The mastectomy procedure was initially developed to treat cancer (in which case all breast tissue must go), they just repurposed the same procedure.
If the nipples were left, they would be much larger and more sensitive than a mans; though for the most part it's just a matter of expedience.
It's sort of like how in mtf procedures, all but the head of the penis is removed; however, erectile tissue within the clitoris plays a huge role in female sexual function, so they lack both male and female parts.
edit: it is possible perform a nipple sparing mastectomy, as well as reducing the size of the areola (tinted skin around the nipple) but the nipples will still be much larger and more sensitive, unless if feeling is lost in the nipples from nerve damage.
But what "gay" guy or "straight" woman would be turned on by a man with no nipples. 99.99 out of 100, I think people would prefer an overly sensitive nipple to no nipple at all.
1.) They experience body dysphoria, similar to someone who want's to amputate an arm. It's a matter of feeling uncomfortable with their genitals.
2.) It's simply easier to perform a mastectomy without preserving the nipples.
The surgeons who specialize 'gender reassignments' usually aren't very good at what they do. Surgeons are fully aware of the permanent harm they are causing, so gender reassignment attracts less scrupulous doctors. Even just comparing the surgical technique between gender surgeries and most other surgeries, they are just sloppy.
In the NHS, surgical oncologists are REQUIRED to perform mastectomies while breast cancer patients have their surgeries delayed, so they use the most time efficient technique so their cancer patients don't die on a wait-list, hence the nipple goes.
They cut the nipple off too?
I've always wondered why they did that...men have nipples.... I'm so confused
The mastectomy procedure was initially developed to treat cancer (in which case all breast tissue must go), they just repurposed the same procedure.
If the nipples were left, they would be much larger and more sensitive than a mans; though for the most part it's just a matter of expedience.
It's sort of like how in mtf procedures, all but the head of the penis is removed; however, erectile tissue within the clitoris plays a huge role in female sexual function, so they lack both male and female parts.
edit: it is possible perform a nipple sparing mastectomy, as well as reducing the size of the areola (tinted skin around the nipple) but the nipples will still be much larger and more sensitive, unless if feeling is lost in the nipples from nerve damage.
But what "gay" guy or "straight" woman would be turned on by a man with no nipples. 99.99 out of 100, I think people would prefer an overly sensitive nipple to no nipple at all.
1.) They experience body dysphoria, similar to someone who want's to amputate an arm. It's a matter of feeling uncomfortable with their genitals.
2.) It's simply easier to perform a mastectomy without preserving the nipples.
The surgeons who specialize 'gender reassignments' usually aren't very good at what they do. Surgeons are fully aware of the permanent harm they are causing, so gender reassignment attracts less scrupulous doctors. Even just comparing the surgical technique between gender surgeries and most other surgeries, they are just sloppy.
In the NHS, surgical oncologists are REQUIRED to perform mastectomies while breast cancer patients have their surgeries delayed, so they use the most time efficient technique so their cancer patients don't die on a wait-list, hence the nipple goes.
Never knew straight women found nipples attractive.