Or both? It may be odd but it’s not illegal.
*Full text at http://slate.msn.com/id/2085402/ *
Does it have to be one or the other? Can’t they be crazy and exercising their rights?
Yes, and I said that in the OP:
Exercising their right to be such an unsanitary rodent, such as it is.
There is a fine line to be drawn between expressing/asserting one’s uniqueness or identity, and undergoing procedures which harm, disfigure or otherwise impair one’s ability to function in everyday life. (I am also minded of that guy who spends a fortune on plastic surgery to look as “cat-like” as possible).
The term “mental disorder” is somewhat loaded (how about transsexuals? And, doubtless, past generations would apply it to anyone with a faceful of piercings today!). I believe this is something which the medical establishment must simply come to a gradual consensus about, considering all possible data, psychiatric evalutions an symptoms of mental distress/depression.
Of course, it should also be remembered that the surgeons themselves are perfectly entitled to refuse such unnecessary operations.
I’ll have to go with c) all of the above.
And of course, I want to know who is paying for these silly bastards to have this done. If it is being paid for by taxpayer funds, then I have a real problem with it.
I also have issues with people incapacitating themselves so that they are unable to contribute to society, especially since at least some of these folks will have dependents.
Body modification.
Split tongues and nose piercings.
He could at least have donated his legs to someone who needed them instead of destroying them.
Your point, SimonX?
Shithouse rats fought long and hard for their rights. Perhaps you recall the Squeak and Scatter Rebellion of 1884?
Show some respect.
Indeed, my understanding is that transexuals seeking gender-reassignment surgery are required to undergo a long series of psychological evaluations and counseling to determine (among other things) whether their desire stems from a metal disorder. I don’t know how many candidates are weeded out through that process, but I assume it’s a bunch. Medically speaking, there is no automatic “right” to gener-reassignment surgery just because the patient wants it, and the same thing would certainly apply to elective amputation.
I cannot imagine the circumstances in which a doctor or psychiatrist would conclude that a desire to amputate one’s own limbs would be anything other than the result of a mental disorder, but you never know what’s buried in the heads (and limbs) of human beings.
It’s old hat, the book Apocalypse Culture, published in 1987 has a number of articles about self amputation. It a very, uh, interesting read. IIRC, there is an article about a performance artist who either wanted to or in fact did create a machine to randomly amputate bits of his body on stage.
Even if there is a mental disorder, there are plenty of disorders that cannot be cured with any amount of drugs or any amount of therapy. So either you condemn somebody to live with a body they hate (which certainly leads to a messed up life and often leads to them killing themselves) or you let them make fairly safe alterations.
See this thread on apotemnophilia. There are others; a search on “apotemnophilia” should turn up most of them.
(It’s interesting how transsexualism always comes up whenever apotemnophilia gets mentioned…)
Kelly, although I would not necessarily make the comparison myself, I can see why some people might. There is little in common between gender reassignment and crippling oneself on purpose. (Warning! Fake male chauvinist rimshot ahead!) Unless, of course, one sees becoming a woman as a form of crippling oneself. (Whew! That’s out of my system! Hope nobody took me seriously, this being GD and all.)
Dissonance, I think I’ve found a present for my wife in that book. Right up her alley. :eek:
Sven, I think you make a good point.
Thanks for the link, Kelly. It’s nice to see that, while I’m not surprised there was at least one thread about this that I’ve forgotten about, at least I didn’t post to it. That WOULD be embarassing.
minty
I’m not so sure that’s the case per this thread.
A couple quotes from the thread:
From Sterra
From KellyM
I’d be definitely interested in any study which attempts to measure the percentage of people denied SRS due to psychological reasons.
Grim
This just seems to be extreme body modification. They certainly seem to have the right.
… DORRANCE #7 STAINLESS STEEL HOOKS!
As far as I can tell, although someone born a man may (with or without surgery) be wearing high heels at work, I will never have to carry a sex-change out of a burning building.
Someone deliberately makes his or her or intermediate stage self blind, deaf, or crippled, they are opting out of being able to pull their weight in a variety of situations.
Would it be discrimination if I refused to hire a man who had deliberately amputated his leg as a letter carrier?
What if I felt it was “normal” and “right for me” to be out of my mind on rhino tranquilizers and carrying automatic weapons? Is that okay?
There is clearly a point where the difference between elective surgery becomes a matter of kind, not quantity. Do something that renders you unable to manage the basic biped mammal mobility crosses the line.
I think it’s their right so long as these self-amputees receive no public aid whatsoever*, neither for the surgical process itself nor for the fact that they may be unable to perform their jobs after mutilating themselves, or that they may be unable to find a new job. And since the bleeding hearts will cry “won’t somebody please think of the children!”, and throw these nuts money anyways if they have kids, then I suppose we’d have to prevent them from doing this if they had dependants (as another poster suggested.)
We clearly have the right to become bums and wander the countryside, so I don’t think the fact that they lose their ability to “contribute to society” (whatever that means) should prevent it, as long as they realize they deserve no assistance from the public.
As the Nat’l Amputee Rights Action League (NARAL) might say if such a group existed, “my body my choice!”