NYC Plastic Surgeon Says He's Training US Army Docs to Do Facial Feminization Surgeries on Male Troops

submitted by MarkTwainiac from self.GenderCritical

A NYC plastic surgeon who specializes in feminizing the faces of men, and giving men other sex-obscuring procedures like tracheal shaves as well, claims he has been training US Army surgeons in such procedures coz "there is a higher demand" for them amongst military men than amongst the general public.

The male entitlement of this and the misplaced priorities and misuse of taxpayer funds by military doctors is appalling.

Medical doctors in the military should be focusing on learning health care procedures and treatments that can benefit troops across the board, not catering to those male soldiers who are sexual fetishists and covetous of being female.

Are these doctors spending a corresponding amount of time and energy learning surgical techniques to help female soldiers with female-specific conditions like endometriosis?

Are they learning the latest plastic surgery procedures and methods to help soldiers of both sexes who've been disfigured by explosives and incendiary devices? To help all the soldiers who've lost limbs, suffered traumatic brain injuries, suffered hearing and vision loss, and have been left to live with crippling and painful nerve damage?

Since when has it been in military doctors' remit to perform cosmetic surgeries on men to help them more closely resemble their fantasy selves? Why the fuck should public funds obtained from taxpayers be used to pay for this sort of shit?

BTW, I saw this story the other day on a small website, but didn't post it coz I wasn't sure of the veracity. Now the NY Post has picked it up. Biased as the Post and other Murdoch media are, they do legit, well-sourced journalism.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/21/military-looking-to-offer-feminization-surgery-to-trans-troops/

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]our_team_is_winning 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Literally an army of Bradley-Chelsea Mannings????

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

So they're all going to have Blaire White/Kim Karsashian fake-face?

Imagine having your door kicked in by a bunch of troops and you're too distracted by their uncanny valley faces to do anything, giving them the upper hand. I wonder what Sun Tzu's take on this would be.

[–]eddyelric 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

No wonder why ex-military men are such sissies...

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

This is a waste of taxpayer money. Isn’t it already expensive enough that they require their hormones while in the military? Ffs should be paid for by their own money

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

The statement that its more common amongst military men then then general public is super interesting because Blanchard has been quite open that people with autogynephilia tend to come from military and it backgrounds

[–]grixit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Is there an Alan Alda facepalm?

[–]peaked2020 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

funding sex changes and maybe adam's apple removal is understandable but breast implants and facial surgery is ridiculous. women with say, wider jaws, don't get free surgery to change that regardless of how it affects their mental health. saying trans women should get that done for free implies that these features are only for men, not women, except born women who get them need to shut up while trans women dont...

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

funding sex changes and maybe adam's apple removal is understandable breast implants and facial surgery is ridiculous.

Can you explain why you think funding some of these cosmetic surgeries is "understandable" for the military to do these at taxpayers' expense but others are not?

Also, there are no surgical procedures, no matter how extensive, that result in or can be characterized as "sex changes." Cosmetic surgeries to alter genitals do not change anyone's sex.

Military surgeons and HCPs should know this full well. In the era of modern warfare, lots of men involved in combat and conflict have had their dicks and balls blown off. This hasn't changed any of these men's sex.

[–]peaked2020 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Because there’s a difference between a surgery that aims to produce a different sexual organ and a cosmetic surgery that’s just supposed to make the person more attractive. That doesn’t go away simply because it’s not the same as a born organ.

Having a certain brow ridge or lip shape is something that happens to born women too and they don’t be t surgery. There is a difference between a trans woman wanting a nose job and a trans woman wanting to have their dick removed. Acting like these are exactly the same is absurd.

This is where radfems lose a lot of people, being so anti-trans that they take a reasonable argument and shift it to the unreasonable.

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

Because there’s a difference between a surgery that aims to produce a different sexual organ and a cosmetic surgery that’s just supposed to make the person more attractive.

There is no surgery that is aiming to produce sexual organs (at least yet), it is only making cosmetic changes to look similar to a sexual organ, and that is it. This surgery is aimed to make person's body more attractive to themselves.

and shift it to the unreasonable.

Unreasonable is to do those surgeries on tax payers cost, while banning women's health issue initiatives and making abortions outlawed. PCOS women suferring for a long time now, but they are not helped on tax payers money, and PCOS not even researched by any country, it is mostly done by charity organizations. Unreasonable is that women who survived acid attacks or "are ugly" or "with almost no breasts" can not do such surgeries even on their own cost often enough, not even saying about doing that on tax payers cost, and here you want same surgeries but for men who want to look like a woman you want it for free (on tax payers cost).

Unreasonable is to say that after removal of adam's apple and putting breast implants is "sex change" and will make that straight person "lesbian" and give them legit right to terrorize lesbians - which is homophobia, as sexuality is innate and lesbian even if will want to get aroused by them - will not be able to, just physically. And yet, lesbians are "the wrong" and almost lost all of their spaces and events (except underground ones or closed ones). And no one is giving any help to them on tax payers cost.

That is what is unreasonable and must be adressed. Taxpayers money should go on surgeries to people who will die if not receive surgeries, not on making someone feel a bit better in their own mind.

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You didn't answer my question, which - I repeat - was

Can you explain why you think funding some of these cosmetic surgeries is "understandable" for the military to do these at taxpayers' expense but others are not?

You said

There is a difference between a trans woman wanting a nose job and a trans woman wanting to have their dick removed. Acting like these are exactly the same is absurd.

This is where radfems lose a lot of people, being so anti-trans that they take a reasonable argument and shift it to the unreasonable.

Why is it unreasonable to ask whether the military should perform non-necessary nose jobs, dick removal surgeries and other cosmetic procedures on male members of the armed services at taxpayers' expense?

BTW, neither I nor anyone else said all these surgeries are "exactly the same." They're clearly different. What they have in common is that there is no medical or therapeutic reason for any of them. They are all elective, luxury, fashion accessory surgeries meant to meet the individualistic, narcissistic sexual desires of males with particular paraphilias and proclivities.

What national security aims are met by performing any or all such surgeries on military men? Why should taxpayers be funding this?