Of course, Plix and Jesus are both correct in saying that someone can still be considered a man after the testes are removed. I myself have indicated that in other posts. In my original post in this thread, I was trying to put myself in the place of someone (probably a woman) who had just learned that someone she was familiar with, and who she thought to be a "normal" male, did not have testes. The person would, I think, in most cases, try to see something in the person's appearance or manner, which showed that he lacked the male hormonal juices. She would be comparing him, in her mind, with men who did have the testes and hormones, and so might be thinking of him as a castrate who was to be compared with them.

I have thought for some time that there should be two different words to describe those castrated before puberty and those whose testes are removed afterwards. The two types differ more from each other, to judge from what I have read, than prepubertal castrates differ from uncastrated adult men.

I think telling someone that you're a eunuch or thinking of becoming one is quite the conversation starter!

I do get a few raised eyebrows at this, but at least 1 or 2 of my friends understand. One even volunteered to be the cutter if need be. I think he would back out at the last minute if it came to that.

Although, he does have a sadistic streak in his personality. I'm thinking he would enjoy it too much cutting off my balls and dick included.

I prefer a more professional approach, but haven't ruled anything out at this time. In some regards, the professional approach is quite boring if not safer.

The risk seems so exciting to me.

I only wish I had thought of the package removal before puberty, I would have been able to still hit those A notes when I was in my school choir.