Identifying as female to sell blood

By this group I mean gay men.

But if you have sex exclusively with TW then you have the same risk as if you have sex with men.

The reason that there are specific rules for men who have sex with other men, is not only because HIV is transmitted more easily through anal sex, but also because this group of individuals has a much higher incidence of HIV than the general population. Your point is correct if TW also have a similarly high incidence of HIV. Do they?

But rallybadidea when you allow the intelletual lie, the distortion of logic and reason, quite plainly as we know see, one encourages some people to think that

rules don't matter
or rules are arbitrary
or the rules don't apply to me
i can make my own rules

When nothing even science-based rules have a rational, reasonable, objective, quantifiable basis you end up with anarchy.

I can see even more clearly now why we have a small c conservative backlash to this liberal extremism. I am so out of touch with the USA.

I am starting to think that some religions have been less harmful to women that this trans ideology. They might have shamed us, controlled us, made us possessions, beaten us raped us, but they didn't try to erase us and replace us like this.

But then if they had the technology we have now at the height of their powers, they might have gone the same way. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss :(

I don't think it's particularly helpful having a discussion about a US situation when this country has its own rules which at present adequately deal with this issue. However, the FDA document that you linked to says:

"Defer for 12 months from the most recent contact a female who has had sex during the past 12 months with a man who has had sex with another man in the past 12 months." Which seems reasonable to me.

Geez. That is insane thinking.

We might expect that some people lie to be deliberately harmful to other people (and do people get punished if found to have deliberately lied when giving blood?), but this is a whole new way of allowing people to do harm and yet to deceive themselves and the woke that they are not being harmful at all, when right thinking people know that they are.

The madness of this hurts :(

this is what I was thinking of. I suppose one way to reduce the risk for men from our horrid man killing blood is to allow biological males to donate and tick 'female' in the box

Providing a detailed medical history when donating blood could be more important than we know - and not just when it comes to screening for disease

New research has found that men have a far higher mortality rate after receiving blood transfusions using the donor blood of women who have been pregnant. But no one knows why.

While the study shows a correlation, it doesn't explain why blood from previously pregnant women would have such an effect. The researchers do hypothesise that there could be a "possible mechanism based on immunologic changes occurring during pregnancy"

They definitely do it on identity — I know somebody FtM (but only socially) who couldn't donate because their iron levels were too low for the male scale, but would have been fine on the female one.

It's the same in the UK. They process / accept your blood donation based on whatever gender you identify as.
I just noticed that the back of my donation questionnaire and my online account say gender. If my sex is female but I don't have a gender, what should I say is my gender? If I phone up can they just change it to none? When I registered I must have assumed they meant sex.

Thanks!

I thought biological sex was extremely relevant in blood donation because there is something in some female blood that can effect men negatively? I'm sure I had read before about some trans women (why is it always trans women?) claiming discrimination for having to report their biological sex and not their gender identity when giving blood.

An interesting case to watch and wait for the outcome. Frightening if they win and I wonder what the consequences will be for the future of donations.

Having said that I'm not sure the 50% MSM infection rate is correct - do you have a source?

They might be accepting the blood, but not using it.

The risk of being sued for knowingly giving someone high risk blood must be quite high in USA. Also as pp said, wouldn't the use of hormones be risky too?

The OP mentions "to sell blood", so I can see how a person might be inclined to lie in that case.

But in the UK there's no fee involved, so you'd only do it if you were an absolute twat (which sort of flies in the face of the act of donation).

Surely the questions which are designed to identify risks eg anal sex / travel to certain countries, receiving blood in the past etc would stand regardless of sex?

I can’t work out if i think this is deeply worrying or a conplete red herring

In the UK, when you donate blood you have to tick boxes to say whether you have or havent indulged in various risky behaviours etc, don’t you. So someone could just lie on that checklist already, and then it wouldnt matter what they identify as?

I am very tired today though so may be missing the point...

Does it specifically ask about sex with trans people? Last time I checked if you were a man who had sex with a transwoman, you would count as a man who had sex with a woman? And vice versa

If you wanted to lie to give blood couldn't you just say you weren't gay or, better still, were a virgin? It's not like they'll check.

They do ask everyone the same questions about sex in the last x months, however on the pre-donation questionnaire that you complete each time you go.

It's the same in the UK. They process / accept your blood donation based on whatever gender you identify as.