Performance ideas help

[RoydonLeeJ]

I'm in the process of making a political performance piece about the UK law which defers gay male blood donation for a period of twelve months after anal sex. The working title of the piece is "Why is my blood dirtier then a straight person's?" but I'm looking at copyrights on a certain offensive word from the Harry Potter series for what I hope will be the final name for the piece. I am very much looking to include modern social technology in my piece and I need as many opinions as possible to make the piece more substantial, which is why I ask you lovely people what your opinion on the matter is. What are your experiences with the blood donation service and what did you think or feel if you were going to give blood and were rejected, or if you just simply have an opinion on it at all. Have you ever lied to give blood and if so how did that make you feel? Even if you just gave blood so that you could have a cheap night, why? I want to know everything you think, feel and see about giving blood whether it has to do with the deferral law or not. It would be such a big help to me and I thank anyone who reads this, let alone anyone who actually shares their opinions and experiences with me. If it is a tad personal feel free to message me, it will be such a great help if I get anything at all from you guys, thanks for listening to me for so long and please help me on this, thanks x

[fjp999]

As I am in the USA I cant really help ya much... your laws are pretty mild over there. In the USA, during the terrorist hit of 9-11 I went to donate blood as was asked of all Americans. I lived in San Francisco at the time.

I filled out a form and came to a check mark about my sexuality and marked gay.

A friendly woman took me back and I was informed that I could not donate blood EVER!!!

I believe this is still the law currently. If you have ever had gay anal sex in your life you are banned from donating blood ever! There has been some movement to change this but I dont think anything has changed - even with the knowledge that there is currently more HIV+ in the hetero black community (I believe this is still true).

Good luck with what will be an interesting piece!

[Lilitu]

I gave blood last year, and they did ask about gay sex. Men who have had any sexual contact at all with menmen are barred for 5 years. Women who have had sex with men who have had sex with men(try say that 10 tens fast. Wait.. Don't do it if there are people around >.>) are barred for one year if I remember.
When I gave my blood, they told me it would be tested for HIV anyway. They did not ask my sexual orientation, only sexual history.

So I guess this is an arbitrary rule based mostly on rumour and the heightened risk of HIV in gay men. However much I do understand their viewpoint that they just don't want the fuss of sorting out a group of people who have higher rates of HIV, I do see that it is a very flawed system.

I believe the rule should be improved, but I don't see how we could without making everybody happy.
But the bottom line is, the point of Blood Donation is so save people's lives with a purely altruistic approach. To make a huge deal about gay rights ultimately, deep down in many people has an implication of self interest, some people are clearly going in their heads "Why can't I save lives just because my social group has a higher risk of HIV? LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME ME ME ME"
Of course I don't mean you! I'm just saying that this attitude does run through people's minds ultimately. Even me. I would feel a hint of being cheated out of the good feeling of having saved a life through blood donation. And that's not what the issue should be about by any means.

The main problem is I think, what about in times of emergency when blood is in high demand, and they're shutting out a large number of people because they've had sex in the past half decade. That's when problems start to appear.

I don't want to use blood donation as an outlet for gay rights issues. It feels wrong.
That being said, if I in future do have sex (well that felt weird to type...) and there is an emergency requiring blood donors, I will donate, knowing that my blood is clean and a useful blood type: type A+ . That's all that matters if the situation is dire. Emergencies are no place for bureaucracy.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

Well I better not go to the UK for a transfusion, I may end up gay from Gay Blood.

We here in the USA have a strict 'No Gay Blood Policy' we know for a fact its turns straight people gay. (All of that before should be in sarcasm text)

The reality is that the no gays donating blood goes back to the early days of the HIV/AIDS crises where there was no effective, sure fire way to test blood and know if it was safe for using on other people.

Today we have RNA testing, it is a bit prohibitive to test every single bag of blood. Here in the states there is reasonable talk aimed at figuring out how to open blood donation to gays and make certain the public feels safe about it.

Understand that for much of the western world, HIV/AIDS became the 'Gay Plague' and heavily connected to LGBT community because its toll in the Western world was predominately LGBT with IV drug Users second (but everyone hates IV drug users, so no one cares).

These myth-conceived notions largely dictates how the public feels about blood donated by gays.

Personally I donated a lot of blood and plasma in my youth, I have one of those rarer blood types that the plembotamists get hardons for and want to tie you up and slowly drain you for life.... :biggrin: Thus I was able to lie, boldly lie and they readily turned a blind eye to the lie.

[Lilitu]

Well I better not go to the UK for a transfusion, I may end up gay from Gay Blood.

We here in the USA have a strict 'No Gay Blood Policy' we know for a fact its turns straight people gay. (All of that before should be in sarcasm text)

The reality is that the no gays donating blood goes back to the early days of the HIV/AIDS crises where there was no effective, sure fire way to test blood and know if it was safe for using on other people.

Today we have RNA testing, it is a bit prohibitive to test every single bag of blood. Here in the states there is reasonable talk aimed at figuring out how to open blood donation to gays and make certain the public feels safe about it.

Understand that for much of the western world, HIV/AIDS became the 'Gay Plague' and heavily connected to LGBT community because its toll in the Western world was predominately LGBT with IV drug Users second (but everyone hates IV drug users, so no one cares).

These myth-conceived notions largely dictates how the public feels about blood donated by gays.

Personally I donated a lot of blood and plasma in my youth, I have one of those rarer blood types that the plembotamists get hardons for and want to tie you up and slowly drain you for life.... :biggrin: Thus I was able to lie, boldly lie and they readily turned a blind eye to the lie.

If gay blood makes you gay... Then if you're already gay and need a tranfusion that comes from a gay person... Does that cancel out the homo.
Or do you turn double gay. Like how there are lesbians and Tres Bien which I believe are french superlesbians.

[Undreamt]

When I gave my blood, they told me it would be tested for HIV anyway. They did not ask my sexual orientation, only sexual history.

So I guess this is an arbitrary rule based mostly on rumour and the heightened risk of HIV in gay men. However much I do understand their viewpoint that they just don't want the fuss of sorting out a group of people who have higher rates of HIV, I do see that it is a very flawed system.

I believe the rule should be improved, but I don't see how we could without making everybody happy.

Firstly they are being blatantly discriminatory and they are asking sexual orientation they just can't ask specifically because then they could be sued for discrimination.

If you can tell me how I, being a gay man in a monogamous gay relationship for the past 6 years has a higher risk of having HIV positive blood than a heterosexual man who has sex with 5 different women a month.

If they were just asking about sexual history then they should take into account the number of partners not just their gender.

I also think it is ironic that they are happy to take gay peoples organs for transplant, but they don't want our blood.

[OrphanPip]

Well the numbers are quite clear, the majority of people with HIV in the Western world are gay. In terms of demographics a gay man in a 5 year monogamous relationship is more likely to have HIV than a straight person who sleeps around.

From the CDC:

Comparing 2008 to 2010, the estimated number of new HIV infections among MSM increased 12%, from 26,700 (95% CI: 23,400–30,000) in 2008 to 29,800 (95% CI: 26,200–33,500) in 2010. The number of new HIV infections among females with infection attributed to heterosexual contact decreased 18% from 9,800 (95% CI: 8,200–11,400) in 2008 to 8,000 (95% CI: 6,700–9,200) in 2010. In 2010, the majority of new HIV infections was attributed to male-to-male sexual contact (63% overall and 78% among males). Among females, the largest percentage of new HIV infections was attributed to heterosexual contact (84%).

63% of new HIV infections each year are gay men, but gay men are only 2-3% of the general population. Some estimates put the rate of HIV in the gay community as high as 30%.

Blood donation associations have a duty to be discriminatory, there's no reason to have equal opportunity blood or organ donation. It's a matter of risk assessment and resources available to the organization.

[tamarIsReady]

I heave an epic, disconcerting sigh of f*ck. I mean seriously? Donating your blood is one of noblest thing a man can do for his fellow. It seems illogical to contradict and put a dirty accusation to one's chaste helping hand. If they're trying to be safe and all, then the medical test should be applied to ALL people, regardless of sexual orientation! To cast away homosexuals into a seemingly quarantine/ qualifying stage of donating is simply prejudicial and unfair.

I feel for you brother.