Don't try this at home: extreme body make-overs

Websites promoting these non-mainstream practices present a major dilemma for the liberal conscience. It seems abundantly clear they are promoting self-harm. One of the cornerstones of classic liberalism is that people should not be prevented from doing harmful things to themselves, so long as others are not hurt. But there are at least two questions here. The first is about empathy. Do those who deliberately maim themselves have any idea what it is like to have no choice about being, for instance, armless or not? How does the intended nirvana from trepanning compare with an intellectual disability conferred at birth? Do these people know anything about unwanted human suffering?

The second question is more difficult. Is proselytising by the converted which encourages the vulnerable to irreparably damage themselves harmful in itself - that is, precisely because it is likely to cause harm to others? While it is very tempting to think it is, along that path lies danger.

It may seem a simple matter to distinguish missionary activity on behalf of voluntary amputation from religious evangelising, for example. But what exactly is the dividing line between bliss and serenity via a hole in the head, and the same through Hare Krishna? Would a devoutly religious parent prefer her impressionable child to lose his leg or his immortal soul? The obvious answer is neither, but can we legitimately prevent people advocating a temporal harm, while continuing to allow others to try their hardest to inflict what is arguably an eternal one?

Perhaps the test case might be sites containing DIY advice. Unlike those merely glorifying apotemnophilia, drilling a hole in your head, or just plain making yourself look ridiculous, it involves something beyond incitement. Obviously it is a test case that tries the liberal conscience hard, especially when we try to distinguish between exploiting the vulnerable and providing help to those in need. And even more so when we consider the freedom of expression given other extreme sites, such as Westboro Baptist Church, or Aryan Nations.

So do we let the amputee and trepanation sites stay, while banning “how to” sites? It can be done. It’s a hard call, but when you’ve had the horror of seeing some of this stuff, Michael Jackson’s face begins to look quite attractive.