Yup, yup. And succinctly said.

In the end, it's all of course so much kabuki.

I think the outrage is understandable in this case. As Alex points out, it's the fact that Target HAS put itself out there as being particularly supportive of the gay community, in turn benefiting from the economic support of those who've appreciated that, which makes it seem like a worse offense than those many corporations for whom being neutral or anti is par for the course. And Emmer is not just one of the many Republicans who just take the default anti-gay marriage position out of popularism. He's an active opponent, aligned with ministry groups with such lovely opinions as, "Of course we don't support the middle eastern countries that execute gays...but boy you gotta admire their commitment to their ideals!" It's a central theme to his politics and his campaign, it's not just a check box on his conservative resume.

Combine those to elements and people are going to make some noise. It's perhaps out of scale, melodramatic, and not 100% logical. But it highlights one of the problems within our system that is presenting a road block for equality, so whether it's perfectly logical or not is kinda irrelevant. The emmotional response to Target's actions is an effective means to an end.

I'm not going to join an ineffective mostly meaningless boycott. But I'll add my voice to those telling Target that they'd prefer they do what they can to put their influence and money behind a better selection of candidates.

I'll be boycotting in the sense that, at present, I won't be giving my money to anybody at all, for strictly practical reasons.

Complete agreement with this. I have no problem with expressing dissatisfaction. And if dissatisfied I have no problem with a personal decision to take business elsewhere.

I just view organized boycotts as not just ineffective but, in this and similar cases, potentially counterproductive in that it discourages companies from putting themselves at the forefront of social issues if all that will do is mark you for getting most beat up.

Agreed, however I also completely understand the impetus to turn to boycott. Afterall, why are they making these political contributions to candidates that otherwise disagree with issues they, as a company, have stated they are in sympathy with? Because they feel like those candidates are better for their bottom line. So if their bottom line what they're being guided by, it's the most obvious target if you want to get their attention.

Yep and yep! :snap:

The only thing personal boycotts are good for is making ourselves feel better about a situation that personally affects us.

For example, I've been personally boycotting BP since the spill because I think of "pumping the blood of dying sea animals into my gas tank" and it doesn't make me feel good. Does it make any impact, really? No. But, it makes me feel better.

My attitude is the same with Walmart. I enjoy shopping there. And, I don't see the employees being forced to work there. Yes, I've read the stories. But, I've read them from both sides, and make my own decisions. Do I avoid certain products widely known to be made in "sweat shops"? Yes. But, for general household needs, we benefit from the savings.

I think everyone has their own sense of "morals", and we should do those things that make us feel best about them in order to make ourselves happy. "But, won't someone please think of the children???" Um, yes, but at the same time, people have the power to choose their own destiny in life. (Which reiterates why I don't have personal issues with Walmart - people don't have to work there.)

If boycotting Target makes a person feel better, then they should.

Personally, I'm more concerned about my husband having to cross any possible demonstrations at his store (which has been suggested by one group). And, yes, he'd cross those lines, because I bet we wouldn't find one demonstrator willing to "show mutual support" by paying our rent. ;)

This is irrelevant to the point of your post but I figured I'd point it out in case you care and don't know.

BP branded stations don't necessarily sell BP gas and non-BP stations may very well be selling BP gas (ARCO stations generally, but not always, are selling BP gasoline; Costco gas is frequently BP).

Yeah, I've been avoiding Arco. But, then again, Arco has usually been last on my list of gas choices anyway, because I don't like their stations. ;)

I am starting to relax more on the issue though, since the well's finally been capped. But, I do hope I see drastic changes to BP's maintenance and emergency practices in the future. Companies screw up, because they're run by human beings which do make mistakes. It's when those mistakes are repeated that I really start to form opinions.

Like you pointed out the list of numerous companies who have supported "bad" candidates - we seriously need to sustain ourselves if we want to truly uphold our own beliefs and morals.

All along, the Amish have had it figured out. ;)

Perhaps, but it's probably hard to run a viable graphics and video editing business in Amish communities.

I'm not sure how I feel about the boycott.