Do phalloplasties actually work?

[SilverTapz]

After wondering about this for a while, I ended up searching phalloplasty online and ended up on a Reddit page where people post their progress. I had never seen one before an was curious, I guess. It was actually quite shocking. People with what looks like no muscle left on their forearms, someone with a necrotic 'scrotum', someone where the stitches were wide open and the tip has turned black and left a gaping hole etc etc. People seem to be commenting saying that they look great, they've made the right decision etc, but honestly they look absolutely butchered. It's scary. And I guess my question is, do they actually function? Some of these people are so young and it's scary what they've done to their bodies. I can't help but think a lot of them will regret the decision. Is it mainly cosmetic? Can they orgasm? Honestly just very shocked by what I've seen!

It’s no different to breast enlargements or nose jobs or labioplasty or any number of surgeries people have because they dislike how their body looks. Do you protest against those?

Yes, actually many of us are concerned for people having those too, especially when they are botched or there is lack of informed consent as to the risks - especially as, by and large, many people are not happy afterwards and go on to have further elective cosmetic surgeries. For many therapy would be a wiser route. However, if a person choses to have those surgeries, they are a) self funded and b) usually reversible. So, Not. The. Same. Thing.

This is grossly disingenuous.

It interferes with healthy and functioning bladder function with potentially life changing consequences.

It disrupts sexual function, with complications around pain, inability to organism.

And ultimately it doesn't deliver on the goal, which is to pass as the other sex. Because it can never achieve that.

We've just had this discussion if you read the thread, no one is supporting having these procedures either. This one is about phalloplasty
Also, no one believes that having a nose job means they change sex.

It is different.

The surgeries are more extreme - breast removal is different than breast enlargement. Phalloplasty has enormous complication rates and potential ill effects.

And it's posited as having an entirely different purpose. It's suggested as a solution to 'dysphoria', it's presented as a way to solve a mental health issue.

People also claim that having these surgeries mean someone has 'changed sex'. Which is of course impossible.

Yes, I do protest against those, but being narcissistic and obsessed with how you look is not the same as being a vulnerable, ND, young person, who necessarily has a reduced capacity to consent, especially given that the outcome they desire after this barbaric, unproven surgery can never happen because you cannot change sex. They are left on a medical pathway for life, most with horrendous wounds that will never heal. It’s experimentation on people with MH issues and it is quite simply morally and ethically inhumane.

I'm not in the UK, and I don't want a phalloplasty, so I wouldn't know if it's available on the NHS.

Whether it should be... I would tend to say no, for at least three reasons.

1. It's extremely expensive. There's no justification for spending so much money on a non-life-threatening condition, when it's my understanding that there isn't enough money to treat actually life-threatening conditions.

2. "Do no harm." Private doctors can put their limit where they want, but a national health service should be very strict about that.

3. Lack of experience. Surgeons need practice to get good results. The trickier the surgery, the more practice is needed. A surgeon who performs only a handful of phallophasties a year is not going to get the results of one who performs dozens. So unless NHS surgeons are thoroughly trained by experts, they shouldn't be performing phalloplasties at all.

Ah, and sorry about "sex reassignment surgery". I used it out of habit. Is "gender-affirming surgery" better?

Thank you for for bringing this up.

I think she's the other side of the same fucked up society and social imagary that creates transgender identification. One lot are making themselves into a chariacture of the sex they are, the other into a chariacture of the sex they are not. I don't think we should be normalising either of them. Both groups are reacting to some inner beliefs about what men and women are "supposed" to be and finding themselves not matching up. And I'm horrified if under-18s are getting extreme dental treatments or cosmetic surgery.

One thing to consider is that society is tending to frame the same-sex-chariacture people as doing this as a cosmetic choice while the opposite-sex-chariacture people as seen as requiring this as a treatment. I do think that implies opposite-sex body modifications are somehow more necessary, more above criticism, and from the oppostiet perspective more problematic which may not in reality be justified.

All these things you quote are different in themselves, with different risks and variations in satisfactory outcomes, and genital surgery is different again, so this is not a helpful observation.

That's a very thought provoking post, thanks

notoriously gender critical

As opposed to embracing of regressive, arbitrary stereotypes?

Since gender is the mechanism by which patriarchy is enacted being critical of it is something to be proud of. That is the substance of radical feminism, aka second wave or gender critical feminism. If the stereotypes of masculinity and femininity didn’t exist perhaps people wouldn’t feel the need to take such extreme steps to distance themselves from the ones socially imposed on their sex. Gender critical = critical of sex stereotypes.

'Ah, and sorry about "sex reassignment surgery". I used it out of habit. Is "gender-affirming surgery" better'

'surgicical body alteration' might be more appropriate, or 'genital alteration'?

If we are honest with the often vulnerable people seeking these massive procedures we should call it what it is. You can affirm your believed gender by dressing and acting how you perceive to be the 'correct gender'. There is absolutely no need to endure extensive, mutilating operations as it doesn't affirm anything.

Wow - lot of projection going on in that post. Do you really think feminist women who raise concerns about the many ways the sexist concept of gender identity is harmful to women and children (and also men by the way) are going to be people who are on board with 23-year old having botox? Half of us don't even shave our legs for God's sake 😂

I think this is one you may need to educate yourself about.

Honestly I thought you were genuine at first and agreed you had a point, but the later posts have made it clear you don't care about those girls either, it's just the usual TRA "throw in anything that might work to delegitimise criticism of trans choices"

"There is absolutely no need to endure extensive, mutilating operations as it doesn't affirm anything."

Heh. I had top surgery, and it did help a lot. Bottom surgery wouldn't work, though, because it would never give me what I want.

No.

Using them to delay puberty is exactly what they are designed to do. You still go through puberty once you stop taking them.

But if instead of stopping them you go on to take cross sex hormones that is a different thing.

We have no idea the impact this has on brain development, yet.

More and more I find myself wishing MN had given us a tear reaction 😥

.

What a silly comparison!

I would not be on a thread about the environment complaining about war in the Middle East, nor would I be discussing local traffic on a thread about classical music - context is all!

As it happens, yes, I disagree with all of those - the fact that you don't like how your body looks is not a reason to mutilate it - that is the outcome of a society / online communities / social media all fixated on concepts of what looks right - rather than accepting that we are all different and loving the variety.

I am married to a consultant plastic surgeon who is qualified in many areas of surgery, but will not do cosmetic work - she spends her time rebuilding people and giving them their lives back - not destroying them.

These discussions are words based - remove the rubbish being said / noise that tries to validate and the fundamental underlying it is clear to all - if someone has their body chopped up / altered despite it being a working and functional body, that is mutilation.

When it happens with society's approval, then we are in a broken society

When it happens to children it is child abuse

When it happens to the vulnerable (autistic / those with mental health issues / those who have been abused in the past) then it is a safeguarding issue

Let's be clear- there is no justification in operating on a physically healthy male or female - mutilating their body and stacking up future issues - all in pursuit of a lie that somehow this will allow them to change sex - which we know as a society, we know at a legal level, we know morally and ethically - is impossible.

It is the time for blunt and clear talking - there is never going to be a valid reason for this surgery - anyone performing it should be struck off as a minimum, but preferably be facing criminal charges under safeguarding / abuse legislation.

Agree - but actually, the current wave of feminism should/does allow for ‘my body, my choice’, so if a [young] woman wants to have a completely reversible aesthetic procedure like lip filler or botox, then it’s not my place to judge.

The poster you replied to clearly doesn’t do nuance or understand that temporary/reversible [self-funded] aesthetics are not in the same ballpark as: permanent, complex, irreversible surgeries and skin grafts, needing life long medical intervention, on otherwise physically perfect/healthy vulnerable and autistic young women. Or maybe I’m wrong and they are totally equivalent?!!

I can't speak for the OP, but to jump into a forum and ask those very personal questions which sit in the nexus of both mental and physical distress out of curiosity (no matter how well meaning) is (1) incredibly rude and purient, and (2) only going to give a limited sample. Support forums are for the people who use them not a resource for curious others.

If I were OP I'd be looking for links to research and wider data rather than individual stories, which is something Mumsnet has to date been good at finding.

Thank you.

@Seethlaw
Ah, and sorry about "sex reassignment surgery". I used it out of habit. Is "gender-affirming surgery" better?

It is neither...

• You can't reassign sex - sex is immutable, you will always be what you were born.
• it is not gender-affirming as gender is a fluid societal concept - as you always remain your sex, so any action you take simply expands and redefines what it means in this society to be your gender - so a man who cuts his willy off - still has sex = man, so all he is doing is expanding the societal understanding of a man to being either a man with a willy or a man with a willy cut off the gender boundaries for man expand. At no point does it suddenly move him to being a woman in either gender or sex.

Yes, and it's exceptionally hard to get these funded on the NHS.

Those of us in healthcare are concerned about anyone seeking surgery in order to correct what may be a psychologically driven issue because those internal dissatisfactions can persist despite surgical procedures https://bdd.iocdf.org/expert-opinions/cosmetic-treatments-and-bdd/…. “ do no harm” is a fairly crucial part of healthcare and we should have the research evidence to prove its value for any procedure that has the capacity to cause significant harm.

Yes but I haven’t really learnt facts about phalloplasty direct from Mumsnetters it’s been through links to NHS websites and other providers and newspaper articles about individuals and their stories.

I’d never suggest anyone uses a discussion forum as a singular source of knowledge but it can be a helpful as a way to point yourself towards resources.

I wouldn’t suggest men wanting to learn about abortion looked solely at one thing either if it was me I’d look at a mix of sites that would explain to me the facts of medical and surgical abortion. Then what the criteria are for where I live and further afield. Sites that offer information and opinion and individual stories.

Then using the information available to me I’d form an opinion. In the old days you could take your opinions down to the pub and have a reasoned conversation with people. I miss those days.