'No Faggots Allowed'
Activists in Portland Maine reportedly "plastered the community bulletin boards of downtown Portland" with a poster campaign drawing attention to the American Red Cross' discriminatory policies.
In May, UK Gay News reported that campaigning by activists led to the successful repeal of a similar ban by Russia.
Is that a joke?
The last days we were hearing that Colombia misused the Red Cross emblem to free the hostages. We learned what a terrible crime that is – a war crime!
Posted by: Martin | Jul 17, 2008 10:29:29 AM
Seriously?
Re-read the posting Martin.
Posted by: Daniel | Jul 17, 2008 10:32:11 AM
Dumb shits, I hope they bleed to death.
Posted by: David | Jul 17, 2008 10:35:17 AM
Awesome! This is guerilla marketing. Taking their sacred "brand" and using it to expose their bias. The Red Cross should give free HIV screening and if you are clean, they milk you for a pint. No one is in a better position to screen masses of people and insure their product at the same time. Everyone benefits.
Posted by: Rikard | Jul 17, 2008 10:51:20 AM
Stephen King country--everybody 's tough.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 17, 2008 10:56:49 AM
I agree, RIKARD, what a great guerilla marketing technique.
Don't sugar coat it, call the policy as it is.
(it is funny that two of the 4 first commenters don't seem to have even read it)
Posted by: Dan B | Jul 17, 2008 10:58:47 AM
The poster is not homophobic - it is pointing out the Red Cross' discriminatory/ homophobic practices. Read fellas, for fuck's sake, READ!.
Posted by: Derek | Jul 17, 2008 11:01:07 AM
@ Rikard - unless the Red Cross was going to give an instant PCR test (not that it exists) a negative result on a standard instant HIV test would not mean squat because it only indicates when the body has developed antibodies and that can take weeks or even months after infection. And sadly it is in that time when someone is the most infectious.
Posted by: Derek | Jul 17, 2008 11:12:03 AM
My point, which I left out, a negative result (while sitting at the blood drive) would not necessarily mean someone is indeed HIV negative. Testing for copies of the virus would be the only way to be 100% sure at that exact moment.
Posted by: Derek | Jul 17, 2008 11:18:11 AM
I was under the impression that the American Red Cross is only required to have that policy because of the Food and Drug Administration's policy.
See article here: http://www.gaypeopleschronicle.com/stories06/march/0317062.htm
The poster is kind of attacking the wrong people, here...
Posted by: Rob | Jul 17, 2008 11:33:23 AM
"clean"?
Posted by: kile Ozier | Jul 17, 2008 1:27:41 PM
Yes, the Red Cross itself is against the ban, but they're not the ones who control it.
One of our Middlebury students was honored by the Advocate for his bringing attention to the issue::
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_1009/ai_n26675205
The Russian case is a bit different. The ministry lifted the ban on ALL so-called risk groups: homosexuals, prostitutes, and drug-users. They did it not because of pressure from the gay activists, but because it was impossible to enforce in practice, since no one would admit to being any of the above, especially not to being gay.
Posted by: Kevinvt | Jul 17, 2008 2:07:00 PM
Didn't the Red Cross not too long ago put out a discrete memo that they won't stop gay people from donating if they don't tell them that they have had gay sex? If I'm rememoring correctly, then this is probably some bigot in Maine that made the sign.
Posted by: Garst | Jul 17, 2008 2:59:49 PM
It's a little unfair to single out the Red Cross when it's federal policy that men who have sex with men (that's what they ask, not if you are gay) cannot donate blood. They also ask if you use needle injected drugs. You all may recall the scandal in France in the 80's when hemophiliacs were infected with HIV because the govt. ministry in charge of the blood supply was too cheap to test for it.
Posted by: anon | Jul 17, 2008 3:20:40 PM
I'm glad to see that others have already pointed out what I was going to say.
The FDA bans gay men from donating. The Red Cross and all other blood donations must abide by their rules. Protesting the Red Cross isn't going to change anything.
Posted by: anon | Jul 17, 2008 7:12:54 PM
Fuck, I'm ashamed to live in Maine.
Posted by: Jeremy | Jul 18, 2008 12:04:11 PM
The truth hurts. I don't care if its the Red Cross, the FDA, or the Mormon Tabernacle Choir... the ban against our blood should have been repealed long ago. Who cares if there's no instant PCR test? Doesn't the Red Cross test the blood anyway? Or does a single claim of heterosexuality mean that they'll just dump the blood in somebody and throw caution to the wind?
A few more marketing tactics like this one, and perhaps the Red Cross will grow a pair and stand up for equality. Until then, they have no reason to do so.
Posted by: The MIlkman | Jul 19, 2008 10:22:22 AM
Milkman : The tests only test for antibodies against the virus. It doesn't test for the virus itself. Except for a NAT test, which is extremely expensive. Find me an attending that'll approve a NAT test for every single blood donation, and I'll show you someone out of a job.
Posted by: James | Jul 21, 2008 6:47:25 AM