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.

  • IGuessThisIsForNSFW@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      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.

      • Stumblinbear@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How about they not call every single day when you’re only allowed to donate every couple months or so or, you know, you’d fucking die

        • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          What if I were to tell you they don’t call unless you’re eligible to donate again?

          (Also I just blocked them because I donate when I feel like and don’t need reminders)

          • IGuessThisIsForNSFW@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hi! I do just want to be clear that this was multiple months of calls and I did explain to multiple people that I have donated too recently for me to be eligible. This did not stop them from calling me again the very next day. Trust me, saying ‘I have had gay sex recently’ to blood donation associate was mortifying, if I had any other option I had already tried it.

            • Microw@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well that sounds like their internal systems suck. Here in Austria they have a robust database that sends me a SMS as soon as the waiting period is over from my last donation. It’s one SMS saying “you can donate again”, and that’s it. If I dont do it, they’ll call after a while. But never would they contact me while in the waiting period.

      • IGuessThisIsForNSFW@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trust me, this method did not work. I have donated blood 10+ times (Which isn’t a crazy amount, but I think it’s probably more than most people) because I know with universal donor blood it’s really valuable. But when you donated blood yesterday and they call you wanting more it can get pretty annoying…

    • gothicdecadence@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      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

      • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We should make it known to these people that it’s ‘gay blood’ though. What they do with their own body is up to them because I support bodily autonomy, including dying of bigotry.

      • nomadjoanne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The rule was very necessary in the 80s. It vast majority of HIV-infected individuals were gay and bisexual men. However, those days are long gone, and we can test blood pretty well for even very low levels of HIV nowadays.

        • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Are youIn 2006, the AABB, American Red Cross, and America’s Blood Centers all supported a change from the current US policy of a lifetime deferral of MSM to one year since most recent contact. One model suggested that this change would result in one additional case of HIV transmitted by transfusion every 32.8 years. The AABB has suggested making this change since 1997. The FDA did not accept the proposal and had concerns about the data used to produce the model, citing that additional risk to recipients was not justified. Source

          We are well past the 80s and decades behind something that should have. Been corrected a long time ago. The systemic discrimination towards gay men is apparent when you look at EU models of deferment compared to the US.

  • beanz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    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?

    • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      This started off when HIV was much more prominent in the gay and bisexual male population than anyone else. The Red Cross, among other organizations, decided it was better to just deny blood from gay and bi males than to check all their samples for HIV. Similarly, you can’t give blood if you were in certain locations in the '80s and '90s due to potential exposure to Mad Cow Disease. At this point, while HIV is still somewhat more prevalent in that demographic, rates have gone down significantly and HIV has spread to the other demographics. It’s also easier to test for than it was then. Repealing these restrictions was proposed quite some time ago and didn’t face any real pushback, but bureaucracy is going to bureaucracy, so it’s taken years to get this settled.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It wasn’t the Red Cross, it was the FDA. This article phrases it as the Red Cross loosening restrictions because the FDA ended the ban in May, and the Red Cross’s own procedural bureaucracy is just now catching up.

      • Billygoat@catata.fish
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Person who lived in Europe in the early 90s here. Couldn’t give blood until earlier this year due to the Mad Cow restrictions.

    • Jardthebard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bigots just assume the blood is always gonna be there. They don’t think as deeply as you credit them for

    • ZodiacSF1969@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why? AIDS was a devestating epidemic. The blood banks were slow to act at all, and as a result many haemophiliacs acquired the disease and died. Gay men were the largest risk group for spreading and contracting it, so it makes sense to screen them out.

      • Microw@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It made sense in a crisis situation 40 years ago. It made zero sense the last few years to have such a discriminatory rule that also neglected to prevent risk from heterosexual anal sex.

    • ryannathans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      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

      • ryannathans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

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