Harm, mods and castration questions

[awen (imported)]

Is castration considered harmful? That is, if one castrates oneself, is one considered harming oneself even if done to cure a greater ill?

What is harm?

What is the difference between self-modification and self-harm? Is there a difference? Does self-modification become acts of self-harm after a threshold?

awen

[luvpain (imported)]

Well I think there is a

difference between self-modification and self-harm.

However most doctors and people do not agree.

The line between the two is real fine, you have to really be able to judge your mindset at the time. I know very well since I have done many self modifications to myself over the years and have attempted to castrate (http://iam.bmezine.com/iams.exe?cmd=fin ... 0101010500) myself. The attempt (http://iam.bmezine.com/iams.exe?cmd=fin ... 0101010500) failed and I drove myself to the hospital to seek help and hoped to have them finish the job. I signed myself in also for depression but I was treated like SHIT.

They refused to listen to me and would only patch things up, I tried to reason with them explain things even told them about My Androcur Experience (http://iam.bmezine.com/iams.exe?cmd=fin ... 0101010300) and that I really knew what I was getting into but they whouldn't listen to me because they thought I was just some crazy person trying to harm myself.

All the shrink wanted to do was drug me up, he wouldn't listen to me nor my parents and almost killed me with some of the medication he had me on because he wouldn't listen.

Anyways I guess what I'm trying to say there is a difference between self harm and self modification but most people do not see or understand it.

[TheOtherSide (imported)]

Is castration considered harmful? That is, if one castrates oneself, is one considered harming oneself even if done to cure a greater ill?

What is harm?

What is the difference between self-modification and self-harm? Is there a difference? Does self-modification become acts of self-harm after a threshold?

awen

I'm not entirely sure there's an official definition of self-harm, outside of "What a psychologist declares to be self-harm, is."

To be perfectly blunt, essentially any psychiatrist in existence will consider the lopping off of one's own body parts self-harm. Some (and not a small minority) even consider just about any form of body modification outside the 'norms' to be forms of self-harm, albeit not it the same league as the remvoal of body parts.

The fact that (in your mind) their removal cures a greater ill does not enter into it. Removing parts of your own body does cross into that realm where they are required to keep you in a safe setting for awhile. This goes far beyond what most see in respect to self-harm. This isn't someone burning themselves with a cigarette or cutting X's with a razor blade to make the pain go away or punish themselves. Removing body parts is in a completely different league.

[SplitDik (imported)]

I think everyone would agree that ideally a person would find their physical state perfectly suited to themselves, that we would feel whole and complete in the form we naturally are. In other words, self-harm and body modification are not ideal -- but then again nothing is ideal.

Any time a physical system in the body is changed or interrupted, it is technically "harm". Even piercing ones ears runs risks of infection and such, and further has subtler psychological aspects that are worth analyzing.

However, you extend the question to ask: what about if it is for a greater good? I think you answer your own question. We all know "no pain, no gain" is generally true. We can't even keep our body fit without literally ripping muscle fibres, getting blisters, etc.

I think that everyone's goal should be to gain the maximum satisfaction in ones physical form while minimizing the harm to get there. If you can gain that satisfaction by taking an anti-depressant, I suggest that you should not castrate yourself. If you absolutely detest your own genitalia, or if you are tormented by your libido, then castration probably is acceptable harm.

In any case, minimization of harm should be your guide. Some harm is necessary, but don't overdo it.

[JeffEunuch (imported)]

I think everyone would agree that ideally a person would find their physical state perfectly suited to themselves, that we would feel whole and complete in the form we naturally are. In other words, self-harm and body modification are not ideal -- but then again nothing is ideal....

Any time a physical system in the body is changed or interrupted, it is technically "harm"....In any case, minimization of harm should be your guide. Some harm is necessary, but don't overdo it.

Your point here is quite profound for me. Body builders and athletes strive to achieve their goals. They are perfecting their bodies so that they can achieve those goals. They run the risk of harming their bodies. BTW, two of my favourite activities are running and cycling, and both are much more comfy w/o balls. I've also harmed my body in running too hard. Those adding jewelry to their bodies and parts or tattoos are doing likewise.

Most on this board are interested in modifying their genitals to achieve their personal objectives. Harm comes when the organism is compromised. The risk of harm is perhaps greater for genital mods than many other actions or activities.

[An Onymus (imported)]

I think it was Ernest Hemingway who made the comment, "moral is what you feel good after." Something similar may apply in this discussion. You may not know if harm was done, until some time after the procedure, whatever it is, has been done. This is one reason why I am skeptical about the idea of removing any body parts which don't have some medical abnormality, such as cancer. There are so many variables, and the decision to carry out the procedures involved, is derived to such a substantial degree from psychological factors--which may be highly distorted--that it's difficult or impossible to determine beforehand what the real nature of the procedure is.

Which, of course, is why a lot of folks who post to this board, recommend that someone considering a procedure like orchiectomy, spend a considerable time with reversible chemical testosterone reduction, before going ahead with a permanent procedure.

Incidentally, I think that one of the principles mentioned in the Hippocratic oath is, "First, do no harm."