Should cometic surgery to 'affirm' someones gender be banned?

[happydappy2]

Should cosmetic surgery to 'affirm' someones gender identity be banned?
So things like males getting silicone implants (not including males requiring that after breast cancer.) Just silicone implants to give them a female shape. Males having having their sex organs removed-being made infertile. Mastectomies for females and the very risky phaloplasty....with hideous infection rates after the op. Again this operation renders them infertile...
This is not health care-this is harming otherwise healthy bodies....if we ban tongue splitting why not ban these types of operations as well?

They are hardly medical necessities though are they?

The only surgeon I've seen that operated in 'affirming' BIID surgery was forbidden from ever doing it again.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/26/6

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/625680.stm

I mean, in the context of NHS treatment.

Differs markedly between the sexes.

Meta-study for FTM surgery:

'A total of 1731 patients underwent phalloplasty, with the most common type of reconstruction performed being the radial forearm free flap (75.1%). Overall complication rate was high at 76.5%, of which urethral complications were high in all reconstructive subgroups (urethral fistula rate of 34.1% and urethral stricture rate of 25.4%).'

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2050052122000129

https://www.nhs.uk/tests-and-treatments/cosmetic-procedures/cosmetic-surgery/labiaplasty/

Quoted from the above page:

You cannot usually get a labiaplasty on the NHS
A labiaplasty is not usually available on the NHS. But it may be offered in some circumstances – for example, if the vaginal lips are abnormal, to repair tears after childbirth, or to remove cancerous tissue if a woman has vulval cancer

MTF meta-analysis:

'A total of 3716 cases were analyzed. Overall incidence of complications included the following: 2% (1%-6%) fistula, 14% (10%-18%) stenosis and strictures, and 1% (0%-6%) tissue necrosis, and 4% (2%-10%) prolapse (upper and lower limits of the 95% confidence interval).

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29489533/

I think your emphasis on the loss of reproductive capacity is concerning. If you were concerned about infection etc then I’d understand. But some people are quite happy to be infertile and it is not a requirement of anyone to have children. I know of a family friend who opted for a tubal litigation (after years of fighting for one) as she didn’t want kids and didn’t do well on contraception, do you take issue with her too?

Mastectomies are the most common 'gender affirming' surgery by far. Not found a meta analysis of complications yet, will see if I can.

Meanwhile, here's one study of 100 odd patients:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10917456/

'Among the 206 mastectomies, there were 5 wound infections (representing 5 patients out of 103, 4.8%) that were treated with oral antibiotics. There were 8 seromas (representing 7 patients out of 103, 6.8%) managed by needle puncture. There were 10 hematomas (representing 7 patients out of 103, 6.8%), 3 of which required surgical drainage, whereas the remaining 7 were managed by needle aspiration in the following weeks. There were 28 cases of NAC necrosis (partial or total; representing 21 patients out of 103, 20.4%), and 4 patients underwent surgical revision (3.8%), including the drainage of the 3 hematomas and 1 NAC excision. Any form of complication occurred in 33 patients, which represents 32% of the patients included in the study. '

Depends if we're talking about pubertal children or not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kn5rpj7mmo

Noting the answer to this headline.

Found a meta analysis of mastectomy for 'gender affirming' care for the 30 days post op:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6635198/

This disaggregates for different cohorts and compares those seeking mastectomy for 'gender identity' reasons:

'A total of 4,170 mastectomies were identified, of which 14.8% (n = 591) were transmasculine, 17.6% (n = 701) were CRRM, and 67.6% (n = 2,692) were GM. Plastic surgeons performed the majority of transmasculine cases (85.3%), compared with the general surgeons in the CRRM (97.9%) and GM (73.7%) cohorts. All-cause complication rates in the transmasculine, CRRM, and GM cohorts were 4.7%, 10.4%, and 3.7%, respectively.'

Hm.

'Plastic surgeons performed the majority of transmasculine cases (85.3%), compared with the general surgeons in the CRRM (97.9%) and GM (73.7%) cohorts.'

That may affect things, I would say.

Blair White is a good example of this. In stills and even video that only shows his head and shoulders he looks very convincing. But I saw a podcast once where before he sat down to be interviewed there was a short piece of footage of him walking to his seat and the gait and size of him was a dead giveaway. So yes, in real life you'd be able to tell

But in no circumstances can these surgeries be defined as 'successful'
They do not create actual opposite sex genitalia. And they ALWAYS create side effects and life long medical needs that the patients would not otherwise have had.

Those are not cosmetic though.

I had no idea who Blaire White is so after a quick Google I found a video of them.

The talking headshot is enough to give the game away with the not quite right forced manerisms and 'female' face, big shoulders and massive hands. That's before any walking/moving around which made it even more obvious.

My personal opinion on this - and I'm aware others may disagree - is that any genital surgery that is medically unnecessary should be banned. Including the horrendous practice of FGM and circumcision for so-called "religious purposes" and of course , gender affirming surgeries on both sexes.

Breast augmentation/mastectomy is a little more awkward.
Mastectomy - other than for cancer - is the unnecessary removal of healthy tissue so I'm generally against it I guess. Particularly as it in no way turns a woman into a man or even, in many cases, a reasonable facsimile of a man.

But neither does breast augmentation turn a man into a woman or even a reasonable facsimile of one. However, boob jobs are common and it's difficult to legislate that women should be allowed them but men should not.

I do think that the age limit should be raised to 25 for ANY and ALL gender affirming treatment though.

Ok but I'm telling you I've literally seen this happen myself - it happens that people are listed because they feel abnormal not that they don't have a perfectly normal (but not porno cosmetic) labia. Argue with someone else if you wanna be pedantic..

The NHS should never do cross sex surgeries but I wouldn't ban them in the private sector.

The NHS needs to look at what it offers and re-think some aspects. It can't afford to splash the cash and I know I'll get flamed but I don't think it should offer assisted conception either. As to cosmetic surgery generally, certainly it should offer reconstructive surgeries after mastectomy for cancer etc. and those curious cases in girls where one breast fails to develop, for burns victims etc. But not vanity projects, but it probably doesn't anyway.

No not at all-because she was trying to achieve a definable goal, which was successful. People who are suffering gender dysphoria are trying to achieve the impossible by attempting to become the opposite sex.

Then why for this version of body dysmorphia?

I have read about people recovering from a stroke, who wake up with a alien leg or arm lying next to them in their bed. Naturally they are appalled and disgusted, and are even more appalled and disgusted when they try to throw it out of the bed and find - horror! - it is attached to them. They cannot escape it. If these patients never recover their connection with their limb, would it be removed? It is not a fetish. It is the result of brain damage.

Pedantic is not what I'm being! NHS policy says that this should not happen. If it is happening, as you say it is, then individual surgeons are contravening policy and this should be challenged. It's not helpful for the patients, and it's a very poor use of critically endangered NHS resources.
Ideally someone working in that area would leak it to the press...

I imagine the patients concerned have psychiatric reports insisting that the surgery is essential to their mental wellbeing.

To reply to the opening question, what is the point of surgery to change "gender"? What is gender? It is just a stereotype of masculine or feminine feelings or behaviours? Some say it is a "social construct". Whatever, it is not real like sex: male/man and female/woman.

The Supreme Court confirmed that it made no difference if a man imagines he is feminine, separate spaces for male and female were the law. A man having cosmetic surgery to mimic feminine attributes is still male and must not use female spaces.