The World Health Organization has updated its “gender mainstreaming manual,” whatever tf that is.
The first edition of the manual dates from 2011, and WHO is now updating it in light of new scientific evidence and conceptual progress on gender, health and development.
Conceptual progress? More like regress.
The review and update process will build on the extensive work already featured in the manual. It will focus on:
1. Updating key concepts around gender;
…
3. Going beyond non-binary approaches to gender and health to recognize gender and sexual diversity, or the concepts that gender identity exists on a continuum and that sex is not limited to male or female.
4. Introducing new gender, equity and human rights frameworks and tools to further support capacity building around these concepts and the integration of their approaches in the work of WHO.
But of course sex is limited to female and male. Oh so fascinating and enigmatic Jonquettamin is still one or the other, even if intersex. It’s embarrassing to see a UN body talking teenagery nonsense.
Comments
6 responses to “In light of new scientific evidence”
“sex is not limited to male or female.”
Cool, the WHO now lies about biology. This will definitely not backfire.
I wonder if they’ve changed their definition of “gender.” I copied it a while back because I thought it useful:
My guess is that their conceptual progress has made their updated definition less useful. The word “gender” in “gender identity” can’t refer to that, because it’s supposed to involve a rejection of stereotypes. They’ll have to add
in “… and a personal conception of self” like Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality finishing her aspirations with “…and world peace.”
It occurs to me to wonder if it’s even possible for people of gender and the rest of us to be even talking about the same thing. We absorb the rules of gender without knowing we’re doing it, starting before we can form distinct memories. It’s not a conscious process. Claiming to be the other gender is an inherently conscious process. The two seem to pass each other without touching.
Well I suppose it’s possible to progress development of a regressive concept.
WHAT “new” and “scientific” “evidence” would that be?
Bring receipts, or it didn’t happen.
I was leaning towards there being no such thing as “gender” and human sexuality being the female and male binary, but then Barbie Kardashian presented a brilliant paper that scientifically established transgenderism on an unbreakable scientific foundation.