It's a strange irony that women have no trouble at all getting castrated. In fact it's the second most common surgery and the most unnecessary.

http://www.archive.org/stream/unnecessa ... t_djvu.txt

Now why is it that women not only have no trouble getting this procedure, but it's usually unnecessary, yet men can not get this procedure unless they can prove they will die if they don't?

Very strange.

Elizabeth

You don't need to prove your going to die. There are some medical reasons for getting it. Orchialgia (for one) that can't be resolved with drugs, tens or other pain cures. However its still not easy to do and there are some doctors that just won't do it.

I think its purely a double standard. Women? They don't "NEED" ovaries. Those just make it possible to get pregnant. Never mind that they also produce 95% of the women's hormones. Why would they need that? Just because it gives them sex drive, mental clarity, etc etc etc... I think the doctors just figure "Well she will be in Menopause in her 40s anyway so whats the big deal.

SHEESH!!!!

mrt (imported) wrote: Sat Feb 07, 2009 8:40 pm You don't need to prove your going to die. There are some medical reasons for getting it. Orchialgia (for one) that can't be resolved with drugs, tens or other pain cures. However its still not easy to do and there are some doctors that just won't do it.

I think its purely a double standard. Women? They don't "NEED" ovaries. Those just make it possible to get pregnant. Never mind that they also produce 95% of the women's hormones. Why would they need that? Just because it gives them sex drive, mental clarity, etc etc etc... I think the doctors just figure "Well she will be in Menopause in her 40s anyway so whats the big deal.

SHEESH!!!!

Might the large amount of money that most OB/GYN practices garner from hysterectomy/oopherectomy procedures have something to do with it? Naw, that would be unethical.

Speed

I honestly don't think its financial. I think its practiced this way because it "was" this way. In other words its typical surgery that has been done forever. This is also (My other theory) why doing an orchiectomy on a man is so much more rare. The patients typically won't stand for it. Those that want it done are limited to people with uncurable cancer or orchialgia. And Orchialgia is so rare that most urologists never see a case. And many are taken care of by using pain meds of some kind. The cancer cases unless they are Testicle cancer (Those get yanked RIGHT NOW) are not that common either. Prostate cancer patients are now opting for chemical castration to extend their lives and insure they die "intact"

I know personally of at least one case where a man refused any treatment along this line saying he would rather die a man. So you just have to factor that type of thinking into the mindset of the patients AND the doctors. How many doctors have serious castration fears? Probably a fair share of the men and probably some of the women. *Those that have had it done to themselves for example.

Think about the way its talked about when your telling a woman that she is going to be operated on. A "Hysterectomy" doesn't say it as correctly as "Female Castration" It sounds more like an operation to dial down hysteria! Which btw is about the exact opposite in my view.

Elizabeth (imported) wrote: Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:26 pm It's a strange irony that women have no trouble at all getting castrated. In fact it's the second most common surgery and the most unnecessary.

http://www.archive.org/stream/unnecessa ... t_djvu.txt

Now why is it that women not only have no trouble getting this procedure, but it's usually unnecessary, yet men can not get this procedure unless they can prove they will die if they don't?

Very strange.

Elizabeth

This is very very and all too often true indeed and makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You have to go to a psycholigist for six months and a thousand bucks to be able to get those things removed? Come on now! And then even if you AND the doctor know that they ARE in fact deformed and are probably giving off intermittent estrogen and testosterone at various intervals leaving you with that awful side effect of hot flashes and night sweats? Jesus Fucking Christ Goddamnit the third (suppose that's his real name). I surmise that because we do live in a extremely militant society (as compared to other cultures and other times and places) that our society has deemed it necessary to have as many fighting males (plus a number of females) as possible. And therefore since once one has been deemed a male (and therefore an elligable fighter) they must never be allowed to revert to a feminine stature by any means whatsoever. And then there are there are the folks who seem to be implanted here by WHOMEVER that deny that if your glands are to the outside they have to almost DIE to get them removed, whereas those with the glands on the inside have no problem whatsoever getting them removed and find out later that they really didn't need to get them removed afterall.

:(

mrt (imported) wrote: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:47 am I honestly don't think its financial. I think its practiced this way because it "was" this way. In other words its typical surgery that has been done forever. This is also (My other theory) why doing an orchiectomy on a man is so much more rare. The patients typically won't stand for it. Those that want it done are limited to people with uncurable cancer or orchialgia. And Orchialgia is so rare that most urologists never see a case. And many are taken care of by using pain meds of some kind. The cancer cases unless they are Testicle cancer (Those get yanked RIGHT NOW) are not that common either. Prostate cancer patients are now opting for chemical castration to extend their lives and insure they die "intact"

Mr. T Sir,

Indeed it was/is this way and has been for longer than the history of modern medicine.

Why is a procedure that would dial down the male sex drive, orchiectomy, not accepted, if not endorsed or even encouraged, is just wrong. I can see from many of the men here, who have had it done, that their lives have been enhanced. S

If you examine the histories of our medical doctors you will find many come from strong religious families and are judeo/christian practioners as well. Their personal religous beliefs most surely taint their practice and the resulting services that are offered. The mind of the devout believer is most certainly stained with the notion that woman, and more significantly female sexuality simply does not matter. Or if her sexuality does matter, its function and the woman's role, is to satisfy the male libido. In this light it would make perfect sense to remove, enhance, pierce or otherwise alter a woman to help her fulfill her duty.

Of course any research into the positive apsect of eunuchism would also be curtailed, as many doctors would see the resulting lifestyle as counter to everything they understand their world to be.

I'm not trying to rib you or bash jesus christ. I just understand that as far as the medical field is concerned, religion plays a huge role. Medicine in america is a reflection of the religious culture that dictates how we must live our lives. If you don't believe, examine the abortion issue, David Kovorkian, or even the woman down in LA that now has 14 children, or free health care for those who neglect themselves.

So yes people are not going to their GP's demanding to be de-balled in great numbers today. However, why the procedure is shunned while removing a woman's ovaries in this day and age is truley sinful!

"pass me the pie"

chilli-