Talk:Acrotomophilia

Asymmetrical amputation

"Identical amputations on both sides of the body are prefaced by a "D": DAK would describe a double above-knee amputee. These are also known as "bilateral" amputations, so BAK would be equally valid."

What if there are amputations on both sides, but they are not identical? For example, Tammy Duckworth, a helicopter pilot in Iraq, lost both of her legs when the aircraft was shot down, but she lost much more of one leg than the other (one AK, the other either BK or KD). Is there a term to describe that situation? 4.243.149.188 22:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no single term. Which leg is AK? Assuming her right leg is AK, she would be RAK/LBK or RAK/LKD. --BlueNight 00:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the communities have frequenltly seen that, and call it AK/BK. If the person is missing 1 arm and leg, they call it OOE, meaning "One of Each". --75.159.2.59 (talk) 04:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Appropriateness of example?

Is it really appropriate to use Heather Mills McCartney as an example? It seems in poor taste to use her as an example subject of fetishist terminology, just because she's lost a (partial) limb. The terminology explanation seems perfectly clear without resorting to an example anyway. 202.45.99.190 12:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I had typed a long, involved answer talking about Miz Mills-McCartney's anti-landmine activism making her an ideal celebrity example, then giving the alternate example of Porn actress Long Jean Silver, whose claim to fame is an incomplete amputation of one leg resulting in what appears to be a peg leg shaped like a phallus. Then I realized only one answer is necessary: we're talking here about amputee fetishism. Any discussion of taste is moot from the beginning. --BlueNight 07:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

However, if there's an example you think would be in better taste, such as Aimee Mullins, by all means, edit the article to reflect that. I chose The former Mrs. McCartney because she is in the public mind as an amputee, not because of a tabloid interest. --BlueNight 00:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk content merged from Acrotomophilia:

"Previously rare, acrotomophilia was first recognised in clinics as commonplace in the western world in the early 1990s."

Wrong. Firstly, acromotophilia is still rare. The number of scientific articles ever published on the phenomenon probably doesn't exceed a dozen. If you claim it is commonplace you must provide evidence . Secondly, a. was first recognised as early as the 1890s !

"It is thought that this was caused by the proliferation of the Internet, which allowed already predisposed individuals to gain access to video footage and still media of amputees in situations conducive to arousal"

Highly Questionable. Most acromotophiles say their attraction is deeply rooted, and that it has its origins in childhood. The internet merely enabled many to overcome their inhibition to talk about it to others.

"As these individuals learned what could be found sexually stimulating and which forms of physical deformities would sate their desires, they would then seek amputee-partners or situations where amputees could be observed during a sexual act."

Sounds like a myth to me. Acromotophiles seeked amputee partners long before the advent of the internet. Even today most don't "learn" their paraphilia from looking at photos and video. The paraphilia normally sets in at puberty.

I'm afraid i'll have to delete the lot.

How apt that this page is a stub. BlueNight 01:41, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Acrotomophilia

Link to article with information about acrotomophilia: http://www.depression-guide.com/acrotomophilia.htm

I don't know if anyone can use this short article as a reference to support statements made on the page, but perhaps it's a start. 4.243.149.188 22:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed from article

I've removed the following:

Acrotomophilia has seen a significant rise in the United Kingdom, and is again considered to be due to high-bandwidth internet being available to a high proportion of the population since 2000. Mental health clinics in the Tilehurst and Caversham districts of this country have reported record levels of a newly termed order: Rhinoacrotomophilia. This particular paraphilia takes its form as the attraction to general nasal aberrations and patients who have undergone complete nose amputations.

Also remarkable is the increase in amputee patients developing various forms of paraphilia. It is thought that the mental damage caused by losing part of their body causes patients to change their sexual practices in abusive ways. It is feared by several notable psychotherapists in the Tilehurst district of the United Kingdom that if left unchecked, this trend could lead to a positive-feedback relationship being formed between masochistic people and acrotomophiliacs. This would inevitably lead to an endemic situation.

I find this hard to believe. Can you give verifiable cites for these assertions, please? -- The Anome 00:14, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Cite sources

Perhaps we can cite sources, perhaps this is not a notable phenomenon. Lets leave it at this: The next time someone edits this article without adding sources, I will nominate it for deletion. Good deal? I think it's good enough. Lotusduck 01:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

End merged content.

Do a google search for "devotee" in combination with "amputee" and you will find at least ten pages of relevant material. Since the Internet has enabled acromotophiles and apotemnophiles to find each other, the Internet itself is the major reference, in the same way that the Internet is the major reference for all things furry.

Within that first ten pages of search results are links to dozens of magazine articles and mentions on television of the phenomenon. Because of the number of lives it touches, this phenomenon is at least as notable as many webcomics articles, yet for lack of advocates, it struggles to survive.

However, I do agree that citing sources is a Good Thing. --BlueNight 09:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

To be deleted or seriously truncated?

I added a link and then read the article. Oh, dear! It tells us very little, is muddled, and is full of arcane inside-speak of interest to about eight people per million, at a guess. No attributions are made, and few are indeed possible. I submit that it is a waste of bandwidth. Livedvalid 22:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

If you severely truncate the article, leaving only a shapely stub, you would make a lot of people very happy. (snicker) --BlueNight 07:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Paraphilias, not fetishes

This article is about the paraphilias "Acrotomophilia" and "Apotemnophilia" as stated in the article. It is a folly to describe them as fetishes. 194.112.32.101 13:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ethical Issues (and move/disambiguate to Acrotomophilia)

This section seems strangely out of place, as the rest of the article deals with the individuals' attraction to amputees rather than individuals' desire to BECOME amputees. BIID is an entirely separate (albeit somewhat related) topic. I believe this section should be removed from this article.WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 01:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed?... it's referenced. Redblueball (talk) 16:07, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

On further reflection - I see your point - the article attempts to describe both states while we already have the apotemnophilia article; thereby making either apotemnophilia redundant or Amputee fetishism too general. I think the clinical nomenclature should be followed here - so i'll move the Amputee fetishism article to the Acrotomophilia namespace and edit the sense of the subjects accordingly. Redblueball (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Move Parsecboy (talk) 00:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: see above. 199.125.109.124 (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The action to move the page has been denied (because it existed previously) and therefore needs administrator intervention and the opportunity for discussion. Any arguments for or against the move anyone? Redblueball (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't think we need two separate articles on what is essentially the same subject, so my primary recommendation would be to Merge them both into Amputee fetishism. However, if we _are_ going to keep the subjects apart, I would Support the proposed move; it makes sense to use the same type of name for both, and "Devotee" and "Wannabee", the non-medical terms, are likely to cause confusion. :) Tevildo (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

No other opinions? Should I turn this into a formal merge proposal? Tevildo (talk) 23:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree with the formal proposal. Redblueball (talk) 13:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the move.

— James Cantor (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Removed terminology section

Follows the original text thereof. Hayley>>(talk) 00:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Community groups and language

Groups dedicated to the benefits and pleasure gained from amputation as an actual practise or as a fictional concept have developed on the internet. Members of these communities may refer to their status as an Amputee Devotee, Amputee Wannabe, Amputee Lover, or Amputee Admirer.

Two- and three-letter abbreviations are also used between the members of the communities to describe types of limb amputations.

• AK: Above Knee
• AE: Above Elbow
• BK: Below Knee
• BE: Below Elbow

The addition of L or R indicates right or left. The abbreviation LBK would thus describe a left leg amputated below the knee.

Single Amputations begin with an “S”. For example, a single amputation of one arm would be called “SAE” for “Single Above Elbow”. If the single amputation were on the left or right arm (Above the elbow), it would be called “LAE” or “RAE” respectively. And if the amputation were below the elbow, it would be called “LBE” or “RBE” respectively. The same goes for amputations occurring on the legs, where single above the knee would be “SAK” or “LAK/RAK” following the previous logic. There would also be “LBK/RBK” for under the knee.

Identical amputations on both sides of the body are prefaced by a "D": DAK would describe a double above-knee amputee. These are also known as "bilateral" amputations, so BAK would be equally valid.

A Disarticulation Amputation involves the removal of bones at the joint by the Amputation of the joint. The addition of L, R, D, or B apply.

• WD: Wrist Disarticulation
• ED: Elbow Disarticulation
• SD: Shoulder Disarticulation

• AD: Ankle Disarticulation.

The AD amputation is also known as an "Symes amputation" after Dr. James Syme.

• KD: Knee Disarticulation
• HD: Hip Disarticulation

The absence of three limbs and the total absence of limbs is described by the terms TRIPLE and QUAD amputee. Thus, the most extreme form of amputation would be a DSD + DHD. A double hip and double shoulder disarticulation, that will leave the person without any stumps, disabling the ability to use any artificial aids.

Within the Amputee Devotee Community, there are trace amounts of finger and toe amputation devotions that can be found. Even though these attractions are equally valid, there is no single, well known system for identifying specific such amputations.

There is also a small group of devotees that have fetishes with amputations of the eyes.

RI-Right eye

LI-Left eye

"refers to"

Why does the first sentence say "Acrotomophilia refers to sexual interest in amputees ..." (my emphasis)?

I mean, the article is about acrotomophilia and not about the word acrotomophilia. Am I right? :-) --109.189.98.138 (talk) 04:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Old page history

Some old page history that used to be at the title "Acrotomophilia" can now be found at Talk:Acrotomophilia/Old history. The page history that used to be at the title of this talk page can now be found at Talk:Acrotomophilia/Old talk history. Graham87 06:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Removal/citation/reference of Jungian explanation

The following sentence makes zero sense to me:

• "A Jungian explanation for the fetish is that it stems from a desire to resolve discontinuities in the collective subconscious by means of distorting the geometric representation of man, which traditionally involves five points, six when focusing on male sexuality, and seven when discussing incarnations of the Logos from certain religious cultures."

It appears to be meaningless nonsense using big words and fancy grammar to try to hide it, and I would suggest deletion. If not, some attempt at explanation as to why this is a valid explanation and what the sentence actually means would be good. With references please.

06:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Acrotomophilia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070223070910/http://www.fleshbot.com:80/sex/found/devotees-pretenders-and-wannabes-036808.php to http://www.fleshbot.com/sex/found/devotees-pretenders-and-wannabes-036808.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:18, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Ethics section

The section on ethics jumps right in to say how "people question whether it's ethical for people to have their own limbs amputated or to amputate their partners limbs for the sake of sexual gratification...etc", but the rest of the article doesn't say anything about this at all. Shouldn't it start by saying somewhere that this is something that people DO before it starts discussing the ethics of doing it or not? Who amputates partners limbs? How? Is that not a crime? Aren't there cases of harm or death resulting? Idumea47b (talk) 22:44, 13 April 2019 (UTC)