WHO accused of stacking group in charge of guidelines for new global ‘self-ID’ with biased trans activists

The globalists’ aim at pushing “self-identification” was knocked as “trans bias” after the United Nations agency announced a meeting to produce a guideline for “gender diverse people.”

In February, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guideline development group (GDG) is slated to convene a meeting of 21 “experts” in Geneva, Switzerland focusing on five areas regarding the health of trans and gender diverse people.

The announcement was not long for backlash as it led off by acknowledging the groups behind the planned guidance included “WHO’s Departments of Gender, Rights and Equity — Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (GRE-DEI), Global HIV, Hepatitis and Sexually Transmitted Infections Programmes (HHS), and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH).”

Sex Matters campaign director of advocacy Helen Joyce readily pointed out in a report from the Daily Mail that, “The WHO has chosen a blatantly biased global expert group to write this draft guidance on treating trans-identified people. Almost all its members are known to support medical interventions for gender distress that have no evidence of efficacy, and growing evidence of harm.”

As the Daily Mail detailed, the guidelines of the group focused on the “provision of gender-affirming care, including hormones” and “legal recognition of self-determined gender identity.” Member Ayouba El Hamri “‘is a trans and feminist activist based in Morocco’ while Florence Ashley ‘is a transfeminine jurist and bioethicist’ and Yanyan Araña is ‘an empowered transgender woman’ who advocates for ‘the inclusivity and accessibility of sexual, reproductive, and transgender health care for the transgender community in the Philippines.'”

“This is part of a disturbing pattern worldwide,” said Joyce, “in which trans healthcare guidance and programmes are written by small, ideologically driven groups behind closed doors, and then presented as definitive.”

“The WHO should abandon its current draft and start over with a panel of genuine experts. The scientific evidence on risks and outcomes should be assessed rigorously and impartially, not through the lens of trans dogma, as it would be with any other public health issue,” the advocacy director contended.

Joyce’s cry for an unbiased approach was coupled with a petition reported to have garnered over 2,500 signatures requesting the WHO “go back to the drawing board.”

“The current panel is highly biased in favour of ‘gender-affirming’ approaches,” the petition read in part, “with an absence of critical perspectives.”

“The majority of the panel members have expressed strong views in favor of hormonal and surgical interventions for transition, dismissed known and potential risks associated with these interventions and denigrated psychotherapeutic approaches as ‘conversion therapy,'” it added in promoting the idea that the proverbial cake was already baked.”

The petition also made clear to voice concerns over the societal ramifications should the guidance promote acceptance of “self-identification” on legal documents like passports, including how readily women’s spaces could be violated.

“These issues have profound implications for both trans-identified individuals and society-at-large (particularly the rights of women and girls), and must not be rushed,” noted the petition.

Kevin Haggerty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles