Self Mutilation as Freedom of Speech

So, do you guys think that intentionally harming yourself as an expression of your opinions and beliefs is acceptable? Would it be okay, to say, cut body parts off as a symbol of what you think of an issue? I know Buddhist monks would light themselves on fire during the British occupation of India, and I suppose this topic carries over into suicide as well, but what do you think and where would you draw the line?

Some circumstances that I feel would weigh in on one side of the other would be:
What if it’s for religious practices (if any religion makes you do that, I don’t know)?

What about depressed (or other psychologically ill) people who cause self harm?

Can it be done in the presence of those who don’t wish to or don’t feel they’d be better off to see it (children)?

It shouldn’t be done in public, and the mutilations should be mostly hidden so they wont harm children or simply disgust people.

Otherwise, why not? No pain, no gain. If people enjoy it, and it doesn’t harm others, there is nothing wrong with it.

Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

What about depressed (or other psychologically ill) people who cause self harm?

This is the thing I don’t understand about self-mutilation being a form of free speech. The people mutilating themselves are, quite simply, causing themselves the most harm. I really don’t see how they are going to teach anyone else a lesson by cutting or nonsense like that.

It does happen, and it’s wierd to watch. I was doing a hospital rotation in school and had no less than two different patients who attempted to commit suicide by lighting themselves on fire. Really? I mean, they had never heard of guns or sleeping pills? They didn’t end up dying, they just ended up with a chronic care plan and (extremely painful) full thickness burns. I just don’t get it.

I mean, they had never heard of guns or sleeping pills?

guns can leave you alive and brain-damaged. pills are almost never succesfully lethal, and can cause chronic somatic problems.

self-mutilation as a form of protest is quite extreme, but you can hardly forbid anything done as a protest, because it is a protest.

as a form of self-expression…this is making it sound like art or something. while it could be done in such a way if you’re really careful, what you said sounds just like an extremely stupid rationalisation of self-inflicted pain. you’re just dressing up a means of drugging yourself with adrinaline and endorphine by employing your natural metabolism.

I wouldn’t understand how this could possibly fall under “freedom of speech”. Self-mutilation should be fine, but I certainly wouldn’t cover it under freedom of speech.

Well, of course you have the freedom to hurt yourself and hurting yourself over something shows that such a thing matters to you. Thing is, it isn’t all that good for you, and there are other methods of getting things across.

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

I wouldn’t understand how this could possibly fall under “freedom of speech”. Self-mutilation should be fine, but I certainly wouldn’t cover it under freedom of speech.

Is self-mutilation any different from a hunger strike? Does the right to hunger strike fall under freedom of speech?

I don’t know the answer to these questions, or anything, but I thought I’d ask. I don’t think that self-mutilation is a good idea for expressing freedom of speech either, but is hunger striking really any different?

It’s your body. Do whatever you please with it. If other people don’t like the look of it, tough luck for them.

self-mutilation: “this happened”
huger-strike: “this might happen”

Is self-mutilation any different from a hunger strike? Does the right to hunger strike fall under freedom of speech?

I don’t think the hunger strike or self-mutilation are covered under freedom of speech. I didn’t explain this earlier, but I think the message you’re getting across is part of it. How you portray it shouldn’t matter, and shouldn’t be part of freedom of speech.

However, they are valid ways of getting the message across and shouldn’t be forbidden.