The health of men is in dire straits around the globe.
In almost every country, men's lifespans lag behind women's. The
disparity ranges up to 15 years in the Russian Federation. In all major
categories of disease, men are at greater risk of death. Worldwide, men
are 3.5 times more likely to commit suicide than women.
According to the Global Burden of Disease study, women's life
expectancy is expected to increase to about 90 years by 2020 in
industrialized countries. As for men, "far smaller gains in male life
expectancy were projected than in females".
In 1998, Gro Harlem Brundtland was named as the first female
Director-General of the World Health Organization. As a well-known
feminist, Dr. Brundtland cares deeply about gender equity. So how did
Dr. Brundtland respond to the challenge of overcoming male disadvantage
in health matters?
It should be noted that when Dr. Brundtland took over at the helm, the
WHO already had extensive maternal and child health programs in place.
Besides those services, little existed in the way of gender-specific
health programs -- even though it had long been known that men are less
likely to seek needed health care services than women.
So what do we find now at the WHO?
The World Health Organization now has a Department of Women's Health.
A search of their web site reveals
well-funded initiatives in the areas of Female Genital Mutilation,
HIV/AIDS, and Violence against Women. In addition, the WHO has a
high-level Global Commission on Women's Health (GCWH).
But for unclear reasons, the WHO has no Department or Global
Commission on Men's Health.
Another example of bias is how the WHO presents its AIDS statistics.
The WHO AIDS program, known as UNAIDS, publishes
Epidemiological Fact
Sheets for every country in the world.
These Fact Sheets list the number of AIDS cases for three categories
of people: Adults 15-49 years, Women 15-49 years, and Children 0-15
years. The WHO clearly knows the number of men with AIDS, since it
reports the overall statistics for adults. But Men as such are not
listed.
What is most disturbing, though, is how feminists have highjacked
entire public health initiatives. Take violence, for example. Globally,
men are twice as likely as women to die of violent causes.
But the recent WHO Report on Violence and Health conveys exactly the
opposite impression. The Report repeatedly downplays the effects of
violence on men. For example, in the discussion on Child Soldiers (page
235), there is no mention made of the fact that almost all children
forced into military combat are male.
Conversely, the Report exaggerates the effects of violence on women.
For example, the Report claims on page 224, "Single and isolated
refugees, as well as women who are heads of households, may be at
particular risk of suffering psychological stress." It is irrational to
imply, as this sentence does, that single refugee men who are heads of
households are not also at risk of suffering from stress.
As a result of these women's health initiatives, health services at
the local level now often ignore men. For example, in many countries in
Africa, the entire primary health care system is geared around maternal
and child health clinics. Although important, such services are unlikely
to address the pressing needs of men's health.
An Agenda Gone Awry
In 1948, the United Nations ratified the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. Article 2 of that Human Rights treaty specifically
prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. But preferential provision
of health services, especially when given to populations at lesser risk,
is a form of discrimination.
Now, the gender health programs of the WHO are violating the U.N.'s
own founding principles. Something has gone wrong with the gender health
agenda at the World Health Organization.
The WHO needs to answer a simple question: Do the lives of half the
world's population count for less because they happen to be male?
