Althouse: "Assuming that the victims consented to this ... that doesn't make it a defense."

April 2, 2006

"Assuming that the victims consented to this ... that doesn't make it a defense."

"We can't have people who are not medical doctors lopping off limbs and other body parts."

8 comments:

chuck b. said...: Some people are into weird shit and they're going to keep doing weird shit whether there are laws against it or not. And I'm not arguing there shouldn't be laws against some weird shit, or this weird shit in particular. Just wanted to post a tautology.

While there's no defense against the state in this case, the "victim's" consent would be a defense in an action brought by the "victim", no?; 4/2/06, 11:52 AM
Gaius Arbo said...: The good news is that at least 6 lunatics won't be breeding.; 4/2/06, 1:34 PM
Palladian said...: They may have already gotten breeding out of the way, Gaius Arbo.

When I was in graduate school, I had an acquaintance who visited a "dungeon" run by two men (one of whom worked at a Roman Catholic church). There was no surgery going on there, but hearing about the whole scenario always made me uncomfortable, especially the extent to which these people considered it part of their "sexuality". I've always hated how the "leather community" and the "BDSM community" attached itself to gay rights, as if the need for sexual accessories was as innate and natural as being gay. I've been chided for believing that all the sexual "subcultures" should not be included in the pursuit of gay equality; it makes me feel a bit like Betty Friedan in her belief that the "lavender menace" of associating lesbianism with feminism was harmful to gaining a broader acceptance of feminism. I point out to my friends that their acceptance of the logical extension of gay rights to every conceivable sexual subculture and deviancy is virtually identical to the arguments of anti-gay people, that gay rights is a slippery slope towards bestiality and consensual castration. It's very difficult to resolve my conservative-libertarian views with the feeling that some activities should not be promoted or accepted by an sort of society.; 4/2/06, 2:34 PM
Ann Althouse said...: This is doing far less than a sex change operation. So what's so terrible if the person consents? The answer is in that original quote: it's not done by a doctor. This is about protecting the territory of the medical profession (unless you want to outlaw sex change operations too).

I would say let these people have their free expression, but I think the real problem is the danger that someone who wants this done to him is likely to be mentally impaired and in need of paternalistic protection from the state. But I thought we were moving away from calling sexual preferences mental illnesses.

Getting castrated is an incredibly stupid choice, but people make stupid choices all the time and we don't try to save them. Here we're apparently trying to save them (or more precisely other people like them) by prosecuting them.; 4/2/06, 2:55 PM
Synova said...: Men get legally castrated all the time. Or at least occasionally. What is a sex change operation after all? And that's legal as well as voluntary.; 4/2/06, 3:27 PM
Palladian said...: "Men get legally castrated all the time."

Yeah, it's called holy matrimony. Bada-bing!

"What is a sex change operation after all? And that's legal as well as voluntary."

The difference here is obvious: "sex change" surgeries are done by medical doctors, in medical settings, not by some sleazeballs in a basement. These guys are lucky that they didn't kill anyone.

Heck, I think piercing anything should have to be done in a doctor's office by medical professionals if it is to be done at all. Perhaps that would discourage people from disfiguring themselves.; 4/2/06, 4:14 PM
Ann Althouse said...: CB: I'm just examining the ideas. I think it probably should be illegal and not just because there happens to currently be a statute making it prosecutable in this instance. Suppose there were no statute, would you support enacting a statute to make this illegal, or would you say, these people are idiots but leave them alone?; 4/2/06, 5:30 PM
Gaius Arbo said...: I think the people who carried this out are dangerous. The people who volunteered are pathetic.; 4/2/06, 6:19 PM