What language are people allowed to use around describing SRS?

[Aaarrgghhh]

And other things. Why are opinions not allowed on the feminism boards but are fine elsewhere? Obviously this is specific to a certain subgroup of people. I’m getting annoyed today because I can say things elsewhere on the site but the same things said here are deleted.

Retrofitted that's interesting, I've only ever heard of ED issues with circulation, not the actual erectile tissue. Makes sense I suppose.
I should imagine it would be more successful implanted in penile tissue than in neopenile tissue.

FlyingOink Why don’t they choose this? It looks so much better than the phalloplasty and seems to come with less risk. And they say it’s not a sexual thing but they get the worse one because penetration.

Aaarrgghhh
Yeah the linked blog earlier suggested an ex partner had insisted on penetration. I'm not sure I'm convinced.

There are obviously a plethora of goodies that can be used to achieve that without surgery, some items are quite disturbingly realistic. So bearing in mind the fucker is going to have limited feeling, and the fuckee wants suitable rigidity and something aesthetically pleasing, it doesn't make sense to have a phalloplasty which neither delivers a realistic looking neopenis nor reliable rigidity (the implants need replacing after a while). Without being too crude, I'm sure more spirited coitus could be achieved using other means instead of relying on delicately crafted genital tissue.

For those transmen who may have previously identified as lesbians (picking my words carefully) I would imagine they are experienced in pleasing a female partner sans penis.

The metoidioplasty results in a neo-micropenis. I've seen a few that seem realistic, but when it comes down to choosing, obviously some transmen don't want a small penis.

Again, my anger is for the surgeons who lead these people on and promise them unrealistic outcomes.

Retrofitted

I’m sure you didn’t mean to imply that those penises are less than real, or their owners as insane or deluded for considering them as a valid penis.

We'll no, I had no idea the pump/saline mechanism was used for men with penis problems. And no offence intended obviously.

But I was talking about women. Where I do think telling them they're men and have male genitals, and here's how, is deluded.

The two scenarios seem, to me, to be completely different.

As long as this site ha a complaint department instead of actual site moderators it is pretty much a crap shoot as to the words you can use to describe the human experience in the year MMXX.

Notbad

Though I said myself about this surgery being done on healthy bodies, as you did, I think this needs correcting. Puberty blockers induce a diseased/disordered state - patients who take puberty blockers do not have ‘healthy bodies’.

There are also very very few long term studies of followup of even conventional SRS. Those there are are poor quality; short follow ups, no proper control groups, very high drop out rates...

True, a better description maybe would be

bodies that still have the potential to be healthy

If puberty blockers are removed and puberty progresses the body will become fully healthy once again. Once surgery is undertaken, this is impossible.

Do they still have the potential to progress to be fully healthy? After being on blockers for the whole of the usual ages for puberty? I haven’t seen an answer on that one as it seems they all go onto cross sex hormones.

Logically, I would say that even if an 18 year old stopped puberty blockers and was allowed to go through puberty their body would progress to be relatively healthy. There maybe some differences in height, bone density etc and the big question would be the level of cognitive development. Overall I think it wouldn’t be considered an unhealthy body if this was allowed, even if it won’t be the natural body that would have developed without interference.

Why would an 18 year old start puberty if it had been stopped, or a 16 year old? Has there been any research on this? Are we sure there isn’t an age window in which puberty must take place or it never will? If they do enter puberty is it a normal puberty or is it foreshortened? I haven’t seen any research on this other than referencing precocious puberty where they stop puberty blockers at 9 or 10 or so.

The man on Embarrassing Bodies had his penis chopped off in a freak accident. The surgeons fashioned one for him but it was not fully functioning, for instance his urethra was also severed and would have had to be lengthened. When tubes are stretched they are subject to infections. I didn't see the episode but I did read about it. It's happened before with soldiers and land mines.

It would be interesting and possibly quite sad to revisit that man's story and see how he lives with his surgically created penis, it could give some insight the life that follows after for someone who has had the operation but is not suffering with gender dysphoria.

Either way, had this op not worked he would still be a man obviously, but a man in pain and suffering following an accident. Maybe he still is.

NotBadConsidering your post at 03:01 is excellent.

What tissue would they use for the phalloplasty?
They will be using any tissue they can think off. Inside or out.

Surgeons are experimenting all the time, remodelling bodies when faced with mutilating tumours or trauma.
This is particularly relevant for military casualties.

Where there are planned interventions there is the potential to use donors or synthetic prosthetics or even animal parts (think of the use of pigs valves for heart surgery).
But there is the problem of rejection which then requires the lifelong use of immunosuppressants.

Therefore using the patients own tissue appears to be the solution, hence the use of military field hospital surgical expertise.

Back to planned intervention on healthy people, surgery is not an exact science.
Many people who undergo operations of any sort often have to return so it can be tweaked and revisited even in a minor way.
This is quite normal to expect.

Any gross removal of body parts is a process trial and error where a favourable outcome only might be possible. When it is being done on a healthy person the outcome, in theory, should be better.

But complications happen and everyone involved has to keep going because the perceived problem has now turned into a medical nightmare.

And here we are, experimenting on healthy bodies.

We don’t have ‘spare’ tissue. Taking tissue from elsewhere ALWAYS involves risk, harm and compromise. For trauma or tumours this compromise is more straightforward eg. disfiguring scaring, pain and risk of infection at skin donor site versus much higher risk of infection and need to cover the trauma site.

Surgery is not an exact science.
Taking medication isn't exact either.

Consider the effects of drinking a dozen alcohol shots in a sample group.

Sex
Age
Ethnicity
Physical health

There will be different effects within the group and different effects between each group.

I wonder if the genderist medics are over confident because they are dealing with healthy people?

Have you seen the program ‘Botched’? There seems to be no shortage of surgeons happy to work against an individuals best interest and perform mutilating surgeries. For the money and sometimes for ego. Even the approach of the ‘saviour’ doctors on the program sometimes seem driven as much by a technical/academic desire to see what they can achieve.

The other thing that struck me with that program is how quickly patients are discharged. They have what sometimes seem quite significant operations but are discharged to spend their first night in a hotel with drains etc still attached. Same thing seemed to happen to a certain young transwoman and I remember the doctor was required to go to the hotel when post-operative complications developed there. Is this usual? If nothing else it would surely increase the risk of infections (as well as complications not being spotted and being away from urgent medical care).

The article linked above says:

A general surgeon averages $220,000 salary a year. A specialized Cardiologist almost doubles that at $512,000. A standard appendectomy in the USA cost $21,000. A Phalloplasty with a scrotum, urethra lengthening and pump averages $85,000-$200,000 and insurance are covering it now. Think of the complication revenues from Phalloplasty alone. Hell, it might even be worth it to skimp here or there in surgery because who’s going to care it’s just a transgender person and the additional revenue could be a plus.

Is this true, that surgeons can deliberately botch surgery for profit? Don't they have the Hippocratic oath in America?

In the UK I believe the hippocratic oath is optional.

I could be wrong on this.

I am suspicious of the aura that surrounds the doctors involved in groundbreaking, sensational type of work.

Geriatric medicine doesn't seem to have the same level of attraction.

Sexequality
.. disfiguring scarring

Yes, there is always scarring.

That instagram picture (on the thread now deleted) showed peculiar horizontal scars on the thighs.
Those scars are presented as some kind of heroic journey.

Have you seen the program ‘Botched’? There seems to be no shortage of surgeons happy to work against an individuals best interest and perform mutilating surgeries.

Yes fair enough that is true. I just don’t think that is what has happened with genital reassignment surgery in the NHS if you look at the history of it. I think they genuinely think they are helping patients with a difficult problem, not taking advantage.

I do agree there should be much better, more effortful and consistent follow up of all patients in the UK not just small samples. If they had there would have been several decades and thousands of cases worth by now.

That's an awesome post NotBadConsidering.

I wonder whether it will be permitted to stand or whether, on checking, will be found to be full of inconvenient facts.

Spot on nauticant
NotBad's post has indeed been zapped.

I can't move beyond people defending these surgeries on minors. It's despicable. Jazz is a victim not a hero.