Black People : Homophobic Blood Donation Ban Contributes to Shortage

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by Keita Kenyatta, Jul 11, 2012.

  1. Keita Kenyatta

    Keita Kenyatta going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Feb 7, 2004
    Likes Received:
    +3,381 / -1
    nurse checked my heart rate, weighed me, and then asked me a few questions. "In the last twelve months," she droned, "Have you had sex with an intravenous drug user?" No. "A person who has been exposed to HIV?" No. "A prostitute?" Of course not. "A man who has had sex with men?" I paused. My fiance is, like me, bisexual. Knowing that we were both perfectly healthy, I considered lying, but ultimately decided to be honest. "Yes," I told her, and was immediately brushed away and told that I couldn't donate.

    Since the 1980s, people like me and my partner -- healthy adults with no blood-transmissible illnesses -- have been prohibited by the FDA from donating blood. The homophobic, outdated ban on blood donations from gay and bisexual men, as well as their female partners, is costing people their lives. The Red Cross is currently experiencing a significant shortage of blood donations, with donations dropping a full 10 percent in June, according to CNN. Their strict criteria designed to prevent the spread of HIV is likely contributing to the problem. The FDA forces organizations to refuse healthy donors because of these outdated fears and homophobic judgment.

    A comprehensive report in 2010 examined the patterns of blood donation and eligibility among gay and bisexual men, demonstrating how essential it is for the FDA to lift this ban. The authors of the study estimated that some 2,603,004 healthy men would be eligible to donate blood in any given year if the ban were lifted, and nearly half of them would actually donate. This estim
  2. Kemetstry

    Kemetstry going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    United States
    Feb 19, 2001
    Likes Received:
    +5,977 / -27
    Describing rational people as phobic is offensive

  3. Zim

    Zim Well-Known Member MEMBER

    United Kingdom
    Oct 12, 2009
    Likes Received:
    +666 / -0
    *Enters thread* *Looks Around* Yep, Everything seems in order. About right. * Leave thread*
  4. MimiBelle

    MimiBelle Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Dec 13, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Texas...for now.
    +423 / -3
    I understand this man's issue with it.

    Certain provisions are in place for the protection of the populace. For instance -
    If you travel to certain areas of the world? You can't be a blood donor. Period.
    Homosexual/Bisexual males are the highest risk group and the largest number of individuals contracting HIV...BY FAR. I guess HIV just up and leapt into the heterosexual community, huh...?

    It's about screening for those (continuously engaging in) extremely risky sexual behavior.
    It's not so much about sexual preference.

    ...which would actually be more believable if we screened our donors for risky sexual activity across the board.

    We don't (I don't think).
    ...and that's the rub, I think.
    I understand.
    We just look at the gays...which, technically, isn't a very fair or accurate way to go about screening donors when you consider that STI rates are increasing at a fast rate within the general (nongay) population... which, in turn, makes everyone more susceptible to HIV... which would imply that some high-risk behavior was going on, in general.

    What about the man who run around running up in anything that moves? Who sleeps with prostitutes and strippers?
    What about the female who has loads of sex partners or the girl who has condom-less anal sex with her signif other?
    That female who came in all sweet and pristine could've done a 'donkey show' in Tijuana...or whatever.
    ...but everyone's looking at the homo...

    I give blood but I don't pay much attn to the quesitons because I'm 'clean', so to speak.
    Now - if there actually are questions on those questionaires that inquire about 'condom usage' or 'numbers of sex partners within a 72 hour period' or sex 'with prostitutes' or 'swingers'...?
    I'll shut up.*laugh* I'll write the homo off as a whiner.
    I don't recall seeing any of these 'catch all' questions, though.

    Yes - I could probably look it up, but I'm lazy...right now.

    Homos probably shouldn't be donatin' ...but neither should druggies and promiscuous heteros.
    Yet, the Red Cross is always crying, "We need more blood. More...BLOOD!!!"
    I'm aware that all homosexual men don't participate in anal sex.
    They just...uh, 'pitch'...? *laugh*

    Suppose we just stick to testing the blood and stop closing the door on otherwise healthy applicants?
    To practically stigmatize a high-risk group is opening the door for bigotry ....
    ...or maybe not.
    Also doesn't seem right to put the entire sickly pop. at risk in the name of not hurting feelings.


    Well -- on another note:
    I don't think you want to go down the 'high-risk' road.

    Black homo men (as opposed to hetero black men) rep the largest number of individuals contracting HIV by leaps and bounds.
    Black women are now the fastest growing group.
    Gee, I wonder why...:rolleyes:
    (2+2 =4)

    ...but let some of these men tell it (in that AIDs thread, for instance)?
    We're all just a bunch of wh--res! *laugh*
    ... and they'd rather believe that this is the entire problem. Rather than admit that some within their ranks are batting for both teams in secret, thus, contributing to the problem (in a major way, arguably).

    The 'Eyes Wide Shut' approach works.
    Some will outright deny that an issue even exists.
    'Statistics always lie'.
    I don't really get that.
    ...because they're usually the same folks who would be the first to see a main post like OP's and agree with barring homos from blood donations.
    Based on...statistics?

    Eh. I'm not entirely sure that this practice of cherry-picking facts and ignoring everything that portrays you in a negative light is a very smart one.
    Sometimes, the facts are mis-represented. Sometimes, the truth is simply the truth.

    Yet and still ...
    I'm fairly certain that most would take great offense if they were prohibited from donating blood...because they're black and, therefore, 'high risk'.

    I have no clear stance. I'm just being 'conversational'....