WHO ‘Going Beyond Non-Binary Approaches’ Because ‘Sex is Not Limited to Male or Female’

WHO ‘Going Beyond Non-Binary Approaches’ Because ‘Sex is Not Limited to Male or Female’

The World Health Organization has lost any credibility it had after COVID.

WHO chooses to ignore basic biology by updating “its widely-used gender mainstreaming manual” by eliminating sexes and expanding on intersectionality.

The radicals conquered “gender.” Now they’re going after sexes. They cannot accept the fact that nature only has two sexes: male and female:

The Gender mainstreaming for health managers: a practical approach manual addresses how gender norms, roles and relations affect health-related behaviours and outcomes as well as health sector responses. At the same time, it recognizes that gender inequality is a cross-cutting determinant of health that operates in conjunction with other forms of discrimination based on factors such as age, socioeconomic status, ethnicity or place of origin and sexual orientation. The manual provides a basis for addressing other forms of health-related discrimination.

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

From WHO (its emphasis):

1. Updating key concepts around gender;

2. Highlighting and expanding on the concept of intersectionality, which looks at how gender power dynamics interact with other hierarchies of privilege or disadvantage, resulting in inequality and differential health outcomes for different people. Intersecting factors include sex, ethnicity, race, age, class, socioeconomic status, religion, language, geographical location, disability status, migration status, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation and political situation.

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.

“Sex is not limited to male or female.”

Did WHO find a way to change our chromosomes? Because unless you can change your chromosomes you cannot change your sex.

Did WHO find more chromosomes and duos? There’s more than XX and XY? Because if they didn’t then we only have male and female.

The science world says there is no evidence we have more than two sexes:

Dr Karleen Gribble, an expert in nursing and midwifery from Western Sydney University, told MailOnline the WHO’s announcement was unscientific.

‘The wording regarding there being more than male and female sexes is concerning,’ she said.

‘The website says that the handbook is being updated “in light of new scientific evidence and conceptual progress on gender, health and development”.

‘However, there is no new scientific evidence suggesting there are more than two sexes.

‘Rather, the idea that there are more than two sexes, is a postmodern, unscientific understanding that should not be supported by the WHO.’

Legal Insurrection has many posts about intersectionality. In July 2019, Professor Jacobson addressed the issue at the DOJ Summit on Combatting Anti-Semitism. He said intersectionality has become “a toxic mixture of racial and identity politics where anti-Zionism is the unifying feature.”

I bring up intersectionality because WHO mentioned “political situation” in its section about expanding the concept in the new manual.

The bossman explained intersectionality in his speech, first coined in 1989 about the problems “black women faced in obtaining justice in the judicial system:

As originally authored, the concept of intersectionality was meant to address the unique problems, in her perspective, that black women faced in obtaining justice in the judicial system. That the sex discrimination laws addressed discrimination against women and the race discrimination laws addressed the discrimination against minorities, particularly blacks. But in her estimation, none of those laws and none of those legal analyses, adequately addressed people, in her article black women, who were at the intersection of multiple identities which were suffering.

So in, in her words, she termed intersectionality as something, as a way of looking at from a judicial and discrimination law perspective, how to better liberate, if you will, black women from those two forces of sex discrimination and race discrimination that they uniquely suffered. That in her words, black men did not suffer and white women did not suffer because they did not have that intersecting identity.

Intersectionality did not have anything to do with politics or Israel. But the left and radicals use it as a way to attack Jews and Israel.

The bringing up of Israel might seem random but WHO has anti-Semitism in its past. A Google search of “World Health Organization anti-semitism” brings back numerous hits going back years. Here are a few.

• 2016: ‘World Health Organization condemnation of Israel is anti-Semitism,’ says Lapid
• 2019: WHO, France and dabbling in anti-Semitism
• 2020: WHO They Hate: The World Health Organization vs. Israel

WHO wants people “to provide inputs and feedback” for the rest of the year.

Something tells me WHO won’t listen to people like you and me.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.