Negotiating Exclusion

Abstract

In the US, blood donors face a variety of restrictions that leave many people excluded entirely from the donor pool. This paper explores the specific circumstances and meanings surrounding the donor ban on Men-who-have-Sex-with-Men (MSM). The ban on MSM is one of the few existing donor guidelines to receive considerable criticism on grounds that it effectively prohibits any sexually active gay man from donating blood and thus discriminates against gays. Due in part to these questions of fairness, the Blood Products Advisory Committee (BPAC) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met to reconsider the decades-old policy, first in 1997 and again in 2000. The FDA asked its advisory committee to address the efficacy and utility of the MSM ban in light of technological developments in blood-banking, epidemiological data on the spread of HIV, and mounting pressures from gay rights and blood-banking organizations to update the policy. Through a detailed reading of meeting and conference transcripts that took place between 1997 and 2000, I argue that ‘MSM’ became a contested definitional category during the FDA’s reappraisal of the policy. During and between the Committee’s discussions, presenters and experts debated the differences between sexual behavior and sexual identity in relation to HIV and, eventually, HHV-8, a virus known to cause Kaposi’s sarcoma in immunosuppressed individuals. I argue that the underlying flexibility in the meanings behind the term ‘MSM’ allowed Committee members, in the end, to retract their more nuanced discussions of human behavior and HIV and to uphold the contested policy. Finally, I suggest how the debates surrounding the MSM donor ban can help us to better understand the place of sexuality in discussions and claims of biopolitical citizenship in early 21st-century America.