This doesn't bother me. If they don't want my blood, that's their loss. I don't take it personally. Rules are rules. I can't make all the rules in this world. I don't expect to agree with all the rules in this world. Being angry and feeling villified doesn't really help me accomplish many things. I prefer to accept the things I can not change, and change the things I can. By coming out to people and letting them get to know me - as a gay man - I think I'm changing people's perceptions of what being gay means. One person at a time. And that's really the only way to approach this. That, or run for public office. And I'm not interested in that.
maybe if i get unlazy i'll look up the last thread about this and see what i said there. I know it was along the lines of saying it's not personal.
Aight, so i did look it up! What i've said before (well the gist) : And i suggest you all read the thread before starting up an entire new one: http://www.emptyclosets.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20019
As I'm reading this thread I imagine the dialogue: Red Cross Guy: Hey kid, wanna donate some blood? You could save a life, y'know. Andy: Sorry sir, but I've had MANSEX! Umm yeah, carry on with the discussion...
Just rereading all this and my reply, and I'm thinking two things: 1) I might have sounded a lot more self-rightous than I meant to , and 2) On reflection, I think I may be naive and wrong in what I said... I'm a little surprised by this statistic. I'd have thought this was the worldwide case, with the spread of HIV and AIDS through rape in a lot of places (such as Africa), but I didn't think that would be the case in the US necessarily. But it seems plausable (and I've no reason to doubt what you say, that's not what I'm saying either). But you're right, it would be a massive civil rights nightmare if they even thought of restricting that demographic. I hadn't really considered this, and what you said about women, whose slates are wiped clean as it were after 6 months, whereas for us gay males its more a one strike and you're out situation. I guess maybe it's harder for me to see this from the perspective of some of you guys as I'm a virgin so technically I haven't been discriminated against - yet. But for sure it's made me think twice. Just out of curiousity, what do other people think about the idea of keeping quiet in order to donate, as I and littledinosaurs mentioned above?
I'm a virgin and so I donate blood every time my school hosts a blood drive. I think for the sake of those who need blood transfusions, the rules should be updated to allow for maximum intake of blood donations. Back in the 1980s, they found that the blood test for finding Hepatitis-B was 88% effective in finding AIDS. That was like thirty years ago. You'd think that the likelihood for detecting AIDS in blood donations would have improved to the point that it shouldn't matter if a person is a sexually active gay person or not.
I mention this statistic very often because it represents a significant demographic shift. If not for some recent reckless behavior in the gay community- usually involving alcohol, ectasy, meth and barebacking- the majority of new HIV seroconversions in the US would be among black women. From the latest CDC HIV Surveillance report:
Not just women... straight guys, too. I would rather not break the law/defy regulations in order to donate blood. And I'd definitely not want to risk punishment for doing so. I'm not actually sure if there is any punishment in Canada for lying in this situation but I can totally see there being some kind of consequences.
I remember when I gave blood at my work(only time ever) I felt that the questions were kinda unfair and against gays. Of course after I gave blood at my work I had a heart attack and had to be rushed to the local hospital. I felt kinda like I was being punished for giving "homo-blood". I later learned that my work doesn't even have a first-aid office or kit anywhere or any medically trained staff and none of the blood people are trained to give any kind of medical assistance which I thought was bogus seeing as they know people can have bad reactions. Turns out for me I have a lower than normal red blood count(not anemia) and my body couldn't handle loosing so much blood. The doctor told me I can never give blood again or it could be worse next time. I guess that's the worlds way of saying they don't want gay blood. Also the blood people said I had the wrong blood in the test result. They said I had AB- when I know for a fact I have O+. I have had O+ in every blood test I have ever gotten in my life so I dunno where they got AB- from. Of course I still get things from the blood people saying I should donate more
While I get how it feels shitty to have someone tell you can't give blood because you've had sex with a man, we need to understand the reasons why. Hepatitis C is common among people who have unprotected anal sex. Why don’t they just ask if you do anal? Who knows? But, that is also why they ask you if you’ve shared needles or traveled outside the country or have gotten a tattoo. We need to keep in mind that our blood is going to sick people and any further infection could be fatal. They do run tests on the blood, but tests can give a false negative, thus they ask questions to try and weed out blood that they can’t use. I know it seems personal, but the medical field is a business and hospitals also don’t want to be sued if they give someone infected blood.
And that's fine... they should of course attempt to manage risk. But people who have shared needles or gotten tattoos or travelled outside the country are ultimately allowed to donate blood again after a certain period. Those men who have had anal sex with other men, no matter how long ago? Banned for life. Let's just think about that. How does a lifetime ban simply based on an activity you engaged in perhaps YEARS ago... how is that even remotely fair? Objective? Reasonable? Tests on anyone's blood can give false positives. Barring an entire population of people from donating because you are assuming they engage in high-risk sexual activity simply because they happen to engage in anal sex with other men is, well, ridiculous overkill. It's akin to saying all gay men are sexually irresponsible and completely untrustworthy, moreso than the rest of population. And that's bullshit. There are so many things wrong with that statement I wouldn't even know where to start. Medicine, like education, is not a business. It has been turned into one, maybe, but at its core, medicine is about saving lives, and education is about, you know, teaching and learning. To claim it's okay to discriminate so blatantly because medical institutions have a "right" to cover their asses to protect themselves from potential lawsuits? That's mind-boggling... Yeah, nothing personal. Just business. Sorry you got told you're a dirty homo and those people you could have donated to suffered and maybe even died because of lack of blood or, more seriously, organs. At least no one got sued, right?
A. Medicine is mostly a business, until it becomes socialized it will still be mostly a business. (statement from America) B.Yes, it's about saving lives. Giving blood is not the place to be out and proud. So shut up and lie if you wanna give blood. Helping other people is about doing what you can to help. If you have to lie to help and you want to help, then do it. Otherwise if you are so upset about the ban on giving blood that you'd rather make a big fuss about it instead of just lying then i suggest you look on why you're giving blood.
From America? You don't say. :rolleyes: Yes, of course, my motives for protesting discrimination are totally suspect. Because you know, the African Americans forced to ride in the back of the bus should have just shut up. All minorities should just shut up, in fact, and stop being so uppity. I fail to see why just because gay guys can lie and donate (we won't get into what repercussions that might entail), they should have to. Why do we get singled out as inherently diseased? Why are we made outcast in our own communities, where we are expected to pay taxes, respect the laws, and participate and contribute?! Why are we denied the opportunity to fully participate, to openly say, "I believe in giving back, so I'm going to donate my blood and/or organs"? If straight people get "forgiven" their high-risk sexual activities after X months, why don't we? But yeah, I shouldn't go around making a big deal about it, because it's about saving lives. Screw treating people with respect and decency and honouring their contributions. I mean, why even bother coming out, right? It's nobody's business, it's an inherently selfish act... why don't I just shut up about it? What does it matter what I do in the privacy of my bedroom? What does it matter that I might (in America, land of the free, home of the brave, at least) lose my job, my housing, the right to see my loved ones in hospital if I actually state the truth? Honestly, minorities--such a selfish, selfish bunch of people, wanting special rights like all the things the majority takes for granted, such as being able to donate blood without having to lie for fear of being rejected as a diseased pariah. Yes people, dishonesty is really the best policy. Weren't you taught that growing up? What an ethical position: shut up and lie. I don't know about you but my parents and my teachers taught me I have inherent worth as a person and I should stand up for my rights. My mother taught me to stand against injustice, whether it was directed against me or against others. So you'll forgive me if I take your advice and shove it where the sun don't shine because I won't dishonour them and their lessons by sitting down and being silent simply because it might be more expedient to do so--or because my reasons for doing so might be impugned as vested self-interest. The end does not justify the means. The boat needs rocking and authority needs questioning. The second we stop doing that, we might as well throw in the towel.
The implication here is that you're talking about HIV. And you've made a logical assumption that a man who has sex with a man is going to be an HIV carrier. That's the danger in the policy- it makes the very 1980s assumption that gay men are somehow more likely to have HIV than the general public. False negatives are extremely rare by the way- less than 1% when tested after 30 days post-exposure. If the question were, "Have you had unprotected sex within 90 days?" it would makes sense (for HIV, hepatitis B, syphilis and a whole host of other STDs). But the current wording of the question would exclude you even if you had a mutual jack-off session with a guy without penetration 10 years ago. And currently blood is not tested for other very serious illnesses like viral encephalitis (sleeping sickness), West Nile virus and other serious diseases that would cause immediate infection to a person who is sick.
My doctor told me this was true. He asked me if I liked women or men, and I told him men. He asked me if I've ever had sex before, and then asked me if I want to have an HIV test done :/ .
I love how my state is reaking of a low blood count at the blood bank so they run to all the highschools with kids who are full of std's in order to meet their needs. I agree its disriminatory but what can we do about it. I mean we can discuss it but it wont change anything and this needs to change. There is no way to boycott and letters with facts from us wont do any good. The only way I imagine we could get ourselves back into those donations centers. If we want a change we need to inform the public, but make sure it doesnt lead to a boycott because that does endanger live, insted inform people about the level of discrimination and have them write letters. When they see that the public in general, not gays, disagree with there shinanagins...its over. But the only problem I see with that is that even with out us, they have a stedy influx of people lining up to donate, not giving a care in the world as long as they get free tickets to the movies and free food for donating.
I guess at the end of the day i should be grateful that someone cares enough to do something about an issue I don't even think about.
Don't know if I'm just deeply pessimistic, but I can't imagine there's anything that can be done. I like the idea, but I just don't see it WTF? They don't have anything like that in the UK? You seriously can get movie tickets for donating? Mother f:***:er :tantrum:
