ll pay more than everyone else (relatively, they pay the same but get treatments).
Everyone should be allowed to risk their life while being sure society pays for it!

1 Like

Well, social security - at least as Europe understands it - is society pooling up money to help individual members. If society as a whole decides it doesn’t want to cover this or that procedure, it’s no different from your car insurance company not wanting to cover that brand new Ferrari you want to buy.

That doesn’t mean you should be denied the right to have that procedure done to you - or the right to buy the Ferrari - if you’re willing and able to pay for the coverage yourself, is my point.

I’m not saying things are fair in the US, I was just stating a fact :slight_smile: One of the main reasons why I emigrated is because I much prefer the European idea of how a civilized society should protect and care for its members.

I’m actually okay with social security - i.e. me, the taxpayer - covering people who bungee-jump, implant crazy stuff inside themselves or have their willies turned into snatches. Those activities are fringe, they’re not going to bankrupt the system.

What I’m not okay with is society flatly denying someone the right to do certain things to themselves, while at the same time fully legalizing and covering the unfortunate consequences of other, equally unecessary medical procedures. It should be all or nothing: either society accepts that anything goes - within a well-defined legal framework of course - or it doesn’t.


I’ve been doing just fine on hormones for years, and as an added bonus I don’t have the random urge to lop my legs off. :roll_eyes: You miiiiight wanna consider sticking to topics you’ve got a clue about, just sayin’.


I think what rosco was saying is that gender reassignment surgery is not any more or less crazy than elective amputation. However the latter you end up in psychiatric care for where as the former you get assistance and understanding.

1 Like

Thank you. I had decided not to answer that one, but you did it nicely for me :slight_smile:


I started to reply to that post, but thought I would leave it to Rosco, @Devilclarke made a more succinct reply anyway, but glad we are all on the same wavelength.

For what it is worth, Here’s what I started:-

I don’t think @anon3825968 was attacking anybody
The way I read this was:
Some people get sex changes, which is mostly accepted by society
However, there are other people who choose to get other amputations, who see themselves as no different from the sex change group, however, their surgery is not accepted by society

Problems result when people are “forced” to resort to “underground” options

1 Like

Yeah, I’m sorry… I honestly get offended about once a decade, but something about that juxtaposition put my blood pressure through the roof like a Tex Avery bulldog. I don’t know if I’ll ever get past the inherit ableism of the unnecessary amputation crowd, especially if it’s taking resources away from people who deserve wholly decentralized augmentation options that won’t catapult them into poverty.

I took a long walk and raided the liquor cabinet in the meantime. It’s fine.

EDIT: ironically my mouthing off coincided with earning ‘trust level 2’ on this board. go figure.




It is my understanding that the “amputation crowd” feels losing a limb is as necessary to them as changing gender is necessary to you. In other words, you make a summary judgment call, but you of all people should know better.

1 Like

I would argue it might also make it more accessible. Don’t people have 3d print files they made and give out already? Maybe in time, better tech will be more accessible.

1 Like