Identifying as female to sell blood

[TurfClub]

This is a complaint by 'Nicole Throckmorton aka Nicholas Throckmorton'.

outinsa.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/2018.09.19-Throckmorton-Nicole-FS-Corr-to-Alex-Lopez.pdf

Under US rules MEN (and only men) who have had sex with men in the last 12 months are not allowed to sell blood (no giving there, lol).

However under US, Obama-era (2015), FDA rules your gender identity is self-identified and not subject to question.

So if you have received anal sex every night in the last year with a different bloke off Grindr, but you want to sell blood then you can do so, providing you say you are a woman.

Again it doesn't matter if you ARE a woman, because self-id. In fact 'woman' is literally a meaningless term.

The risky behaviour is receptive anal sex, which has a transmission rate 100x higher than say, vaginal sex, with the result that MSM have a 50% chance of getting HIV in the US.

But if you identify as a woman then that identical behaviour is no longer risky.

So the FDA is happy to give everyone HIV at the altar of self-ID.

Hallelujah!

There is nothing we can't sacrifice to self-ID.

Saying you are female when you are male is outright lying surely? I thought 'female' was still relating to sex not gender? I have my UK blood donation questionnaire and it uses the terms male and female, which I thought was foolproof.

The GRA allows biologically male to be legally female.

There is no longer any hard line around biological sex.

Nope.

www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/BloodBloodProducts/QuestionsaboutBlood/ucm108186.htm

"The FDA’s recommendation to blood establishments is that in the context of the donor history questionnaire, male or female gender should be self-identified and self-reported for the purpose of blood donation."

Sorry that reply was to Cachailleacha

Why would it matter what legal sex you are for blood donation? Biological sex would what matters surely?

What is male or female gender? Masculine or feminine?

They treat transgender people as gay men scaremongoring about HIV is disgusting you are basically saying in the US self id is more inmportant that infection control

I've heard of at least 1 biological male refused from giving blood on exactly that basis - biology (and sleeps with men) who was quite far into estrogen treatment. So I don't think it is that simple, unless self id changes that of course.

I think that the assumption is that transwomen aren't a pronl because gay men aren't having sex with them.

Can trans people even donate blood? Surely hormone treatments would rule them out as donors?

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

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.

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.

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

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...

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 think that the assumption is that transwomen aren't a pronl because gay men aren't having sex with them."

Say what?

I mean say what now?

Why do you think gay men aren't having sex with transwomen?

Transwomen are men, gay men have sex with men, that's kind of the definition of 'gay man'.

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?"

They don't ask about anal sex in the US, the question is 'man who has sex with men'

www.aabb.org/tm/questionnaires/Documents/dhq/v2/DHQ%20v2.0.pdf

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?

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).

It's not a lie though is it? If you believe you are a woman, and all the politicial parties in Britain believe you are a woman, then there's no lie involved.

It comes back to 'vagina people' and 'penis people' (previously known as 'women' and 'men').

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?

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.

Source: www.poz.com/article/HIV-risk-25382-5829