Soooo... recently I donated blood for the first time through the Red Cross.

I went through the typical questionaire.... answered questions regarding where I had traveled etc...

AFTER having been asked whether or not I had engaged in unprotected sex of any kind-- to which I truthfully responded no -- I was asked if I had engaged in sex with a prostitute.

Now... what in the fuck business is it of theirs who I'm fucking as long as I'm doing it w/ protection? The inclusion of that question is complete bullshit.

From time to time on this forum when people decline to give personal information or when they mention how they don't want other people to know about our little hobby someone will respond and call them a pussy and start saying how they don't care who knows and how it doesn't matter and blah blah...

Just goes to show ya... it matters. There is definitely a prejudice against what we do and this is just one small way it pops up. As unfortunate as it is, what other people think can and does impact you.

Don't agree Ash.
Seemed a reasonable question in helping assess risk.

After all, if you were in a car wreck, whose blood would you prefer; a guy whose had a couple of girlfriends a year, still using protection. Or a randy sod like me, who gets it on with about twenty hookers every vacation!

I know whose blood I'd choose.

Haha, I'd pick the monger's, and not the lame dude who only has two girlfriends a year! :)

Seriously, I've mongered in a wide range of manners, probably seen over 200 prostitutes in all guises over the last 20 years. I've had unprotected sex with strippers in USA strip clubs, for instance. And protected sex in the Walletjes.

I've had one sexually transmitted concern ever. I got papilloma virus. From a girlfriend. No hooker has ever given me anything. And yes, I got tested. Up to the last time I had a full blood regimen done (about 3 months ago for travel to East Africa) I had nothing.

By my anecdotal evidence, it's safer to bone prostitutes and even do it unprotected sometimes, than it is to have a girlfriend. :)

haha danny... :P

You know... while you are disagreeing with me I think you are still managing to prove my point.

If the sex is with protection, then what does it matter if money changed hands?

Book_guy; love your logic.

Perhaps, from the "lame dude," you're thinking you'd catch something like 'limp wrist syndrome': after all he must jerk off a lot!

Ash, I'm too mean too give blood. Sell it, maybe!

hmm... there's an idea. Selling plasma to finance our hobby :P

I'd gladly accept your blood Danny...a man after my own heart after all!!! At least you would know the blood you parted with is still carrying life as norma as if it were still with youl!! LOL!!

Amsterman,
I think you're more likely to need a semen transfusion.
Well at least a top up, given the amount you've deposited at those LMP parties!

It's ok, i've been storing jar fulls of my own over the years!! Always knew it would cum in handy one day ;-)

The strict rules about who can give blood are basically to minimise the possibility of people donating blood who might have HIV or hepatitis. I think with HIV, it can take quite a while after infection before it shows up in any tests.

For the national blood service in the UK, you are not supposed to donate blood if you have had paid sex within the last 12 months. I suppose they are mainly concerned about clients of street prostitutes who also inject drugs, but having a strict rule about it is simpler.

Interestingly, they also don't want blood from anyone who has ever had gay sex, or had sex with someone who has been sexually active in Africa or other places with a high rate of HIV.

All these groups of people (gays, prostitutes, Africans) are considered "high risk" as a whole, even if that isn't true for many individuals within those groups. Despite a low risk of transmission from protected sex, with the huge volume of donations the risk of some infected blood getting through by this route is a reasonable concern.

I donated blood a couple of times some years ago. These rules were displayed quite prominently on notices, so if they applied to you, at least you had a chance to leave quietly without being asked any embarrassing questions.

National Blood Service - Who Can Give Blood?

I didn't wanna give blood before i read this thread and i definately don't now. screw them asking that question, they can't guilt my in to anything, it's my blood! lol. keep your cookie..

From someone who gives every 58 days religiously...

...I hated that question long before I ever was with a prostitute.

Back when I was married I would always respond with, "Yes, I'm married. I pay for it every day whether I get it or not."

They used to have you fill in all the little ovals/circles ( I would answer "no" ) and when they verbally re-asked all the questions I would give the above response. Threw them every time!

Eric

The rules are designed to keep people safe. Oh yes, you and I are at a higher risk for catch HIV ( be in denial if you want ). If you are that concerned about it, then don't give blood. Not a knock against you, just tring to do the most good for the most people. There are blood products that get pooled, so one infected person could kill 100's. lets see donate 6 times a year......... you do the math

I agree with the . These are generalisations. I'd happily lie and give blood anyway. I know for a fact that having only protected sex with prostitutes puts me at equal or lesser risk than the average member of the population who has bareback sex with someone without them getting checked out first, on several occasions.

Ok then, time for some denial... :o)

You don't really specify any of the actors in this comparison, you say that I am at higher risk, but higher risk than who? Than 'Mr hardcore christian, married as a virgin, only one partner who was also a virgin before marriage', yes you are probably right, I am at higher risk. How about 'Mr 3 weeks in Ibiza every summer getting drunk, high and shagging myself stupid while under such a significant influence that I am unlikely to even remember if I used protection or not', I strongly suspect those guys are at significantly more risk than I am.

You don't even know *me* well enough to make a comparison, you probably know that I 'pay 4 play', but is that 1 £350/hour escort a month, or do I pick up an illegal immigrant, drug addicted street walker once a week who will happily go bareback for an extra £10?

The idea that you are automatically at more risk than anybody else because you pay for sex is entirely incorrect. I bet you my whole holiday budget that, adjusted to a percentage, more people catch nasty things from the 'free' kind of sex, with anonymous 1-night stands being the single biggest culprit (in the west at least, rape is the biggest spreader in the third world).

My point is, you cannot pick two people at random and even come close to assessing their relative risk based on questions like, "Have you ever paid for sex?", "Have you ever had homosexual intercourse?" (That one is my favourite question by the way, the assumption being that only gay men have anal sex). In fact, I think the relevant question in the UK is worded as, "Have you in the last <some period of time>, had sex with anybody who has had sex for money in the last <some period of time>?". How would you even know that for sure? I am not good with women as it is, without the need to slip... "Oh, by the way, have you been a prostitute recently?" into my chat up routine!

In an ideal world, with intelligent people, we should just be able to slip a question in such as, "Have you done anything recently that would increase your likelyhood of being HIV positive?", into the questionnaire, with a few examples. Sadly, the majority of people seem to be so under-educated on the subject that you have to be far more explicit, and one thing that can be said for the working girls.... very very few of them are under-educated on this particular subject.

Hey, look at the bright side -- at least they don't ask these questions if you need blood!

--CC Girl

Sure - but if you've had sex at all, then your answer to that question would be Yes. However, you posit this ideal world would have intelligent people... so perhaps they would define risk as something such as having unprotected sex instead of protected sex with a prostitute.

I just don't see the difference of having protected sex with a prostitute and having protected sex with a woman who isn't.

Other than the fact that you're paying of course :P. If it's protected sex then it's the same risk either way, and hence that question being included is retardedly descrimnatory.

Worst part is I didn't even get a cookie. They were out.

I just had a look at Aldebran's National Health Service link......bloody hell, there's a number of questions I can't say "no" to! However, I am suprised there wasn't a question asking whether you've used controlled substances, etc.....plenty of questions about your sex-life, but none really about drugs? I was sure you couldn't give blood if you'd smoked weed within a certain amount of time?

It shouldn't make a difference whether it's sex with a girlfriend, a girl from a club or a prostitute......ignoring the girlfriend, you know as much about the girl from a club as you do about the prostitute (in some of our cases, we'll know the prostitute far better than a random girl in a club!).

Peace

My guess is (GUESS!) that "Mister Low Risk Christian" who supposedly only ever fucks his wife, and married her when he and she were supposedly virgins, is probably more likely to have STDs than a "professional" monger. The Fundamentalist Christian community has an extremely high rate of teen pregnancy because of lack of information, and lack of adherence to their supposed moral code. Look for example at Sarah Palin's daughter -- a common occurrence, the surprise child, which garnered Palin POSITIVE rather than negative marks from her core constituency. I would have guessed that the Fundies would hate someone who slept around; but actually, they all know that they all do it, but they don't admit that they do it, and therefore they don't take protective measures because they don't want to admit reality, so then they get pregnant or diseases, and then they can engage in the cathartic "sin and repent" cycle. In other words, instead of practicing what they preach, they transgress what they preach, in order to then demonstrate to one another that their redemption is all the greater, for the fact that they fell so low.

In other words, fucking hypocritical liars. Just like the rest of us. :)

Mongers, on the other hand, use condoms, at least.

HOW DARE YOU!?!?!

I will have you know, that my hypothetical friend was being completely honest about his sexual history and I will thank you not to question his integrity in future!!!

Perhaps you will change your tune if you, or somebody you know ever needs hypothetical blood!!

;o)