A 66-year-old Scottish man, who has been giving blood for more than five decades, was recently turned away from a blood donation center because he refused to answer whether he was currently pregnant or had been pregnant in the last six months. Leslie Sinclair, of Stirling in Central Scotland, refused to answer the absurd question which is intended to “promote inclusiveness.”
Great Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) recently launched a campaign to recruit a million more blood donors over the next five years, owing to a falling number of donors during the Covid-19 pandemic. Sinclair, a longtime blood donor, was more than willing to do his part but was nonplussed about the pregnancy question since he is both male and 66 years old.
“I am angry because I have been giving blood since I was 18 and have regularly gone along,” Sinclair told the Daily Mail. “I’m very happy to do so without any problem.”
When told he would not be allowed to donate blood without answering if he was or recently had been pregnant, Sinclair walked out of the clinic.
“I told them that was stupid and that if I had to leave, I wouldn’t be back,” Sinclair said. “And that was it, I got on my bike and cycled away.”
A veteran blood donor, Sinclair was used to the blood-giving drill — but he found a new question that needed to be answered prior to the usual ones.
“There is always a form to fill in and that’s fine,” Sinclair said. “They tend to ask about medical conditions or diseases — and clearly that’s because the blood needs to be safe. 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.”
Not applicable was not one of the choices given, which angered Sinclair.
“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.”
The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service (SNBTS), which was in charge of the blood drive, was apologetic about Sinclair’s situation but refused to back off their stance that males need to inform the blood bank of their pregnancy status.
“We appreciate the support of each and every one of our donor community and thank Mr Sinclair for his commitment over a long number of years. Whilst pregnancy is only a relevant question to those whose biological sex or sex assigned at birth is female, sex assigned at birth is not always visually clear to staff,” said Professor Marc Turner, director of SNBTS.
Of course, it’s all about “inclusiveness” for the organization.
“As a public body we take cognisance of changes in society around how such questions may be asked without discrimination and have a duty to promote inclusiveness — therefore all donors are now asked the same questions,” Turner said.
The “changes in society” Turner brings up should only take hold if they make some sense to society as a whole — not to fringe groups of the society in question. In their efforts to make a tiny part of society feel better about themselves, government entities such as the SNBTS would rather risk offending the majority of society with inane biological questions than offend the sensibilities of a few emotionally unstable transgender individuals.
You’d like to think that the absurdity of a male being asked on an official government form if he’s pregnant would signal wokeism’s death knell. Unfortunately, it seems that the wokesters have not yet begun to be ridiculous.
