dandelion wrote: Thu Dec 18, 2025 3:26 pm
I once had a discussion with Wheely regarding countries that do not have the SOC8 process and patients who could not afford medical tourism. I know of some underground cutters who most likely have had some pretty comprehensive form of medical training and do excellent work: so good that you would have thought one was born like that. I would bet my money that there are only a small handful of surgeons in the US that can do what he does, as often as he does. Perhaps out of fear of prosecution, or perhaps to prevent amateurs from DIYing, he does not publish his methods but only before/after comparisons.
The world is not black and white. Our forum's audience is mostly from the western world, however, and we are lucky that modern western medicine has provided a safe pathway for those who seek such medical intervention. With such avenue, I think it is appropriate to not allow discussion of seeking/providing cutter service.
You mention 3 very timely and relevant points that I’d like to build on, even at the fear of dragging this out even further:
A) “I am” a person who arguably lives in one of the worlds top cities for access to GAS resources, surgeons, and clinics, as well as top tier cancer clinics where onco-urology is available. And, I am also one of those people who can’t afford to travel, or has the support network to help with that.
If you revisit my posts, I started this journey from the “high moral ground” of trying to do things the right way, engage stakeholders, and solicit legal support with the idea of changing the system - which I’ve found (to the agreement of both lawyers and the practitioners I’ve spoken with) is blocking access due to technicalities and nomenclature, even though all the legal and technical precedents are already there.
I invested that time and effort from the standpoint and intention that “a rising tide raises all ships.” That while this benefits me first, the time and effort pays off for the community’s next person’s journey.
And I was deeply invested in that path (some of the next steps of which I outlined here) until I saw the video of Trent sitting on a bed that the Pennie’s dropped from my eyes and my perception flipped to the other side of the coin.
Maybe seeing that casual approach and setting contradicted with the bloody, screaming, nightmare horror movie that I originally imagined these things to be. Maybe it connected with my independent streak of growing up in isolated places where I was surrounded by strong willed people just “doing whatever needed to be done in emergencies because there were no other options and because that was just a different time (good luck with calling for help in 70’s…) of being exposed to much “scarier” things starting at a very young age?
Maybe it had to do with my decades of doing serious extreme sports in remote areas (back when I was still healthy) that requires having to take matters into hands - for self and others - and then seeking formal training to be able to do those things right?
Maybe it connected with so many years of having to learn and improvise how to work on my own body after it was broken to expedite “getting on with it” and avoid the months long waits for 15-minute specialist referrals and delayed procedures?
Whatever it was, *something* connected enough to make me question why I was looking at stacking more years on top of already “sunk cost” years in chasing a system that was actively avoiding what it was bound to do; cajoling professionals who refused to do what they were already doing.
THAT new perception is what set me down this road of seeking new opinions and information.
B) You made a very legitimate point about differences in “academic skill” versus “practical skill.” I saw an example of that where the person showed their work and it was demonstrated far more expertise than the sloppy-by-comparison work shown in the clinic and teaching slides I sought out for further information.
Additionally, your point actually builds on the argument around the paradox and the moral dilemma that I’ve been discussing here: the absence of “accessible, vetted
knowledge.”
C) I also agree with you that conversations around access to cutters, etc., isn’t a direction the site wants to go in. No one in their right mind could advocate for a “classified ads” kind of presence. And I also mention (NOT endorse - MENTION) the prevalence of sites and people who work around the rules and ethics but infer it in posts and ads (not necessarily on this site) for slaves, masters, and whatever the kink, fetish, or living arrangement is that’s used as code for predation.
I agree that the current state of this whole genre is just too loaded with not just all kinds of jeopardy, but also both predators and prey - the predators who should be expunged, and the prey who should be gently and earnestly guided towards help.
Let me clarify yet again, that there hasn’t been - and are not now - ANY traces of that kind of encouragement or endorsement in my words.
My theme has ONLY been philosophically focused on the moral dilemma of transparency, and I have clearly stayed focused on the *problem* (knowledge gaps), rather than the *people* (seeking assistance, finding/serving an audience, sex roles, etc).
Never have I drifted across that line. And I don’t intend to.
That inference may or may not have been embedded in your comment; I’m restating my intentions and positions again because this is just too flammable a topic and too unstable an accelerant - and too many dubious lurkers in the shadows with matches in their pockets - for there to be any misinterpretations…