Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Tatchell calls for an end to the blood ban on gay men

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Simon Murphy 30 Nov 2009, 5:59pm

    F*** off Rahman – you boring troll

  2. Simon Murphy 30 Nov 2009, 6:00pm

    Before anyone attempts to engage with ‘Rahman’ be aware that he is a troll who is posting with the sole intention of winding people up.

    I think he used to be called Monkeychops or something.

  3. Derek North 30 Nov 2009, 7:40pm

    Simon.

    Noted and understood. Just ignore.

    When these types have their platform removed, they eventually
    bu@@er off.

  4. We’ve been through this debate before. It all got pretty heated, but I think the concensus was, even gay men are aware they are a high risk group. We don’t *HAVE* to donate blood, and if it potentially puts others at risk, then we should gracefully decline.
    As usual, Tatchell puts the whole equality issue before common sense.

    However, I do think there are many other high risk groups such as sub-Saharan Africans who should also be treated the same.

  5. Mihangel apYrs 1 Dec 2009, 10:24am

    RobN

    The problem with blanket bans, blanket laws, etc, is that it leads easily to stereotyping and stigmatising a certain group – it fails to treat people as individuals with different histories.

    In this case it is sheer laziness: gay men who feel that they are in the “at risk” category will probably not seek to donate, others who feel able to should at least be allowed to attempt it.

  6. I’ve known bi and gay men who are HIV- just lie on the forms. Frankly, I’d like to see blood testing made far cheaper and more accessible – and each potential donor properly screened. I understand that on-site rapid testing for HIV gives a result in under 20 minutes. Having listened to younger friends of all orientations describing their party habits, I’m disinclined to trust forms (or even some people’s ability to recall what they did, with whom, how, and when). They’re bringing in blood screening for children’s transfusions now; why not extend it? Investing in health services at a time of recession makes sense in terms of our physical health services, jobs, and industry.

  7. In the United States, it has been determined by the FDA that an individual that does MSM (male who has sex with another male) is about 30 times more likely to be HIV positive than the general population. The testing for HIV isn’t perfect so the risk of getting HIV from a MSM donation would be 30 times higher than that general (non-MSM) population. If the regulatory agencies were anti-gay, you would see a ban on FSF (female who has sex with another female) too, but this isn’t the case, because based on risk, FSF are not higher risk and therefore can donate.

  8. Anon: “I’ve known bi and gay men who are HIV- just lie on the forms.”

    That would just about sum up the despicably selfish nature of so many gay men. And how do they KNOW they are neg?

    There is no major shortage of blood, so we are in a position to screen it as carefully as possible before even running a single test on it. No process is infallible, so screw all this equality bollocks and just cherry pick the ones that have the best chance of being safe. It may be politically incorrect, but it will almost certainly save peoples lives.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all