Body Augmentation / Reduction Discussion

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

It indeed is… I read several interviews with people who feel that way, and while I strongly support body autonomy in all its ways, this is still something I feel uncomfortable with. Not against it, no way, but just… not so sure what to think about.
People who decide to change their gender (Little sidenote - please don’t call that “genital mutilation”, that’s nonsense. Modification is not mutilation.) can live a healthy, happy, whatever live afterwards. People who lose a limb will have to cope with all the difficulties it brings - undeniably more that just “not able to get children”, which might be simply irrelevant for lots of people.
I honestly don’t know where I draw the line - in the bodmod-scene, there are people who get their ears or part of their nose removed. Fine with that. People who cut off a part of their fingers. Okay. Still, everything can be used and it has little impact on their daily life (not talking about the looks they get, just about keeping the body “working” in a way). When people want to lose a leg or an arm, that’s a different story for me - but still, I think I would support it.
Guess everyone should get the opportunity to live a happy life, even if that’s really different from what I or anyone else would consider “happy” or “healthy”…


Side note: if removal of the clitorus is fgm then turning the whole penis inside out or taking your insides and making them outsides is much more than modification. The difference between mutilation and modification is the skill of the person and the effective ability to consent with full understanding. A surgeon can still mutilate someone.

Just before people go too far or whatever I have personally gone to multiple appointments with 2 different friends one of which have had bottom surgery from both sides of the gender divide. Its a really interesting procedure but it is most certainly not a modification it is full on reconstructive surgery.

Exactly the last part is what I meant - if Rosco calls a consensual operative change of gender “mutilation” it puts it on exactly the same level as the gruesome stuff that happens to girls in africa, and that is just plain wrong. Mutilation is nonconsensual. Surgery and modification is consensual. At least that’s how I would differentiate that…^^


So we are getting well off topic here, I will split this out into its own thread soon.
Once I figure out where it branches off.
Open to opinions for a Thread title

1 Like

My point (and my only point in fact :slight_smile:) is, whatever your think of surgical gender modification shouldn’t be any different from what you think of voluntary amputation. Because ultimately they’re the same thing, regardless of the consequences to the one who undergoes either: it’s heavy body modification for the purpose of allowing the requestor to fit their own body image. Nothing more, nothing less.

Personally, both make me cringe, but logic dictates that they’re two sides of the same coin.

I beg to differ: I know people who lost a limb, and they’re mighty inconvenienced in their daily lives for sure. Also, they have to deal with chronic pain and shit like that. But they’re functional individuals for the most part.

People who have gender reassignment surgery aren’t just unable to have children, they’re also unable to have an orgasm. That’s a pretty heavy loss too in my book. It might not prevent them from climbing up stairs or pushing a trolley at the supermarket, but I can totally see how this can be a devastating side effect. Not to mention the possible trauma of changing gender and identity, which, even if it’s desired and chosen, I imagine can be quite a shock on someone’s personality.

But crucially, these things are explained to gender reassignment seekers, and discussed up the wazoo with their health care professional before anything can happen. Because it’s legal and there’s a well-defined process that everybody has to follow. People who want to go through with it have to follow months, if not years of psychological counseling and evaluation to obtain what they wish. The doctors have to be convinced the risks of hormone therapy and surgery outweigh the psychological issues created by a person trapped in the wrong body.

Assume for a minute that people who want a limb off are in fact also trapped in the wrong body - only in a different way: why shouldn’t they be allowed to follow the same path? If it was legal, they could follow the exact same process. It would be a pretty sane thing to do, instead of letting them simmer in their misery. In fact, it might even put some of them off their project. If it doesn’t, at least they’d know what to expect, and doctors would have a chance to evaluate how serious their request is, and the consequences denying it. Just like gender reassignment.

Finally, regarding the consequences to society, it’s true that a transgender person will probably incur fewer ongoing medical costs than an amputee. But then, countless people go bungee-jumping, motorcycle racing or off-piste skiing, break their spine, then end up costing a fortune to society. Many, many more than people who want a limb off. Yet nobody bats an eyelid when they decide to engage in dangerous activities. So I think that particular point is moot really.

Yeah okay, slip of the tongue. One can’t always think of weighing each and every one of one’s words all of the time :slight_smile: I agree with you actually, just didn’t use the proper term.

To be honest, I’d say so, yes… the child cannot consent, it is not medically necessary… so, yes.

Oh hell… hope this didn’t come over wrong - I did not want to say that people who lost a limb or whatever are non-funtional! Know some myself, and I just wanted to state that they have (at least from what I experience) much more and severe repercussions from their amputation, compared to people who changed their gender.

Thaaaat’s, as far as I know from some, not so true. Orgasms do happen still :wink: That would be indeed a really great loss, I’m on your side on that point!^^

And yeah, totally on your side here. Both things should be allowed and made possible, and it should be made easier as well, as long as the people who want / need that surgery are serious about it.

1 Like

As a circumcised man myself (not religious, medical, done as a kid but old enough to remember) I’m very glad it was done for a variety of practical reasons. But I must admit, there’s a tiny part of me that does regret not having had a choice in the matter: the doctors just decided it had to be done, right in front of me (but not talking to me), and they did it. Never had a say in the matter. Even if it was necessary and I’m happy with the outcome, I find the whole process a bit offensive.

The problem with thag is some of the girls agree to it is that then a modification :thinking:

I hope noone took offence to anything its a very interesting topic in its own right.

Uuuuh… okay. Let’s start a definition of consent :wink:
If a girl agrees to get that done, because her family talks her into it - that’s not consensual. Or if she knows she will never be married without getting it done (in a country where “being married” is absolutely important for survival, in a way…) - no consent at all.
Similar (yet muuuuch less gruesome, don’t get me wrong) - if a boy gets bullied at school for years because his ears are sticking out, and he finally decides to get them operated (not because he didn’t like them, but because the others don’t) - is that consensual?

And there are actually plastic surgeries where, for example, labias are reduced or removed, in a sterile environment, done by a professional - that’s the “consensual and clean” alternative, in a way^^

That is really interesting, especially since you are happy with the outcome - but that’s just the point, “having things done to you” never really feels good.

1 Like

I know what that tiny part is… or was :woozy_face:


Touché :slight_smile:

1 Like