Originally Posted by IHaveALight
Who here would sacrifice their balls not because they were told that they had testicular cancer or because they were told they will absolutely eventually get it but because they were told they had a high chance of getting it someday?
Can we stop with the idiotic false equivalences here? Testicles are not comparable to breasts in terms of "necessity". Once again, she decided against removing her ovaries, ostensibly because she didn't think the tradeoff was good enough (at this time).
The real (general) comparison is, would you accept what is essentially a purely cosmetic alteration (and a minor one at that, comparable to the alteration that millions of people make for non-medical purposes) of your body if you were told not doing so would almost certainly lead to a deadly disease?