It turns out you aren't such a unique snowflake after all. :)
Wonder how she feels about the Confederacy? :sleep:
Quote
Woman fascinated with being blind pours drain cleaner in eyes, now happier than ever
POSTED 12:42 PM, OCTOBER 1, 2015
BY TRIBUNE MEDIA WIRE, UPDATED AT 01:52PM, OCTOBER 1, 2015
RALEIGH, N.C. — A North Carolina woman says she is happier than ever after fulfilling her lifelong wish of becoming blind.
Jewel Shuping, 30, has Body Integrity Identity Disorder, which is a condition where able-bodied people believe they are meant to be disabled, according to Barcroft TV.
Shuping said that her fascination with blindness began when she was about 6 years old.
"By the time I was six I remember that thinking about being blind made me feel comfortable," she told Barcroft TV.
As a teen Shuping said she began wearing thick, black sunglasses and walking with a cane. By the age of 20, she was even fluent in braille.
"I was 'blind-simming', which is pretending to be blind, but the idea kept coming up in my head and by the time I was 21 it was a non-stop alarm that was going off," Shuping told Barcroft TV.
In 2006, Shuping found a psychologist who was willing to help her become blind. The psychologist began putting numbing drops in her eyes, followed by a couple of drops of drain cleaner.
"It hurt, let me tell you. My eyes were screaming and I had some drain cleaner going down my cheek burning my skin," she told Barcroft TV. "But all I could think was 'I am going blind, it is going to be okay.'"
It took about half a year for the damage to take effect.
"When I woke up the following day I was joyful until I turned on to my back and opened my eyes – I was so enraged when I saw the TV screen," Shuping said.
Eventually, one of her eyes had to be removed and the other had glaucoma and cataracts.
At first, Shuping told her family that it was all an accident, but they eventually found out the truth.
Shuping's mother and sister are no longer speaking to her.
She told Barcroft TV that she has no regrets and hopes to help other blind people live an independent life.
"I really feel this is the way I was supposed to be born, that I should have been blind from birth," Shuping said. "When there's nobody around you who feels the same way, you start to think that you're crazy. But I don't think I'm crazy, I just have a disorder."
http://fox59.com/2015/10/01/woman-desperate-to-be-blind-had-drain-cleaner-poured-in-eyes-now-happier-than-ever/ (http://fox59.com/2015/10/01/woman-desperate-to-be-blind-had-drain-cleaner-poured-in-eyes-now-happier-than-ever/)
Unfortunately, the evidence suggests this is the sort of trans* stuff that runs around on tumblr, where you always have some sort of condition and you are secretly an asexual jamaican dragon.
Her claiming that her actions are actually the result of a disorder nobody had heard of up until now fits the bill perfectly.
But it would seem she's "happier than ever", so all's well that ends well.
That psychologist should at least loose his license, and probably should go to jail, though I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2015, 08:25:25 PM
That psychologist should at least loose his license, and probably should go to jail, though I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
I'm thinking they were a 'psychologist' in the same way that all those crazy bitches who inject silicone into other chick's asses and kill them are 'plastic surgeons'... as in not really at all.
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 01, 2015, 08:20:37 PM
Unfortunately, the evidence suggests this is the sort of trans* stuff that runs around on tumblr, where you always have some sort of condition and you are secretly an asexual jamaican dragon.
Her claiming that her actions are actually the result of a disorder nobody had heard of up until now fits the bill perfectly.
But it would seem she's "happier than ever", so all's well that ends well.
I heard of it, and linked stories about on this forum.
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2015, 08:25:25 PM
That psychologist should at least loose his license, and probably should go to jail, though I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
Assault, battery.
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 01, 2015, 08:20:37 PMyou are secretly an asexual jamaican dragon
DON'T JUDGE ME, MON!
More seriously, there was a long article in a German newspaper (Süddeutsche? It wasn't a tabloid.) about a man who had basically the opposite of a phantom limb: since he was a kid he always felt that his lower leg wasn't really a part of his body. He would tie it off to make it numb, bind it up so it looked like he only had half a leg etc. He sought treatment and therapy, but nothing helped. One day he set up a "work project" in his garage with steel beams etc. and smashed his leg in an "accident." The doctors tried to save his lower leg (naturally), but had to take it off in the end. They guy is now happy and feels "complete." He's participating in a psychological study on the subject (naturally there's few people with this condition) and leads a double life because to most people he has to pretend that losing part of his leg was a horrible thing. He's married, with children.
So, apparently there's people like this out there.
A true visionary for the transblind community.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 01, 2015, 11:53:38 PM
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2015, 08:25:25 PM
That psychologist should at least loose his license, and probably should go to jail, though I'm not sure what he could be charged with.
Assault, battery.
Even though the victim not only consented, but sought out the "treatment"?
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
Can someone who is obviously mentally ill offer meaningful (i.e., legally cognziable) consent to a battery anyway?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See
R v Jobidon.
Quote from: Syt on October 02, 2015, 02:44:22 AM
More seriously, there was a long article in a German newspaper (Süddeutsche? It wasn't a tabloid.) about a man who had basically the opposite of a phantom limb: since he was a kid he always felt that his lower leg wasn't really a part of his body. He would tie it off to make it numb, bind it up so it looked like he only had half a leg etc. He sought treatment and therapy, but nothing helped. One day he set up a "work project" in his garage with steel beams etc. and smashed his leg in an "accident." The doctors tried to save his lower leg (naturally), but had to take it off in the end. They guy is now happy and feels "complete." He's participating in a psychological study on the subject (naturally there's few people with this condition) and leads a double life because to most people he has to pretend that losing part of his leg was a horrible thing. He's married, with children.
:hmm: Was his name Eduard Zorn? :)
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
Yup. That's how they finally got Kevorkian. The shrink should have given her the solution and had her do it to herself.
Quote from: Barrister on October 02, 2015, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See R v Jobidon.
Yours is a nation of complete pussies. No offense.
Quote from: Barrister on October 02, 2015, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See R v Jobidon.
So Canada has totally outlawed BDSM? Also boxing? Neat. :blink:
I'm going back to bed, so I don't have time to look into it, but are you sure it's not "grievous bodily harm" or something similar?
Never has :bleeding: been so appropriate.
:lol:
Quote from: Ideologue on October 03, 2015, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Barrister on October 02, 2015, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See R v Jobidon.
So Canada has totally outlawed BDSM? Also boxing? Neat. :blink:
I'm going back to bed, so I don't have time to look into it, but are you sure it's not "grievous bodily harm" or something similar?
No way! They even have a national holiday dedicated to boxing.
Quote from: Ideologue on October 03, 2015, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Barrister on October 02, 2015, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See R v Jobidon.
So Canada has totally outlawed BDSM? Also boxing? Neat. :blink:
I'm going back to bed, so I don't have time to look into it, but are you sure it's not "grievous bodily harm" or something similar?
Come on, man. I gave you the name of the case. I googled it, and the first hit is the case itself.
"grievous bodily harm" doesn't exist in Canadian law. "bodily harm" however is defined in section 2 of the Code:
Quote"bodily harm" means any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature;
The Supremes, in
Jobidon, were clear: you can not consent to bodily harm.
This can and does effect some of the more extreme forms of BDSM, but not when practiced safely. It's generally found not to effect boxing, since a fight is called before bodily harm results.
Quote from: Barrister on October 03, 2015, 08:26:39 AM
It's generally found not to effect boxing, since a fight is called before bodily harm results.
Tell that to Duk Koo Kim
Quote from: Barrister on October 03, 2015, 08:26:39 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on October 03, 2015, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Barrister on October 02, 2015, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 02, 2015, 11:29:42 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Consent isn't always an effective defense when there is serious bodily harm.
In this country, consent is never a defence to bodily harm. See R v Jobidon.
So Canada has totally outlawed BDSM? Also boxing? Neat. :blink:
I'm going back to bed, so I don't have time to look into it, but are you sure it's not "grievous bodily harm" or something similar?
Come on, man. I gave you the name of the case. I googled it, and the first hit is the case itself.
"grievous bodily harm" doesn't exist in Canadian law. "bodily harm" however is defined in section 2 of the Code:
Quote"bodily harm" means any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature;
The Supremes, in Jobidon, were clear: you can not consent to bodily harm.
This can and does effect some of the more extreme forms of BDSM, but not when practiced safely. It's generally found not to effect boxing, since a fight is called before bodily harm results.
"The limitation demanded by s. 265 as it applies to the circumstances of this appeal is one which vitiates (negates) consent between adults intentionally to apply force causing
serious hurt or non-trivial bodily harm to each other in the course of a fist fight or brawl."
I.e., my intuitions were correct. :P
And yeah, I'm aware of Canada's weird animus toward BDSM. (Although the particular case we're both thinking of involved some seriously unsafe practices, safe practices can involve unconsciousness and pre-consent too.)
That said, clearly "blinding somebody" counts as one serious hurt.