My dignity or a sandwich?

My dignity or a sandwich?

There are 10 comments on the www.chicagonow.com story from Jan 13, 2011, titled My dignity or a sandwich?. In it, www.chicagonow.com reports that:

The list of places I no longer can go is growing.

No, I am not banned for getting drunk and dancing on the bar. In fact, it's the opposite--I am boycotting certain businesses based on what I feel are unfair or discriminatory policies.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.chicagonow.com.

Gay in Bethlehem

Bethlehem, PA

#1 Jan 13, 2011
...eh I think we kind of need to take the sandwich. Everyone knows you can't spell GBLT without BLT.
Equality NOW

Alpharetta, GA

#2 Jan 14, 2011
If Jason can't give up Archer Farms Lemon Drop Cookies for Civil Rights Equality
.
He's just not gay enough
.
po'thang

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#3 Jan 14, 2011
No matter what company is involved, there is another that offers deals as good, or meals that are better. Quit thinking about how you might be inconvenienced, and boycott whoever is discriminating. Either that, or go back in the closet. Very simple, really.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#4 Jan 14, 2011
I hope Trader Joe's is not anti-gay but perhaps the reason they did not respond is that they are a subsidiary of a foreign owner. I would not boycott companies who did not respond to the survey - who knows why they did not? They also might just have an overall corporate policy of not responding to political surveys. I don't think non-responders should be ranked or judged. It is more important to know about organizations which have a specific history of being homophobic.

Since: Jan 07

Ann Arbor, MI

#5 Jan 14, 2011
A few comments:

The HRC guide? Pfft. I would never do business with some of the places they rate highly. For instance the Darden Restaurants (Olive Garden, Bahama Breeze, Red Lobster, etc.). They rate an 80, but this is the company that tried to overturn a civil rights ordinance protecting LGBTs when they got sued for their discriminatory practices. I don't care how good their policies are now - that's an action I will never forgive and forget.

On the flip side, sometimes boycotts are more than merely inconvenient. Not everyone lives in a place where they have viable alternatives.

Then you have companies like Nestle, who seem to own everything. We try to avoid them as best we can, but you practically have to carry a book around with you to keep track of who owns what.

With a number of companies getting HRC's green light despite some despicable behavior (Target, Best Buy, etc.), and others having low ratings merely for refusing to participate in HRC's surveys, we take a moderate approach.

I am not interested in having to buy goods I consider inferior simply because the alternative means patronizing a company the HRC rates poorly.

I won't patronize a company just because the HRC likes them.

When my alternatives are limited, a balancing of quality, price and convenience wins hands down every time. What's more, I'm not persuaded that consumer boycotts make much difference unless the numbers behind them are pretty huge. Politics rarely generates those kinds of numbers. A company has to do something really heinous to generate that level of rejection of its products/services.

The obvious issue being: Anti-gay discrimination doesn't generate that kind of response from the public. Until it does, a few gay people boycotting a company makes little difference. We have to win the public relations game first.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#6 Jan 14, 2011
Target being anti-gay is like WalMart being anti-redneck

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#7 Jan 14, 2011
JohnInToronto wrote:
I hope Trader Joe's is not anti-gay but perhaps the reason they did not respond is that they are a subsidiary of a foreign owner. I would not boycott companies who did not respond to the survey - who knows why they did not? They also might just have an overall corporate policy of not responding to political surveys. I don't think non-responders should be ranked or judged. It is more important to know about organizations which have a specific history of being homophobic.
I hope Trader Joe's aren't either b/c one is opening about 5 blks away this spring.
DJ in Minneapolis

AOL

#8 Jan 14, 2011
Inquisitarian says: "When my alternatives are limited, a balancing of quality, price and convenience wins hands down every time."

I respect your opinions, Inquisitarian. However, if you are gay, YOU are the one who is perceived as being limited in quality and value. YOU are the one that Paster Osteen said was "not God's best" on TV. It's not about the quality of the shoes you seek. It's about the quality of YOU as a living, breathing, human being.

As for boycotts, they are educational both for the public and the employees of the company boycotted. Any company can survive without 10 percent of the population -- the gay population -- shopping there. A monetary decrease for the boycotted company isn't the major point of a boycott. HOwever, without educational boycotts, gays would be limited to depending on the goodwill of mainstream media to get its message out, a media that gets the bulk of its advertising revenue from the big companies being boycotted. I will go with no shoes, etc., before I buy anything at Target. I have not shopped at Target since I heard about their political donations. If most gays spurned Target, Target would become just another Montgomery Ward. Why? Because wherever the gays go, that's where the cultural mojo goes. Fundamentalist, counter-cultural evangelicals do not fuel Target's image or bank account. Like a vampire bat, Target's corporate image feeds off of the blood of gay culture and depends on gay culture for its survival. Once you understand that, you'll understand the power of boycotts. By the way, I and many others now shop at KMart instead of Target, and KMart sales are up for the fourth quarter -- Kmart's profits for Q4 have beat estimates and surprised Wall Street.

Since: Jan 07

Ann Arbor, MI

#9 Jan 14, 2011
DJ in Minneapolis wrote:
Inquisitarian says: "When my alternatives are limited, a balancing of quality, price and convenience wins hands down every time."
I respect your opinions, Inquisitarian. However, if you are gay, YOU are the one who is perceived as being limited in quality and value. YOU are the one that Paster Osteen said was "not God's best" on TV. It's not about the quality of the shoes you seek. It's about the quality of YOU as a living, breathing, human being.
As for boycotts, they are educational both for the public and the employees of the company boycotted. Any company can survive without 10 percent of the population -- the gay population -- shopping there. A monetary decrease for the boycotted company isn't the major point of a boycott. HOwever, without educational boycotts, gays would be limited to depending on the goodwill of mainstream media to get its message out, a media that gets the bulk of its advertising revenue from the big companies being boycotted. I will go with no shoes, etc., before I buy anything at Target. I have not shopped at Target since I heard about their political donations. If most gays spurned Target, Target would become just another Montgomery Ward. Why? Because wherever the gays go, that's where the cultural mojo goes. Fundamentalist, counter-cultural evangelicals do not fuel Target's image or bank account. Like a vampire bat, Target's corporate image feeds off of the blood of gay culture and depends on gay culture for its survival. Once you understand that, you'll understand the power of boycotts. By the way, I and many others now shop at KMart instead of Target, and KMart sales are up for the fourth quarter -- Kmart's profits for Q4 have beat estimates and surprised Wall Street.
I fail to see the power in a boycott that doesn't actually result in any changes in corporate policy or behavior. Target has not changed its behavior.

Here I'll just reiterate that I do participate in the boycotts to the extent I reasonably can. That includes Target and Best Buy, among others. But I'm not doing so with the illusion that it actually will make any difference. I do it because it's my money, and I'll decide who does or doesn't deserve it.

I don't require a lecture about the Osteens of the world who will never consider us to be anything more that "nitty gritty, dirty, little freaks", as Pink would put it. I'm well aware of those worthless opinions.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#10 Jan 15, 2011
Here is an interesting article about Washington University (very GLBT-freiendly) and Target:

http://www.queerty.com/washington-university-...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Big Box Retailers Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Milton Mayor poised to become the next Hazel Mc... (Aug '14) Jun 22 why jail still lo... 2
News Milton Mayor Gord Krantz poised to become the n... (Aug '14) Jun 18 Innocent Bystander 11
News OUR Walmart Demands Chain Pay $15/Hr., While UF... (Nov '14) May '15 Dude 6
News Evolving awareness is cause for same-sex-marria... Apr '15 Lawrence Wolf 13
News Indiana religious objections law slammed on soc... Apr '15 NorCal Native 224
News Indiana officials look to stem religious object... Mar '15 Long_Live_Freedom 5
News Indiana officials look to stem religious object... Mar '15 Go Blue Forever 67
More from around the web