Good on Ricky Martin for wanting to — or at least raising the possibility of — donate his loca blood cells. But someone might want to share the news with the soon-to-return pop singer that neither the U.S. nor Puerto Rico permits donations from men who have sex with men.
Of course, telling José Enrique Martin Morales the bad news would also, you know, bring up the whole “Aren’t you gay?” thing, so maybe simply retweeting his message with this link.
chris
wait…so is it confirmed that he’s gay now?
terrwill
Miss Ricky Martin is so not gay…………….
Cam
Uh, yeah, Ricky Martin is….He has been famous in Latin America for decades because of firts being in Menudo, yet was never linked with a woman. Finally when the gay rumors start to surface they bring out some woman who had supposedly dated him for over five years to say how great their relationship was and how fantastic he was in bed. Only problem, there aren’t any pictures of them together….ooops!
Yeah, just another boring closet case. But nice that he’s trying to help encourage blood donation, even though he’d be turned away if he told the truth.
terrwill
No. 3 · Cam: Kidding……..Miss Martin should now that
its in vouge for former boy banders to finally come out
of the closet….Lance Bass is getting more attention
since commin out then he did in the five years prior….
ChrisM
Of course he can give blood. Just tell him to tell a little white lie when that question comes up. If heterosexuals at the FDA are stupid enough to unnecessarily reduce the blood supply, its up to us clean “MSM”‘s to raise it back up.
I particularly like the FDA’s list of reasons for banning MSM’s. One of them is actually that blood testing is not 100% accurate and that HIV positive donations could slip into blood banks. That’s a great thing to brag about. I guess the infected transfusion recipients can take solace in the fact that they got it from a heterosexual.
James Davis
@ChrisM It’s hardly a little white lie. Blood agencies have sued and I believe it is actually a criminal offense.
So while I find the question morally wrong, I don’t recommend fixing that morality with a lie that has some nasty consequences for yourself.
Mike
God, Queerty, could you come off as any more condescending. Yes, you are the almighty Ghey and know everything. Jesus.
Tom
@ChrisM – So happy to read your assertion that because you (apparently) are not HIV+ that you are one of the privileged “clean” cocksuckers, as opposed to us “dirty”, non-monogamous HIV+ fags who don’t enjoy the luxury of telling a little white lie in order to heroically “raise up” the nation and it’s blood supply. Oh yeah, and you’re a bigot and an asshole.
ChrisM
Whoa, Tom, calm down. When I said clean I meant tested for and free of diseases. I didn’t mean monogamous or to belittle HIV+ gays. Maybe clean was a bad choice of words, but I stand by what I said. If you are tested and know you don’t have any diseases, you should donate blood regardless of your orientation. It is nothing against HIV+ people – I just don’t think (and I think you would agree with me) that people who know they have a contagious disease should give blood. What is bigoted about that?
Jake
I’ve been lying and donating blood for years, and plan on doing so until the FDA changes its policy to one that isn’t so outrageously homophobic (i.e. not a lifetime ban, maybe a 1-year deferral.) Any of you FDA number crunchers reading this? Put that in your calculator.
Anyway, I haven’t gotten so much as a wort. Not surprising since I’m in a monogamous relationship and use protection. And supposedly I’m at a greater risk than a frat brother that bangs 5 chicks raw every week? Right…
ChrisM
Jake, if they institute a 1-year deferral it would not be any different for gay men. My understanding is that the deferral of this sort which some countries implement applies to the date of your last sexual encounter. This would mean that unless you remain celibate you are permanently deferred in installments of one year rather than in one shot.
The FDA prides themselves in being safe by deferring homosexual men because they are at a much higher risk for HIV infection. What would be much more effective would be to defer people who have ever had unprotected sex. Why don’t they do this? If you read their FAQ, their reason is basically “don’t change the subject.” They just reiterate that male-male sex is at more risk for disease transmission than unsafe heterosexual sex. In other words, being THAT safe would mean losing a lot more donors. I understand and support the concern for public health, but they seem to be arbitrarily drawing a fine line on how much it matters to them with this issue.
If the FDA insists on deferring people based on who they sleep with rather than whether they practice safe sex, I believe they should institute a new policy that will increase supplies. If they are so scared that every gay man’s blood is infected with HIV, let MSM’s donate blood and place this blood in an “Emergency Only” supply center. That way, if a disaster occurs, and standard blood supplies run out, we have more blood for people who are suffering major blood loss. In the RARE chance that infected blood makes it through testing to this emergency supply, we are presented with this scenario – someone who would have died is instead alive with HIV. If I were in that position, I could only be grateful to be alive considering the alternative to being HIV+.
RickyFanForLife
Firstly, I’m shocked that gay men are lying about their homosexuality in order to give blood! Secondly, Ricky Martin does not tell lies – in order to donate blood or otherwise. Ricky is not gay and has actually said on a few occasions that he’s not. Whatever else all of you think, Ricky supports gay rights for the simple fact that he’s a decent human being.
Tom
“Clean” was definitely a bad choice of words.
benlayvey
I’ll still hit that!