Common Sense or Discrimination? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

amaidiamond -> Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:15:47 PM)

Good Evening Everyone,

Not sure this is the right place for this thread but if it is out of place mods please move it :)
Basically I was a little irate during the second half of my day at work, the reason for this is that I went at lunchtime for some information about giving blood, I never have done this before, always been to afraid but I thought I'd try and face my fear and help others.
Now upon reading the literature I found out that I am not able to give blood, now as I don't inject drugs, never have, never will, am clean of disease, don't have casual sex etc so I would have thought that I was a good strong doner material, apparently not.
The reason I am not able to give blood is believe it or not because my Dom is bisexual and has played with men in the past, the ruling states that if you are female you must wait 12 months before giving blood if your male partner has ever in his life been with other men, now this 12 months is since you had sex so if you have a long term male partner who is bisexual or even experimented in his younger years to find out you are well and trully out of the question.
Now the bit that irks me is this, I understand that there is a higher risk of HIV between males that have anal sex, but oral? Why should there be a higher risk of HIV from oral sex be it male male or male female? Also why is it only that males that have had anal sex should be avoided? It mentions nothing at all about females that have and do have it.
Basically it strikes me as strange that if you take two say, 20 year old people, one male one female, both bisexual, the male has anal sex, he is then counted out for blood donation for the rest of his life, the female however sleeps with this male and has anal sex (therefore being equally at risk) and then goes on to have anal sex with other partners who happen to be straight, in 10 years time the male is still out for the count but the female, though she could have had sex in a multitude of ways with a hundered different men is classed as "safe"
So I ask, is this common sense? or is it discrimination?
I'm interested in others oppinions.

Thanks



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:17:48 PM)

It's very ridiculous, and a leftover from a much more ignorant and uncontrolled time.

A lot of my gay friends in college were very upset for not being able to give blood.  Everyone suffers for it.



mnottertail -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:18:51 PM)

I received blood while overseas on a US Army base in a US Army Hospital........

I can't give blood.

Ron



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:23:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
I received blood while overseas on a US Army base in a US Army Hospital........

I can't give blood.

Ron

I thought the statute for that was 2 years?  Or was that just BEING overseas?  I know that's a reason I had to wait.



mnottertail -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:27:38 PM)

the way I read it there was no time limit.

Edit:  I recieved blood on foriegn soil in two of the countries listed. 
same same as poopchuteing.

I think the 2 years is from being overseas except in the case of africa if I am not mistaken.

Ron   



amaidiamond -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:27:44 PM)

I'm glad I'm not the only one with the oppinion that it is wrong, It just seems like they are saying, girls, go out and sleep with a different man every night if you want to, take as many risks as you like, we don't care, but heaven forbid a man should have the audacity to be gay or bisexual.
It made my blood boil!



amaidiamond -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:29:34 PM)

Theres another strange limit as well, you cannot give blood if you have had sex in a country with a high AIDS percentage  - at least for the 12 months, I could understand it if it was with someone that lived in that country but hell, if I took for example my new husband to south africa on honeymoon, that would count us both out!



AquaticSub -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:31:38 PM)

This annoys me as well. It's my understanding that they test all the blood anyway. I realize that isn't foolproof but still... Why can't a gay man give blood? If they are really doing it to avoid HIV infected blood then they are turning away the wrong group.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:33:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond

I'm glad I'm not the only one with the oppinion that it is wrong, It just seems like they are saying, girls, go out and sleep with a different man every night if you want to, take as many risks as you like, we don't care, but heaven forbid a man should have the audacity to be gay or bisexual.
It made my blood boil!

Actually, prostitutes are banned as well.  It's ok to fuck tons of men if you are a woman, just not take money for it.

http://www.redcross.org/services/biomed/0,1082,0_557_,00.html



SamKeithsslave -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:37:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond
Now the bit that irks me is this, I understand that there is a higher risk of HIV between males that have anal sex, but oral? Why should there be a higher risk of HIV from oral sex be it male male or male female?

I guess its the idea that men who have oral with other men are in 'gay' relationships and/or have been and are therefore more likely to be infected etc There is also the risk of the Heps too, which can be readily passed orally.

Also why is it only that males that have had anal sex should be avoided? It mentions nothing at all about females that have and do have it.

Again because they are niave and assume that women who have anal dont have anal with 'gay' men [&:]

Basically it strikes me as strange that if you take two say, 20 year old people, one male one female, both bisexual, the male has anal sex, he is then counted out for blood donation for the rest of his life, the female however sleeps with this male and has anal sex (therefore being equally at risk) and then goes on to have anal sex with other partners who happen to be straight, in 10 years time the male is still out for the count but the female, though she could have had sex in a multitude of ways with a hundered different men is classed as "safe"
So I ask, is this common sense? or is it discrimination?

I dont think its necessarily discrimination, I think its lack of common sense and stupidity on their behalf. I am not allowed to give blood either, not because of my partner etc but because I have tattooes - say what!?!?! I was floored. Now while I can accept that not all tattooists are going to be of the highest quality, fact is most are and do have to follow standards and the needle used in tattooing is not hollow, so it can not store infected blood like a syringe can. Each time I have been tattooed the needles have be removed from a sterilising unit and a sterile bag.
What I dont get is are they not testing all blood anyway? So IF you or I had something wouldnt that be picked up?
And now that piercings are all the rage are these people also prevented from giving blood? At this rate they will alienate half the population [&:]



amaidiamond -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:40:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SamKeithsslave

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond
Now the bit that irks me is this, I understand that there is a higher risk of HIV between males that have anal sex, but oral? Why should there be a higher risk of HIV from oral sex be it male male or male female?

I guess its the idea that men who have oral with other men are in 'gay' relationships and/or have been and are therefore more likely to be infected etc There is also the risk of the Heps too, which can be readily passed orally.

Also why is it only that males that have had anal sex should be avoided? It mentions nothing at all about females that have and do have it.

Again because they are niave and assume that women who have anal dont have anal with 'gay' men [&:]

Basically it strikes me as strange that if you take two say, 20 year old people, one male one female, both bisexual, the male has anal sex, he is then counted out for blood donation for the rest of his life, the female however sleeps with this male and has anal sex (therefore being equally at risk) and then goes on to have anal sex with other partners who happen to be straight, in 10 years time the male is still out for the count but the female, though she could have had sex in a multitude of ways with a hundered different men is classed as "safe"
So I ask, is this common sense? or is it discrimination?

I dont think its necessarily discrimination, I think its lack of common sense and stupidity on their behalf. I am not allowed to give blood either, not because of my partner etc but because I have tattooes - say what!?!?! I was floored. Now while I can accept that not all tattooists are going to be of the highest quality, fact is most are and do have to follow standards and the needle used in tattooing is not hollow, so it can not store infected blood like a syringe can. Each time I have been tattooed the needles have be removed from a sterilising unit and a sterile bag.
What I dont get is are they not testing all blood anyway? So IF you or I had something wouldnt that be picked up?
And now that piercings are all the rage are these people also prevented from giving blood? At this rate they will alienate half the population [&:]




Well bugger me (though obviously not litterally, cant be having things like that) I didn't know about the tattoos, that also counts me out!
No wonder they are screaming for doners



Dragonskiss72 -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:49:43 PM)

I offered to give blood.  I was told no.  Something to do with the fact that it usually takes a min. of 4 attempts to get any out of me for a routine test & my habit of trying to pass out/throw up during it all.



mnottertail -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:52:30 PM)

well you are out for being in the UK.  Mad Cow and all that. Forget any other anomalies.

Interesting if you look up KC692 on one of the threads here it is het females of hispanic and white types I think, that is the fastest growing HIV+ around....

So, the gay thing is so 90's now, it seems...........the Rot Kreuz should catch up to the CDC and others in another ten years and only still be 20 years behind.

Ron  



RosaB -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 12:57:19 PM)

Considering how many men don't even fess up to their partners that they've been with other men, or even if said women's recent partner may or may not have come in contact with the virus via some other means, it truly is a most curious discriminatory practice to say the least.  Sounds like they are basing things on a numbers game and not anything factual.   If that's how they base their practices, IMO, it's sort of like playing Russian Roulette.

Darn, I can't edit worth chit.



amaidiamond -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:02:16 PM)

I have to admit I agree, it just seems so...wrong I guess. It surprises me that with all the publicity about the effects of discrimination and the like it's still happening.



Archer -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:07:12 PM)

Well the fact is recieving anal sex is a riskier sexual activity for HIV transmission. That part is accurate, the rest is assumptions, and conjecture with policies set and not updated since the lte 80's early 90's.

If you have lived in the UK during the Mad Cow scare years you cannot give blood either, Elegant is disqualified under that policy.
It is a matter of them over protecting to avoid the potential for lawsuits based on fact or not they are expensive to defend against.



amaidiamond -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:10:24 PM)

It's not that it's people who have had anal sex, that I can understand because yes, it does carry a higher risk, it's the fact that it is only men that are outed because of this that irritates me.



Archer -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:14:39 PM)

They have added to the list of who cannot give but they have not to my knowledge ever removed anyone from the list.
When the list started they had reasonable information to exclude homosexuals from giving blood, now the availabl information should have them re evaluating the list from the bottom up. But that would require study and thought.Its easier to simply add to the list.



LW3 -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:16:42 PM)

it's another stupid case of discrimination.
you only need to test the blood and the risk will be 0 or as near 0 as possible and you need to do this same test even if the person is virgin (sex is not the only way to get AIDS)
but it's sooo easy to put a lot of discriminating rules and say "we care about society. that's why we make this stupid rules to discriminate whoever is not perfect like you or me"



Renorei -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/27/2006 1:30:57 PM)

I think it's more of a common sense thing.  I mean yes, there's some discrimination there, but oh well.  It's not like someone's passing you over for a job or making you go to some separate bathroom.  Not being able to give blood is, quite frankly, small fry.  As for the strict regulations and such, yes they probably do need some updating in light of recent statistics.  But evidently the need for blood is not so dire that they've had to do this yet. 



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875