Lucky Stripe: Day 29
UncategorizedDay 28
UncategorizedDream Weaver: Day 27
UncategorizedTurban Time: Day 26
UncategorizedDay 25
UncategorizedDay 24
UncategorizedYour Blood is so… Gay.
Open LettersThe Canadian Blood Services’ page asks: “Pop Quiz! What type of blood is the universal donor and is always in high demand?”
Answer: O negative. That’s me. Too bad I won’t be giving blood until gay men are removed from the banned donor list. This policy is in need of a serious update. We’ve learned so much since the ‘gay panic’ of the 80s. Haven’t we? This continues to promote negative stereotypes about the LGBTQ community. Saying you’re not discriminating against a sexual orientation (just men who have slept with men in the last five years) is the biggest equity dodge I’ve heard lately.
Sent an email, via a colleague, to the Blood Services Rep before they do a drive at my school. Still the same ridiculously evasive answer:
The rep wrote, “[I believe she] is referring to the Canadian Blood Services MSM Policy (men who have sex with men in the past 5 years are not eligible to donate). This policy does not discriminate against sexual orientation, rather ensures we have a safe blood supply for the vulnerable patients we serve.
All of this information can be accessed at http://www.blood.ca. ”
“Blood. It’s in you to give.”
Guess what? It IS in me to give. And I care about this. I want to give; but what I also give a crap about is basic, non-discriminatory policies in a country like Canada – that self-identifies as a global leader in equity. Why are we preventing healthy, generous men (who happen to be gay) from helping to save a life? Because we use words like “vulnerable” as scare tactics to insinuate that gay blood belongs to promiscuous, unprotected, reckless … people… who are just as likely as anyone who doesn’t know every detail of their past/partners/partners’ past as anyone else.

The rep’s reply is the same ‘we aren’t discriminating’ crap that they’ve always offered. It rests squarely on the assumption that gay sex, which implicates someone on the basis of “orientation” (unless they are celibate) is somehow dirtier or more ‘risky’, therefore likely to put the ‘vulnerable’ blood recipients at more risk than other people who have sex without condoms or safer sexual practices. * Just so we’re clear. You CAN be gay and donate, as long as you haven’t had sex with a man in 5 years. If, on the other hand, you are a gay man who isn’t actively refraining from having a sex life, your orientation DOES preclude you from donating. So their ‘orientation’ loophole is a gaping black hole of carefully worded b.s.
If someone (anyone) is sleeping with anyone, they may be at risk of having an STI. Yes, gay men in the 80s were hit hard by HIV/AIDS (which we well know) and as a result, their population/community actually tends to be MORE informed and often safer, as a result, than your average sexually active person. But I dare you to find the latest stats on the highest rates of STI transmission. I’m going to bet (I would actually put real money on this) that it’s not gay men who are contracting the most new STIs. So, let’s not be naive (or a bigot): essentially, every person who doesn’t know every detail of every partner’s past, every monogamous partner who has unknowingly been cheated on, every one night stand, every broken condom, or forgotten one, makes someone just as likely to be ‘unsafe’ – sexual orientation aside.
I’m really disappointed by the answer I got. Because I thought our new Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau, had JUST issued directives to help end this policy. There is even a link to the Petition to end this ban.
Maybe our GSA members will want to protest the blood drive. Just kidding. Sort of. But I’m glad I asked. Never a fun question; always an interesting answer.
As a final thought: When this policy does end, I’ll throw a vampire-themed party and let them pump all my veins to within an inch of my life.
#CanadianBloodServices(used to)suck
#bloodbandiscrimination #canadianbloodservice #equityplease
For more on this… check out the ever-reliable wikipedia Here

Day 23
Uncategorized#Best and Worst Oscars… Coverage
Open Letters, style
HOLLYWOOD, CA – FEBRUARY 28: Actress Kerry Washington attends the 88th Annual Academy Awards at Hollywood & Highland Center on February 28, 2016 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Todd Williamson/Getty Images)
Is it 2016? I can’t tell. Why? Magazines like Flare Magazine and Elle Canada are still putting out embarrassingly antiquated trash articles like ‘Best and Worst Dressed’ Oscars lists. Really? Why not just stick with praising the ones you liked rather than shaming and bullying people whose dresses (and bodies) you feel like publicly critiquing? How can a magazine simultaneously publish articles on feminism, while also churning out this garbage, and think that no one will notice? You can do better.
Flare’s Best and Worst List and
We talk so much about modern womanhood, about gender, about anti-bullying, about focusing on a person’s talent and contributions rather than his/her appearance; we’ve heard the years and years of inane ‘what are you wearing?’ questions, posed almost exclusively to female athletes, actresses, celebs, and heard the, ‘wow, she really bounced back after all that baby-weight’ comments, and we’ve started (thank God) to notice that it’s not merely sexist to focus on a woman’s body in lieu of her talent (at an AWARDS show), it’s also just mean-spirited. And sometimes racist, classist, sizeist and… still mean-spirited.
There are very few other situations where a person’s unsolicited, unwelcome comments about a person’s appearance wouldn’t be called out. More on that later.
No woman at the Oscars picked (or had a stylist pick) her dress and thought, ‘Fuck it, I look like crap, but this will do.’
It isn’t even an excuse to say, ‘but Heidi Klum looked radiant, despite an iffy choice on that dress’. If we think she looked great… great. Why veer into the salacious territory of commenting on the things we don’t like about someone when it is NOT relevant to the event.
You wouldn’t walk up to your neighbour to compliment her on her beautiful landscaping and casually toss in, ‘but you sure do have a fat ass’.
You wouldn’t go to a high school graduation and watch an accomplished young woman cross the stage to give her valedictory address and say, ‘too bad she has teen acne, how will she ever succeed with only her brains and winning personality?’
You would never go to someone’s wedding, to celebrate their love, and say, ‘everyone looked so amazing and gave touching speeches as a testament to your beautiful relationship… except your ugly cousin, whose ill-fitting dress was a shade that no red-head should wear.
Or worse, congrats on your wedding, engagement, birth of your child, promotion… shame about ‘your ugly spouse, your tacky ring, old-man-wrinkled raisin-baby, ugly footwear.’ We just wouldn’t.
But it’s commonplace to devote entire magazine spreads and tv spots to publicly judging things that are beside the point. And I don’t want to hear the ‘well, as celebrities part of their job is to be judged.’
Yes, that is a side-effect of being a celebrity. But no one invites public bashing. Nor is it okay. That’s, on some level, like saying that being a woman invites sexual harassment. Yes, it happens. But it isn’t okay. Something being common-place doesn’t make it right, or progressive.
Just ask Rebecca Black’s mother, who had to watch her teen daughter’s ‘haters’ post comments like, ‘You should kill yourself,’ because she had the nerve to post a video of herself singing (like everyone was watching). And some people didn’t like it. And the adults in her life supported her ambition. And the world replied. Sadly, I heard actual teens defend her crucifixion, saying that ‘she should have known that if she posted something online, people would tear her apart.’ This ‘she brought it on herself’ kind of attitude is so regressive and … frankly, terrifying. If media permits, and encourages, us to eschew kindness and courtesy (in favour of the kind of brutal honesty that get someone fired or slapped in the real world), is it any wonder that we are dealing more than ever with online bullying and a crisis of self-esteem. Fashion has become a gladiator sport, and the contenders are seemingly willing participants with no way out of this gauntlet.
When it comes to the Oscars, people spend huge amounts and hire experts to make sure their look will get them the right kind of attention: the kind where people either leave them alone, or give them a pat on the back for having escaped the vicious, catty humiliation of being targeted by ‘style watchers’ for daring to wear something that didn’t strike the right note with a particular person. Are we okay with a best-case-scenario where someone feels lucky to be praised for picking the right dress and shoes and favourably showcasing their body… when the alternative is being torn to shreds?
Nowhere else would this be acceptable.
So to those magazines, I’ll respond:
“Unsubscribe”… seriously. #shameonFlareMagazine #growupElleCanada #givemesomefashionmediawithoutthebullyingandbs Flare Magazine ELLE Canada
P.S. Kerry Washington, you make me want to be strong and fragile and badass and professional and sexy and clever. And yes, I like your outfits, but that’s beside the point.


















































































