Get the Flash Player to see this player.

controversial again

Tuesday 22nd April 2008

I seem to be getting the hang of this

My song on last week's Now Show - protesting the fact that while the NHS is perilously short of blood, the Transfusion Service refuses to allow gay men to donate – has garnered a bit of response. I've had a few emails in support, and so far just the one against. I'm reprinting a bit of it here; see if you can spot the inherent contradiction:

Mitch; I've always been a fan, got your CDs, and think you're incredibly clever, but I'm afraid you got it badly wrong with your gay blood donor song.

Can you please just clarify the facts and NBS position on it next
week? (References below)

FACT: One in ten gay men in London has AIDS.
FACT: There is NO CURE for HIV/AIDS.
FACT: The National Blood Service DOES NOT discriminate against gay men.

Statement from the National Blood Service:

This policy is in place for the sole purpose of protecting public health by minimising the risk of transmission of HIV and other blood-borne viruses to patients through the blood which we supply to hospitals. Men who have ever had sex with men are at a higher risk of carrying such viruses. Since it is specific sexual behaviour which places individuals at risk, rather than their sexuality, there is no exclusion of gay men who have never had sex with another man nor of women who have sex with women.

See what he's done there? On the one hand he's insisted that:

"FACT: The National Blood Service DOES NOT discriminate against gay men.â€

... and on the other hand, he's pointed out why the National Blood Service HAS to discriminate against gay men, and that it's in everyone's best interests that they do so.

One could present one or the other of those arguments (although they're both contestable) but presented in tandem like that they make a bit of a nonsense of each other. It's like a murder suspect saying "I didn't kill him, I've never met him, I've never even heard of him and anyway it was self defence."

Oh, and drawing a spurious distinction between "Gay Men" and "Men Who Have Sex With Other Men" is REALLY uncomfortably close to the stuff Christian Fundamentalists are always pulling to justify their bigotry. How exactly is sexuality expressed if not through sexual behaviour?

The real point surely is that (apart from working prostitutes) no STRAIGHT people are banned outright from donating, however reckless THEIR sexual conduct might have been, and according to this site the rate of infection among heterosexuals overtook that among homosexuals as long ago as 1999.

Ho well, guess I'm down one fan then. Never mind, have a look at this instead:

[ Fixed link ]

Bookmark and Share
[ Back to the Blog index ]