Trump has dumped the World Health Organization. Hurrah!

President Trump just defunded the World Health Organization — again. He did the same thing the last time he took office.

Trump’s hasty withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) this time around was likely spurred by the WHO’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic and by the possibility of a WHO pandemic treaty that critics say could essentially handcuff governments around the world in the event of a global “emergency.”

But the same old rotten reasons to abandon the WHO are still around and are still reeking like sewage from a deep, dark pit.

Sex for kids

The World Health Organization (WHO)—one of the original UN entities launched in the late 1940s—is an avid supporter of “sexual rights” for children and comprehensive sexuality education. Comprehensive sexuality education is based on the concept that children have “sexual rights” that must be upheld and protected.

Comprehensive sexuality education programs teach children to seek out sexual information, question their parents’ moral teaching, and engage in sexually arousing behaviour from an early age. They also de-emphasize the need for love and commitment in sexual relationships and frame abortion as a human right. To be clear, we’re not talking about just teaching children the biological logistics of sex and how to avoid sexual disease. We’re talking about full scale promotion of all kinds of sex for all ages of people (see here.)

The WHO’s name and logo appears on the front cover of UNESCO’s “International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education” published in January 2018. This document—posted on the WHO website—is laced with references to childhood sexuality, including these statements:

  • “[Young] people want and need sexuality and sexual health information as early and comprehensively as possible.”
  • Children should have “agency in their own sexual practices and relationships.”
  • Comprehensive Sexuality Education can “help children … form respectful and healthy relationships with … sexual partners.”

More sex for kids

The 2009 version* of UNESCO’s “International Guidelines on Sexuality Education,” which was officially endorsed by the WHO, was intended to guide comprehensive sexuality education programs in schools globally. It included these statements:

Learning Objectives for Level I (ages 5-8):

  • “Girls and boys have private body parts that can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself.”
  • “Touching and rubbing one’s genitals is called masturbation.”
  • “Masturbation is not harmful, but should be done in private.”
  • “All people regardless of their health status, religion, origin, race or sexual status can raise a child and give it the love it deserves.”

Learning Objectives for Level II (ages 9-12):

  • “Relationship between excitement and vaginal lubrication, penile erection and ejaculation.”
  • “Many boys and girls begin to masturbate during puberty.”
  • “Steps for proper use of condoms.”
  • “Definition and function of orgasm.”
  • “Legal abortion performed under sterile conditions by medically trained personnel is safe.”

Learning Objectives for Level III (ages 12-15):

  • “Respect for the different sexual orientations and gender identity.”
  • “Definition, reasons for, and legality of abortion.”
  • “Health risks associated respectively with safe and legal abortion, and with illegal and unsafe abortion.”
  • “Definition and description of the physical changes and stages of male and female human sexual response including orgasm.”
  • “Sexual behaviours include kissing, touching, talking, caressing, oral intercourse and penetration.”

Even more sex for kids

The WHO has partnered with International Planned Parenthood Federation—a global abortion promoter and advocate for sexual rights for children—on a wide range of projects for years. International Planned Parenthood’s 2011 document, “Exclaim! Young People’s Guide to ‘Sexual Rights: An IPPF declaration’” makes these statements:

  • “Young people are sexual beings. … It is important for all young people around the world to be able to explore, experience and express their sexualities in healthy, positive, pleasurable and safe ways. This can only happen when young people’s sexual rights are guaranteed.”
  • “Sexuality and sexual pleasure are important parts of being human for everyone — no matter what age, no matter if you’re married or not and no matter if you want to have children or not.”
  • “There is a common misconception that young people are not or should not be sexual beings with the exception of certain groups, such as married young people or young people above a certain age. Sexuality is a central aspect of being human during all phases of each person’s life.”

Notice the phrases “no matter what age” and “at all phases of each person’s life,” which appear to make no exception nor distinction for anyone—even toddlers or babies.

A grand finale: let’s legalize prostitution worldwide

And in case you need any more reasons to dislike this morally bankrupt entity, the WHO supports decriminalizing prostitution or “sex work”. In fact, at DecriminalizeSex.Work, the WHO is listed as an official supporter of the decriminalization cause. Despite the insistence by some powerful voices that decriminalizing sex work will result in rosy outcomes for sex workers and for society at large, that claim has been thoroughly debunked by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation and elsewhere.

With all this in mind, a standing ovation might be in order for the Trump administration and any other administration with the political will to distance itself from the World Health Organization.

*After public protest, these guidelines were later somewhat modified, but the original guidelines still remain posted on the UNHRC website.  


Forward this article to your friends.  


Kimberly Ells is the author of The Invincible Family. Follow her at Invincible Family Substack.

Image credit: Bigstock   


 

icon

Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

Showing 17 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Janet Grevillea
    commented 2025-01-30 08:55:31 +1100
    Julie Bindel has a new article out on prostitution in Amersterdam. It begins . . .“Amsterdam, often hailed as the sex Mecca of Europe is to have a major face-lift. After 25 years of legalised window brothels, attracting hordes of British and other European stag parties, politicians, police, citizens and even many of the prostituted women themselves are admitting that state-sanctioned buying and selling of women is a failed social experiment.”

    https://juliebindel.substack.com/p/amsterdamnation?triedRedirect=true
  • Quentin Neill
    commented 2025-01-28 07:57:34 +1100
    Paul Bunyan wrote:

    > Incidentally, rape skyrocketed after Roe was overturned, since predators saw an opportunity to “choose the mothers of their children.”
    > https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/01/24/1226161416/rape-caused-pregnancy-abortion-ban-states

    Interesting choice of words – “skyrocketed” – given that study is hotly contested. Okay I used the word “hotly” when really it is just seriously doubted as to accuracy and reliability.

    Readers:

    I read the study summary and found out
    • the study is done by Dr. Dickman who works for Planned Parenthood
    • Dr. Dickman is a plaintiff in lawsuits challenging abortion restrictions
    • the study is an adjusted(x4) estimate from a survey – adjusted along at least four dimensions:
      – they start with a national 2016-2017 survey from the CDC
      – they adjust for age-related data from another annual survey from the BJS
      – they adjust for uncertainty and vaginal rapes
      – they adjust for national vs state-level, apportioning to rape estimates from the FBI
      – they multiply by a “fraction likely” to get pregnant


    Read into that what you will. I for one deeply distrust Planned Parenthood, the study, and the data, but who am I to comment?

    Read what some scholars think instead – which is basically the same thing:
    https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/256670/scholars-dispute-study-that-claims-thousands-of-rape-related-pregnancies-in-pro-life-states
  • Jürgen Siemer
    commented 2025-01-27 19:20:15 +1100
    Hurra!
  • mrscracker
    I don’t understand Mr. Bunyan’s comments either Miss Janet but perhaps he could explain.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2025-01-26 00:36:06 +1100
    Janet,

    I find the consequences of your vote to be reprehensible, and yet, here we are.

    Super glad Trump cut funding for AIDs/HIV world wide, I’m
    sure this will have no negative consequences
  • Janet Grevillea
    commented 2025-01-25 20:03:11 +1100
    Paul Bunyan I find your views incomprehensible.
  • Paul Bunyan
    commented 2025-01-25 11:31:08 +1100
    Ms Grevillea, that would be an exception. Rape is obviously not prostitution because it’s not consensual.

    Incidentally, rape skyrocketed after Roe was overturned, since predators saw an opportunity to “choose the mothers of their children.”

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/01/24/1226161416/rape-caused-pregnancy-abortion-ban-states
  • Janet Grevillea
    commented 2025-01-25 08:32:42 +1100
    Paul Bunyan, and rape?
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2025-01-25 00:26:23 +1100
    See you all in three months when bird flu is raging and Trump is telling us “if the media stops covering it it will go away”
  • Paul Bunyan
    commented 2025-01-24 21:40:24 +1100
    Ms Grevillea, all sex is prostitution. You either pay with entertainment, dinner etc, or you pay directly in cash. All other differences are moot.

    And if there was COVID mismanagement, it occurred in the US, where the rate of death was higher than any other country.
  • Janet Grevillea
    commented 2025-01-23 17:53:19 +1100
    So a global organisation that is supposed to safeguard our health, perhaps work towards eliminating a major killer like malaria, is focussed on sexual behaviour, especially in children. What sort of view of life is behind that?

    As for prostitution I wonder why my country, Australia, refuses to bring in the Nordic model, which makes prostitution criminal behaviour for those who buy sex, but not for those who sell it.

    Julie Bindel has written a book about prostitution “The Pimping of Prostitution: Abolishing the Sex Work Myth”. ”https://www.spinifexpress.com.au/juliebindel" rel="nofollow">https://www.spinifexpress.com.au/juliebindel
  • Emberson Fedders
    commented 2025-01-23 12:59:34 +1100
    Man, MAGA thinks A LOT about sex.
  • mrscracker
    You didn’t ask me Mr. Mouse but I personally oppose teen marriage bans. I know a number of people who married under the age of 18 and perhaps you do too..
    If we’re talking about two young people with honorable intentions it’s one thing. When teens find themselves in a family way and want their child to grow up in a home with two married parents, judges have traditionally given permission for that exception. To me that seems like a humane and decent thing and we shouldn’t ban it.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2025-01-23 05:29:08 +1100
    Kim,

    May I call you Kim? What are your thoughts on the GOP opposing child marriage bans?

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/republican-lawmakers-child-marriage-abortion-1235018777/
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2025-01-22 23:22:41 +1100
    Keeping sex work illegal and taboo leads to further abuse of women. Allowing for decriminalizing / legalization allows for better policing (let’s face it, there are going to be prostitutes regardless of legality) and protection of women.

    So I have to ask why you want to make it more dangerous for women simply because you disapprove of their means income.
  • mrscracker
    It sounds like the same nonsense we heard back in the 1970s.
  • Kimberly Ells
    published this page in The Latest 2025-01-22 12:32:46 +1100