Zero sex life? World Health Organisation says you’re disabled. If you’re unable to find a sexual partner or lack a sexual relationship, you need treatment. Wow.
Quite simply, a person is disabled when they have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long term negative effect on their ability to do normal daily activities.
WHO currently defines infertility as a disease of the reproductive system which fails to achieve a clinical pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse.
The World Health Organisation is set to change THAT standard to suggest that a person who is unable to find a sexual partner or is lacking a sexual relationship to have children will be classified as disabled. According to WHO, this is to provide every individual with the “right to reproduce”.
A right of one should not endanger the rights of another.
WHO’s decision, in that way, doesn’t make an iota of sense. Under this decision, the asexual community is practically disabled! The underlying assumption that every person is a sexual being shows how ignorant the WHO is on the issues that concern different sexualities.
The justification lies on the fact that under this new law, heterosexual single men and women and gay men and women will be given the same priority as a couple seeking IVF, because not being able to produce children through “natural” intercourse will come under “disability”, and this will ease up the process of getting an IVF for homosexual couples.
Doesn’t it sound like covering a mountain of waste with humus, and growing a grass carpet on it?
Shouldn’t the first step be to recognize homosexual relationships, and ease the process of “right to parenthood”? WHO’s decision is homophobic to matter of homosexuality.
And wait, what about women who don’t want children? Are they disabled too?
Countries will be bound by this amendment, and the definition will be an international legal standard, says Dr David Adamson, one of the authors of the revised definition.
The Indian population already perceives singlehood as a problem and infertility a taboo. This move by the WHO will legitimize the social stigma that comes attached to the aforementioned cases.
People can be publicly labeled disabled, and no objection will be raised against it because this is how the WHO guidelines operate. If “disability” is incorporated in the normal Indian vocabulary, it will shoot up the cases of marital rape – a man will not prefer to be publicly patronized because the couple can’t conceive, hence it will lead to continuous sexual violence.
WHO, in the past, has also defined disability as a social condition.
People who generally have poor health, experience illiteracy or have higher rates of poverty face barriers in everyday life, and hence categorized disability as a development issue.
This definition is a reiteration of regressive practices being followed around the world in the name of “reproductive rights”, like total ban on abortion. It is a failed half-hearted effort to declare “reproductive equality”, whatever they want it to mean.
Other Recommendations:
http://edtimes.in/2016/10/who-urges-to-increase-tax-on-sugary-drinks-do-these-decisions-actually-work/
