I’m trying to figure out why losing your legs means no sex. It’s like it was thrown in as a bonus. Why not include a speech impediment with the loss of your eyes or diabetes with the loss of your arms?
So do I still have hands emanating from my shoulders? (Kidding)
I went with blind. I used to have a blind friend and he used to get all kinds of pity sex. Plus, I have an arm chair theory that there are some women out there who are turned on by the idea of get’n freaky with a guy who can’t see them.
Or some shit like that. I don’t know.
Polls are supposed to have an “other” option. Take my spleen.
One could learn to eat with their feet. There was even a documentary about a girl who did such a thing; she had no arms and drove a car with her feet, ate with her feet, painted with her feet, etc.
Me too. Particularly on this board, it should be the arms.
And if I ever lose my mouth?
It was.
Stop it! 
Ha!
Why would losing your pelvis make it impossible to have sex? Orgasm is a mental concept, and there is another commonly used sexual orifice. Yes, orgasm without stimulation is less common in men, but hypnotic therapy has had a way around that for a long time.
Do your rules also stipulate an inability to re-learn doing these things with one’s feet? Because it is very much possible to do so.
I just don’t think all these people picking “legs” are really thinking it through. This world is a world constructed to be lived in on two feet. Not having legs, or being able to walk, or ambulate yourself without the use of a clunky machine, serves as a huge impediment to what a person is able to access and experience in it. Not to mention the social stigma that comes with such an existence; it wouldn’t be matched by someone who was armless but still standing.
And I think the lifelong health issues experienced by someone who is missing both legs would probably be more dire than those of someone missing both arms; things like circulation, blood pressure and others (although this is just my guess).
And you add the “no sex” stipulation to the mix, and I can’t understand why anyone would pick “legs”.
I would also go with legs. I already have plenty of secondhand knowledge of the ins and outs of life as a wheelchair user. I can’t see myself adapting well to doing things like feeding myself with my feet. The idea of going blind freaks me out. Needing a wheelchair is something that feels familiar and normal to me, and I can do without sex.
But obviously no first hand knowledge.
So what? I have plenty of firsthand knowledge of myself and what I do best. I might make a different choice if it involved being that way from birth, but I know what kind of loss I am best equipped to handle at this point in my life. My hypothetical choice of disabilities does not mean that I think you have it easy, either. I do think that some of the things that bother you about it (social stigma, loss of sex per the scenario given) are less concerning to me. I would actually be more worried about getting too fat due to less exercise and less muscle mass, and not having the upper body strength to transfer myself.
I just meant that the disparity between the experiences of someone who has no functional legs (or who uses a wheelchair) and someone who is intimately familiar with that person with no legs is vast and wide and not really comparable. But I understand your point. But I also mentioned health concerns as being a reason why I thought legs would be a poor choice, as well as the other reasons.
Right, so I base my opinions on the knowledge I have of people close to me who have dealt with similar things. You certainly have a much closer experience to one of the options than I do, but I don’t have any reason to suppose that you know any more than I do about being without arms or sight. As for the general experience of being a middle-aged, overweight female wheelchair user living not only in this city but in the very same house that I now live in, I will go with my mom’s over that of a young male bodybuilder.
No snark intended, or at least only very small amounts. I am actually always interested in hearing your perspective on discussions like this.
Ambivalid, you mention health concerns related with the legs option. What do you mean exactly? Is upperbody weight & aerobic exercise somehow inadequate? I can see how not having legs is a PITA, but I can still do pretty much everything I do now without legs. Take my arms and I can’t cook, clean myself or the house, operate a computer, work on cars, or tie my own shoes. Legless mobility issues can be overcome relatively simply. I’d rather lose my legs AND eyes than my arms.
Losing arms or eyes means that I can’t do my computer job any more. I could still work in a wheelchair. However, if you’re gonna castrate me on top of that, forget it. I’d rather lose my arms. But then how the fuck am I gonna masturbate? No eyes then. Now how am I gonna watch porn? This is like the Gift of the Magi!
Wouldn’t losing the pelvis mean the loss of the bladder and rectum as well as the reproductive organs?
Legs for me. No sight would be unbearable. Being unable to manipulate objects would also be unbearable. Wheelchair (and no sex) seems like the lesser punishment.