The news that the British ban on gay blood donation is being lifted is a mixed bag for us. The 365Gay.com story explains that the ban is being lifted because “the rule could be discriminatory and might breach equality legislation.”

My husband and I used to be serious blood donors (he more than I). When the AIDS pandemic hit and our blood was no longer wanted for fear we had HIV in our veins, we kept on donating for awhile by simply lying about never having sex with another male.

The truth was that we were entirely monogamous had had been for years, but that didn’t seem to matter to the rules governing the American Red Cross demand for our blood. It assumed that gay men were promiscuous or possibly had the virus, even at low levels, in our systems. America could not distinguish between monogamy and promiscuity.

Even now, the distinction in this British announcement is missing.[1] According to journalist Andy Bloxham, “However, gay men will only be permitted to donate if they have not had sexual intercourse for a decade. Homosexuals who are or have recently been sexually active will continue to be barred from giving blood.”

Well I admit I have had sexual intercourse in the last decade. But the new policy apparently wouldn’t care that it has been with the same partner for the last three decades plus. And for the record, I have never had any STD in my lifetime. But I won’t be flying to Britain to be generous with my blood.

The real oddity of our own American blood policy (I haven’t looked into British law or policy) is that it seems to be crafted to give assurances to heterosexuals that they can’t get HIV from gay blood. Are we doing that for white supremacists to assure them they won’t ever be given a transfusion of African-American blood? Truthfully, assurances of purity really can’t be 100% ever.

Blood banks do not and cannot guarantee the purity of their blood supply. Although blood products are screened carefully, but HIV takes awhile to show itself in an infected person. You would think in the 30 years since this terrible pandemic began (June 1981) that blood-screening science would have improved as dramatically as the medicines to control HIV/AIDS.

Of greater concern is that America can’t seem to convince our youth that getting HIV/AIDS is a serious health problem, even while the older generations still fear getting it from blood transfusions. We have much work to do, for example, to educate people who engage in risky behavior. (Keep your eye on [2] www.HollywoodRemembers.org).

I still believe that donating blood is a worthy cause and that it saves lives. As a generous person, I would still donate blood, but they don’t want it. Even as the science of blood purity struggles to improve itself, I don’t see American homophobia declining rapidly enough or law and public policy keeping pace with the change of either. And although our national blood supply is amazingly safe, too much bigotry still seems to flow in America’s veins.

— Dan Hooper