Single men and women without medical issues will be classed as “infertile” if they do not have children but want to become a parent, the World Health Organisation is to announce.
In a move which dramatically changes the definition of infertility, the WHO will declare that it should no longer be regarded as simply a medical condition.
The authors of the new global standards said the revised definition gave every individual “the right to reproduce”.
Until now, the WHO’s definition of infertility – which it classes as a disability – has been the failure to achieve pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sex.
But the new standard suggests that the inability to find a suitable sexual partner – or the lack of sexual relationships which could achieve conception – could be considered an equal disability.
When do we start nationalising wombs so that this new right can be enjoyed by single men?
And how would the current mass abortions fit into all this?
I look forward to watching them impose this on China, which has a shortage of young ladies.
Perhaps the answer will be to allow an invasion of more neighbouring countries in order to plunder their chaste treasure.
Inability to find sexual partner = disablilty = Hookers on the NHS?
Every citizen has the “right” to reproduce?
Good lord. I’m damned if I can see how this will work. So- let’s pretend I’m a hideous munter of the male variety. Let’s pretend that I feel incomplete without an offspring that I can live vicariously through. Y’know, teach him guitar at the age of three so he can shred his way into the beds of young nubile ladies in a way that my hideous visage has prevented me from doing. All those usual healthy reasons to become a parent. How do I claim my right to reproduce?
If I cannot afford a wife or surrogate, does the state provide one? Do I have the right to select an appropriate baby bank for my seed? How does this work?
Let us leave aside whether it’s even a good idea- A fair few of my circle of friends shouldn’t have been allowed to reproduce in the first instance.
John Square – not *just* the right to reproduce, but apparently to pick your partner:
“suitable” being a pretty elastic concept. I’ll take Charlize Theron, thanks.
What this is, is an example of reverse engineering communism: no need for a cadre to seize power and impose it, when you’ve got an influential independent (cough) body proposing something which people then demand through the courts, bypassing electorates just as effectively as seizing power top-down.
Python got there first. Wasn’t it the People’s Front of Judea who established the right of men to have babies…?
(Or was it the Judea People’s Front….?)
The right to reproduce?
Why do I instantly think that in 5 years time our masters will decide we have the responsibility to reproduce…
I suspect they’d be more likely to decide we have the responsibility not to reproduce, given the attraction of Malthus to the bureaucratic mind.
John Square: “If I cannot afford a wife or surrogate, does the state provide one? “
Yes. To the same quality as the other services they provide.
JuliaM
I’ll pass, then!
Where do we stop? Two immediate additional problems spring to mind:
1) Children are (or should be) hard work and expensive.
2) Children vary in quality.
Dongguan John – hookers on the NHS – the Dutch are already there.
A disabled man claimed his human rights included the right to sex. But his disability prevented him getting a willing partner. The state forked out for a monthly visit by a prostitute.
Dongguan John – “Inability to find sexual partner = disablilty = Hookers on the NHS?”
With Brexit will it be cheaper to send them all to Thailand?
I assume this is part of a push to make IVF available to all. On the government’s budget too. After all, policy is not about men or enabling men to do things. It is about women and protecting them from the consequences of their choices.
I suggest a better alternative – unmarried women over 16 should be forced to pay a hefty poll tax.
SMfS, well the NHS is already full of Filipino nurses, so they could import the Thai hookers and have brothel wards. You’ll need a note from your doctor first, of course, to get which you’ll have to claim if you don’t soon get laid you’ll go on a rape frenzy. The hookers will cost the taxpayers 30 times the market rate, although they will only see 1/50th of that, the rest going to administrative costs.
MB, why is it however ridiculous joke one makes, some government has beaten you to it in reality?
Wasn’t there a woman in Berlin who, in order to satisfy the requirement of her unemployment benefit that she not turn down job offers, was refused that benefit because she turned down an offer to work in a brothel?
Maybe “unprotected” isn’t a good word to use.
EL – yes, that happened. It was admin work, not the actual sex bit.
Remember the Iraqi refugee who raped a ten year old boy at a swimming pool in Austria, claiming it was a “sexual emergency”? Government-provided prostitutes might have prevented that emergency. Or not – widespread availability of brothels in Germany didn’t prevent Cologne.
So I have a right to have sex? A right to consume requires a responsibility to supply. Who’s going to ensure somebody will have sex with me?
With Brexit will it be cheaper to send them all to Thailand?
The way the pound is collapsing against the baht you’ll soon have Thai sex tourists sampling the delights of Brighton.
After all, policy is not about men or enabling men to do things. It is about women and protecting them from the consequences of their choices.
Exactly. It’s the inevitable result of telling women they don’t need a man only for them to find actually they do, and making a subset of women so fucking obnoxious no man wants them anyway.
Hookers on the NHS? But I have BUPA. Who does that entitle me to? Will the BUPA hookers be better than the NHS hookers?
That was exactly the punch line of the Alan Coren column on hte subject.
BUPA card gets you to the front of the queue outside the brothel.
The WHO really is gong bonkers.
Another thought: Could this be made to work like jury service? Men and women could be selected at random and sent a letter, informing them that they have to report to the local NHS hospital for breeding duty.
Imagine the poor face of an 18 year girl who receives a letter stating that she will have to carry the love child of a bloke called Angus MacChildless from Inverness.
Rob,
Going? Haven’t you been following Chris Snowden’s revelations over the anti-tobacco conferences and approach to vaping?
Not only Python Nautical Nick, but the Goodies predicted this insanity too. From about 14:20
“A man isn’t a man unless he exercises his right to fatherhood”
“You can exercise it all you like but you won’t find much use here mate!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDt4cDudm7c
“inability to find a suitable sexual partner”
The WHO do know the difference between finding someone to shag, and finding someone to raise your children with, right? Right?
Bueller?
Will the WHO explain to the horde of single-parent offspring why mummy/daddy doesn’t love them anymore?
“But the new standard suggests that the inability to find a suitable sexual partner – or the lack of sexual relationships which could achieve conception – could be considered an equal disability.”
Tumblr fat feminists will [attempt to] weaponise this. Don’t find her smelly folds of flab sexually appealing? YOU’RE DENYING HER BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS, SHITLORD!
The ROP are well ahead of them on this.
.
Good God! This means every spotty teenage boy and 90% of the world’s software designers are now officially infertile. Plus any grown man who plays with train sets or collects comic books. The species is doomed.
Dongguan John – “The hookers will cost the taxpayers 30 times the market rate, although they will only see 1/50th of that, the rest going to administrative costs”
They will weigh 30 times the market weight too if government run projects are anything to go by. After all, the official NBS (National Bonking Service) cannot endorse discrimination whether on the basis of age or race or fat content. Remember that Andrea Dworkin did work as a prostitute at one time.
Maybe it’s just an excuse to remove restrictions on adoption so you can’t deny a creepy single man living in a hovel the right to adopt
Roue le Jour – “The way the pound is collapsing against the baht you’ll soon have Thai sex tourists sampling the delights of Brighton.”
I think the pound will have to collapse a lot more considering the goods on offer:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3856114/Accountant-cross-dressing-sex-worker-called-Janine-brothel-raided-wife-discovers-secret-life-tips-police.html
Also cross post with “transsexuals are normal people really”
Allegedly.
She was also “raped” more often than you would expect given that at the time she was a 300 lb swamp donkey.
John Galt – “Allegedly.”
Well she alleged it. But as she was a mental health case from waay back, who knows? When you have lost the Guardian, you have lost the argument:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jun/08/society
I think it is safe to say that if the government provided the p*ssy, it would look more like Dworkin than Honor Blackman.
It will soon be realised that you don’t need actual sex partners – just the sperm and the eggs.
Then what?
Eager ugly men and women may be surprised.
Sure, we can have artificial sperm, artificial eggs and artificial vaginas – then we have no need for actual human beings at all and we can hurry up and go extinct at least.
Where is the “Merciful Meteor of Death 2016” when you need one.
When Sony finally manufactures the Sony Sexbot the human population will plummet into the earth faster than United Airlines Flight 93.
Sure, there will be some small number of men who will forgo the automata in favour of the natural variety, but boys, nerds, geeks and the unfavourably ugly (80% of the male population according to female only surveys) will be ploughing the furrows of their electronic Angelina Jolie / Scarlett Johansson look-alike sex bot.