Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Trans woman launches legal challenge after being denied breast surgery

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Is this woman ill? No. Go and get a job and pay for them yourself you lazy woman. My best mate has small tits, I’ve spent the last ten years telling her how sexy her small tits are – she’s always felt inferior, will the NHS pay for them. NO. Why should this woman get plastic surgery paid for by the tax payer. I’d rather the money be spent on someone who is sick.

  2. ChutneyBear 12 May 2010, 3:05pm

    Agree 100%, there is more deserving cases out there. People with cancer, HIV etc. etc. Good point Jay

  3. This woman is taking the piss.

    She’s not happy with her breast size? Well save up your money and pay for new boobs yourself.

    If she gets away with this ridiculous claim then any woman could potentially demand a boob job on the NHS.

    Having large breasts is not a sign of femininity. Many women are flat chested.

  4. Pumpkin Pie 12 May 2010, 6:48pm

    Having large breasts is not a sign of femininity. Many women are flat chested.

    And have man-sized hands? And an Adam’s apple? And small hips? And a masculine face? And wide shoulders?

    No ciswoman has to put up with all of that at the same time. This is why it’s a trans issue, rather than something that’s going to “open the floodgates” for every woman in the country to claim a free boobjob (honestly, that rubbish is so specious I can’t believe I’m even having to argue against it).

    The point of sex reassignment procedures is to not only create equilibrium between a trans person’s body and their gender, but to allow them to live as normal a life as possible for the sake of their mental health. This last bit is something everybody seems to forget. Body modifications aren’t to be treated like a new toy – they’re to be seen as a tool that’s there to do a job. And if SRS stops short, it can’t do its job properly. One of the most important jobs that SRS does is to allow trans people to successfully pass as their reassigned sex. As you can see from the list I gave at the start of this post, every little thng helps. Human eyes are like scanners. They’re attuned to minute differences in shapes and anatomy. Larger breast size could easily be enough to fool an uncritical eye (the vast, vast majority of people we meet don’t scrutinise us, but just give us a cursory glance) into under-emphasising other features, like width of shoulders.

    Hey, but there are definitely more important things out there, like cancer. In order to maximise funding for that, why not stop all treatment for people who aren’t physically ill? Why not start with scrapping reconstructive surgery for women who have had a mastectomy?

    Sex reassignment surgery IS reconstructive surgery. I have sympathy for the NHS due to the costs involved, but let’s not forget that this is the same NHS whose primary care trusts routinely deny lesbian couples IVF treatment while giving it out to any straight couple who asks. Sure, all that becomes money that can be used to fight cancer and world hunger and save kittens from trees, but the NHS is absolutely ruthless in its money-saving schemes. Ruthless in everything except cutting the salaries of its top execs. Gee, I wonder how many cancer treatments those salaries could pay for?

  5. ChutneyBear 13 May 2010, 12:13pm

    Im surprised reading that , bottom line is you can live without a pair of tits but you cant live without a kidney. Honestly…

  6. “you can live without a pair of tits but you cant live without a kidney”.

    Well, yes, but that’s true in the same sense that you can live without having SRS at all. Nonetheless, we as a society have decided that the non-life-threatening psychological condition of gender dysphoria is sufficiently distressing to those who suffer from it that we should provide treatment for it, including surgery designed, as far as possible, to reshape the body into the semblance of the acquired sex. Given that we have reached that position, I don’t see why we shouldn’t follow it to it’s logical conclusion. That is, anyone who thinks that breast surgery shouldn’t be part of the package ought really to be arguing that we shouldn’t be offering the package at all.

    And, in a spirit of mischief, what if we were to reverse the situation? What if a particularly large-breasted person, born biologically female but psychologically male, opted for SRS and was told he couldn’t have breast-reduction surgery? Plenty of guys have man-boobs, but that doesn’t mean it’s something we should wish upon someone in this situation.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all