Quote from: Unicorn888 on April 19, 2018, 11:47:08 AM2-4 weeks of muscle training before surgery makes zero difference and the cybex tests to measure muscle improvements (at an additional charge, of course) were all circus hoops for us to jump through.
His analogy is it's like tuning a car before a race. Yeah, because we are stretching a car 
I think to generalize that women have less of a need to do CLL than men do, invalidates our suffering and discrimination experienced as short women.
Anyone - male, female, transgender, has just an important a reason to do CLL no matter how trivial. The very fact that anyone is willing to succumb themselves to so much risk, pain and cost, to willingly break both legs would probably have suffered enough of short stature discrimination and feelings of innadequacy to resort to such desperate action.
So PLEASE, don't tell women that it's less necessary for them than it is for men, and then turn on the tv and enjoy Victoria Secret Angels strutting down the runway. At the work place, believe it or not, taller women are often more successful than their shorter counterparts of the same calibre.
Even as early as elementary or secondary school, you'll often find leaders to be the taller ones in the class. Why is this one attribute so important that it makes us this obsessed? Perhaps we've been conditioned psychologically from an early age that being taller than those around us was enough reason to garner praise (as if we had any control over height as we do with having brains or looks!!!). But no matter how illogical, height is viewed as an "achievement" by the people from whom we seek approval, and probably on whom we should blame for our short genes.
The fact that a few men in this forum had to qualify that the short women they know are smart, is exactly the kind of insult and discrimination we short females often get slapped with. It's like saying, yes it's a monkey BUT this monkey can tell time. I've often heard so many times, "she's little BUT what a firecracker" and it's supposed to be a compliment! Because short women are usually lame? Or simply invisible?
So, please stop with the generalization that men have a superior need to get ahead in their careers, earn more or find ideal partners than women do. We're no longer living in the '50s, women today often are the sole breadwinners and need just an equal advantage or more, just to stay in the same level playing field. It's not like women today can expect most men to gallantly take care of them financially to warrant men needing to earn more than women do. We've reached an age of equality, in the eyes of the beneficiary only.
So, if we can all agree to disagree, being taller is a universal desire and a proven signal of superiority (no matter how irrational) in all the aspects of life that matter, and if you're reading this, you would have had at some point felt innadequate for this very reason.
I think if all my suffering were to bring meaning and value to you readers : if you're female and/or older (and god forbid east Asian too), healing may be slower / more complications. In this case, perhaps an external fixator with no internal reaming, might be recommended. Or at least, use a nail that can reverse when there's non-union. And don't be fooled by all the success stories that outnumber the horror ones which often go untold. Seriously, the amount of people who write me about their nightmares (including several suicide attempts due to botched up lives) convinces me now that this surgery is not worth the risk, and this forum covers just the very tip of the iceberg of patient experiences.
I am pleasantly surprised to hear that the russian institute does not accept patients above 40. There has to be a correlation btw non-union the older we get, as Paley concludes in turning away smokers.
Men need height much more than women.
The ideal for men is tall dark and handsome. For women height is not necesarry, on the contrary many men prefer short women much more than tall ones.
Women who prefer short men over tall ones are very very few, so few as men who like fat women.
So yes, even if in carreer of a woman height plays a good role (which I believe it does), the thing that height play no role on a woman's attractiveness (unless she is very short which is still not worse as being veey tall) is more than enough to say that height is much more important for men than women.
For you Unicorn almost nothing would change after LL, for me many things change and especially if I do another LL and reach 1.80+ my whole life will be completely different.
But we are offtopic and I don't judge you of course for your choice, that has norhing to do with the bs Guichet did to you.
But whatever anyone say, height determines in a great degree the life of a man while attractiveness (good face and a fit body) determines the lifw of a woman in a great degree, not height.
Wholeheartedly agree with Unicorn. While many more women are comfortable with their short stature than men are due to embracing positive identities like petite, which have no male equivalent, shorter women are also relegated to "cute." Most grown men hate to be called a boy, and many women don't like being called a girl into adulthood either.
No matter the gender, as long as you don't identify with what people label you as, it's frustrating. The demeaning examples she gave would infuriate many men; somehow a few of us have lost empathy, instead telling Unicorn to cope.
Additionally many women want longer legs in general, because they're seen as attractive. If you think that height isn't as important for women, then perhaps you can consider that women want enhanced proportions.
Cosmetic surgery in general isn't a need, it's a want. It's something we do since we refuse to accept reality, found a solution, and have the means to change it. I don't see why we need gatekeeping especially at the gender level, it's misogynistic to label stature lengthening as a surgery for bros even if the majority of patients are young men.
Your life will not be completely different. You will not be tall, maybe closer to average, that's all. Life becomes completely different after gettin so much money and reputation among important ppl after that u stop thinking about this procedure. You can succeed even when you are below 160 like Jack Ma. For average ppl like us its not understandable, if you focus more on badoo/tinder or going to club for one night episode social pressure affects You badly.
Quote from: Android on April 19, 2018, 10:54:39 PMWholeheartedly agree with Unicorn. While many more women are comfortable with their short stature than men are due to embracing positive identities like petite, which have no male equivalent, shorter women are also relegated to "cute." Most grown men hate to be called a boy, and many women don't like being called a girl into adulthood either.
No matter the gender, as long as you don't identify with what people label you as, it's frustrating. The demeaning examples she gave would infuriate many men; somehow a few of us have lost empathy, instead telling Unicorn to cope.
Additionally many women want longer legs in general, because they're seen as attractive. If you think that height isn't as important for women, then perhaps you can consider that women want enhanced proportions.
Cosmetic surgery in general isn't a need, it's a want. It's something we do since we refuse to accept reality, found a solution, and have the means to change it. I don't see why we need gatekeeping especially at the gender level, it's misogynistic to label stature lengthening as a surgery for bros even if the majority of patients are young men.
Because if men would describe the ideal women's body, the first trait would be fit.
If women would do the same on men's body, the first they would say is tall. And furthermore, many men would prefer a short woman over a tall one while almost no woman would prefer a short man over a tall one.
This is no misogynistic, this is the truth.
Thats why women get crazy if they get 1-2 kilos while men simply don't care unless they become really obese. Because being thin is not important for men while for women is the most important thing.
That said, I don't disapprove any short woman to get LL but no, women who are near average and more (5.3ft and up) and want LL is like 6+ft weirdos men who want LL. In both cases, LL won't improve their life and the risks they take are for nothing.
Quote from: Body Builder on April 19, 2018, 11:52:14 PMBecause if men would describe the ideal women's body, the first trait would be fit.
If women would do the same on men's body, the first they would say is tall. And furthermore, many men would prefer a short woman over a tall one while almost no woman would prefer a short man over a tall one.
That said, I don't disapprove any short woman to get LL but no, women who are near average and more (5.3ft and up) and want LL is like 6+ft weirdos men who want LL. In both cases, LL won't improve their life and the risks they take are for nothing.
I agree that women are much more sensitive to BMI, and men are much more sensitive to women's BMI as well. Workplace discrimination toward overweight women is analogous to short men after all.
But let's get real here, many women want to impress each other, not other men. Male preference for shorter women doesn't do squat in the workplace if what you want is respect.
The average height for a woman in the UK is 5'3". So it's not like a 6 ft+ man wanting CLL, but more like a 5'9" man wanting to become a member of the 6 ft club; slightly below average to taller than average. Hell, I wish I could be average height so I could be tall, but I'll settle for average!
Quote from: Unicorn888 on April 19, 2018, 09:39:59 PMI think to generalize that women have less of a need to do CLL than men do, invalidates our suffering and discrimination experienced as short women.
Anyone - male, female, transgender, has just an important a reason to do CLL no matter how trivial. The very fact that anyone is willing to succumb themselves to so much risk, pain and cost, to willingly break both legs would probably have suffered enough of short stature discrimination and feelings of innadequacy to resort to such desperate action.
So PLEASE, don't tell women that it's less necessary for them than it is for men, and then turn on the tv and enjoy Victoria Secret Angels strutting down the runway. At the work place, believe it or not, taller women are often more successful than their shorter counterparts of the same calibre.
Even as early as elementary or secondary school, you'll often find leaders to be the taller ones in the class. Why is this one attribute so important that it makes us this obsessed? Perhaps we've been conditioned psychologically from an early age that being taller than those around us was enough reason to garner praise (as if we had any control over height as we do with having brains or looks!!!). But no matter how illogical, height is viewed as an "achievement" by the people from whom we seek approval, and probably on whom we should blame for our short genes.
The fact that a few men in this forum had to qualify that the short women they know are smart, is exactly the kind of insult and discrimination we short females often get slapped with. It's like saying, yes it's a monkey BUT this monkey can tell time. I've often heard so many times, "she's little BUT what a firecracker" and it's supposed to be a compliment! Because short women are usually lame? Or simply invisible?
So, please stop with the generalization that men have a superior need to get ahead in their careers, earn more or find ideal partners than women do. We're no longer living in the '50s, women today often are the sole breadwinners and need just an equal advantage or more, just to stay in the same level playing field. It's not like women today can expect most men to gallantly take care of them financially to warrant men needing to earn more than women do. We've reached an age of equality, in the eyes of the beneficiary only.
So, if we can all agree to disagree, being taller is a universal desire and a proven signal of superiority (no matter how irrational) in all the aspects of life that matter, and if you're reading this, you would have had at some point felt innadequate for this very reason.
I think if all my suffering were to bring meaning and value to you readers : if you're female and/or older (and god forbid east Asian too), healing may be slower / more complications. In this case, perhaps an external fixator with no internal reaming, might be recommended. Or at least, use a nail that can reverse when there's non-union. And don't be fooled by all the success stories that outnumber the horror ones which often go untold. Seriously, the amount of people who write me about their nightmares (including several suicide attempts due to botched up lives) convinces me now that this surgery is not worth the risk, and this forum covers just the very tip of the iceberg of patient experiences.
I am pleasantly surprised to hear that the russian institute does not accept patients above 40. There has to be a correlation btw non-union the older we get, as Paley concludes in turning away smokers.
I agree with you about the suffering and discrimination. Those are all individual experiences. It's like when people tell others they cannot suffer due to X because of Y people in Z situation. When talking about depression and similar topics, this generally ends up being: you shouldn't suffer that much because of the starving children in Africa, or something along those lines. The absolutely most appalling human situations happening and existing can't, and won't, make other subjective experiences of suffering lighter on everyone else. Generally, high levels of suffering require stronger stimuli, but this isn't always the case for everyone. Hence the need for empathy and to help others with their problems. I'd much rather see someone in a more developed society become happier than have both that person and the African kids stay miserable.
By the way, the wikipedia page on nonunion lists old age and smokers as risk groups. However, the science on bone healing regarding "old age" is still mixed, so a lot of CLL doctors are willing to perform on people in their 40~50s. Some studies have shown better bone healing in older age brackets. Yet, the way I see it, it's better being safe than sorry.
And here are the requirements of the Ilizarov center in Russia.
I've considered starting a thread about LL risk groups, but I'm just a layman. I definitely think people who fall under too many of them should be first shown the door by any ethical doctor. If, for some reason, they believe the patient in question can make it despite their risk factors, or believe the patient is willing and consenting enough despite their risk factors, those patients should be shown the utmost care and attention to detail by the doctor in question, who should be aware of all factors, and who should make the patient aware of them in their initial consultation --- so the doctor is sure their patient is making a fully informed decision. But this is CLL, and doctors like that seem to be dime a dozen...
Quote from: Android on April 19, 2018, 10:54:39 PMCosmetic surgery in general isn't a need, it's a want. It's something we do since we refuse to accept reality, found a solution, and have the means to change it. I don't see why we need gatekeeping especially at the gender level, it's misogynistic to label stature lengthening as a surgery for bros even if the majority of patients are young men.
We don't need gatekeepers, but we need reality and fact checkers. Make sure everyone is aware of the risk factors involving all these procedures. And ideally, I'd like to see doctors turn away people who are obvious lost cases. Paley already rejects all the desperate enough people, who try to do things such as mortgaging their houses without spousal knowledge to pay for their CLL. I'd like to see a 60 year old, frail, 155cm Asian man with a lifetime history of smoking and alcoholism, and who comes to one of these doctors wanting to lengthen no less than 9cm in his tibias, eating his usual low-protein, low-caloric diet to be immediately shown the door, not be told "let's start and see how it goes; 9cm is an ambitious goal, you know" after they think of the cash, or that it was the patient's own decision.
Hi Unicorn,
I have been reading your journal from beginning to end over the last couple of weeks and what a rollercoaster you have been on!
I turned 40 this year, am female and am of SE Asian desent, living in the U.K, and before I came across your journal, was strongly considering Guichet as an option for CLL. Thank you so much for your journal, as without it I might have gone ahead with it!
Please stay strong and and positive as there will be an after and I believe for you, it will be a great after. I am so glad to hear that you have a little callus formation on one side, hopefully this will improve after bone graft.
Reading through Doctor Donghoon’s blog, it seems he uses stem cell to help with poor bone formation? Is this something that could possibly help you?He is my strongest option at the moment because of this and Also because I read he is an artist when it comes to cuts/scars.
Wishing you you miraculous recovery and sending you much love 💕.
Quote from: Body Builder on April 19, 2018, 11:52:14 PMBecause if men would describe the ideal women's body, the first trait would be fit.
If women would do the same on men's body, the first they would say is tall. And furthermore, many men would prefer a short woman over a tall one while almost no woman would prefer a short man over a tall one.
This is no misogynistic, this is the truth.
Thats why women get crazy if they get 1-2 kilos while men simply don't care unless they become really obese. Because being thin is not important for men while for women is the most important thing.
That said, I don't disapprove any short woman to get LL but no, women who are near average and more (5.3ft and up) and want LL is like 6+ft weirdos men who want LL. In both cases, LL won't improve their life and the risks they take are for nothing.
Agreed on all fronts. While I don't disapprove of women doing LL, I was just trying to state that the increased risks (women seem to have an easier time lengthening but a harder time with bone regeneration/recovery) aren't as worth it. Yes, of course a woman's short stature may have an impact on her life, if people are calling her short/cute, I can see how that would be annoying. Especially when it comes to the workplace.
I know women think that "men just do LL so they can have more dating options," and while that's certainly not untrue, as I said, it has to do with what society expects men to be. A man should be TALL, first and foremost, THEN good looking, in shape, financially successful, confident (which depends greatly on these factors to begin with), etc. Many people, women and men alike, do not see short men as "real men," and let me tell you, as a man, there is no greater pain than having your masculinity taken away from you. There's also more pressure for us, on a very primal level, to go out there and "land" a woman. I understand we're in 2018 and many women don't think these basic "rules" still apply, but as much as you might deny it, they do. Women still want men to dominate (be more masculine then them in all ways, aka "be the man in the relationship") them physically (not financially, women can and should make as much as we do, and I applaud them for that!), and height is a huge factor in this. Imagine being a very short man with few dating options, unable to afford LL - there's a greater likelihood this man will never find a woman. So you might say "men do LL just to get women," but it's a lot deeper than that.
Yes, as a short woman, you might get jabs from family and friends and in the workplace, and that I'm sure sucks. I didn't mean to downplay that. And of course, it has to do with your own self image too. But at least your womanhood or attractiveness (in most cases, unless the man in question really likes tall women, which in my opinion most men don't care about womens' height that much) or ability to attract a life partner isn't nearly as greatly reduced.
You must be logged in to post a reply.
