Scottish Man Cannot Give Blood Because He Refuses to Say He is ‘Not Pregnant’
Shane Trejo
|
A Scottish man can no longer give blood legally because refuses to say he is “not pregnant” on a form.
The good citizen, 66-year-old Leslie Sinclair, is a regular blood donor but is refusing to participate in a senseless new policy that requires biological men to state they are “not pregnant” in order to give blood.
“There is always a form to fill in and that’s fine – they tend to ask about medical conditions or diseases – and clearly that’s because the blood needs to be safe,” Sinclair said.
“This time around, there was a question I hadn’t seen before: ‘Are you pregnant, or have you been in the last six months?’ which required a yes or no answer,” he continued.
“I pointed out to the staff that it was impossible for me to be in that position but I was told that I would need to answer, otherwise I couldn’t give blood,” Sinclair added.
This is when Sinclair said enough was enough and exercised civil disobedience against the stupidity pushed by the Scottish public health administration.
“I told them that was stupid and that if I had to leave, I wouldn’t be back, and that was it, I got on my bike and cycled away,” Sinclair said.
“It is nonsensical and it makes me angry because there are vulnerable people waiting for blood, including children, and in desperate need of help, but they’ve been denied my blood because of the obligation to answer a question that can’t possibly be answered,” he added.
Big League Politics has reported on how the transgender plague is resulting in the destruction of language as civilization spirals into oblivion:
“Staff members at a UK hospital have been instructed to replace terms like “mother” and “breastfeeding” with “birthing parent” and “chestfeeding.”
Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, according to The Times, is the first hospital in Britain to “formally implement a gender inclusive language policy” for its maternity wing, which, naturally, will be renamed “perinatal services.”
The changes are not just limited to “birthing parent” and “chestfeeding.” Other changes include replacing “breastmilk” with “human milk” or “milk from the feeding mother or parent”; replacing “woman” with “woman or person”; and “father” with “parent,” “co-parent,” or “second biological parent.”
The hospital clarified in an internal policy document that staff need not eliminate all uses of the word “woman” or all phrases relating to motherhood, but to consciously use “inclusive language” in general.
“Gender identity can be a source of oppression and health inequality. We are consciously using the words ‘women’ and ‘people’ together to make it clear that we are committed to working on addressing health inequalities for all those who use our services,” the document reads. “As midwives and birth workers, we focus on improving access and health outcomes for marginalised and disadvantaged groups. Women are frequently disadvantaged in healthcare, as are trans and non-binary people.”
As if that weren’t enough, the document also decries the “biological essentialism and transphobia” infecting “elements of mainstream birth narratives and discourse.”‘
Share: