Castration among futurists

http://www.betterhum...03/20/5117.aspx

Mark Plus first brought this to my attention in a post some time ago, and now I find another report of castration in this blog entry. How common is this practice among futurists?

I would imagine it is not very common, if only because it represents such an extreme method for reducing biological imperatives. In a community as small as that of Transhumanism however, even a few instances would be statistically significant. From reading the thread you provided, and just by thinking about this as a transhumanist, I can see that the castration issue is really just indicative of a some common features of transhuman psychology, ie the desire to transcend/master our biology.

Transhumanists possess a world view that is so divergent, so outside of the mainstream, that true intellectual intimacy is virtually impossible 99.999% of the time. So women, at least for me, become play mates. I do not mean this in a condescending way, as much as I mean that interaction with the opposite sex generally remains light hearted -- and -- separated from one's intellectual sphere. As one who has return to the dating scene, this can be a frustrating reality. And it is a reality. Most of us possess extremely serious minds, and the overwhelming majority of humanity could never entertain this seriousness (go look at all of the 20somethings on myspace and see what how many people put down molecular biology or neuroscience as one of their interests [wis] ). Being pragmatic about the situation, it is better to remain "in the closet" about one's higher level beliefs.

So, I can certainly understand the imperative to stifle the sexual drive. It is both extremely pleasurable and extremely frustrating. If the frustration takes over and dominates the pleasure, then solutions will be sought, catastration being one of them.

I also think it is important that we don't place value judgements on individuals who decide to go forward with such a procedure. I am a strong proponent of morphological freedom, so if someone wishes to castrate himself, then...good luck with that. [:o]

The real problem with castration, from my perspective, is that it is an irrevocable act. You can't [airquote] uncastrate yourself [/airquote]. As such, I don't know if I could ever reach a level of conviction sufficient to go forward with such an action.

I also think it is important that we don't place value judgements on individuals who decide to go forward with such a procedure.  I am a strong proponent of morphological freedom, so if someone wishes to castrate himself, then...good luck with that.  [:o]

I hope I didn't convey a value judgement implicitly, for future reference in this thread, that was not my intent.

I wasn't implying that you were, Cosmos (I know you better than that). Yet, because of the severity of such an act, and because of its demasculizing nature, I could see others responding with disgust or ridicule. I don't feel personally that such attitudes are appropriate or *enlightened* (admittedly, this is a value judgement on my part ).

There was an article in last month's Details about this, if anyone wanted to read a little further into it, though it didn't go into too much detail...basically just superficial portraits of some people who had chosen to be castrated.

Why stop at the gonads when you can take out the amygdala too.. In fact take out most of the limbic system with the exception of the hippocampus. That should do the trick of eliminating all emotion, drive and other "redundant" cognitive processes and propel one directly into the future..

I wasn't implying that you were, Cosmos (I know you better than that). Yet, because of the severity of such an act, and because of its demasculizing nature, I could see others responding with disgust or ridicule. I don't feel personally that such attitudes are appropriate or *enlightened* (admittedly, this is a value judgement on my part wink.gif ).

*responds with disgust and ridicule* WTF! Talk about alienating behavior... if this is ever in any way associated with the longevity/immortality movement you can kiss public support goodbye.

if this is ever in any way associated with the longevity/immortality movement you can kiss public support goodbye.

Not necessarily. Some people become so serious about religion that they become celibate, ascetic, etc., becoming monks or hermits. Yet people rightly view these individuals, for the most part, as a fringe, one that shouldn't reflect on the mainstream segment of the same religion. I've even heard of castration among individuals seeking higher enlightenment and trying to deny the flesh while embracing the spirit, etc.

I think the initial yuck factor will turn people off and hurt the movement in the short term (only slightly, I suspect), but in the longer term it will just be another one of those things people have to snicker about, and then move on.

Just how much negative impact it would have on public opinion is debatable, but I'm sure we can all agree the impact would indeed be negative. That's why I feel good about responding with disgust and ridicule, and you should too.

Think about the religion of Islam and the radical suicide bombing extremists. Obviously the extremists don't represent the entire religion, but the association with terrorism has made a certain large percentage of people think worse of Muslims as a whole. Not the "enlightened" people, but unfortunately they don't represent the majority.

So do we want to depend on people to be "enlightened" enough to decide the people castrating themselves are on the fringe and don't represent us? Or would we do better to appeal to the unenlightened masses by offering no support to practices like castration. I think the latter makes a whole lot more practical sense. Maybe supporting people's individual freedoms to express themselves through radical body modification is ideal in principle, but is it worth it if it could slow down our progress? No.

Edited by funkodyssey, 22 March 2006 - 03:48 PM.

Not sure why these kinds of personal decisions would ever need to be referenced that much in public discussions of bigger issues anyway. Because then we could reference all the reasons why people of the same group don't make these kinds of decisions. Like Cybert himself said, the Singularity will make this particular choice moot. Another reason might be, as Resonte indicates, castration defeats the very purpose for which it is intended. Reference the apparent, more general fact that this group will find more cognitions and behaviors self-defeating than any other group.

Think about the religion of Islam and the radical suicide bombing extremists. Obviously the extremists don't represent the entire religion, but the association with terrorism has made a certain large percentage of people think worse of Muslims as a whole. Not the "enlightened" people, but unfortunately they don't represent the majority.

From a libertarian standpoint, there's a big difference between fundamentalist Islam and its propensity for spawning suicide bombers in today's political climate, and religions/philosophies that embrace extreme asceticism (to the point of castration, etc.).

The difference has to do with the right/freedom to make choices that fundamentally only really affect one's self and immediate family, and the right/freedom to make choices that affect others' lives and rights/freedoms.

Thankfully, the notion is being given little support from the medical community on account of the rationale provided by would be castrationists.

Arch Sex Behav. 2004 Oct;33(5):433-42.

New age eunuchs: motivation and rationale for voluntary castration.

Wassersug RJ, Zelenietz SA, Squire GF.

Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. tadpole@dal.ca

We used a survey posted on the Internet to explore the motivation of men who are interested in being castrated. Out of 134 respondents, 23 (17%) reported already having been castrated. The 104 (78%) individuals who said they had not been castrated were asked why they wanted to be castrated and why they had not actualized that desire. They were given multiple-choice answers to select from. The major reason (selected by 40% of respondents) for desiring castration was to achieve a "eunuch calm" and freedom from sexual urges; however, a large proportion (approximately 30%) of respondents found fantasies about being castrated sexually exciting and a similar percentage desired castration for the "cosmetic" appearance it achieved (which we interpret to mean scrotal removal along with an orchiectomy). This high interest in castration as either a sexual stimulus (a fetish) or a cosmetic enhancement was unexpected and contrasted with the more classically stated motivation for voluntary castration in the psychiatric literature, i.e., libido control and transsexualism. Internet discussion groups that serve these men may encourage them to act out their castration fantasies. Alternately, Internet discussions may give them a displacement outlet for their fantasies and decrease the risk of castration by nonmedically qualified "street-cutters" or by self-mutilation. Forty percent of our respondents claimed that they would have an orchiectomy, if it were cheap, safe, and simple. A quarter wanted to try chemical castration first, but 40% were embarrassed to talk to their doctors about their interest in castration. Information now available on the Internet provides these men with increasingly easy access to street-cutters and directions on how to perform surgical castrations, putting them at risk of permanent injury and disability. Physicians need to be aware of these risks.

Although the following provides a psychoanalytic perspective of the desire to be castrated amongst transsexuals it may relate to some of the underlying psychology with non-transexuals too:

Encephale. 2002 Jan-Feb;28(1):59-64.

[Was Snow White a transsexual?]

[Article in French]

Michel A, Mormont C.

Universite de Liege, Service de Psychologie clinique, boulevard du Rectorat, B 33, 4000 Liege, Belgique.

The Rorschach Ink Blot test is considered to be an essential analytical instrument when studying the personalities of individuals presenting identity disorders, in particular, in the context of a sex change request. Nevertheless, there exist less than 20 studies of transsexualism utilising the Rorschach since the creation of this diagnostic category in 1953. This research has mostly concerned itself with relations between psychopathology and transsexualism. Practically non-existent are studies investigating the psychological conditions that permit, shape or induce sex change requests in individuals. Transsexuals request the removal of their genitals through mutilation surgery, which can be seen as subjects literally crying out to be castrated. This request is all the more surprising given that castration, in psychoanalytic terms, is considered to be the most severe punishment that an individual (woman or man) can be threatened with. Therefore, we asked ourselves which psychic conditions could motivate such as request. Based on any earlier study where answers (some explicit, others symbolic) given by sex-change applicants tested on the Rorschach were analysed, results seemed to suggest a counter-phobic attitude underlying sex-reassignment requests (28). According to these hypotheses, the fear of castration (banal as such) can only be overcome through the active search for castration itself. In opting for castration, the transsexual puts an end to the states of anxious waiting that are dominated by feelings of the incertitude and unpredictability of an eventual castration. Once obtained, the threat it constituted disappears, and with it so does the fear. Thus, by taking this active and voluntary step, the subject is no longer exposed to an imminent danger in a passive manner. This in itself creates a great feeling of relief, if not of actual pleasure in the subject (28). In this article, we postulated in a purely speculative manner, the existence of one or several modalities in the transsexual dynamics. Nevertheless, one can ask oneself about the possibility of a request based on a desire rather than on a defense, or even on the existence of a defensive process diametrically opposed to the counter-phobic attitude and which, instead of actively provoking the dreaded reality, would privilege its avoidance and the search of passivity. This latter hypothesis has the advantage of being rather easy to explore with the Rorschach because, according to Exner, the predominance of passive compared to active human movement responses (which he terms the Snow White Syndrome) indicates the propensity to escape into passive fantasies and the tendency to avoid the initiative for behaviour or decision-making, if other people can do it in the subject's place (12). Our results largely confirmed the hypothesis of the existence of an opposite mechanism, as a third of subjects (n = 26) presented Snow White Syndrome. According to Exner, these transsexuals are typically characterized by hiding into a world of make believe, avoiding all responsibility, as well as any decision-making. This passivity in our Snow White Syndrome group was all the more remarkable in that, on the whole, it infiltrated into all the movement responses and seemed to define a rigid style of thinking and mental elaboration, in addition to a suggestive content of passivity. However, this condition cannot be associated with a general lack of dynamism or energy. In fact, the treatment of information, which provides data concerning the motivation to treat a stimulus field of the stimulus--whether this concerns the capture (L) of the stimulus or the elaboration (DQ+) of the response--displayed a sufficient amount of motivation. Furthermore, internal resources (EA) were considerable and were brought into play whenever it was necessary to adopt a behaviour or make a decision. Furthermore, based on these Rorschach findings, we note that in transsexuals with Snow White Syndrome, there is a stereotyped tendency to shy away from difficulties by seeking refuge in realistic representations (but that lack in variety), which could be materialized by actions, but where the initiative is delegated to others. These transsexuals appear to shy away from the difficulties of life by seeking refuge into a world of fantasy, which they fill with the representations borrowed from reality (rather than fantasy) and consequently that are liable to be transposed, if necessary, back into reality. Therefore, one can better understand why they shun away from the deceiving reality that their physical sex represents, into the satisfying dream where they possess the genitals of the opposite sex, that is, a perfectly real organ, no longer the result of the subject's fantasy world.

Thanks Prometheus, I'm not hungry anymore. [sick]

That'll show you..

From a libertarian standpoint, there's a big difference between fundamentalist Islam and its propensity for spawning suicide bombers in today's political climate, and religions/philosophies that embrace extreme asceticism (to the point of castration, etc.).

The difference has to do with the right/freedom to make choices that fundamentally only really affect one's self and immediate family, and the right/freedom to make choices that affect others' lives and rights/freedoms.

There you go again with that enlightened thinking we talked about. You don't have to convince me or anyone else on this board. You have to convince the average joe. Average joe hears the word castration and runs for the hills. Anti-aging progress depends on public support. People castrating themselves does not foster public support. Therefore, we should endeavor to prevent castration from being in any way associated with what we are doing here. Can anyone challenge that logical conclusion?

Why stop at the gonads when you can take out the amygdala too.. In fact take out most of the limbic system with the exception of the hippocampus. That should do the trick of eliminating all emotion, drive and other "redundant" cognitive processes and propel one directly into the future..

LOL Somehow I missed that one.

FO

You don't have to convince me or anyone else on this board. You have to convince the average joe. Average joe hears the word castration and runs for the hills. Anti-aging progress depends on public support. People castrating themselves does not foster public support. Therefore, we should endeavor to prevent castration from being in any way associated with what we are doing here. Can anyone challenge that logical conclusion?

I don't dispute your logic, just your opening premise. I couldn't care less about Joe 6 pack. Developing real anti-aging tech doesn't depend on general public support, it depends on the support of an elite tech intelligencia. And this intelligencia would recognize this issue for what it is, trivial.

Funk, you surprise me. You actually think that appealing to the masses has a decent probability of success? Now who's being the idealist? Give yourself a few years in the movement and perhaps your naive optimism will meet a quiet death.

Average Joe's opinion is relevant and important, because he elects the lawmakers who can either decide to throw massive financial support into anti-aging research (did you read In Pursuit of the Longevity Dividend?) or not. Yes, I do think making everything about anti-aging and immortality as appealing as possible to the masses is key to our success. I don't think there is anything naive about that. Eunuchs are not appealing.

Funkodyssey, supposing you're right that Average Joe's opinion is relevant and important, does Globo Gym really need to take extra steps to obfuscate the practice of castration if this practice is rare and internally criticized enough?

Funkodyssey, supposing you're right that Average Joe's opinion is relevant and important, does Globo Gym really need to take extra steps to obfuscate the practice of castration if this practice is rare and internally criticized enough?

Probably not, but internally criticizing it is key, and thats what I'm trying to do here.

What about trannies, homosexuals? Joe Blow is ignorant on many levels. Should we always cater to ignorance?

As far as appealing to the masses, I guess I will agree to disagree. I couldn't be bothered arguing the point. Believe what you wish.

Probably not, but internally criticizing it is key, and thats what I'm trying to do here.

You're really not criticizing it, just siding against it based on a utilitarian perspective.

Aside from whether the movement should appeal to the masses or some smaller target demographic, I am not against THism/Immortalism maintaining a robust public image. (Just look at my rants about Kurzweil). I suppose where I take issue is that I do not see a few isolated cases as significant, and I believe other rational minds will see things the same way. As Nate pointed out, one could always bring out the thousands of cases where castration is decided against for every one case where an individual went forward with the procedure. One could also reference the other mass movements that have isolated incidents of castration and ask why futurism would be held to a different standard than these historical movements. If the individual in question is assumed rational, then this issue is really a nonissue.

*But one should never decide their public policy based on irrationalism, or even rationalized irrationalism.*

I'm glad we both agree about maintaining a robust public image. We only differ in our assessment of the impact immortalist eunuchs would have on that image. I see it as something a skeptical, sensation-hungry media would pick up and run with, for example. Hopefully, few people will castrate themselves in the name of immortality, and this will be a non-issue. I think we could help avoid that by condemning it rather than condoning it.

How about a third options; ignoring it. And ceasing to create threads about it which get spidered by google (just busting your balls Cosmos [lol] ).

(just busting your balls Cosmos  [lol] ).

No busting of balls! Everyone leave their balls alone! [lol]

I set em up, you knock em down! [lol]

What about trannies, homosexuals?  Joe Blow is ignorant on many levels.  Should we always cater to ignorance?

As far as appealing to the masses, I guess I will agree to disagree.  I couldn't be bothered arguing the point.  Believe what you wish.

I'm afraid that your very premise is founded on ignorance. Neither homosexuals not transexuals - individuals that have an active sex-life - desire to be "gonadless" which is the objective of castrationists who prefer to have no sex-life at all.

In the special case of transexuals, sexual reassignement - which includes castration - is not merely the surgical removal of the male endocrine glands but also the life-long supplementation of female hormones to sustain secondary female sexual characteristics whilst supressing male ones.

Castrationists - males who wish to have their gonads removed, not for sexual reassignment nor as a treatment for disease - are in my view psychologically disturbed and have nothing to do with homosexuals or transexuals.

I know Don prefers to fight his own battles, but I think what he means is that if Funkodyssey wants to protect the immortalist image he would also need to go as far as disassociating immortalist transsexuals and homosexuals. Hence, it's arguable that highly biased people are probably not worth trying to appeal to in the first place. Because public policy analysis is sometimes heavily biased anyway, I suggest that undue negative attention probably wouldn't even improve the situation.

Edit: subject-verb agreement.

Edited by Nate Barna, 24 March 2006 - 04:12 AM.

Furthermore we should not forget that attitudes towards transhumanism probably reflect very deep characteristics of one's personality, which I believe are not strongly affected by such comparatively superficial influences as the sexual habits of other transhumanists. (or indeed are not strongly affected by much at all...)