So the government's Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood has decided that men who have not had sex with other men can give blood after 12 months. This brings them into line with the rule on women who have had sex with men who have had sex with other men (of course that depends if they are aware that a men they have slept with was bisexual).
However, such a rule change is still discriminatory. There is still an exclusion on monogamous homosexuals who are in long term relationships, while promiscuous heterosexuals are allowed to give blood. Also the ban on men who have sex with other men includes those who do so orally or anally with or without a condom. Yet there is no request of heterosexuals on whether they practise safe sex or not. The only exception is using prostitutes, or sleeping with someone from sub-Saharan Africa when it comes to sexual practise.
What we are looking for is a rule change based on practise rather than carte blanche ban. While this new rule is good to those men who are bisexual, or had a one off experiment in their youth it still discriminates against those gay men who couple up monogamously, who constantly practise safe sex, providing they are sexually active.
If you think it is not discriminatory to ban man who have sex from other men from having sex think of those who work in an office that brings a blood transfusion van unto the site. They ask employees to sign up for sessions, yet every time some healthy men are not putting their name forward. They are constantly being asked by colleagues why. The reason of course is that they know they cannot give blood under these rules, but they have to come out to people who aren't their direct colleagues as a result.
Practise not pretence should be the only rules governing the giving of blood. If a gay man has a history of clean bloods and a history of safe sex they should not be prevented from giving blood, while men who father four children from four random one night stands are able to give.
Thursday, 8 September 2011
Monday, 5 September 2011
#LDConf in which I gambled to save over £100
Today I have finally received my email from Lib Dem Conference Office confirming my accreditation for this months conference. The fact that it has taken so long, for someone who applied for early bird registration raises the question, how much extra would it have cost me to get there and stay there if I'd waiting until now to book flights and accommodation.
Here is the answer.
My flights were booked as soon as the availability for September became available. The additional cost of £113.85 is actually more than double what I paid. This is for the same flights on the same airline.
The accommodation I had booked back in January is as you might have guess fully booked seeing as it was so cheap and so close to the conference venue. I expect to see a lot of Lib Dems around the lobbies. Therefore I went unto late rooms to find the best deal. Now here of course I could have got cheaper, further out but I'm only 400 metres from the ICC where I'm staying. So instead of a 4 minute walk I'd be facing half an hour. So while I could safe £90 the standard is lower and it is not as convenient. For the equivalent class at about the same distance I save £6 which would be used up easily in fares back and forth for when I didn't feel like walking.
Total additional costs £107.85 with sore feet, c. £120 by taking public transport in and out of the city instead of half hour walk. £135 when you consider there won't be public transport when I leave the bars.
Therefore letting people know 2 weeks in advance that they are accredited for conference is not a very economically liberal way of doing so. When you consider that I am also attending this conference as a claimant (yes still looking for work) that additional cost would have been prohibitive, fortunately this time a little forward planning has saved me a fortune.
Some are still waiting to be accredited.
Here is the answer.
My flights were booked as soon as the availability for September became available. The additional cost of £113.85 is actually more than double what I paid. This is for the same flights on the same airline.
The accommodation I had booked back in January is as you might have guess fully booked seeing as it was so cheap and so close to the conference venue. I expect to see a lot of Lib Dems around the lobbies. Therefore I went unto late rooms to find the best deal. Now here of course I could have got cheaper, further out but I'm only 400 metres from the ICC where I'm staying. So instead of a 4 minute walk I'd be facing half an hour. So while I could safe £90 the standard is lower and it is not as convenient. For the equivalent class at about the same distance I save £6 which would be used up easily in fares back and forth for when I didn't feel like walking.
Total additional costs £107.85 with sore feet, c. £120 by taking public transport in and out of the city instead of half hour walk. £135 when you consider there won't be public transport when I leave the bars.
Therefore letting people know 2 weeks in advance that they are accredited for conference is not a very economically liberal way of doing so. When you consider that I am also attending this conference as a claimant (yes still looking for work) that additional cost would have been prohibitive, fortunately this time a little forward planning has saved me a fortune.
Some are still waiting to be accredited.
Saturday, 3 September 2011
Could Cameron see the death of the Scottish Tories?
According to the Torygraph, David Cameron may be about to do something that not even Margaret Thatcher was able to achieve and kill off the Conservatives in Scotland. This may seem far fetched but it is what Murdo Fraser MSP and one of the possible winners of the leadership contest is proposing.
What Fraser wants is to hold a ballot of members with the proposal to disband the Scottish Conservativies and set up a new right wing party in Scotland. He believes that the Conservative brand is too toxic in Scotland since the wipe out in 1997 under the leadership of John Major.
If Fraser gets his way there will only be three parties that can say to have organisation across the whole of the UK, Labour, the Lib Dems and Greens. However, a lack of a party calling themselves Conservative is nothing new north of the border.
It was only in 1965 that the Conservatives in Scotland started to use the name Conservative, up until that time there were the Scottish Unionist Party. Though until that time the difference between the Scottish Unionist Party and the Conservative Party of England and Wales was had to differentiate, if not invisible when it came to Westminster. Indeed Andrew Bonar Law (1922-23) and Sir Alec Douglas-Home (1963-65) were both part of the separate Scottish Unionist Party but served as Conservative Prime Minister.
Beware of Scottish Conservatives deciding to return to the sheep's clothing of their former lupine appearances north of the border.
What Fraser wants is to hold a ballot of members with the proposal to disband the Scottish Conservativies and set up a new right wing party in Scotland. He believes that the Conservative brand is too toxic in Scotland since the wipe out in 1997 under the leadership of John Major.
If Fraser gets his way there will only be three parties that can say to have organisation across the whole of the UK, Labour, the Lib Dems and Greens. However, a lack of a party calling themselves Conservative is nothing new north of the border.
It was only in 1965 that the Conservatives in Scotland started to use the name Conservative, up until that time there were the Scottish Unionist Party. Though until that time the difference between the Scottish Unionist Party and the Conservative Party of England and Wales was had to differentiate, if not invisible when it came to Westminster. Indeed Andrew Bonar Law (1922-23) and Sir Alec Douglas-Home (1963-65) were both part of the separate Scottish Unionist Party but served as Conservative Prime Minister.
Beware of Scottish Conservatives deciding to return to the sheep's clothing of their former lupine appearances north of the border.
Must win this afternoon
This is the final game of the outdoor season and it is a must win game for us. The team with the most shots across the green will get 3 points this afternoon and for each rink that is up there will be a point. In total there is a maximum of 7 points at stake.
Here is the bottom of NIBA division 3.
As you can see we at North Down are 5 points behind Markethill, so we have to win and they have to lose. Fortunately we'll be able to keep and eye on how they are doing as we are playing host to them this afternoon. This means that for the whole 21 ends it will be a battle for survival.
While my rink for the past few weeks is attending a family wedding, I'm playing behind another skip, my third of the season. Something that has rather annoyed me earlier in the week. The last time I played for North Down before I moved to Bangor I played behind 8 other skips on the B team. Now I've been given a place at the back end of the A team and 6 of the others have been allowed to skip a rink. It is rather frustration for the youngest and most sucessful back end player in the team to be downgraded behind so many others. Especially when in recent weeks I have been performing the shots that are needed under pressure situations. But that is the way bowls goes. Sadly in this club you often have to pay your dues rather than simply being good enough.
I'l let you know how we got on later.
Here is the bottom of NIBA division 3.
While my rink for the past few weeks is attending a family wedding, I'm playing behind another skip, my third of the season. Something that has rather annoyed me earlier in the week. The last time I played for North Down before I moved to Bangor I played behind 8 other skips on the B team. Now I've been given a place at the back end of the A team and 6 of the others have been allowed to skip a rink. It is rather frustration for the youngest and most sucessful back end player in the team to be downgraded behind so many others. Especially when in recent weeks I have been performing the shots that are needed under pressure situations. But that is the way bowls goes. Sadly in this club you often have to pay your dues rather than simply being good enough.
I'l let you know how we got on later.
Friday, 2 September 2011
Tory MP doesn't get suppy and demand equal marriage
 |
| Weatherley in middle of road at Brighton Pride 11 |
Also those of us who have supported equal marriage for any length of time don't want to force anybody to do anything as it will only antagonise the opponents to the cause. What we want to do is to enable those who are supportive and get them to start offering equal marriage.
Note that what we want is equal access to marriage, not what the Conservatives offer i.e. civil partnerships in Religious Buildings. If they were offering equality that would be offering civil marriage for divorced mixed-sex couples in Anglican Churches as an example and other civil weddings in the same buildings. No what they are trying to do is appease the LGB part of our community. They haven't even looked at the Transgender dichotomy of a couple still living each other through gender reassignment of one partner but having to divorce to annul any legal relationship before going through it all again once the reassignment is complete.
Weatherley's approach may be seen by some as standing up for LGB rights, but if it merely antagonises those opposed to same-sex marriage and pushes it further into the long grass that is not the way many of us who are LGB and of Faith want to go. We want to be welcomed in the churches, not merely an evil necessity. In fact religious leaders can turn away mixed-sex couple who wish to get married in their building if they don't met certain criteria. Some religions and congregations are more inclusive than others in this matter and for equality we want the same when it comes to equalising marriage.
I doubt Mr Weatherley will start campaigning for every religious building to marry whoever comes to them to get married or else they lose the right to carry out such a service. So why does he want to do it for same sex marriage? Because he mistakenly thinks it is equality. Because he mistakenly thinks it will get LGB people of faith what they want. Sadly he is wrong on both counts as I have pointed out.
What we want is those groups that currently, or once it becomes a possibility to offer marriage equally to couple irrespective of their gender make up MF, MM or MF. Many of us even want marriage or civil partnerships to be maintained for (M-F)F, (M-F)M, M(F-M), F(F-M) couples if they still love each other.
Don't make up battles that we don't need to be there. Don't make up 'equalities' that aren't equal at all or to all. Let's get this thing sorted out in a thought out and sensible way that gives everyone the options that they want. There is more than one way to peel an egg.
Read also Archbishop Cranmer on this issue.
Thursday, 1 September 2011
Never Kiss a Gay Tory before the watershed
There is an article on Politics Home today about which of the following kisses are acceptable before the TV watershed.
So while LGBT Labour groups were going around giving out "Never kissed a Tory" badges at various Pride events up and down the country would appear justified, there are over 50% of their own party who don't want to see LGB kissing before 9pm, at least not on their TV. Heaven knows about on theri streets. Labour also seem to be less likely to want to see two girls kissing than two men*!
The Tories though are 25% more likely to want to see two women's lips collide than men. Yet at less that one in three to less than one in four neither of these statistics are good.
Now we're not talking full on sex here. Just a kiss, maybe not a full smacker too early. But a kiss is a normal sign of saying goodbye, see you later, or hello to a lover. If even these can not be shown as normal, but confined to a point where shameful things are locked away from children they will continue to bully those at school who are LGB, or whose parents are.
So my advise is never kiss a LBBTory member before 9pm, you never know who may be watching.
* The issue of Lesbephobia amongst Labour voters is something to be addressed separately.
- Straight Kiss
- Married Kiss
- Gay Kiss
- Lesbian Kiss
The Tories though are 25% more likely to want to see two women's lips collide than men. Yet at less that one in three to less than one in four neither of these statistics are good.
Now we're not talking full on sex here. Just a kiss, maybe not a full smacker too early. But a kiss is a normal sign of saying goodbye, see you later, or hello to a lover. If even these can not be shown as normal, but confined to a point where shameful things are locked away from children they will continue to bully those at school who are LGB, or whose parents are.
So my advise is never kiss a LBBTory member before 9pm, you never know who may be watching.
* The issue of Lesbephobia amongst Labour voters is something to be addressed separately.
Artful Thursday 9 - Vuelta a España
So I did it for the Tour de France with pictures symbolising the greatest of the Grand Tours. Yesterday British cyclist Bradley Wiggins assumed the lead of the 2011 Vuelta, as good a reason as any for some more cycling inspired art.
The famous orange colours of the Basque team Euskaltel Euskadi appear to be the subject of this pastel by Miki de Goodaboom.
There is this 1960's Spanish Stamp celebrating Cycling
And this sculpture
The famous orange colours of the Basque team Euskaltel Euskadi appear to be the subject of this pastel by Miki de Goodaboom.
There is this 1960's Spanish Stamp celebrating Cycling
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)