No, WHO has done an excellent job of recognizing the exact things which you invalidate. Please give evidence and examples to support your claim that they are politicizing by attempting to alleviate and bring more attention to previously neglected demographics.
From your other comment in this thread, it is clear that you are not well educated on this subject to speak with such authority. Calling somebody who feels their gender identity doesn't match their body as mentally ill is offensive and inaccurate, how can someone who is born in the wrong body be at fault? Organizations like WHO are doing a great job.
Precisely an example of these definitions becoming heavily politicized, to the detriment of people suffering from disorders for which it is now unfashionable to seek a therapy for. It is offensive to you because you accept it as a dogma that is not allowed to be questioned. It leads to paradoxical, irrational treatments for disorders that could otherwise be researched and their impact minimized.
It's certainly a slippery slope. I suppose it's not a so big problem if "healing" is optional.
Political dissidence has been categorize as an illness in the past. In the Soviet Union, for instance. The same with sexual preferences.
In the science fiction novel "Distress", by Greg Egan, appears a character that it's a highly functioning autistic that don't want to be "healed".
I have the book here. This idea has been with me since I read it:
"What's the most patronising thing you can offer to do for people you disagree with, or don't understand? [..] Heal them. [..] Whoever claims the authority to define the boundary between health and disease claims...everything."
This is thoroughly unempathetic. Video game addiction is absolutely real, and the WHO is well behind the curve on this, as other posters have already pointed out.
