Should I accept 600 quid to stick a beer bottle up my Gary

1. Medical harms are real, sometimes severe

Inserting non‑medical objects into the rectum can cause abrasion, laceration, thrombosed haemorrhoids, and — most seriously — rectal perforation that leads to peritonitis and septic shock; such complications sometimes require open abdominal surgery or creation of a colostomy to save the patient’s life ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. Emergency care often means sedation, imaging and surgery

When a foreign object becomes retained the clinical pathway frequently includes a focused history, imaging (x‑ray or CT), digital and endoscopic examination, and removal by clinicians skilled in the procedure; removal can require local or general anesthesia in the operating room, and occasionally the rectum must be surgically opened to extract the item ^{[5] [6] [7] [8]}.

3. Bottles and similar household items are a documented cause of severe cases

Case reports and series show that bottles and other household objects can become lodged, migrate proximally into the colon, or remain for long periods — one published case involved a beverage bottle inserted for sexual gratification that required laparotomy five years later — illustrating the potential for long‑term harm and delayed presentation driven by shame ^{[4] [8] [3]}.

4. Infection and long‑term sequelae are not negligible

Non‑sterile objects and traumatic mucosal injury raise the risk of local infection and bacteremia; once the bowel is breached, fecal contamination of the abdominal cavity can lead to peritonitis and sepsis with major downstream consequences for health and recovery ^{[1] [9] [2]}.

5. Psychological, social and consent issues matter

Literature on rectal foreign bodies documents stigma, delayed care and inaccurate histories; motivations range from consensual sexual practices to assault or coercion, meaning any offer accompanied by pressure, humiliation, intoxication, or imbalance of power must be treated as a red flag because it increases both physical and psychosocial risk ^{[3] [10] [8]}.

6. Safer alternatives and harm reduction exist

If the aim is sexual experimentation, clinicians and patient‑education sources recommend devices designed for anal use — with a flared base and materials intended for insertion — and avoiding improvised household objects; such devices reduce but do not eliminate risk, and medical attention should be sought promptly for any retained object or persistent pain ^{[6] [11] [7]}.

7. The money versus risk calculus — an evidence‑based conclusion

Medical literature does not place a monetary value on bodily injury, but it does document serious, sometimes life‑altering outcomes from inserting household objects into the rectum; accepting £600 in exchange for the act of inserting a beer bottle exposes one to documented physical risks, potential emergency surgery, infection and long‑term consequences that commonly outweigh short‑term cash offers, especially if the encounter is not clearly consensual and safe ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. Sources reviewed do not provide legal or ethical guidance about exchanging money for sexual acts, so those dimensions cannot be adjudicated from this medical literature alone ^{[5] [8]}.

8. Bottom line

From the clinical evidence, inserting a beer bottle into the rectum is a high‑risk act: documented complications include perforation, sepsis and surgery and safer, purpose‑made alternatives exist; therefore, taking £600 to have a bottle inserted is medically inadvisable and fraught with avoidable harms unless the activity is replaced by consensual, safer alternatives and performed with informed understanding of the risks — and this medical literature does not address the legal, ethical or personal safety implications of the payment itself ^{[1] [2] [6] [4]}.