In order not to tie up Opal’s (wonderful, IMO) thread on a blood drive, I’m starting a Pit thread for those who wanna fight about the Red Cross’s practices.
Have at it, folks.
I’ll post in a bit…but here’s the original thread that started it
Bite my ass, Red Cross
I’m sorry. I will not more let a thread supporting the red cross go unchallenged in MPSIMS that I would one supporting the boy-scouts or one supporting the Death Penatly. Some of us can’t shut our eyes and pretend everythings all nice when it’s not.
well now that you mention it…
I can’t stand the way blood drives try to guilt trip people into giving. If I don’t want to give, I DON’T WANT TO GIVE!
I can’t stand needles, pain or passing out.
What gets me is some of their “cute” techniques. In the place I used to work, there would be posters saying:
“Give Blood. Save a life. Get a cookie.”
Well damn! If I’m gonna save a life, I’ll tell you right now, I expect more than a fucking COOKIE!
That’s all I have to say for now.
sorry. Haven’t had my coffee yet.
OLD SCRATCH, could you please explain what, precisely, you consider homophobic about this organization and its practices? Thanks.
The Red Cross saves lives.
Giving blood saves lives.
What the hell is your problem with this?
Jodi, I think I can answer that: the Red Cross has set a policy of not accepting any donations from gays, or a few other marginalised groups, on the assumption that they all have HIV.
Without having read any of the links:
Not all blood drives are sponsored by the Red Cross. At least not around here.
The Blood Center of Iowa does our drives. We invite them to the plant twice a year, and they also travel to churches, schools, Legion Halls, etc. all over the state.
They are incredibly well-organized. They bring all the stuff (including the juice and cookies), and do all the work.
Their volunteers are remarkable people. They work their butts off loading and unloading cots and coolers and fans and stuff, stick needles in people all day long, then reload when it’s over and hit the road.
Then they invite all the sponsoring groups to a fancy appreciation dinner. Shoot, we need to be thanking them!
Give blood!!!
Perhaps 'scratch is referring to the policy stated in this quote from the Red Cross’ website.
In other words, Homosexual Men Need Not Apply.
Although admittedly it sounds like that it’s not that the Red Cross doesn’t want blood from gay men, rather that the FDA won’t allow them to accept it. I’ll leave that open to dicsussion.
AuntiePam…You might want to go check my link…I specificly suggest giving blood to an organization that has lobbied to have the restrictions on gays removed. I also urge people to write a letter to the red cross informing them why they can not have your blood…
Scylla…the red cross endangers lives by turning down perfectly safe blood…the reason they do this is becasue of a bias against homosexuals and certain other groups. The Taliban has also saved lives…are you suggesting that we support them too and ignore all the small insignificant bad bits?
The red cross supports the fda not removing the restriction. Other blood donation groups supports the fda removing it. If the red-cross did so as well it would very likely be removed.
I wasn’t aware of that. Thanks for the info.
As Alphagene points out if the FDA guidelines suggest against donation of blood by gay males, then it would seem your beef oughtta be with the FDA.
I am very uncomfortable making this a political issue at all. Arthur Ashe died from an HIV contaminated blood transfusion. I am all for extreme measures to ensure that the blood supply is clean so that one in need can accept a donation in confidence.
Missed the last post. What is the Red Cross’ reasoning?
SUO NA:
This is not my understanding. My understanding is that they do not accept donations from homosexual males because they are at considerably higher risk to have HIV, not because it assumes they all do have HIV. Do you guys deny that it is not accurate that a person is statistically more likely to contract HIV if he is a homosexual male?
OLDSCRATCH:
So how does this justify further reducing the blood supply by refusing to give?
I don’t think so. I think their protocols, as I understand them, have the primary purpose of protecting the blood supply. People engaging in at-risk behavior are not allowed to donate because of the risk, not because of the behavior. Interveneous drug-users can’t donate either; do you contend this means the Red Cross is biased against interveous drug-users? What about those who travel to sub-Saharan Africa? Do you think the Red Cross is biased against travellers, or just thinks the likelihood that they might have contracted a disease dictates their blood not be used?
This has got to be the mother of all ridiculous comparisons. How does the Taliban save lives? What service does the Taliban render that otherwise would not be filled? To compare the Red Cross to the Taliban is . . . well, it’s so stupid it appears to undermine what otherwise might be a reasonable argument.
Do you have a cite for this?
IMO, the day the Red Cross is guilty of discriminating against gays is the day they refuse to donate the blood they gather to gays.
And you might keep in mind that not every community has the option of deciding which organization to donate blood through. In my community, if you want to give blood, you do it through the Red Cross – period. You can surely see the detrimental effect your ill-advised boycott would have on the citizens of this town, both gay and straight. But what’s a few dead people in the name of the greater cause, right?
That should read, “Do you guys deny that it is accurate . . .”
Preview preview preview
The Red Cross will also turn down females that have had sex with a gay/bi male or anyone that has had sex with an IV drug user AT ANY TIME IN THEIR LIFE, BE IT 10 YEARS AGO. Knocked me out of the loop, too, and I tried to donate to them many times before I gave up in disgust. I now go directly to my hospital and donate there. I may have had sex with “undesirables” at some point in my life (and, yes, with condoms thenkyewveddymuch), but that doesn’t mean I’m irresponsible.
Jeez, I’m in theatre. How can I avoid having sex with gay/bi men? 
Poor people are at higher risk to have Hep. Donated blood is routinely screened for both. What’s your point?
The boycott is not against all blood collection organizations, just the Red Cross, which supports the FDA restriction.
I’m with you here. The Red Cross is being stupid, shortsighted and (perhaps unintentionally) bigoted, but they’re no Taliban. Nothing is helped by this comparison.
Fair question. I’ll try to rustle one up for you.
I daresay that if the local hospitals start running short of blood, they’ll damn skippy find an alternative source. The point is that the Red Cross’ near-monopoly on blood (and until this policy, my money) gives them enormous political clout in the legislature and the medical community.
Until they are willing to take blood from my 20-year monogymous gay neighbors, who have a risk factor lower than me or anyone else on Ghod’s Green Earth, they ain’t getting one lousy drop from me.
Please feel free to find an alternative spelling for a word describing people who have been faithful to each other for a long time. “Monogamous” comes to mind. Sheesh!
**
actually what it justifies is refusing to support an organization that perpetuates stereotypes against gay men even if they do perform a usefull service…and putting presure on them to change their policies.
**
I can understand that. However testing is highly exacting now. There is no medical reason to deny gay men’s blood. If a gay man had numerous sexual partners recently, than sure…BUt if they’ve been involved in a monogamous relationship since 1981? WTF? I’d even support if they went with the Blood Center’s of the Pacific plan. If you’ve had sex with a gay man in the last 5 years. That would free up a hell of a lot of people…including me. Of course blood centers, knowing that the red cross is endangering lives for no good reason support the lifting of the ban.
**
sure thing boss…
from SF Chronicle September 15th 2000 "Blood banks, faced with blood shortages, supported
easing the restrictions, but the plan was opposed by the
American Red Cross. "
**
This sounds like that ridiculous argument that the DOMA isn’t discriminatory against gays cause they can still marry memebers of the opposite sex.