We're just saying the same thing over and over. But one more try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flippyshark
The goal is to get Target's attention.
|
Why is this the goal? Target is a company that has given 95% of what is wanted on the gay rights issues.
If the driving goal is to get the other 5% then I agree that the PR of a boycott may make sense.
What I question is why getting that 5% would be the driving goal when there are 50 companies out there that only give 5% of what is wanted. That said, I recognize that the real political game here is not targeting Target but getting press attention on Emmer's anti-gay positions. Fine, I'm ok with that political game. I just can't work up any actual outrage for Target and I suspect neither can most of the organizations presenting otherwise.
Demanding absolute ideological purity may bring personal comfort, but it can also put you on the fringes and negate any effectiveness for seeming completely unreasonable. If all being at the forefront of gay rights gets you is prominent denunciations for for any remaining lapse then why bother?
PETA ends up looking unreasonable as a whole even when making reasonable demands about animal treatment because equate as equally bad killing cockroaches in the home and shooting roman candles out the asses of cats.