THE FEVERED and irrational tone of the article "The great castrator" (Review, 31 October) was interesting, if not particularly surprising. The castrator Bodkin, bizarre and dangerously unqualified though he is, only operated on men who wanted his services and does not appear to have posed as a qualified surgeon. In spite of that, he is equated in the article with serial killers and devil worshippers, and his customers are described as victims. His flat is called the "House of Horrors", inevitably calling to mind torturers and murderers such as Fred West.
I have never seen such language used of rapists, child abusers or traffickers in sexual slaves. If large numbers of men believe that a man who castrates other (consenting) men is as bad as a murderer or torturer and worse than a rapist or slaver, should we allow them to be judges and legislators?