You see,

This is the reason why doctors prefer NOT to do this procedure.

Wrong decision...BINGO! Doctor's fault, find a Great White legal shark and see if we can draw some blood from those deep pockets...

A-1

2Beunuch (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 2:09 am You want my opinion? The doctor that castrated The Fraj (and we all know who that is, his last name begins with a "K") is more than a little guilty in this whole thing. He castrated a very young man without a letter of recommendation from a therapist -- so who the HELL does this doctor think he is being able to perfoem mutilating surgery on young men like this?

Of course you may think The Fraj was of age, and of course he ASKED POLITELY for the surgery, but you know what? Lots of crazy people ask for lots of crazy things. And yes The Frag was / and or is crazy in the sense that he was at a minimum depressed, and prone to self mutilation.

There are therapies and medications for what the Fraj was/is suffering from. Having two very important pieces of his anatomy chopped off obviously wasn't the solution to his problems -- now he's not only a depressed young man, he's an impotent depressed young man who is probably sprouting little embarrasing man-boobs (which, by the time he's in his 40's, will be positively pendulous) and with a penis that is slowly retracting into his body.

OK now is when everyone jumps in and says "Well, you're mileage may vary" -- but everything I've learned about having no testicles leads me to state the above.

Is there ANY case of anyone under about 50 years old being castrated who is actually HAPPY with the operation? I haven't heard of one (aside from the occasional transvestite, but that's different than a eunuch).

Time for me to put in my 2 cents worth.

TheFraj arived in Philly on a Tuesday I think, I arived that Friday, the three of us, TheFraj, Luvpain and me. I got into town in the afternoon and went to see Dr Kimmel first thing, joined by my friends Luvpain and thefraj. TheFraj was castrated the following Monday. Over the weekend I had a lot of time to ask him if he was sure he would not regret his actions. His folks had done the same thing for several months.

Dr Kimmel questioned me for about 45 minutes before castration and I am 57, he did the same with TF.

I guess my anger comes in, in that you were not there, I was. You dont know Dr Kimmel, I Do. There is nobody that could have made TF change his mind, no one. I know, we tried.

Should there be a procedure for a person that wished to be castrated? Yes I think so. I was chemically castrated for a year before castration, TF several months. I have stated many times to take castration on a test drive before surgery.

So I guess my question to you is this?

When are you going to go to the medical community and suggest a plan to which a person can be castrated?

I awate your answer.

hmmmm

This is the only forum that I know where we have such a group of eunuchs and those that wish to be. What is our responsability to the world to step up to the plate and put ourselfs on the line and edicuate the medical comunity?

Again I awate your answer.

hmmmm

No one said you would have a perfect life, I think its time to take responsibility for your own actions and quit trying to blame someone else.

I dont have the answer.

Friends,

Unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect world.

There is no case law on this subject to set a legal precidence.

SO, all medical practitioners engaging in this procedure are in unknown territory, legally. To say the least, it makes most of them antsy...

In addition, although the effects of castration are well known, the psychological/psychiatric aspects of such patients are pretty much undocumented medically, in psychology and in psychiatry.

Furthermore, when documentation exists, it always involves those who 'regret' their decision because those who are satisfied are not about to complain. Bias is not a new concept to this or any other phenomenon.

I have spent lots of time here attempting to help Krister and others convince people to take responsibility for their actions. This is where the trail leads on this subject...RESPONSIBILITY.

Doctors are responsible and most are very uneasy about castrating a young, healthy male. Perhaps the E.A. as a group should approach the medical community and ask them to study this issue. Unbiased research into this phenomenon should be conducted and perhaps the male "fascination with the fantasy" can be analized, catagorized and classified.

No doubt there are some who desired this, who have had it done and who moved on and are living with the results without the major problems being experienced by the Fraj.

Like I constantly say, once these things are cut off, they will not grow back.

Jesus, if you read this please offer your comments.

Thanks...

A-1

A-1 (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:56 am Like I constantly say, once these things are cut off, they will not grow back.

They don't grow back!?! I thought they grew back bigger ...

Okay, so back to the original question.

For TS castration, there is already a standard of care that specifies a protocol for determining suitability of a person for sex reassignment. So we don't need to discuss that.

For other eunuchs, there is no standard of care. So it is worthwhile discussing what it could/should be. The TS standard of care is close, but there are two problems I see with applying it to other eunuchs: (1) TS get female hormone replacement while eunuchs ideally want none, (2) TS have to "live as a female" for a set time while "living as a eunuch" is not really a socially accepted orientation.

My suggestion for a eunuch standard of care is as follows. Start with the one for TS. However, the minimum age should be set at the age where people are finished their growth (maybe 21?) and are also age of majority. Furthermore, the eunuch should "live as a eunuch" by using medically administered chemical castration for a period equal to that required by a TS person.

Perhaps someone can write up a draft of such a standard of care?

The remaining tricky part is the psychiatric referral. I think there are several psychiatrists that would approve it, but there is not enough literature/study right now to form a basis. To do my part, I have been making the psychiatrists that talk to me aware of the extent of this issue (i.e. castration desire) to prod them to study it further.

The Fraj obviously had a depression-related castration fixation. He could have eliminated testosterone from his body several different ways (as apparently he did for awhile). I hope the science of chemical castration advances or is made more available to those who want electivce castration. Already there are advanced chemical castrations involving small subcutaneous shots that lost for an entire year or more (the "Lupron" class of drugs). Right now they are extremely expensive as they are prescribed mostly and mainly for those dying of prostate cancer. So for those people, dropping $1,000 or more per shot is nothing compared to the alternative. But hopefully once the companies are done squeezing the cancer crowd of it's money they'll look to other markets -- like chemical castration of prisoners and hypersexuals. I think a $500 one-shot year-long chemical castration injection would be wonderful for anyone contemplating castration. And for those wanting permanent castration, they could just come in for their yearly shot, maybe make it a New Year's tradition. There are also "immunocastration" technologies on the horizon, already being used in animal studies. This is the "promised land" of castration as far as I can see -- one simple shot that immunizes your body from testosterone, inducing permanent chemical hypogonadism. This simple shot will take the wind out of your sail, the lead out of your pencil, and make having any sort of sexuality completely optional -- you could get testosterone shots of you wish to remain active, if not just do nothing and be happy with your flaccid penis and deactivated testicles. You'll be a completely calm, asexual "stealth eunuch" in the sense that nobody will ever have to know that you've shut down your genitals for good. Just a quick trip to the doctor, one small injection and you'll be impotent within weeks, asexual within months. I think when this technology is widely available castration will be used more and more in a variety of settings and institutions. It could be mandatory for release from prison for sexually violent offenders -- and I would argue it be used upon first offence. A simple shot will eliminate most if not all public objections to castration -- it will percieved more as "treatment" and those who recieve it will consider it treatment as well. Most of the "punishment" of current castration involves the physical removal of the testicles, the main organs of male sexuality. Once males learn they can be asexualized without any surgery or change in external appearence, being castrated will be like getting a flu shot.

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 4:14 pm Okay, so back to the original question.

For TS castration, there is already a standard of care that specifies a protocol for determining suitability of a person for sex reassignment. So we don't need to discuss that.

For other eunuchs, there is no standard of care. So it is worthwhile discussing what it could/should be. The TS standard of care is close, but there are two problems I see with applying it to other eunuchs: (1) TS get female hormone replacement while eunuchs ideally want none, (2) TS have to "live as a female" for a set time while "living as a eunuch" is not really a socially accepted orientation.

My suggestion for a eunuch standard of care is as follows. Start with the one for TS. However, the minimum age should be set at the age where people are finished their growth (maybe 21?) and are also age of majority. Furthermore, the eunuch should "live as a eunuch" by using medically administered chemical castration for a period equal to that required by a TS person.

Perhaps someone can write up a draft of such a standard of care?

The remaining tricky part is the psychiatric referral. I think there are several psychiatrists that would approve it, but there is not enough literature/study right now to form a basis. To do my part, I have been making the psychiatrists that talk to me aware of the extent of this issue (i.e. castration desire) to prod them to study it further.

"

2Beunuch (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 6:58 pm Once males learn they can be asexualized without any surgery or change in external appearence, being castrated will be like getting a flu shot.

"

A shot is quite private. I learned that when I got HRT earlier this year (2003). It changed my perception and enjoyment of life. No one ever asked about it. Still, it took the doctors a long time to respond to my complaints--a test that showed my testosterone level was extremely low jolted the HRT. However, years of my complaining and my former wife complaining about my low libido got me nowhere.

"

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 4:14 pm The remaining tricky part is the psychiatric referral. I think there are several psychiatrists that would approve it, but there is not enough literature/study right now to form a basis. To do my part, I have been making the psychiatrists that talk to me aware of the extent of this issue (i.e. castration desire) to prod them to study it further.

"

Doctors seem slow to learn.

SplitDik Sez...

A-1 (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:56 am Like I constantly say, once these thing

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 3:59 pm s are cut off, they will not grow back.

They don

't grow back!?! I thought they grew back bigger ...

Nope, that don't happen unless they is keloids and you don't cut it all out. So, cut it all out...y'all...



Really, though, it is no laughing matter.But Keloids ain't cancer, cancer is Baaaaaaddddd... nuthin' to joke about...ya don't have a choice with cancer if you want to live long and prosper...

A-1

Falcon (imported) wrote: Thu Jan 01, 2004 6:12 am freedom includes the opportunity to make decisions that we later regret.

I think it's good that this topic was named "suggested age limit" instead of "age limit"; I fully agree with the above quote about freedom.

In general, the subject is the one who has to live with the consequences of getting castrated, or the consequences of not getting castrated. So the final decision should be that of the subject.

Is TheFraj willing to tell us more about why he ended up regretting his castration, despite having tried out chemical castration for a few months (and apparently really liking it), indications that he should not have gotten castrated that he may have missed, etc.?

Voluntary castration involves an inherent psychological risk, which is like "everything else.". :hearthrob