Recommits Company to Anti-discrimination Legislation »
05/05/2005
Anti-gay mayor of Spokane, Washington caught in molestation and abuse of office scandal involving young men he met in the 70's and more recently on Gay.com. Mayor James E. West is "a vocal opponent of gay equality, abortion rights, and teenage sex" according to the Advocate. West reportedly offered an 18-year-old he met on Gay.com "gifts, favors and a City Hall internship" says the Spokesman-Review. Yet he says he doesn't consider himself gay. West: "There's been a strong wall between my public life and my private life."
FDA set to ban gay men from being anonymous sperm donors. Says AIDS risk too great. Rule would apply to any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the last five years. Lambda Legal: "There's a steadily increasing trend of heterosexual transmission of HIV, and yet the FDA still has this notion that you protect people by putting gay men out of the pool."
Posted 4:02 PM EST by Andy in Elsewhere | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Do they not test all sperm donations for HIV?!?!?
Posted by: Geoffrey | May 5, 2005 4:49:33 PM
Well there you go again, idiots breed.
Why must the outspoken anti-gay ones always turn out to be gay themselves? Why oh why? Because they are afraid, ashamed, and stupid.
As for the sperm testing, this is just ridiculous. When schools are opposing giving blood because of the discrimination to gays, the idea to try to start that kind of shit up is just ridiculous.
Posted by: Rob | May 5, 2005 5:33:57 PM
The sperm bank policy has NOTHING to do with AIDS. It's a back-door attempt at eugenically-screening "us" out of the gene-pool for future generations. It's a genicidal policy directed at the genetic-future of gay men by the fundemetalists that have pressured and lobbied the FDA knowing that FDA policies are the unwritten "law" for sperm-banks; and that many health professional will hide behind the FDA policy to insure that the "purity" of the gene-pool.
Herr Dr. Geobbels would have been proud.
Posted by: Ted B. | May 5, 2005 5:46:35 PM
Didn't see a direct comments about the Mayor of Spokane, so apologies if this is off topic.
The mayor is another example of scummiest of us all: 1) he's a pedophile. 2)he's a hypocrite. 3) he's using the power of his office to seduce.
Posted by: jeff | May 5, 2005 6:03:09 PM
Ted B. -- straight sperm makes gay people, and the gay sperm being held back was never going to play a role in reproduction, anyway. So I love the drama, but i question your facts.
As for Spokane's mayor, it's perfect that this happens. As shameful as this goofball is, it gives us a real, live posterchild for toxic right wing hypocrisy to display to the world...and I cannot wait to snicker at some of my Republican acquaintances tomorrow in our Spokane office. Frankly, I hope more of these clowns are unearthed -- Delay and Frist, Karen Hughes...bring 'em on.
And finally, again to the mayor story, I love these gigs that some reporters get...trolling for mayors in America's sex chatrooms. i would LOVE to see the pics that they used to lure the mayor to his Waterloo...
Posted by: Todd | May 5, 2005 7:20:12 PM
Strikes me as the same BS kneejerk reaction. Can you imagine the outrage if black women's blood was rejected due to HIV panic? We protested the Red Cross in college (along with the army recruiters) but really, this is a grim sign of the bush backlash. It will get better, but right now the world is scary.
Posted by: ls | May 5, 2005 9:10:40 PM
Are they using the AIDS thing as a smokescreen for trying to weed the 'gay gene' out of the nation's gene pool? What would be the public reaction if they were to deny blacks and Latinos as they are also in a higher risk group? BTW, I'm black and gay.
Posted by: Seth | May 5, 2005 9:13:49 PM
It's funny (not haha, but kinda scary) that the FDA would do this because HIV transmission via artificial insemination has never really been a problem. Prior to HIV antibody testing there were 6 reported cases in the US and 15 worldwide. Since HIV testing became widely available, there has been one reported case from a woman whose husband was HIV positive and they were trying to conceive in the late 1980s. There's more on my blog, if folks are interested. It's just a really sad attempt at marginalizing gay men by the FDA.
Posted by: Andy B | May 5, 2005 10:42:16 PM
Today's action by the FDA is outrageous, insulting, discriminatory, and smacks of eugenics. First the American Red Cross, now the FDA.
Posted by: Steve | May 6, 2005 12:18:38 AM
In Canada, any man who has had sex with another man (even once) since the early 1980's, cannot be a donor.
Also, it is illegal for a gay man to be a donor to another couple (in most cases, lesbians) even if it is with the couple's permission.
Posted by: Steven | May 6, 2005 10:36:42 AM
Here in American any gay man since 1977 who's had one sexual encounter with another man cannot donate blood to the Red Cross, so our country goes back even further than yours, which is crap.
Posted by: Schroeder | May 6, 2005 11:34:07 AM
Have you seen the new fall line from Sears and JC Penny? Beautiful madris swastikas layered over jew hair coats...it's what all of the red states will be wearing this winter.
Posted by: Wayne | May 6, 2005 3:54:44 PM
I just saw a news story about Spokane's mayor and, in typical right-wing fashion, they're not discussing the fact that he's an anti-gay Republican...instead, they're reporting that Gays ARE Pedophiles!! The spin doctors on the right are very very good. We need to hire them.
Posted by: Wayne | May 9, 2005 9:29:16 AM
I've been doing some Googling and it turns out that there have been ZERO cases of HIV transmission through anonymous sperm donation since testing became possible in the 80s. And there has only been ONE case of HIV transmission through sperm donation between parties who know each other (the husband was known to be HIV+ positive -- there are "cleansing" procedures for sperm -- they didn't work, apparently).
Previous to testing, there were fewer than 20 cases worldwide, and most of those were NOT anonymous.
There is NO scientific basis for this policy. NONE.
Posted by: BobN | May 9, 2005 1:05:25 PM