Please use correct medical terminology for procedures

[Iused2BanOptimist]

From an article about student health plan coverage for sex reassignment in USA.
For female-to-male surgeries, the new coverage plan will include “mastectomy, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, vaginectomy, metoidioplasty, scrotoplasty, urethroplasty, placement of testicular prostheses (and) phalioplasty,” Hebert wrote. For male-to-female surgeries, coverage will include “orchiectomy, penectomy, vaginoplasty, clitoroplasty (and) labiaplasty.”

I loathe the use of cosy euphemisms "top surgery/bottom surgery".
This list of procedures really spells out what a journey of horror any trans person seeking surgery is about to embark on. I think of it as a menu of mutilation.
I think it is really important to pull no punches what the end destination is for any child/teen who starts out on puberty blockers is.

Sorry, I think the thread should have come with a warning. Can HQ add one? It is a rather horrifying list.

www.browndailyherald.com/2013/02/06/student-health-plan-to-cover-sex-reassignment/

The link to the article.

Correct terminology is critical - which is why trans people prefer eufemisms.

Personally, I think the correct terminology would be slightly different: scrotoplasty should be neo-scrotoplasty (as it's not a real scrotum),
phalioplasty should be neo-phalioplasty (as it's not a real phalus),
vaginoplasty should be neo-vaginoplasty (as it's not a real vagina), clitoroplasty should be neo-clitoroplasty (as it's not a real clitoris) and labiaplasty should be neo-labiaplasty (as they are not real labia).

Agree Jelly

As horrid as that list is,, it still implies that the person will end up with genitals just like the sex/gender they aspire to.
Some bottom surgery can produce decent results, but it doesn't always turn out right. Especially trying to produce a neovagina using the material from a prepubesescent penis which has been prevented from developing by hormone blockers

TBF though, the '-plasty' bit implies 'neo' in any case. It's creation of something that isn't there, by making it out of something else. So I suppose it's accurate in one sense. Just not in the sense that it will give the patient real sexual organs.

Jelly I think plasty covers the procedure and you then end up with a neo organ whatever it is.
Breakfast I'm sure some of the results are good, in form at least, but function? I haven't a clue.
Whilst people argue about things like suicide rates or the existence of ROGD I wonder if anyone, anywhere, is studying rates of relatively straightforward adverse effects such as UTI and/or incontinence following procedures such as urethroplasty?
Leaving aside all the very serious outcomes that can occur when surgery goes wrong.

The "Neo" is important. I have had a procedure that counts as vaginoplasty - I most definitely already have a vagina!

Beyond definitely. Clarity is important.

I abhor the move to rename anatomical terms and medical procedures.
There is already enough misinformation in this space.

Carceal Especially as most of those new names are just fluffy euphemisms to cover up the reality or to avoid offending those people who aren't affected anyway. As Jenny Murray said, she had breast cancer not chest cancer which literally could mean anything from lung cancer to skin cancer anywhere on the chest. It's beyond ridiculous.

Sorry Carceral

Quite.
And "bottom surgery" could just be removing an abscess or something.
TBH, all this is dangerous. Scientists and medical professionals have to learn lots of specific terminology, but then this needs to be communicated clearly to the public/patients.
Thanks for posting the list of procedures, btw. It's very clear what surgical transition really involves when you see them listed, with 9 for females and 5 for males. The idea that removing reproductive organs fundamentally changes sex does underline that this trans ideology is actually the one that reduces people to body parts.
How do they possibly reconcile their arguments with cancer patients, etc?

Destruction of language is fundamental to trans ideology.

Surely bottom surgery is what they do when they remove piles?

I agree this obfuscation of language is deliberate and dangerous.

Well, one might euphemistically refer to "bottom surgery" rather than admit to a haemorrhoidectomy.
But it could equally refer to some of those plastic surgery liposuction procedures. Or dealing with a pilonidal sinus. It is often better to admit the truth than leave the imagination to run riot!

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352587815000492
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29057562
Two different set of numbers, but it seems like a 10 to 35% chance of medical complications, aside from any revision surgery for aesthetic reasons.