Elective Orchiectomy--Better Off or Worse Off?
Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:50 pm
I'm not sure how long this website has been in operation, but I think I've read it goes back to the 1990s. And there are a number of people involved with the Archive who, as far as I can tell, have been active in affairs related to those who want orchiectomies, or who have had the surgery, for as long as twenty years. And, when I accessed the Archive earlier this week, I had the thought that it would be interesting to get some sort of idea about whether the Archive has had a constructive effect. Also wondered about the perspective of members, over the last couple of decades, on what the general view, several years after surgery, has been.
I think, after reading through the archive, that there are some individuals who, because of gender dysphoria and similar states, can be considered to have clearly benefited by having orchietomies. If I remember right, the Fraj has observed that he could have avoided years of confusion and misery, if he had had the surgery earlier. And, too, there are those who simply had excessive sex drives or else their personalities were negatively impacted by their testosterone levels, and removal of the gonads had a distinctly positive effect for them.
But, at the same time, I think most people with long experience on the Archive can tell you, that some people want to have orchiectomies for reasons which aren't adequate, and which sometimes aren't even rational. So my question would be, in general, have those who have had orchiectomies over the last twenty years, generally been better off after the surgery or worse off, a few years on? I realize this is a complicated question, and there may be no definitive answer for a lot of people, but it is something which is a salient topic to explore. It is, of course, hard to determine whether somebody would have been better off if he hadn't had the surgery, because it's impossible to know what would have happened to him. Undoubtedly, a lot of people who have had the surgery, and may have had less than ideal results, are nevertheless better off than they would have been without the operation, because they would have spent their lives continually miserable because of their dissatisfaction with their gender characteristics if they hadn't had the orchiectomy. Still, I have to think that most people have made some judgement about whether their own surgery was beneficial, and those around them most likely have formed a general view of whether the person is better off or worse off.
Beyond that, the Archive has provided a place where those who are interested in having the gonads removed, can get information about the surgery, and where they can get advice from those who have gone down the same road before. So, is there any indication that the existence of the Archive, has reduced the incidence of people getting surgeries they really weren't ready for, and also the incidence of surgeries performed by incompetent persons? I don't know what percentage of those who are interested in orchiectomy, actually access the archive, but the number of hits on the website seems quite large.
One thing which seems to be typical about those who have had the surgery, is that even those who have expressed regrets, appear over time to become ambivalent about it--I think both Plix and IE have said they have wondered if they made the right decision in having the surgery, and some, like Krister, had less than ideal experiences during after their operations, and consequently must have regretted, at least, their choice of surgeons or "cutters." After a few years, of course, people become accustomed to the effects of the operations, they find that they have certain advantages or new opportunities, and the negative features of it tend to be more in the background than they might have been earlier.
Anyway, I think it is worthwhile to think about the effect of the Archive on those who fantasize about removal of the testes, those who have had the gonads removed, and those who have used pharmaceuticals to reduce testosterone levels. I don't access the Eunuch Archive much any more, but I learned quite a lot from it, and I think it has probably been the most constructive of those websites connected with the subject of voluntary orchiectomy.
I think, after reading through the archive, that there are some individuals who, because of gender dysphoria and similar states, can be considered to have clearly benefited by having orchietomies. If I remember right, the Fraj has observed that he could have avoided years of confusion and misery, if he had had the surgery earlier. And, too, there are those who simply had excessive sex drives or else their personalities were negatively impacted by their testosterone levels, and removal of the gonads had a distinctly positive effect for them.
But, at the same time, I think most people with long experience on the Archive can tell you, that some people want to have orchiectomies for reasons which aren't adequate, and which sometimes aren't even rational. So my question would be, in general, have those who have had orchiectomies over the last twenty years, generally been better off after the surgery or worse off, a few years on? I realize this is a complicated question, and there may be no definitive answer for a lot of people, but it is something which is a salient topic to explore. It is, of course, hard to determine whether somebody would have been better off if he hadn't had the surgery, because it's impossible to know what would have happened to him. Undoubtedly, a lot of people who have had the surgery, and may have had less than ideal results, are nevertheless better off than they would have been without the operation, because they would have spent their lives continually miserable because of their dissatisfaction with their gender characteristics if they hadn't had the orchiectomy. Still, I have to think that most people have made some judgement about whether their own surgery was beneficial, and those around them most likely have formed a general view of whether the person is better off or worse off.
Beyond that, the Archive has provided a place where those who are interested in having the gonads removed, can get information about the surgery, and where they can get advice from those who have gone down the same road before. So, is there any indication that the existence of the Archive, has reduced the incidence of people getting surgeries they really weren't ready for, and also the incidence of surgeries performed by incompetent persons? I don't know what percentage of those who are interested in orchiectomy, actually access the archive, but the number of hits on the website seems quite large.
One thing which seems to be typical about those who have had the surgery, is that even those who have expressed regrets, appear over time to become ambivalent about it--I think both Plix and IE have said they have wondered if they made the right decision in having the surgery, and some, like Krister, had less than ideal experiences during after their operations, and consequently must have regretted, at least, their choice of surgeons or "cutters." After a few years, of course, people become accustomed to the effects of the operations, they find that they have certain advantages or new opportunities, and the negative features of it tend to be more in the background than they might have been earlier.
Anyway, I think it is worthwhile to think about the effect of the Archive on those who fantasize about removal of the testes, those who have had the gonads removed, and those who have used pharmaceuticals to reduce testosterone levels. I don't access the Eunuch Archive much any more, but I learned quite a lot from it, and I think it has probably been the most constructive of those websites connected with the subject of voluntary orchiectomy.