like Target, corporate simple doesn't want to deal with the possible lost business of nutbags boycotting starbucks over a few pride flags in the store.
or maybe the drama of said nutbags coming into store and assaulting employees over it.
Target and Starbucks are (understandably, IMO) bowing to violent threats against their employees and customers. There's not enough nuts out there to make a boycott actually impact their profit margin, and if there was it would be obvious to the other side that would probably more than offset any effort. Rainbow Capitalism wouldn't exist if that wasn't the case.
But there are enough nuts out there to make good on their threats of violence. We've already seen those threats carried out many times, so it's not just some hypothetical possibility.
I think that Walmart employee that was murdered by and anti-mask but really opened people's eyes to how real domestic terrorism is in the US to these companies. Whether they're doing this because they want to protect their employees or want to stop backlash against them is still up for debate, but either way it's clear that terrorism works.
like Target, corporate simple doesn't want to deal with the possible lost business of nutbags boycotting starbucks over a few pride flags in the store.
I 100% consider myself an ally of the lgbtq+ community.
Its just not worth putting a target on your employees back these days. Lunatics coming in, harassing and assaulting minimum age workers because of colors on the wall.
Employees think they want it.. but they aren't prepared for the backlash that would ensue (nor should they, they're baristas for fuck sake).
What I'm worried about is the engagement they're getting, I wouldn't be surprised if they went from "let's put pride stuff to produce engagement off conservatives" to "let's put pride stuff to produce engagement off conservatives and THEN take it away to produce engagement off progressives"
Acquiescing makes the queer community more vulnerable and many of these employees are themselves queer.
Standing up to hate is the correct thing. Rubbing your position in bigot's faces is the correct thing. Pulling a Gary Bettman and pretending anti-queer hate is something which can be ignored away is taking the side of and emboldening oppression.
How can you ask our baristas and target employees to do the right thing when our police, politicians, etc. can not?
Security guards were shot in the head at convenient stores for asking customers to mask up during the pandemic. I don't expect the 16 year old kid making my coffee to stand up to a right wing lunatic. Our children and minimum wage workers should not be on the front lines of human rights issues in my opinion.
So your suggestion is to embolden the fascists who would threaten 16 year olds with guns? Your solution to the location of the front line is to surrender to those who would move that line to the homes and rooms of some of these same cashiers and baristas? You think giving in to threats will make those threats go away?
The moral responsibility of all people is to oppose hate.
The responsibility for the safety of workers from attack rests with their employers.
Clearly the solution is to make the stores even gayer and pay for as much security as it takes to keep the workers safe from those who take offense.
Giving in will make everyone less safe, appeasement never works.
This year is quickly turning into the year of the strike. France is no surprise, but Germany, UK, USA, uh... are there any other countries with major strikes?
This is why you don't give in to boycotts - they'll just keep pushing if you do.
If Walmart and Target and Starbucks and Budweiser and every other targeted brand just shrugged their shoulders and carried on Pride'ing, eventually conservatives would be left with nowhere left to shop at and would lose their enthusiasm for continued boycotting.
if you ask generic customer what they feel about minor holiday X that retail stores make a huge deal about - if there aren't massive sales, most customers will be equally ambivalent.
there's nothing really to be "on board" about, it's an ignorable decor change. They don't even have music or large amounts of candy like in the winter holidays.
According to the representative sample size divided roughly equally between Republicans, Democrats and independents, only 13% said a brand or store offering LGBTQ Pride-themed collections or merchandise would make them more likely to buy from that same vendor.
Another 61% said it would make no difference at all, while a full quarter of respondents said it would actually negatively impact their purchasing decision. source
Yes, the majority of Americans are in fact on board with it, or at very least ambivalent.
One might then conclude that business explicity Pride is actually done out of some level of general desire show genuine support, even at a slight business cost.
This is a bit cynical but I don't think companies care at all about pride. There may be individuals pushing for it within the company, but buy and large any time a company pushes for a social issue it is to make themselves look better and strategically pivot to appeal to different age brackets.
In this way I think corporate "pride-washing" is very much akin to green washing, acting like the company is carbon neutral or reducing emissions or whatever, when they just want people to feel better about buying their product that everyone knows is harmful. Plastic recycling, green ETFs and "clean" natural gas all fall under this category.
Profit decline due to these efforts is probably exaggerated, too, because people always conveniently ignore their moral values when buying products. We always hear about how horrid Nestle is, or how unethical the mining process is for our phone batteries, but look around and everyone still buys these things.
I agree with you, companies only care as far as their bottom line goes. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that doing pride displays and showing support, even in superficial support, is a bad thing. And there is no such thing as moral consumption under capitalism, and the only solution is to move towards a more worker centric society and eliminate exploitation from these industries. It starts with how you use your vote and your voice, we should advocate for more people to get involved and active.
Correct, but if you read the article it illustrates the incentives are different when the company is already an LGBT ally, revoking support is more detrimental to the bottom line.
You're making an assumption though -- that the 61% wouldn't mind if they explicitly banned Pride stuff.
I'd say I'm in the 61% -- I wouldn't go to a store because of supporting Pride, but I would avoid a store that explicitly supports bigotry and hate.
So chasing those supposed 25% could mean both the 13% who supports it and chunks of the 61% would actively avoid that store.
Give an inch, they'll take a mile. These crazies will just find a new thing to demand. Probably selling contraceptives, or crayons with all the colors of the rainbow.
For real! They’re coming for our kids!! Trying to teach them sexual health, and idk about you but nothing with the word “sex” in it is appropriate for my child! Oh the humanity, why can’t we go back to the good ole days when Catholic priests were given free reign to abuse children
Add comment