![Would you support a person with BIID to amputate their legs? [Discussion]](https://tranistan.com/pictrs/image/7603938e-2bee-40fe-86f5-2fe4de85d087.jpeg){kind=link}
Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID), or Body Integrity Dysphoria, is a rare psychological condition characterized by an intense, lifelong desire to become physically disabled (e.g., amputee, paraplegic) because of a belief that a specific body part does not belong. Symptoms include severe distress, acting as if disabled, and risks of self-harm, often stemming from a discrepancy between the brain’s body map and physical reality.
I’ve recently stumbled upon such disorder’s existance, and in some ways it seems similar to gender dysphoria. It supposedly cannot be cured by therapy nor anti depressants. The way it manifests is really similar to how GD does, so I’m curious if it stems from similar malfunctions in different regions of the brain on a biological basis.
I’ve also recently saw some online comments under a video about BIID, and the way that people reacted were similar to how transphobes or cissoids do. I feel like it gives a perspective on how cissoids might perceive us. Probably not literally in the same way, but coming from the same background of lack of understanding. They literally cannot understand what they didn’t experience, just like we can’t understand BIID in the way BIID people do.
Sorry if too off topic from trans issues, or too truscum, but I want some actual discussion here. Not a troll post.
Trannies don’t directly harm themselves for no reason, comparing transition to having a leg off is kinda wild lmao. One is like fine and the other will leave you perminently disabled and unable to function normally
there is a reason, you made a post about people who would be right wing if they weren’t trans, aren’t you the same? you don’t understand what they’re going through and just decide that they must be delusional and harming themselves for no reason
I mean, I don’t doubt they’re distressed but I don’t think distress is enough to make someone perminently disabled and unable to function, you just have to manage the distress
Do you think we should let anorexics starve themselves to death too?
yea but there’s no way to manage distress over body parts
There’s ways to manage distress over like anything that’s just how distress works
Also again do you think we should let anorexics starve themselves?
anorexics can get better but not people with biid neither can trans people be ok with their wrong bory, there’s been 0 cases of people with biid getting better, it’s the same with dysphoria, conversion therapy or distress management or ssris or antipsychotic or whatever won’t work, did you read the wikipedia article about biid?
I mean I don’t think they’ll “get better” I think distress management is a better solution than making someone a perminently disabled and incapable of functioning
Also anorexia is treatable yes but that doesn’t mean everyone can get better. Sometimes treatment just isn’t effective. As I said in my other comment courts have literally allowed anorexics to starve themselves before because treatment was futile and they were “utterly defeated by the condition”, to quote the judge in one case.
yea what does distress management mean here, what practical solution are you telling them to consider? dbt skills? ssris? antipsychotics? suicide? youre saying the term distress management but that’s quite vague, and i doubt you have some solution that nobody has considered yet
also you’re saying that the person can function while having the leg and that amputating is will make them no longer able to function, but that’s not true, they are functional in the same way a repper is functional, and without treatment will try to amputate the limb by themselves, some people have amputated their body parts bc doctors wouldn’t do it and their biid was fixed, nothing except amputation has worked so far, and in the few cases im which amputation was tried, their biid was fixed
Yeah like all those things, it’s not a "solution’ it’s management
Also reppers literally are functional??? They’re just mentally ill (and have treatment that doesn’t render them unable to function)
Also not all of them try to do it themselves in the same way that not all trans people try to do diy orchis
So we can rep? Why don’t we rep yet? Why does John 50 exist when we can rep?
I mean you can rep but why would you when transition exists and that’s a better solution
Valid point. But you could say the same about them, cause their treatment will not negatively affect them in their subjective experience.
It will in the objectively. How easy do you think it is to get a job with one leg? They objectively wouldn’t be able to function normally in society ever again
But anorexia can be cured just like bdd. BIID on the other hand can not.
Anorexia is treatable, there isn’t a “cure” per say. Courts have literally let people starve themselves before because they thought treatment was futile, which is why I ask.
So it is treatable in some cases and not in others? Well than I think we should offer assisted euthanasia or experimental cosmetic surgeries to those who do not benefit from lifelong therapy and can not be alleviated from their pain. Our priority should be being able to understand the brain and prevent such malfunctions in the first place. That’d mean the end of trannies tho.
I was trying to show people, how it is like for cissoids to see us. They couldn’t ever imagine mutilating their body in a way we do. The same kind of reaction you experience, is the same kind of reaction cissoids do.
Of course, I agree that the situation is much different, and that their disorder carries a real disability, while being trans is harmless. But I feel like to fully understand morality and perception we have to understand edge cases as well.
I mean, I understand why they do it I just think they obviously shouldn’t just be allowed to. It’s not that I don’t understand it’s that the situation isn’t remotely the same
If we had a way to measure their happiness, I think the decision should be based around the utilitarian morality.
Utilitarianism is bourgeois nonsense unforch
A lot of anorexics are happier killing themselves than they are eating that doesn’t mean we should let them lol
What kind of morality do you think is the best? We should be able to quantify what is arbitrary. We should convert the morality of every human on the earth into an average morality to demonstrate of how humanity is wired to function biologically. Problems would start if that morality excluded not following it exclusively.
I think grand moral theories are stupid in general tbqh, morals aren’t objective and are shaped by the society we live in and the mode of production. Pretending you can “solve” morality via applying some grand theory like utilitarianism or deontology is bourgeois nonense
if morals aren’t objective, what separates morals and opinions?
Nothing?
If morals are objective where do they come from? God?
Morals are not objective, but we can objectively measure them based on output from other humans. Morals are a result of a biological system inner guidelines shaped by their inner life experiences.
Yeah that’s what I think too. But how do we make something arbitrary empirical? We need axioms in a system just like in math.
I think those who can’t be cured from extreme mental illnesses should be offered assisted euthanasia or some kind of drugs to alleviate pain. Why do we have to be cruel to those suffering? You could argue that their choice is not rational, but what other choice do they have? Are they supposed to be tortured? We are ignorant to them.
But when i say we should manage distress you think im wrong
Can you manage your dysphoria? What stops a conservative from saying that and preventing you from taking HRT? Don’t you see this is the same logic? Where do we draw the line? That is why quantifiable mortality is important, so that the lines do not become arbitrary.
I mean, certain things will objectively make the distress less bad? If I get numbed on anti psychotics I imagine I’d probably feel it a bit less yeah
Nothing? They literally do say that? The difference is that they’re wrong about transition causing harm??
When we start making it objectively impossible for people to function normally in society? Why are you talking about transition as if its remotely comparable to removing someone’s ability to function ever again
The lines are also always arbitrary