• FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Why not Chemical Castration? The state’s ability to decide who is and is not an offender aside, surgical castration seems pointless and ineffective.

    • kitnaht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Surgical castration is quite effective. It removes the ovaries/testes which produce testosterone/estrogen. Problem is, from that point on, you probably need to take supplements, because I’m no doctor but I think you need those hormones for proper bone density control, etc.

      • PolarisFx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        I have a genetic condition that severely limits testosterone production. Didn’t find out until I was almost 40, my health hasn’t been terrible. Mental health is a different story.

        I’ve spent the majority of my life “castrated” and it hasn’t been all that bad, that being said I still had urges even with pretty much zero testosterone so I question whether it will do anything to prevent abuse.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I used to think so, too, but it turns out castrated monks and other animals have a lot of data implying they live even longer. I still think Chemical Castration would be better, though.

        • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Living longer doesn’t necessarily mean that your bones are healthy. Osteoporosis is much more likely without adequate sex hormone production.