It's most definitely totally fucked up, but I'd say legal. Who's to say what we can or cannot do to our own bodies? If you want your balls cut off, you're probably not going to or gong to be able to do it yourself(unless you're a total psycho, which is very possible if you want your junk sliced up).
I wonder if the guys who ran it are totally nuts.
Ew, I'm scared.

Since this case was in my neck of the woods, I uploaded some of our ever so lovely LOCAL news coverage to youtube. Here is the link for youtube

The footage starts around 47 seconds. Before that,you can watch Russ "beefcake" Bowen read the news.

They were charged with "castration without malice." That phrase always makes me giggle.

There would be serious questions as to the "victims'" competency when they consented to the castration. That is, a reasonable person of sound mind would not want their pee pee cut off for the purposes of sexual gratification. It's as illogical as it is gross.

As such, an excuse of consent would be flimsy. This still fits under Lawrence v. Texas because the Court there said that there was a fundamental right to private, CONSENSUAL acts between adults. It did not create a right to private mayhem and mutilation.

You see... Consent doesn't mean anything when that particular type of consent creates a presumption that the person is not competent to legitimately form such "consent." It's kinda the same reason why you can't really consent to someone killing you.

If someone wants you to beat him over the head with a baseball bat, you don't do it. If someone wants you to run over his dog, you don't do it. There are reasons why there are some legal restricctions on harmful activities. These guys knew what they were doing was wrong.

It's a general legal principle in law that a contract made for an illegal purpose is invalid -- people can't "consent" to have someone else do something illegal to them, such as kill them or chop off their privates--it's still an illegal act. The same principle, it seems to me, applies in this criminal case: the fact that the, um, "amputees" said "oh yeah go ahead and whack me off" (so to speak) is immaterial, since it's generally illegal to go around slicing off peoples' parts, whether or not for culinary purposes. I'm afraid that if we go defending the "right" of folks to engage in this stuff, we're walking right into the slippery slope trap that the fundies always like to slide down (i.e., if you legalize gay marriage, interspecies marriage is next). I hate to sound like a prude here, but I think we may be on safe ground if we say "People should be strongly discouraged from cutting parts off of other people, unless the cutter is a doctor and the cutting is part of a valid medical procedure."

Everyone made good points, it comes down to the right to do what you want with your body vs. protecting the public. Was this castration(removal of the testicles) or did they cut everything off?

Whatever the case, it's bizarre and probably wrong.

Well, if one can consent to being fisted or being infected with HIV fox sexual kicks, then it would seem to me people have the right to consent to have their nuts chopped off for what they deem to be a one-time-only sexual thrill. I guess the government should stay out of that which doesn't kill us.

C. Gerard, well said!! Thank you.

Bill/Loki ugh. Nothing is absolute. Societies can only function by finding the right balances between opposing forces.

We can argue over the fisting example, but willingly getting infected with HIV probably is illegal (i.e. as suicide (attempted) is illegal) Trouble is who's reporting it? Not the bug giver, and probably not the bug chaser.

Frankly, I'd argue if you are actively seeking the bug, then there are issues you're facing that actively bar you from giving legitimate consent.

I think the problem in both cases is that the person desiring the death or mutilation may not be mentally sound. If they approached a plastic surgeon or requested assisted suicide, they would be medically evaluated by a "professional" and, no doubt, turned away. The crazy German and Master Rick & friends are not medically certified to do this and I suspect their "screening" process consisted of willingness (just like predatory physicians) and nothing more. Its within reason to consider them predators of unstable individuals.

(OK, so it's clear I don't "get" the whole self mutilation subculture thing. Even so, there's a big difference between slicing your tongue and castrating yourself)

For me this comes down to protecting the least of us - gay or straight. I'm willing to "suffer" some incursions (such as these cases) into my right to do whatever I want whenever I want (to myself) in order to ensure that some people are protected from themselves and those that would use them for entertainment.

I wonder if Master Rick's playmates consulted plastic surgeons and were turned away before going to N.C...

I find it hard to accept any practise that harms someone else whether that someone consents or not. It presumes the person giving consent is competent to do so. Considering that gender reassignment surgery is allowed only after considerable psychiatric review to determine whether or not the person seeking the surgery is psychologically sound, I don't see where this sort of practise gets a pass. Since there are a number of long term consequences to losing one's testicles and the hormones that are produced by them as well as the short term risk of massive infection, it is at least practising medicine without a license.

Playing devil's advocate here.

Anyone could go to a doctor and have their nuts removed. They may need to see a phych to see if they're mentally competent, but it would still be possible. So, is it a large stretch to say that mentally competent people should be able to do it in some sort of weird sexual way? (A lot of people would say that anyone willing to have their nuts chopped off isn't competent, but that's at extreme odds with the GLBT movement - specifically, the "T." Since one of my friends is transgendered, I can attest to the fact that he's probably the sanest/most mentally competent person in that circle of friends.)

It's not something a whole lot of people would want, but as long as they're mentally fit, do we have the rights to stop them? Again, I'm playing Devi's Advocate here because no one brought up this point of view, so I thought it was important.

easy to see why society would want to say, regardless of 'consent', that murder, dismemberment, and cannibalism are always wrong. gelding, on the other hand, has often met with societal approval as in the case of the italian castrati. conflating the two is kind of mixing your .. uhh.. meat and potatoes.

seems to me all these guys are guilty of is operating without a business license!

How is this different, in principle, from getting your ears pierced? your nose piereced? your nipples pierced? 25 piercings all over your face? a PA? a really THICK PA? with dumbells down your shaft?

I mean, come on...who are we to judge why and where we mutilate our bodies? It's not my cup of tea, and I think it's a fairly complex cultural issue, but not a moral one.

ryan - no not eveyrone can go and get his nuts chopped off by a doctor. Don't be so dismissive of seeing a shrink. there's a reason why it's a complicated process.

Voiture12: "All" they're guilty of is operating without license. Wow, so i guess if I go to a "brain surgeon" operating out of a filthy alley, he's not guilty of anything except not having a license. There's a reason why people are licensed --it's not just to get the licesning fee!

One of the biggest issues here is that there is no licensing for this (a common issue in the world of body modification). The real danger lies in whether or not the people performing the castrations actually know what they are doing, and if they are doing it in a sterile environment. I am 100% in favor of trained surgeons being allowed to perform voluntary procedures such as this.
There are spiritual aspects involved here that not everyone can understand. This is also very different from the idea of pain as pleasure, as it is centered around the removal of a body part, as opposed to the "mutilation" of it. This may also have more to do with expressing literal physical control over one's body in an extreme and overt gesture. In any case, I am tired of people being so very concerned with telling other people what they CANNOT do with their lives and/or bodies.