PLEASE COMMENT on WHO’s NEW DEFINITIONS of TRANSGENDERISM!

This is your opportunity to comment on transgenderism (“gender incongruence”) in the 11th revision of the draft International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

transgender-bullshitThe ICD system (currently ICD-10), developed and published by the World Health Organization (WHO), is the international standard diagnostic tool for epidemiology, health management and clinical purposes. It is used worldwide for morbidity and mortality statistics, reimbursement systems, and automated decision support in health care.

In developing its draft definitions for transgenderist conditions, WHO consulted with “researchers” and activists from the crooked and non-evidence-based “World Professional Association for Transgender Health” (WPATH). In February 2013, WHO and WPATH convened a “consensus meeting” to decide which conditions and definitions hurt trans-folks’ feelings too much, and should thus be thrown out or at least defined as vaguely as possible.

Not surprisingly, WPATH wanted to have it both ways, so that transgenderist conditions were simultaneously de-pathologized and made eligible for health care insurance coverage.

Anyway, the process is pretty far along by now, but it is not too late for people to weigh in on the draft definitions. In fact, WHO is HOPING that people will weigh in. You can do it online, in the draft “beta” version of ICD-11. So far, only one other person besides myself has provided input in this way.

We have until late 2015 to make comments. [edit May 2017: comments still accepted; opportunity will likely end soon.] ICD-11 will be released in 2017 2018. It is crucial that WHO receive comments from people who are critical of “gender,” to counter the self-serving definitions written by transgender activists, as well as to refute their foolish comments.

Please go here, register and make comments on the definitions. The web site is a bit “pokey” and confusing, but I’m sure you can figure it out.

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

After you register, look to the left panel: “Conditions related to sexual health”

Within that framework are the “gender incongruence” definitions. Open those, so you can comment separately on the ones for adults and children.

Look for a little flag where it says “Definition.” Click on that, and you can make comments. In addition to making comments, please “Agree” with posts made by gender-critical folks.

You can also propose drastic changes or even make whole new proposals.

You won’t be able to see other people’s comments until you register.

Of note: In an effort to pretend autogynephilia doesn’t exist, the WPATH/WHO consensus meeting voted to delete the whole category of “fetishistic transvestism.”

Also, “gender” is not defined anywhere. It is naturalized, just sort of “understood” that transgenderist cravings to mimic stereotypes of the other sex have some biological basis. This “lack” of definition conflicts with WHO’s own definition of gender, elsewhere on their site.

Here is the report of what the transgenderist lobby decided: From a document called “WPATH Consensus Process regarding transgender and transsexual-related diagnoses in the ICD-11”:

The Working Group’s initial recommendations, which were reviewed at the meeting, include the following:

  • A reconceptualization of ICD-10 category F64.0 Transsexualism as ‘Gender Incongruence of Adolescence and Adulthood’, characterized by ‘a marked and persistent incongruence between an individual’s experienced gender and the assigned sex’.
  • A reconceptualization of ICD-10 category F64.2 Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood as ‘Gender Incongruence of Childhood’ characterized by ‘a marked incongruence between an individual’s experienced/expressed gender and the assigned sex in pre-pubertal children’.
  • Deletion of the ICD-10 category of F64.1 Dual Role Transvestism.
  • Moving the Gender Incongruence categories out of the ICD-11 chapter on Mental and Behavioural Disorders. There are various options for the placement of this category; the option with the broadest support across the ICD revision is to create a new chapter on conditions related to sexuality, of which Gender Incongruence would be a part.
  • Elimination of many existing F65 categories, specifically those that involve consensual or solitary activity that is not distressing to the individual, including F65.1 Fetishistic Transvestism.
  • Elimination of all existing categories under “Psychological and Behavioural Disorders associated with Sexual Development and Orientation” (F66), including F66.0 Sexual Maturation Disorder; F66.1 Egodystonic Sexual Orientation, and F66.2 Sexual Relationship Disorder. ICD-10 indicates that all of these categories may be assigned based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

FIELD TESTING OF THE PROPOSALS
As a next step, WHO will subject the Working Group’s initial recommendations to field testing in a variety of relevant health care settings in different WHO regions, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The purpose of field testing is to assess:

  • The acceptability of the proposals to health professionals and to the affected communities;
  • The reliability and the coherence of the constructs;
  • The global clinical utility of the proposed categories, definitions, and diagnostic guidelines;
  • The validity of the categories as predictors of health care needs; and
  • The usefulness of the categories in accessing health care services.

Based on the peer review process and comments received so far from professional groups and civil society, WHO has indicated that the greatest question about the above proposals concerns the need for a category of Gender Incongruence of Childhood. There appear to be different, valid perspectives on this issue. Therefore, the clinical utility and need for this category, as well as the potential consequences of its use, will be a particular focus of field testing. If such a category is retained in ICD-11, it will be placed in the same chapter as ‘Gender Incongruence of Adolescence and Adulthood’.

The field tests will involve internet-based methodologies to assess acceptability and feasibility, and subsequently clinic-based methodologies to assess the use of the classification by health professionals and clients in real-life settings. Country based field tests will be conducted within a multi-stakeholder process including the involvement of academic institutions, government ministries with special attention to the ministry of health, civil society, professional associations and other relevant actors.

The field study process will also include review and analysis of legal and policy issues that affect the utilization of health services by the affected populations. WHO has invited WPATH to collaborate actively in the field testing process.

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “PLEASE COMMENT on WHO’s NEW DEFINITIONS of TRANSGENDERISM!”

    1. Click where it says: “Participate in the ICD revision.”

      On the page where you then arrive, you will see: “If you wish to participate in the Beta Phase please register or sign-in here. Registering will provide you additional functionality such as accessing print materials, commenting, making change proposals, receiving notifications, etc. “

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Hi, it’s not all that clear but click the link provided and midway down the page it says “ICD-11 Highlights” and under that it has “register to become involved” and you can then sign in.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Oh goddess. This is really horrible ‘activism’. I would like to implore women not to forward it.

    It repeats the myth that M.E. and ‘CFS’ are the same thing – although it gets them so badly wrong that it gets *both* their names wrong. There is actually no such thing as ‘myalgic encephalitis’ (it is *encephalomyelitis*) and ‘Chronic Fatigue Syndrome’ is not the same thing as ‘chronic fatigue’.

    It is because of this kind of misinformation that the capitalist-based medical system has been able to get out of providing people with M.E. with proper support – because conflating a disease that is well-researched and testable for (and centred on neuro and cardiovascular/cardiac problems) with a vague, untestable fatigue-centred syndrome is a *brilliant* method of justifying denying patients adequate treatment. Why bother testing for something that’s vague and unfindable, right?

    So it’s very unlikely to be effective in persuading the government to help – especially as the petition-writer clearly had no idea what she was doing, hence getting the names so badly wrong. It just perpetuates the myths used to oppress patients and deny us treatment, making the government *more* likely to continue what it’s doing.

    Like

  2. A bunch of trans hating women who never went beyond half of the 1970ies feminism apparently set this up. Never understood that biology isn’t destiny. Ready to team up with women hating-institutions as the church, regardless of its attitude towards sexual rights. Just because they seem to have an axe to grind with trans women. Trans women aren’t a natural phenomenon of gender diversity to these “trans critical” people. That feminist scientist Fausto-Sterling already for + 20 years told there are more than two sexes and gender diversity is not a moral issue but a fact, which even Nature now acknowledges, is irrelevant because not “gender critical”.

    I would think it is good and honourful of WPATH and WHO to not want to pathologise what is just diversity. Just disagreeing with something is not a valid ground for declaring it unhealthy. Not wanting health care for trans people to be covered by insurance is just vicious. It means that to you certain people have no right the highest attainable standard of health, just because of who they are. And what are your rights or science based arguments actually?

    But hey, if you want to end up in the rear guard of historical positive change for men, women and the rest of us .. feel free. Just realise who your powerful friends are (the French “manif pour tous”, the Vatican, ..). It may make you reconsider. But I think I am casting pearls before swine.

    Good luck, or rather not.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. More misrepresentation. Read above. That is not what people are doing–trying to get trans health ‘uncovered’. The same old lies you folks perpetuate about women who are gender critical. You, as a trans person, which your comment seems to reveal, ought to be concerned about the nonsensical and dangerous approaches to normalizing gender. You are in the most conservative position allying yourselves with the Christian fundamentalist right (amongst other religious margins), who identify gender as real, as immutable and as necessarily linked to a specific body. The trans movement is way behind the rest of society which has for decades recognized that gender is non-binary and that bodies should not be ‘corrected’ by dangerous and extremely unfounded medical practices. Plastic surgery is not the panacea to ‘gender identity’ issues. Sorry, but this is the biggest nonsense stitched together by WPATH which is nothing other than a lobby driven by money. That people have ‘issues’ with gender is not up for debate, nor is the fact that they need help. But humans have an obligation when we see ‘remedies’ for gender filling the very prescriptive and sexist tropes that for centuries have created the terrain for transgenderism. You don’t cure racism by telling a black person to get their skin lightened, no matter how deep their desire is to live a life free of this personal struggle to be accepted. What a loving and responsible person does is to change society and you help that individual accept their body.

      Liked by 4 people

    2. “… which even nature recognizes…”

      Thank you for the lol. I needed a good laugh, picturing the squirrels in my yard declaring that they are not male squirrels at all, they want to now be recognized as and live as female squirrels. My god, trans arguments get more far fetched and more ridiculous every day! You should not be allowed access to a computer.

      -BBB

      Liked by 3 people

    3. Ah yes the classic “have my cake and eat it too” shtick.

      “Dont pathologize transsexuality!” only to immediately state “But free health care is a necessity!”. Can’t have it both ways, buddy.

      Like

    4. We know biology isn’t destiny. You’re the ones confused by this.

      Gender isn’t biology. It’s sex-based stereotype. There’s no such thing as a manbrain. No such thing as a ladybrain. You cannot biologically decide you’re female because you like pink sparkly things or wearing lingerie. You cannot biologically decide you’re male because you like football and think heels are silly. None of these things are biological, therefore we are not hardwired about them.

      One’s physical sex is for making babies. If you are not making babies, or going through the motions as if to make babies, anything else you want to do is open to both sexes. Nothing is “gendered” except that public or personal opinion makes it so. Again, not biological.

      There is no reason to have a transgender category at all. If someone’s got some form of body dysphoria, they need effective therapy, not hormones and surgery. Right now people who aren’t autogynephiles are resorting to hormones and surgery because the medical community is a bunch of a**holes and sexist and homophobic as h*ll and not willing to develop any other treatment. But none of these patients actually need hormones and surgery, in fact the suicide rate goes up among trans if they’ve physically transitioned. Go read that interview with Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner again and see what his reaction was when he first woke up from facial feminization surgery. He’s had tons of social support for his change. Most trans don’t. They’re making a total mess of their lives and they genuinely do not know better, everyone tells them this is best. And that’s what happens when you take a totally sexist stance on what it means to have an individual personality that doesn’t buy into the gender narrative, said narrative being that males have to look and act one way while females have to look and act another.

      It won’t be us who turn out to be on the wrong side of history. We say you are fine the way you are no matter how you want to dress or act. It doesn’t mean you’re in the wrong body or that you need fixing. Too bad it’s us old intolerant dinosaurs trying to get that message out, and not you tolerant folk.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. The WHO site is really buggy. It would not display the Captcha widget at the bottom of the complete registration form in either Safari or Firefox. I had to use Tor to successfully register at the site. Just as an FYI.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Hi, I could have been what most would call a MTF transgender… but I chose not to. So I kind of agree with the key argument in your website: the gender identity thing is probably wrong (for many transgender anyway) and the sexual aspect of it kind of hidden / ignored. However it took me a while to figure it out (I am almost 40) and my life has been impacted (negatively) big time by this issue – Not to compare “our” issue with more dramatic personal problems we all have but that is still 30 years of constant questioning about who you are, questions all of us are afraid to discuss openly… I think your website makes it sound like transgender men are doing this on purpose, that they know they have an issue but refuse to admit it… That is just plain wrong, they may sense that this is wrong but the transgender feeling is very very strong and relentless, trust me it is extremely difficult to control… I have really only managed when I took anti-androgen for a while, really helps. So what I am saying is yes you probably have a point, the media is currently presenting one view of the problem and somebody should point out the issues in the gender identity theory. But saying that “we” are in fact orchestrating this on purpose for sexual gratification is not true – I wish that it was that simple trust me. To me the message should be: for those of you that suffer from feeling transgender, please consider all the theories carefully and try hard to separate sexual desires from you true self…

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s