GC: Can you explain why a neopenis/phalloplasty is not a penis? If a man is something with a penis, then if a man removes all of his genitals in surgery, why will he still remain a man after surgery?

submitted by GarageCar from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DogeWalker 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

Hypothetically, let's say I lost an eyeball in a tragic basketweaving accident.

Doctors offer to create a replacement eyeball for me, using soft tissue from my forearm.

My replacement eyeball is literally an eyeball. Do you agree, u/GarageCar ?

[–]SnowAssMan 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

A flawed analogy. Reconstructive surgery & "SRS" aren't the same thing. Trans-men didn't lose their penis in an accident. There is nothing actually wrong with their sexual organs the way they are, as they function exactly the way they were meant to function.

[–]DogeWalker 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thanks, but I already understand that SRS and reconstructive surgery aren't the same thing. That's why it's merely an analogy... it is somewhat similar, in that an organ is being assembled from different tissue. If you have a better, more apt analogy, let's hear it.

[–]SnowAssMan 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Analogies are flawed by definition? "SRS" is far more like a cosmetic procedure than a reconstructive one. It's like the difference between getting breast augmentation surgery even though there is nothing wrong with your breasts vs. getting breast reconstructive surgery after having undergone a double mastectomy due to being diagnosed with breast cancer. The former would be a more accurate comparison to "SRS" than the latter.

[–]GarageCar[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think the eye analogy is very good, it is the exact same case of taking a different tissue to create an organ (an eye), the same thing that happens with the neopenis

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Back to the eye analogy, though -- an eye is a special sensory organ (some would say it's actually part of the brain). You can't construct a functional eye from forearm tissue. Full stop.

Simulacra are simulacra; organics are organics.

[–]GarageCar[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

That's a very good analogy walker, this is where my issue begins, if you lost your eye in a tragic accident, and the doctors took the tissue from your forearm and made a neoeye that looks exactly like an eye, can not see things but has nerves enough you can feel things with it, how is the neoeye different from the eye of a completely blind human who just can't see anything with it and what makes the neoeye not an eye? Because the eye of a completely blind human can not see things, but is still an eye, if we pluck that out and put it in a jar, it's still an eye. Why is the neoeye created from the tissue of the forearm, etc any different from the plucked out eye of a blind human that can not function as much as the neoeye can not function?

[–]DogeWalker 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

So you agree that my neoeye is an eye, then?

[–]GarageCar[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I believe a neoeye is an eye, but if I'm wrong and it isn't an eye, then please convince me of why that is

Why is the neoeye created from the tissue of the forearm, etc any different from the plucked out eye of a blind human that can not function as much as the neoeye can not function?

[–]DogeWalker 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I believe a neoeye is an eye, but if I'm wrong and it isn't an eye, then please convince me of why that is

No, I'm not going to try and convince you. If you honestly believe that anything called an eyeball is an eyeball, then I am not sure what could convince you otherwise.

ETA: If I am wrong and anything called an eyeball is an eyeball, then please convince me of why that is.

[–]GarageCar[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I didn't mean anything called an eyeball is an eyeball, I meant;

How is the neoeye different from the eye of a completely blind human who just can't see anything with it and what makes the neoeye not an eye? Because the eye of a completely blind human can not see things, but is still an eye, if we pluck that out and put it in a jar, it's still an eye. Why is the neoeye created from the tissue of the forearm, etc any different from the plucked out eye of a blind human that can not function as much as the neoeye can not function?

Answering these questions will definitely convince me otherwise

[–]DogeWalker 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How is a tractor different from the eye of a completely blind human? What makes the tractor not an eye? Because the eye of a completely blind human can not see things, but is still an eye, if we plow the fields with it, it's still an eye. Why is the tractor any different from the plucked out eye of a blind human that can not function as much as the tractor can not function?

Answering these questions will definitely convince me otherwise

[–]littlerbear 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because an eye is not just something that looks like an eye. It's something that has the anatomical properties of an eye. If one can't see out of one's eye, that's a problem. If one can't see out of their arm skin, that's not a problem. Even a blind person's eye is still an eye - it's an eye that's not functioning properly but it's still an eye. A ball of arm skin is still a ball of arm skin and nowhere close to being an eye.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Why are you working so hard to try to convince anyone that it is the same as a biological penis?

Do you have, pardon the phrase, skin in this game, so to speak?

[–]GarageCar[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not really convincing anyone that a neopenis is a penis, I believed it was the case, and wanted to know where I'm going wrong in my belief