Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

No. All forms of body modifications have had their own terms which are clearly recognized as NOT mutilation since literally forever. We just came up with a term that encompasses all of them since, in the West, it tends to be the same establishments that perform multiple different types of body modification. It's easier to have one term.

According to whom? The extremist communities who engage in them? I'm sorry, but I don't really view their - kind of by definition - fringe opinions as holding all that much weight here.

The fact that this guy might call what he's done to himself "body modification"...



Really doesn't change the fact that, by any reasonable definition of the word, he has mutilated himself, not only in terms of appearance, but likely function as well (not having a nose - and all of the lovely pathogen filtering elements that go with it - can potentially have certain health repercussions, after all).

Well, it IS relative. It DOES potentially fall under either term, depending on circumstance, just like sex versus rape.

It's still subjective even judging by function. There's two ways we can judge function. One is human perception, and the other is nature (biological, as you say).

An individual human's perception of function is subjective. According to me, my reproductive organs function BETTER now that I'm fixed.

And nature? Well, nature doesn't give a ****. Nature has wiped out nearly all life on earth multiple times. Every creature nature has ever created eventually dies out because it was stops functioning. There is no "value" to function in nature.

I've always found it hilarious when people say something "goes against nature." Nature is nonsentient, and it doesn't care. There is nothing to go against.

Like I said, to the person being willingly fixed, there is no loss. It actually has much more benefit with much less harm than vision correction does, in many ways. Yet I bet you don't think of that as mutilation, since you want it, and it doesn't get you riled up about your politics.

Sterilization in fact prevents numerous types of harm, from both other forms of contraception and childbearing. It even decreases certain cancer risks.

But even if it didn't, it still isn't "mutilation" when done consensually. Humans judge function however they want, and nature doesn't care.

And again, if we're going to go this asinine "everything's relative, maaaaaannn" route, then we might as well just throw the word out of the freaking dictionary, because it no longer has any meaning whatsoever. You've literally rendered it meaningless, because you can just infinitely keep shifting goal posts around, depending on any random whackjob's "perception." :roll:

Like it or not, nature IS the baseline from which we judge form and function, because nature is what keeps us freaking alive under normal circumstances. Human perception is fallible at best, outright insane at worst, and often works actively counter to the goal of preserving life and health for that exact reason. It doesn't make any sense to use that as the metric instead.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

According to whom? The extremist communities who engage in them? I'm sorry, but I don't really view their - kind of by definition - fringe opinions as holding all that much weight here.

The fact that this guy might call what he's done to himself "body modification"...

Really doesn't change the fact that, by any reasonable definition of the word, he has mutilated himself, not only in terms of appearance, but likely function as well (not having a nose - and all of the lovely pathogen filtering elements that go with it - can potentially have certain health repercussions, after all).

Extremists, huh? So I guess none of the girls in your family have their ears pierced, and you're not circumcised, or you fight against these routine American practices? Cutting off a body part is a pretty extreme modification, dude.

Every society on the entire planet has practised many different forms of body modification, always. Including ours. Including your own family.

Some of us just do it for ourselves rather than some kind of social mandate.

And again, if we're going to go this asinine "everything's relative, maaaaaannn" route, then we might as well just throw the word out of the freaking dictionary, because it no longer has any meaning whatsoever. You've literally rendered it meaningless, because you can just infinitely keep shifting goal posts around, depending on any random whackjob's "perception." :roll:

Like it or not, nature IS the baseline from which we judge form and function, because nature is what keeps us freaking alive under normal circumstances. Human perception is fallible at best, outright insane at worst, and often works actively counter to the goal of preserving life and health for that exact reason. It doesn't make any sense to use that as the metric instead.

Well, it is. We use different words for exactly the same procedures. Sometimes it's "mutilation" and sometimes it's "modification," and I've given you many examples to that effect. They are relative words as they are used in reality.

"Nature" is a baseline of how things SOMETIMES start. "Nature" does things slightly differently for each and every living creature on earth. Not all humans have 5 fingers, or 32 teeth (I don't -- I have 29), or two eyes, or legs, or gonads, or, or, or... Nature does it differently every time, and nature doesn't care.

And then eventually, "nature" simply kills the entire species off all together. Eventually, it will kill absolutely everything in the solar system when the sun implodes.

Nature doesn't "keep us alive." Nature, at this point in time, has not yet killed us all.

Frankly, who gives a **** about the baseline of nature. It doesn't give a **** about us, and it doesn't care what we do.

How is the state of nature better than what we might invent? If it leads to greater happiness and less suffering to the person doing it -- which elective sterilization does -- it's good. Nature couldn't care less.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

To recap, surgical sterilization fits basically all necessary criteria to fit any given definition of the word "mutilation."

It is A) a form of physical damage or alteration to the body, which B) causes harm to the form and function of that same body with no tangible medical benefit, while being both C) permanent, and D) doing so to a degree which can reasonably be called "severe."

That was a lot of work to establish the fact that it is still only your opinion based on criteria that you want to matter. Anybody that read this who is "objective", understands English, thinks "logically" and knows what a "fact" actually is you just proved that you have the "OPINION" it's mutilation but it most certainly is not a fact. You are free to have that opinion though.

 

[GEIxBattleRifle]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

And again, if we're going to go this asinine "everything's relative, maaaaaannn" route, then we might as well just throw the word out of the freaking dictionary, because it no longer has any meaning whatsoever. You've literally rendered it meaningless, because you can just infinitely keep shifting goal posts around, depending on any random whackjob's "perception." :roll:.

I never was a real fan of Relativism and for good reason also.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

I never was a real fan of Relativism and for good reason also.

Yeah, same here. I think more times than not it is used as an excuse to get out of things that bother the person using it. It seems to also be used quite often to defend the indefensible and to declare that whatever is being talked about is nothing but opinion and therefore whatever bogus and usually stupid position that is being proposed is legitimate.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

And again, if we're going to go this asinine "everything's relative, maaaaaannn" route, then we might as well just throw the word out of the freaking dictionary, because it no longer has any meaning whatsoever. You've literally rendered it meaningless, because you can just infinitely keep shifting goal posts around, depending on any random whackjob's "perception." :roll:

What's funny is you are the only one trying to throw out the dictionary. You posted a link from it and then ignore it trying to form it to only what you want. Good luck but it's not going to work on anybody that isn't biased, the only people that will accept it are those that share your opinion and also want to make up their own criteria and force it on others. It's not working.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

That was a lot of work to establish the fact that it is still only your opinion based on criteria that you want to matter. Anybody that read this who is "objective", understands English, thinks "logically" and knows what a "fact" actually is you just proved that you have the "OPINION" it's mutilation but it most certainly is not a fact.

Clearly, a lot of people here are either incapable of being "logical," and "objective", or simply flat out refuse to be. We wouldn't be having this conversation, otherwise.

In any case, the definition stands as it is. That much is self-evident. "Mutilation" is "physical injury, degrading the appearance or function of the living body."

Your, or anyone else's, refusal to acknowledge the definition for what it is doesn't change that definition. It simply renders you incorrect in using it.

You are free to have that opinion though.

It's the other way around. Factually, surgical sterilization fits the dictionary and text-book definitions of "mutilation."

You are free to hold the opinion that it does not. It doesn't change the fact that you're wrong, however. :shrug:

What's funny is you are the only one trying to throw out the dictionary. You posted a link from it and then ignore it trying to form it to only what you want. Good luck but it's not going to work on anybody that isn't biased, the only people that will accept it are those that share your opinion and also want to make up their own criteria and force it on others. It's not working.

Clearly, "breaking it down, Barney-style" was insufficient. :roll:

According to the definition, mutilation is A, B, C, and D. According to simple reality, surgical mutilation is also A, B, C, and D.

You do the math.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

Clearly, a lot of people here are either incapable of being "logical," and "objective", or simply flat out refuse to be. We wouldn't be having this conversation, otherwise.

In any case, the definition stands as it is. That much is self-evident. "Mutilation" is "physical injury, degrading the appearance or function of the living body."

Your, or anyone else's, refusal to acknowledge the definition for what it is doesn't change that definition. It simply renders you incorrect in using it.



It's the other way around. Factually, surgical sterilization fits the dictionary and text-book definitions of "mutilation."

You are free to hold the opinion that it does not. It doesn't change the fact that you're wrong, however. :shrug:



Clearly, "breaking it down, Barney-style" was insufficient. :roll:

According to the definition, mutilation is A, B, C, and D. According to simple reality, surgical mutilation is also A, B, C, and D.

You do the math.

Your math is made up and based on your opinion and not facts. You already proved that. The link you provided to the dictionary is all one needs to see you posted your opinion. The dictionary is not based on YOUR provided reasoning whatsoever. The criteria of A B C and D is not based on your OPINION of A,B,C,D. You are trying to base it on your own subjective opinions and not included in the actual definition in anyway. That's the best part. You made all this sensationalized claims and that where you failed and went wrong. You went in to great detail about why YOU feel its mutilation but again the dictionary definition doesn't use your criteria, feelings and opinions. Repeating your criteria and opinion only further shows how your statements are indeed opinion and not facts. Your own source proves it's just your opinion. Keep trying but your own link already proved your claims to be nothing more than opinion. This is why you are so desperately struggling now to support your claim and it's not selling. All you have is the ability to repeat your own subjective criteria and feelings and NOT the actual definition. You will continue to fail because the definition isn't going to change based on your feelings.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&a mp;amp;a mp;amp;a mp;amp;a mp

Your math is made up and based on your opinion and not facts. You already proved that. The link you provided to the dictionary is all one needs to see you posted your opinion. The dictionary is not based on YOUR provided reasoning whatsoever. The criteria of A B C and D is not based on your OPINION of A,B,C,D. You are trying to base it on your own subjective opinions and not included in the actual definition in anyway. That's the best part. You made all this sensationalized claims and that where you failed and went wrong. You went in to great detail about why YOU feel its mutilation but again the dictionary definition doesn't use your criteria, feelings and opinions. Repeating your criteria and opinion only further shows how your statements are indeed opinion and not facts. Your own source proves it's just your opinion. Keep trying but your own link already proved your claims to be nothing more than opinion. This is why you are so desperately struggling now to support your claim and it's not selling. All you have is the ability to repeat your own subjective criteria and feelings and NOT the actual definition. You will continue to fail because the definition isn't going to change based on your feelings.

Lol. Okay. :roll:

Is it an "opinion" that "Mutilation" is a "form of physical injury which degrades the appearance and function of the living body?"

No, that's the literal, objective, text-book definition of the word. There isn't a single "opinion" involved there.

Alright, so, clearly you can't be you can't be talking about that. Where else could this elusive "opinion" be then?

Is it an "opinion" that surgical sterilization is a form of physical injury?

No, it is not. That is a fact.

Is it an "opinion" that the surgery in question removes reproductive functionality from the organs it injures?

Nope! That's also a fact.

By all means, Windu, feel free to point these so called "subjective opinions" out for me. I'm not seeing them.

Are you sure you know what these words you're throwing around actually mean? :roll:

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Lol. Okay. :roll:

Is it an "opinion" that "Mutilation" is a "form of physical injury which degrades the appearance and function of the living body?"

No, that's the literal, objective, text-book definition of the word. There isn't a single "opinion" involved there.

Alright, so, clearly you can't be you can't be talking about that. Where else could this elusive "opinion" be then?

Is it an "opinion" that surgical sterilization is a form of physical injury?

No, it is not. That is a fact.

Is it an "opinion" that the surgery in question removes reproductive functionality from the organs it injures?

Nope! That's also a fact.

By all means, Windu, feel free to point these so called "subjective opinions" out for me. I'm not seeing them.

Are you sure you know what these words you're throwing around actually mean? :roll:

That's easy, where in the definition is your criteria? You fail again cowboy HAHAHA Like I said, repeating YOUR criteria and not using the actual definition won't make your opinion true. Keep trying, it's funny.We get it, you want your opinion and criteria to be fact, it just simply isn't. It's like you don't realize you posted the definition in your op, you did and it proves you are stating your opinion.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mu

That's easy, where in the definition is your criteria? You fail again cowboy HAHAHA Like I said, repeating YOUR criteria and not using the actual definition won't make your opinion true. Keep trying, it's funny.

Please tell me that question was meant as a joke.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "M u

Are you sure you know what these words you're throwing around actually mean? :roll:

That's easy, where in the definition is your criteria? You fail again cowboy HAHAHA Like I said, repeating YOUR criteria and not using the actual definition won't make your opinion true. Keep trying, it's funny.We get it, you want your opinion and criteria to be fact, it just simply isn't. It's like you don't realize you posted the definition in your op, you did and it proves you are stating your opinion.

Please tell me that question was meant as a joke.

I rest my case. :roll:

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of &amp

I rest my case. :roll:

Translation: you have no case.
I asked you a question why are you running.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of &am p

Translation: you have no case.
I asked you a question why are you running.

Ummm... No, you didn't. You rattled off a couple of non-sequitur red herrings like a lunatic, because you clearly don't have the slightest idea how to even begin to address the issue at hand here in a rational or systematic manner, and think simply being loud and obnoxious is an acceptable substitute.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

No, you didn't. You ranted like a lunatic, because you clearly don't have the slightest idea how to even begin to address the issue at hand here in a rational or systematic manner.

Transition: you are still ruining and now you are simply posting lies. I clearly asked you a question, can you answer or will the melt down in your post continue?

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Transition: you are still ruining and now you are simply posting lies. I clearly asked you a question, can you answer or not internet tough guy hahaha.

Layla... No one's "running" from anything. The simple fact of the matter is that this so called "question"...

That's easy, where in the definition is your criteria?

... (and I'm only even calling it that out of charity - it's honestly more of a non-sequitur 'outburst') can't be answered, because it doesn't make any sense. It's meaningless.

The rest of your post reads like the transcribed audio from an insane asylum.

Pull yourself together, start THINKING instead of emoting, and maybe I'll consider taking you seriously.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Layla...

​

This "question" (and I'm only even calling it that out of charity - it's honestly more of a non-sequitur 'outburst') can't be answered, because it doesn't make any sense. It's meaningless.

Pull yourself together, start THINKING instead of emoting, and maybe I won't simply dismiss what you have to say.

Translation: you are still running. Personal attacks won't save your OP from failing and being exposed for the falsehood it is.

Thank you for proving I did ask you a question and you posted a lie. Now that is out of the way please proceed to answer the question. It's a VERY simple question, "where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?"

Simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Translation: you are still running. Personal attacks won't save your OP from failing and being exposed for the falsehood it is.

Thank you for proving I did ask you a question and you posted a lie. Now that is out of the way please proceed to answer the question. It's a VERY simple question, "where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?"

Simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true.

"Why do brown cows say bark, layla?
HAHAHAHSHAAHSHSHAH! Why you sscared, cowboy? That's just your opinion!

Answer me! Stop running!"


The above is your posting style in a nutshell. It's also the reason why I'm not going to respond to you, until you actual demonstrate that your posts are worth the effort.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

"Why do brown cows say bark, layla?
HAHAHAHSHAAHSHSHAH! Why you sscared, cowboy? That's just your opinion!

Answer me! Stop running!"


The above is your posting style in a nutshell.

Still running huh? That's what I thought.

It's a VERY simple question, "where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Still running huh? That's what I thought.

It's a VERY simple question, "where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

Again, WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

Can you not freaking read? Is that the problem?

It's right in front of your face! Everything you're asking here was spelled out, in detail, in the OP, and in the post directly before you asked the question.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Again, WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

Can you not freaking read? It's right in front of your face!

There's nothing to explain, its a very simple question. You can answer it or keep running. My guess is you will do the later because you know the answer exposes the falsehood of your failed claims. It's funny seeing you get angry over your claims getting exposed.

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

There's nothing to explain, its a very simple question. You can answer it or keep running. My guess is you will do the later because you know the answer exposes the falsehood of your failed claims.

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

Layla... This is the definition.

"An act of physical injury which degrades the appearance or function of a living body"

The "criteria" are physical injury, and degradation to appearance and function.

Again, can you simply not read what's right in front of you? The criteria are literally part of the very definition you're asking about.

How are you not able to get this on your own? Again, your "question" doesn't even make sense.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Layla... This is the definition.

"An act of physical injury which degrades the appearance or function of a living body"

The "criteria" are physical injury, and degradation to appearance and function.

Again, can you simply not read what's right in front of you? The criteria are literally part of the definition!

How are you not able to get this on your own? Again, your "question" doesn't even make sense.

Ok so you can't answer, we get it, thank you. Let me know when you can answer. Your opinion is noted and the definition proves it's not fact.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

Ok so you can't answer, we get it, thank you. Let me know when you can answer. Your opinion is noted and the definition proves it's not fact.

What "definition," Lalya? The one I just proved not only supports my criteria, but actually includes them as a part of the definition itself? :roll:


So far, all we've demonstrated here is that you seem to have difficulty seeing and wrapping your head what's actually on the page in front of you. You also don't seem to know the meaning of the word "opinion."

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

What "definition," Lalya? The one I just proved actually supports my criteria? :roll:

No it doesn't, we get you think it does but it simply doesn't. This is why you can't answer my question. Until you can you got nothing. Here's a hint you never will be able too either because the definition in fact does not support your subjective criteria. If it did you could simply answer my question and show us, but you can't.