571
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The American Red Cross is now allowing gay and bisexual men to donate blood without restrictions that specifically single out a person’s sexual orientation or gender, the nonprofit group said Monday.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 91 points 1 year ago

And it only took... *checks notes* 40 years!

[-] GlendatheGayWitch@lib.lgbt 5 points 1 year ago

Technically still waiting on it to happen. If you've had anal sex, you still have to wait 3 months. So they are still discriminating against most MSM.

[-] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, it isn't. Anal sex is a known high risk factor for STDs and infections. It also applies to everyone, not just gay/bi men.

[-] GlendatheGayWitch@lib.lgbt 1 points 1 year ago

Theoretically, it applies to everyone. The anti-sodomy laws also technically applied to everyone, but were only enforced against the LGBT community.

It is good that now they will at least screening those who have heterosexual intercourse, but most MSM still won't be able to donate with the various restrictions. Only MSM in a long-term relationship will be able to donate.

I can understand the biological reason for not allowing certain medications to avoid complications. However, they could still take blood and just keep it separate just as plasma centers that take MSM plasma do. If there really is a shortage, they should be taking everything being offered.

[-] DrPop@lemmy.one 11 points 1 year ago

Not really, it specifies "new partners," which is completely fair. People lie, and it allows time for symptoms to show up so the red cross doesn't end up wasting resources. I don't really know how they'd work out polycules unless they add a monogamous restriction. The three months it's about safety since they are dealing with blood.

[-] MaiteRosalie@kbin.social 64 points 1 year ago

Great, now I can move forward with my plan of turning everyone gay by donating blood

[-] Poot@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago

Convert 10 or more and you get a new toaster oven!

[-] Treatyoself@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

God speed 🫡

[-] Blumpkinhead@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Can I just get a little blood? I don't want to go full gay, I just want to be able to tell which sneakers I should wear with this outfit.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

not if you like having sex. lol

[-] IGuessThisIsForNSFW@yiffit.net 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Goddammit! I have o- blood and the red cross called me LITERALLY everyday after I donated the first time. I asked them to only call every quarter because I still did want to donate, but that just made them call every other day. Finally out of frustration I looked for anything that would make me ineligible to donate and the next time they called, I told them I was gay. All calls stopped after that.

[-] DV8@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I found that making an appointment, no matter how far in the future makes them stop calling.

I donate plasma (AB+) as often as I can, usually 2 weekly as that is the limit here. But if you're single the 4 month halt for having sex with a new partner is annoying because they will keep calling while they say you can't donate.

[-] TopShelfVanilla@sh.itjust.works 36 points 1 year ago

Cue right wingers refusing transfusions. Actually, that's fine.

[-] gothicdecadence@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Blood is blood is blood. I'm sure that people who need it don't care if an absolute bigoted moron gave it to them, they wouldn't know anyways.

Edit: I'm the moron, you meant refusing taking blood, not giving it lmao

[-] DocMcStuffin@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Maybe this is a cynical take, but will conservatives refuse a life saving blood transfusion because it may have come from a gasp gay man? I mean a bunch were refusing transfusions because the blood could have come from someone that had a gasp covid vaccine.

[-] zaph@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

There are people who refuse blood transfusions because of relious beliefs and will let their children die. Of course there are some that would refuse "gay blood."

[-] itsyourmom@artemis.camp 27 points 1 year ago

Literally can’t even believe that was a thing!

[-] DaCookeyMonsta@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago

I think it was set up when AIDS was spreading amongst the gay community before they had a test for it.

Of course, now they can both test for it and it spread well beyond the gay community for a while so it's ridiculous that it was still a thing.

[-] ryannathans@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

In my country gay men account for 90% of all HIV infections. It's very hard to ensure blood is free of HIV, as blood is infectious within three months of infection but won't test positive

[-] Tenthrow@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Conservatives might be getting some of that gay blood. Does that work the same as eating the heart of a warrior to gain their power?

[-] Blumpkinhead@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Yes, but instead of becoming more powerful, you become more fabulous.

[-] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Sign me up! Sound like A-positive to me!

[-] brlemworld@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Under the new guidelines, anyone who has recently had sex with a new partner or multiple people and has also had anal sex would have to wait three months to donate

Those taking oral medication to prevent HIV infection, called pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, still have to wait three months from their last dose to donate blood. People taking long-acting PrEP injections have to wait two years before donating.

[-] snert@midwest.social 8 points 1 year ago

Also note that the Red Cross is usually quick to say it's actually the FDA that imposes these homophobic restrictions and it's "not their fault"

[-] Microw@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

They said the same thing in Austria: "not our fault, the government agencies make these rules!"

And the government agencies would be like "well, we want to change the rules, but the Red Cross tells us not to!"

Took us to have a left-wing green health minister to pressure them enough.

The finally implemented the changes last year, sounds like it is 1:1 the same rules like you guys have now.

[-] DebraBucket@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Darn, so straight people having anal raw dog gang bangs can no longer donate soon after experiencing a DVDA? How is that fair? /s

[-] Oyster_Lust@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

I didn't know that was still in place, since they started testing for AIDS decades ago.

[-] itsyourmom@artemis.camp 7 points 1 year ago

I didn’t even know that was happening!

[-] beanz00_@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

how the hell have we reached a point as a society where people would rather literally fucking die than get life saving blood from someone who thinks differently from them?

[-] carbonprop@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

I wonder if homophobes will suddenly turn gay after a blood transfusion? /s

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bro that's not it. It was about AIDS having spread throughout the gay community before testing was feasible.

[-] ryannathans@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Testing methods are still inadequate, as blood may test negative whilst infectious in the first three months

[-] sachamato@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

In 2023. Unbelievable.

this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
571 points (100.0% liked)

News

22890 readers
3340 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS