The history-making, Grammy Award–winning artist graces one of four 2023 SI Swimsuit Issue covers.
Kim Petras has been breaking barriers since releasing her first single, “I Don’t Want It at All,” in 2017. Earlier this year, the German-born pop star made history as the first transgender woman to win a Grammy Award for Best Pop Duo/Group Performance, for her track “Unholy” with Sam Smith. Petras calls the “insane life moment” both “so unexpected” and “completely incredible.” The 30-year-old is now adding another magnificent life moment to her growing list of accomplishments with her 2023 SI Swimsuit Issue cover.
“I was so excited when I got the call to be in Sports Illustrated,” Petras says. “It’s very iconic, and a lot of very iconic people have done it before, so [it was a] big dream come true for me.”
The pop star’s cover feature was photographed by SI Swimsuit staple Yu Tsai in Los Angeles earlier this spring. Petras posed poolside in an incredible bright-pink Barbiecore-inspired swimsuit, a vibrant blue one-piece and an elegant black long-sleeved number with gold beads and a chest cut-out. She admits she was initially nervous on set, but the “Heart to Break” singer was thrilled with the images that resulted from her photo shoot.
While Petras says she occasionally feels pressure to represent the transgender community, she’s proud that fellow trans people are inspired by her and the work she does.
“I think what you do is the most important thing, not what your gender is,” Petras says. “No matter what your gender or sexuality or any of that stuff is, it’s about what you make of life and it’s about what’s inside of you and all of that, so I hope that can be inspiring to people.”
“The Grammy-winning pop star, a beacon of inspiration for the LGBTQ+ community, has blazed her own path to superstardom, but it has been anything but a straight line,” says editor in chief MJ Day says.
This year, Petras joins three other women—actress Megan Fox, legendary lifestyle guru Martha Stewart and five-time SI Swimsuit model Brooks Nader—who were each honored with their own 2023 SI Swimsuit Issue covers.
I don't find a lot of things to be woke that are claimed to be. We certainly agree on this example. But as you can see by The Daily Wire Twitter post, some people crave to label most anything they think they can that way.
Believe it or not there is actually some life to the fact they're trying to make this yet another "woke" issue. Just when you think it couldn't get any worse.... Who am I trying to fool. I've been around long enough to know it can always get worse...
Miller Lite Boycott Calls Grow Over Beer Commercial: 'Did Nobody Learn'
Social-media users are now calling for a boycott of Miller Lite over what they describe as a "woke" advert. It follows a backlash against Bud Light over a partnership with a transgender influencer.
The commercial at the center of the outrage discusses the historical role that women played in beer brewing. It appears as an apology from Miller for some of its prior advertising campaigns, which the company itself described as "outdated" and "sexist."
Miller is just the latest company to be targeted for apparent "woke" marketing. Experts have said such campaigns provide an opportunity for brands to appeal to consumers in new markets. However, critics have accused companies of alienating their traditional customer base.
"Women were among the very first to brew beer, ever," Ilana Glazer, a comedian who has starred in films The Night Before and Rough Night, says in the advert, while walking through a brewery. "From Mesopotamia to the Middle Ages to colonial America, women were the ones doing the brewing."
She adds: "Centuries later, how did the industry pay homage to the founding mothers of beer? They put us in bikinis."
Glazer then walks through a room covered in previous Miller Lite advertising materials featuring scantily clad women in sexual poses with their faces blurred. She drops a picture in a garbage can. "It's time beer made it up to women," Glazer says.
The comedian then goes on to explain that the company would be buying back its old marketing material. Miller will turn it into compost to make fertilizer so female farmers can produce over 1,000 pounds of hops. This would then be given to 200 female brewers to make 330,000 beers.
It is unclear why influential conservatives on social media are picking up on the advert now, when it was first released nearly a month before the controversy over Bud Light's partnership with Mulvaney began. Miller Lite's advertising campaign was announced on March 7, while Dylan Mulvaney first posted about receiving a commemorative can from Bud Light on April 1, and was timed for Women's History Month.
"Miller Lite saw the Bud Light disaster and decided they needed their own woke beer ad," wrote Clay Travis, a radio host, on Monday, in a tweet that, as of 3 a.m. ET on Tuesday, had been viewed 3.2 million times. "These companies are broken & have no idea who actually consumes their products."
"Did NOBODY learn from Bud Light's COSTLY mistake?" Graham Allen, host of the Dear America podcast, tweeted the same day. The post has since been viewed 4.4 million times. "Miller Lite just dropped this WOKE advertisement!!!"
"Miller Lite apparently wants the Bud Light boycott treatment too. Well they can have it," Rogan O'Handley, a self-described political influencer, wrote. "Newsflash: After a hard day's work, working class beer drinkers don't want to be lectured like they're in a Gender Studies class."
Meanwhile, Richard Hanania, president of the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology, tweeted: "Miller Lite feminist ad blurs the faces of women in bikinis, destroys their ads, makes it into fertilizer, for being offensive. This kind of ugly (literally and figuratively, for ugly women) feminism much more harmful than anything Dylan Mulvaney did. Hopefully leads to boycott."
However, some users disagreed with the notion of the ad being "woke." Mike Kogan tweeted that it was "not woke nor offensive" but "based on history and is actually funny."
Trina Wood wrote: "Women are half the population, why wouldn't any company want to 'intice' more of us to try their product?"
Newsweek approached Molson Coors, Miller Lite's parent company, via email for comment on Tuesday.
In a press release, Miller Lite sad that "many in the beer industry (Miller Lite included) alienated the very people who helped create it" by "dividing women as consumers, objectifying them in their ads."
Elizabeth Hitch, senior director of marketing for the beer brand, said at the time: "We wanted to acknowledge the missteps in representation of women in beer advertising by cleaning up not just our s***, but the whole industry's s***."
Bud Light has faced an ongoing backlash since its promotional work with Mulvaney, who rose to prominence by documenting her first year of transition to more than 10 million TikTok followers. After calls for a boycott were raised, conservatives have refused to drink the beer, while other licensed venues have withdrawn the beer from sale.
The beer brand has since seen a rapid decline in sales in the U.S.—with much of that custom being picked up by competitors, including Miller Lite—and placed two of its top marketing executives on leave.
At the start of May, Anheuser-Busch's global CEO, Michel Doukeris, said it was placing "significant" investment behind Bud Light after a decline in sales representing around 1 percent of the brewery's global volumes.
Adidas is accused of trying 'to erase' women by using biological male model with hairy chest and bulging crotch for its WOMEN'S swimwear line during Pride Month - one month after Nike paid Dylan Mulvaney to model sports bra
Target is slammed for selling women's bathing suits with a section to 'tuck' private parts in its new Pride collection - that includes clothes for babies and children with trans-friendly slogans
People who do nothing but search for a new enemy to lash out at. They just have to find people who think, act differently or believe differently than they do and punish them, discriminate against them and attack them. Cause you know, Murica!
Adidas is accused of trying 'to erase' women by using biological male model with hairy chest and bulging crotch for its WOMEN'S swimwear line during Pride Month - one month after Nike paid Dylan Mulvaney to model sports bra
This is the part that I don't get. I mean I don't really care but women are the ones who are losing out in this whole deal, men aren't losing anything, at least not yet. Woman of the year was a "man", women athletes are being beaten and replaced by "men", women models are being replaced by "men", pageant participants are being replaced by "men"... I feel like embracing all of this is just about the most anti-feminist thing a person can do... Women fought for decades to earn respect and recognition in a lot of aspects of life and are now being replaced by "men" who think they are women... I just don't get it.
And yes, to OCD and Pit.. the whole concept of "woke" is way overplayed and used in many ways where it does not belong and it has become the rally cry of the right for anything they disagree with, like respecting people who are different than you.
Saying that men are replacing women is much like saying people of color are replacing whites in US society. I don’t agree with those blanket statements and know the issue is so much deeper. Diversity is the key to American culture. When we repeal diversity we lower our collective consciousness, expectations, and values.
These companies believe there is an added value to their sales and marketing efforts with these products. This is free America and whether we like or not, what a private company is pandering, don’t like it don’t buy it. Really pretty simple. it’s still our choice. If it’s a dangerous product It’s up to our lawmakers that we vote in to decide their fate. I just move along and say “whatever floats your boat” none of my biz anyways.
This is all a publicity stunt. There is no such thing as bad publicity. What better way to get national publicity than make items for she-males when there is a national hot button about wokeism.
I guess if you think immediately alienating about half of the consumer base in America as a positive marketing move one might see that as a good thing.
So you're going to expand your customer base by pi$$ing off half of America? You may wish to ask Bud Light how that has worked out. I mean it's not as if we haven't seen exactly how this has played out already.
So you're saying that Bud Light sales didn't suffer for the very same type of thing? Blaming me for your lack of ability to see the very evidence of what happens when companies do this less than even a month ago isn't a me issue. All one had to do is pay attention. Those that don't shouldn't be pointing the finger at those who do.
You know nothing. This drama is temporary. After some time their customers will come back and so will their new customers. Go learn about business and marketing.
You know nothing. This drama is temporary. After some time their customers will come back and so will their new customers. Go learn about business and marketing.
You know nothing. This drama is temporary. After some time their customers will come back and so will their new customers. Go learn about business and marketing.
Murica!
Yes, I know I'm right. Enjoy being wrong. I have other things to do.
That seems to be a common thing with you. But what you are doing is looking through a microscope at something that requires a telescope. You seem to boil it all down to marketing when in fact that's a very small piece of the puzzle. While it really doesn't matter how you feel about LGBTQ rights, this has become a volitile political issue in our nation.
More than 417 anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced in state legislatures across the United States since the start of the year. This thing has much bigger implications than boiling it down to nothing more than a marketing issue. Lines have been drawn and it's a huge part of the political battlefield this nation has engaged in.
That isn't going to go away soon. That isn't about marketing. I know you don't see that but that's not my fault.
Good luck thinking you're right about this. You'll need it.
2023 legislative session The ACLU is tracking 490 anti-LGBTQ bills in the U.S.
Choose a state on the map to show the different bills targeting LGBTQ rights and take action. While not all of these bills will become law, they all cause harm for LGBTQ people.
More than 417 anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced in state legislatures across the United States since the start of the year.
Which states? How did you decide if a bill is "anti-LGBTQ"? What was you methodology in this?
How do you decide? By any means necessary. 🤣 Here's the real litmus test... Is there republican leadership?
Many of these fall into "other" by their own definition: "These bills don’t quite fit in any of the other categories, but nonetheless target the rights of LGBTQ people." so, who knows... maybe they contain the words boy, girl, man, woman?
Get with the program Frank, these people are UNDER ATTACK!
2023 legislative session The ACLU is tracking 490 anti-LGBTQ bills in the U.S.
Choose a state on the map to show the different bills targeting LGBTQ rights and take action. While not all of these bills will become law, they all cause harm for LGBTQ people.
Not surprisingly the answer was pretty much what I expected. Deflect and paste.
So that's all you've got? Astounding. You act as though your a legal expert but can't seem to understand that a question mark is asking a question and not making an accusation.
Not surprisingly the answer was pretty much what I expected. Deflect and paste.
So that's all you've got? Astounding. You act as though your a legal expert but can't seem to understand that a question mark is asking a question and not making an accusation.
Who comes here to fight again?
I asked you how you arrive your assertion and you take it as a personal affront and deflect on the answer.
And rather than posting an opposing view you played question and answer. Yep, deflect and paste was your response. That isn't asking how someone arrived at their conclusion.
And rather than posting an opposing view you played question and answer. Yep, deflect and paste was your response. That isn't asking how someone arrived at their conclusion.
So I didn't post the post you think I should and instead asked you for how you arrived at a very specific number and that is a problem? You really do not understand debate and logic.
Debate requires counterpoints. Something you didn't offer. And yet more of the same nothingness about the topic. White noise continues.
Debate requires honest participation, when you are asked where you arrived at your data and you take that as an affront it says everything that needs to be said about you and your honesty. The only white noise is the buzzing in your brain caused by your own delusions.
No one's assertions are beyond proving. Especially yours.
No you merely pasted a couple of links. That was stuff in found when I already searched for your assertion. You still haven't explained anything. Are they too complicated? Do you only understand the spoon fed portion? Should we get someone to explain it to you?
They only find it clever or see the humor in it when one of them do it or so it seems....
Marjorie Taylor Greene, who's raged about drag queens for months, is defending her boyfriend over an old video of him donning drag in Dallas
Greene defended her boyfriend, RSBN's Brian Glenn, after an old video of him in drag resurfaced.
"I may keep the pantyhose on. It does feel kind of good," Glenn said in the video.
Greene, who has a strong anti-drag stance, laughed it off, saying: "The left is so stupid."
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has consistently bashed drag queens, defended her boyfriend, Brian Glenn, after a Twitter account surfaced an old video of him dressed like a woman.
The Twitter account "Patriot Takes" posted the video on Sunday, which showed Glenn dressed like an old Caucasian woman — complete with a fluffy blonde wig, white gloves, and a pink cardigan.
Glenn, a producer at a right-wing broadcasting network, could be heard saying: "I'm kicking the shoes off. I may keep the pantyhose on. It does feel kind of good, actually." It is unclear when the video first aired, but Glenn was an anchor for WFAA TV, an ABC-affiliated media company in Dallas, from 2013 to 2015.
The video has been viewed more than 1.3 million times at press time.
Greene, 48, reposted the video on Sunday, saying: "I'm literally lol'ing. @brianglenntv dressed in drag for morning news in Dallas years ago reporting on an upcoming local theatre production and the morons over at Patriot Takes think this is an attack."
The Georgia Republican added: "Brian loves the throwback and is reposting. The left is so stupid."
Glenn reposted the video and tweeted: "The things I did for morning show television!! LOVED it and so did the @wfaa @WFAADaybreak viewers. It's a good thing I have a sense of humor!"
But Greene has previously taken a very different tone when talking about drag.
She previously said that allowing children to attend drag shows should "be illegal."
"What's the difference in children stuffing cash in a drag queen bra and a strippers bra? Nothing. It's wrong and it's indoctrination," Greene's tweet on June 15 read.
In 2022, she also claimed without substantiation that Democrats would use IRS agents to target Trump voters who refused to support "drag queen story time for children."
Greene divorced her husband of 27 years, Perry Greene, in September. Seven months later, she went public about her relationship with Glenn.
Glenn tweeted a picture of him and Greene on a golf course in Georgia on April 11, saying that he was "looking forward to returning with this one in 2024."
"Love living life with you," Greene tweeted back at Glenn the same day.
A representative for Greene did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent outside regular business hours.
The next target of the right’s campaign against woke companies: Fox News?
A conservative outlet is attacking Fox for being too respectful of trans employees. It’s a sign of the times on the right.
On air, Fox News personalities have been endlessly attacking so-called “woke corporations.” But now, Fox News finds itself in the right’s cultural crosshairs — with conservatives accusing it of promoting “trans ideology” in its own workplace.
The inciting incident is a Monday morning story in the Daily Signal, the media arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank. In the story, reporter Mary Margaret Olohan writes that Fox’s employee handbook allows employees to use “bathrooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex,” permits them to “dress in alignment with their preferred gender,” and requires that their coworkers use “their preferred name and pronouns in the workplace.”
Many of Fox’s rules in this area appear to be in line with state law: The company’s headquarters are in New York, where state law explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity (something Olohan notes in passing but doesn’t dwell on). Fox told me in a written statement, “FOX News Media is compliant with all Human Rights laws mandated by the cities and states in which we operate, including New York and California.”
That there’s less to the Daily Signal’s exclusive than meets the eye didn’t stop many on the culture war right from blasting Fox as a sellout.
Matt Walsh, an influential anti-trans podcaster at the Daily Wire, led the charge. According to Walsh, Fox is “actively working to suppress conservative voices” — an apparent reference to the network’s ouster of Tucker Carlson — “while promoting leftism in its most radical form” and thus “needs to get the full Bud Light treatment.” (Bud Light has been targeted by a boycott campaign on the right after partnering with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney.)
Geoffrey Ingersoll, the editor-in-chief of the Daily Caller, tweeted that he “personally [knew] several employees, some very senior, who hate their [house] style going along with far-left activists and their propaganda terms.” You can find several other popular conservative Twitter accounts saying similar things.
These tweets crystallize a backlash against Fox that has been growing on the right ever since Carlson’s unceremonious firing about a month ago. In fact, there’s some speculation that this was the intended result of the Daily Signal story.
In her story, Olohan cites “a former producer for ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’” as one of her key sources. She also reports on behind-the-scenes drama from the now-canceled show to support her theory that Fox is quietly pro-trans.
“A source who still works at Fox News told The Daily Signal that after Carlson’s show was canceled in April, producers for the new 8 p.m. ‘Fox News Tonight’ program were told not to bash [trans Bud Light spokesperson Dylan] Mulvaney. That directive came from high-level executives,” Olohan reports.
Whether or not Tucker himself is behind the handbook leak, or it’s merely the work of some of his allies and former employees, one thing is for certain: The network is continuing to suffer from parting ways with its biggest star. And what matters for Fox matters for the conservative movement writ large. What the latest controversy tells us about Fox’s future
Whether it be the Bud Light boycott, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s war on Disney, or rising fury at the investment giant BlackRock’s “woke investing,” anti-corporate politics has become increasingly prominent in the messaging and agenda of the Republican Party. The post-Trump populist turn among conservatives has led to a rising sense that corporations are staffed by members of the socially liberal elite, graduates of fancy colleges who may like lower taxes but will sell the right out where it counts: the culture war, in which trans issues have become an especially heated front.
You’d think Fox, of all places, would be exempt from this critique of corporate America. But there is actually some history of conservatives, especially on the populist right, being suspicious that Fox isn’t fully on their side — and not without a little justification, as Fox’s editorial line was fairly hostile to Trump in 2016 before his victory presented a fait accompli.
Of all of Fox’s recent programming, Carlson’s show did the most to convince more populist conservatives that Fox News wasn’t purely an outpost of the dreaded GOP establishment. Profoundly obsessed with gluing eyeballs to sets, Carlson had cracked the code on winning the hardcore right’s allegiance: incessant, baseless, and nonstop cultural fearmongering about immigrants, Blacks, Democrats, and the LGBT community. The conservatives angriest about the Daily Signal story are, not coincidentally, big Carlson fans.
Walsh claimed that he’s “been personally blacklisted from appearing on the network because of my stance on the [trans] issue,” and tweeted, “Tucker fought behind the scenes against my blacklisting, and even managed to have me on a few times over the past year. But now that he’s gone, there’s no stopping Fox’s march leftward.”
It’s far from clear if these claims are true (Fox did not respond to my queries on this particular point). But the idea behind them — that Carlson was the conservative populist bulwark against squishy corporate executives — is not an uncommon view among people on the hard right. And this sentiment makes Fox vulnerable to attacks from the Carlson camp and other conservative outlets like the Daily Signal designed to reinforce the post-Carlson discontent with Fox.
The restiveness on the right has been reflected in the numbers. Carlson’s firing has proven to be a major ratings disaster. Data from Nielsen shows that Fox’s ratings at the 8 pm weeknight slot fell by fully half after Carlson’s dismissal, from an average of 3 million for his show to a mere 1.5 million for the various temporary hosts Fox has tried out during his former slot. Perhaps the numbers will tick back up after a permanent replacement is chosen, but right now it seems the network is sorely missing its star.
The big question is what Fox does in response to its post-Tucker woes. If the backlash from pro-Tucker forces on the right keeps going, and its ratings keep suffering, how does it try to make up with the alienated far-right base?
Fox plays an outsized role in American public life, a more important one than any other media outlet with the possible exception of the New York Times. Where it decides to go from here could have a consequential impact on the course of American conservatism — and the 2024 campaign.
The big question is what Fox does in response to its post-Tucker woes. If the backlash from pro-Tucker forces on the right keeps going, and its ratings keep suffering, how does it try to make up with the alienated far-right base?
Maybe they could try what other networks try. You know compete for viewers by showing real not fake news. And showing the truth about trump and his brigade, and not publicize his lies as truth.
Adidas is accused of trying 'to erase' women by using biological male model with hairy chest and bulging crotch for its WOMEN'S swimwear line during Pride Month - one month after Nike paid Dylan Mulvaney to model sports bra
This is the part that I don't get. I mean I don't really care but women are the ones who are losing out in this whole deal, men aren't losing anything, at least not yet. Woman of the year was a "man", women athletes are being beaten and replaced by "men", women models are being replaced by "men", pageant participants are being replaced by "men"... I feel like embracing all of this is just about the most anti-feminist thing a person can do... Women fought for decades to earn respect and recognition in a lot of aspects of life and are now being replaced by "men" who think they are women... I just don't get it.
And yes, to OCD and Pit.. the whole concept of "woke" is way overplayed and used in many ways where it does not belong and it has become the rally cry of the right for anything they disagree with, like respecting people who are different than you.
These companies on both sides of the culture wars are exploiting the situation for profit and furthering the divides. There is literally nobody trying to turn down the temp any more. Some things are good, like giving lgbtq equal rights and protection under law. Rubbing gay in the faces of fascist right wing terrorist is never going to be a popular nor smart thing IMO. People should be able to live without the drag show they find offensive or less that natural coming to their living rooms. But at the same time those people need to learn that the lgbtq have a right to live how they see fit without being oppressed. But that all gets lost in the culture wars rhetoric.
Those ford trucks will be targets.
And on a side note, I‘m barely coming in or posting right now, so it was good to see you still think of me.
Is this Calvin Klein's 'Bud light moment?' Ad featuring trans man who's not had top surgery modelling a bra sparks backlash - as shoppers say it's a 'far cry' from their usual snaps of chiseled models
As if losing 15.7 Billion in market cap isn't enough, now they can't sell beer during "beer drinking season". This will go down as the biggest marketing blunder of all time. Stay Woke, Bud!
Bud Light sales plunge nearly 25% in latest week as rivals steal away customers By Lisa Fickenscher May 22, 2023 3:24pm Updated
Steep drops in sales of Bud Light continued to worsen for the sixth consecutive week, plunging by nearly 25% since the ill-fated promotion with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, the latest industry data shows.
Sales of the US’s No. 1 beer were down 24.6% for the week ended May 13 compared to a year ago — slightly worse than the 23.6% dip they suffered a week earlier, according to Bump Williams Consulting and NielsenIQ research.
Even more alarming, industry experts say, is the negative impact on Anheuser-Busch InBev’s other brands, including Budweiser, Michelob Ultra — with the latter being the nation’s No. 3 beer last year with more than $3.3 billion in sales last year.
Michelob Ultra sales were off 2.9% versus a year ago in the latest week, in line with a drop a week earlier, according to a Bump Williams analysis of NielsenIQ data. Sales of Budweiser, last year’s No. 7 beer with more than $1.8 billion in sales, were down 9.7% in each of the two most recent weeks.
“Bud Light is ‘sick,’” Bump Williams, founder of the consultancy said of the US’s top-selling beer, which raked in $4.8 billion in sales last year. “It’s now infected other healthy brands with the InBev portfolio and that’s a bigger problem in my mind.”
Sales of Busch Light were down 6.8% compared to 0.3% decline the previous week, while Anheuser-Busch’s Natural Light sales were down by 2.8% in the week ended May 13 compared to a 2.5% decline the previous week.
Meanwhile, Anheuser-Busch’s competitors are guzzling market share with Coors Light up 23.2% in the week ended May 13 compared to a bump of 22.2% the previous week. Sales of Modelo Especial – the second most popular beer brand in the US with more than $3.7 billion in sales last year – are up by 10% in the most recent week compared to a 5% increase the previous week.
Bud Light has lost $110 million in sales volume year-to-date compared to the same period last year. The number of Bud Light cases sold was down 28.4% in the week ended May 13 from a year ago compared to a 27.7% decline the previous week.
The timing couldn’t be worse for the Belgium-based conglomerate. Beer is most in demand in the summer months and key drinking season kicks off on Memorial Day weekend.
“If Bud Light doesn’t stop the bleeding now, [it] runs the risk of losing the entire three months of the high demand for beer,” Williams said.
Anheuser-Busch’s 385 distributors are feeling the most pain, imploring consumers and businesses alike to look past the Mulvaney flap and understand how the backlash is hurting local businesses.
Anheuser-Busch has conceded as much and has committed to buying back unsold cases of expired Bud Light.
The public relations debacle began on April 1, when Mulvaney was given a commemorative can of Bud Light with her image on it in celebration of her one-year anniversary of womanhood. Mulvaney posted videos of herself on her social media in a bubble bath, surrounded by Bud Light cans and showed off the can with her image on it — with the backlash and boycotts beginning almost immediately.
Nah, it's actually people tired of the political/social/cultural indoctrination by corporations. If there was ever a situation for "shut up and dribble", it's right there. Make a good product and sell it on it's merits. Everyone's pretty fed up with corps telling us how 'good' they are and thinking they can tell people how they should act or what they should do.
Then, when it really comes down to it: it has probably become a bit embarrassing to order a 'Bud' in certain settings. Then the consumer orders a different brand and discovers not all beer tastes like pig swill.
Your side is just not used to seeing reaction reflected in sales. You specialize in crocodile tears and burning down cities.
Everyone's pretty fed up with corps telling us how 'good' they are and thinking they can tell people how they should act or what they should do.
And what in that ad told anyone " how they should act or what they should do"? I'll tell you, nothing. They just extended marketing their product to an audience they hadn't before. And the haters homophobes and crazies went wild. Excuses and rationalization for that simply don't fly.
Quote
Your side is just not used to seeing reaction reflected in sales.
I just find it hilarious the reaction a bunch of drunk homophobes had by getting their little feelings hurt and acting just like the snowflakes they accuse others of being.
Quote
You specialize in crocodile tears
The only tears I have is from laughing my ass off at people like you making excuses for these homophobes.
Quote
and burning down cities.
Which is such a stupid thing to say. Because no matter your faux outrage, every person on this board you label a "liberal" stated plainly that every person guilty of committing crimes during thse riots should be charged, convicted and sentenced for their criminal acts.
When I used to drink I never drank Anheuser-Busch products of any kind and I really don't care what happens to them as a a corporation. But watching a bunch of Karen's acting like somebody shot their dog over this is both sad and hilarious at the same time. So is watching those trying to present lame excuses it.
Try addressing the topic rather than the poster for a change. But that's the go to for a lot of you. If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger. Good luck with that.
J.D. Vance says Target ‘decided to wage war’ on customers with Pride Month collection
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) suggested on Friday that Target “decided to wage war” on its customers by releasing its annual Pride Month collection.
“Target could have decided to stay out of the culture wars, instead it decided to wage war on a large share of its customer base,” Vance tweeted. “I no longer shop at Target, and it seems many families are doing the same.”
Conservatives have called for a boycott of the company over its LGBTQ merchandise, with several Republican lawmakers expressing support.
“Why support woke corporations that hate you?” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) said on Twitter Monday. “Target won’t be getting another dollar from me.”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) compared the situation to the conservative backlash that Bud Light faced last month after partnering with transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney.
“What they don’t realize is the guys, who quit Bud Light, wives shop at Target. Or at least they used to,” Greene tweeted on Thursday.
Target announced this week that it would be removing certain items from stores and that it had moved Pride merchandise to the back of some Southern stores, after customers knocked down Pride displays, angrily confronted workers and posted threatening videos on social media, according to The Associated Press.
“Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” Target said in a statement to The AP. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior.”
The company has been selling merchandise for Pride Month, an annual celebration of the LGBTQ community, for a decade, according to The New York Times.
So J.D. Vance is now calling marketing to the LBTQ community as "waging a war" against others. Boebert is saying that if you market to the LGBTQ community it means those companies "hate you". Target employees are receiving threats over it. Yet there are still those who can't admit this movement is based on hate and homophobia.
Bud Light truck drivers have been flipped the bird, called homophobic slurs in wake of Dylan Mulvaney fiasco
Truck drivers who deliver Bud Light have been flipped the middle finger and vendors have been called homophobic slurs, according to beer distributors reeling from slumping sales in the wake of the Dylan Mulvaney fiasco.
Several top officials at beer distribution companies told ABC News they have been put in an untenable position by Bud Light’s St. Louis-based parent company, Anheuser-Busch, which has seen sales of its top brand fall six consecutive weeks since the April 1 tie-up with the trans influencer.
Aside from harassing truck drivers, distributors have faced intentional collisions from shopping carts as they drop off Bud Light and vendors have been called “gay beer salesmen,” officials for the family-owned businesses told the outlet.
“I feel like my main supplier has put the wholesalers and their employees in a really bad spot,” one Anheuser-Busch beer distributor told ABC News.
Another Anheuser-Busch distributor based in the Pacific Northwest told ABC News: “It’s sad that they [the boycotting consumers] can’t make that disconnect between the independent wholesale and a big corporation — it’s disheartening.”
Everyone's pretty fed up with corps telling us how 'good' they are and thinking they can tell people how they should act or what they should do.
And what in that ad told anyone " how they should act or what they should do"? I'll tell you, nothing. They just extended marketing their product to an audience they hadn't before. And the haters homophobes and crazies went wild. Excuses and rationalization for that simply don't fly.
Quote
Your side is just not used to seeing reaction reflected in sales.
I just find it hilarious the reaction a bunch of drunk homophobes had by getting their little feelings hurt and acting just like the snowflakes they accuse others of being.
Quote
You specialize in crocodile tears
The only tears I have is from laughing my ass off at people like you making excuses for these homophobes.
Quote
and burning down cities.
Which is such a stupid thing to say. Because no matter your faux outrage, every person on this board you label a "liberal" stated plainly that every person guilty of committing crimes during thse riots should be charged, convicted and sentenced for their criminal acts.
When I used to drink I never drank Anheuser-Busch products of any kind and I really don't care what happens to them as a a corporation. But watching a bunch of Karen's acting like somebody shot their dog over this is both sad and hilarious at the same time. So is watching those trying to present lame excuses it.
You used the word "homophobes" three times in this. It is nice you just spew the agenda but some of us don't need political clap trap for every single thing in our daily lives. It isn't about having an irrational fear of homosexual people.
They only find it clever or see the humor in it when one of them do it or so it seems....
Marjorie Taylor Greene, who's raged about drag queens for months, is defending her boyfriend over an old video of him donning drag in Dallas
Greene defended her boyfriend, RSBN's Brian Glenn, after an old video of him in drag resurfaced.
"I may keep the pantyhose on. It does feel kind of good," Glenn said in the video.
Greene, who has a strong anti-drag stance, laughed it off, saying: "The left is so stupid."
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has consistently bashed drag queens, defended her boyfriend, Brian Glenn, after a Twitter account surfaced an old video of him dressed like a woman.
The Twitter account "Patriot Takes" posted the video on Sunday, which showed Glenn dressed like an old Caucasian woman — complete with a fluffy blonde wig, white gloves, and a pink cardigan.
Glenn, a producer at a right-wing broadcasting network, could be heard saying: "I'm kicking the shoes off. I may keep the pantyhose on. It does feel kind of good, actually." It is unclear when the video first aired, but Glenn was an anchor for WFAA TV, an ABC-affiliated media company in Dallas, from 2013 to 2015.
The video has been viewed more than 1.3 million times at press time.
Greene, 48, reposted the video on Sunday, saying: "I'm literally lol'ing. @brianglenntv dressed in drag for morning news in Dallas years ago reporting on an upcoming local theatre production and the morons over at Patriot Takes think this is an attack."
The Georgia Republican added: "Brian loves the throwback and is reposting. The left is so stupid."
Glenn reposted the video and tweeted: "The things I did for morning show television!! LOVED it and so did the @wfaa @WFAADaybreak viewers. It's a good thing I have a sense of humor!"
But Greene has previously taken a very different tone when talking about drag.
She previously said that allowing children to attend drag shows should "be illegal."
"What's the difference in children stuffing cash in a drag queen bra and a strippers bra? Nothing. It's wrong and it's indoctrination," Greene's tweet on June 15 read.
In 2022, she also claimed without substantiation that Democrats would use IRS agents to target Trump voters who refused to support "drag queen story time for children."
Greene divorced her husband of 27 years, Perry Greene, in September. Seven months later, she went public about her relationship with Glenn.
Glenn tweeted a picture of him and Greene on a golf course in Georgia on April 11, saying that he was "looking forward to returning with this one in 2024."
"Love living life with you," Greene tweeted back at Glenn the same day.
A representative for Greene did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent outside regular business hours.
You used the word "homophobes" three times in this. It is nice you just spew the agenda but some of us don't need political clap trap for every single thing in our daily lives. It isn't about having an irrational fear of homosexual people.
So.... you can't actually debate the points made but you don't like a word he used 3 times. Ok.
'Fixer Upper' Stars Under Pressure Over Target Partnership
HGTV stars Chip and Joanna Gaines have come under fire from conservative activists over their relationship with Target, which is facing a right-wing boycott campaign due to its sale of LGBTQ-themed clothing, including items reportedly aimed at children.
Fox News host Rachel Campos-Duffy urged the couple to speak out publicly, accusing Target of being partnered with a brand "that makes tuck 'em bikinis for kids."
It follows the boycott of Bud Light by conservative activists in response to the company's partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney.
On Thursday night, Campos-Duffy zeroed in on the TV fixer uppers on Fox News whilst guest presenting the Jesse Watters Primetime show.
She commented: "No one doubts that Chip and Joanne are good people, kind, moral, and aligned with American values. But if I had a line at a company and my name was on it and that brand partnered with a trans-Satanist that makes tuck 'em bikinis for kids, I would feel compelled to speak up.
"Now, maybe they're raising questions internally. Of course, that's possible, but why aren't they doing so publicly?"
Target announced it was removing items from its LGBTQ pride range earlier this week, claiming it had received threats that were "impacting our team members' sense of safety and wellbeing."
Kayla Castaneda, a company spokesperson, added: "Our focus now is on moving forward with our continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year."
The company also launched a review into some merchandise, including swimsuits with the ability to "tuck" genitalia for transgender women, and items from its children's range. Controversial products included rainbow-colored children's clothing and a babygrow emblazoned with the words "bien proud," also in LGBTQ-aligned colors.
Conservative activist Benny Johnson, who has 1.5 million Twitter followers, also used the platform to take aim at the Gaineses.
He shared a video of himself in a Target store, commenting: "I've been tweeting about how Christian influencers Chip & Joanna Gaines have not disavowed Target's Satanic child grooming despite the backlash.
"What I didn't know is the Gaines Section of Target is directly ACROSS from the Groomer section. Not cool."
Newsweek has contacted Chip and Joanna Gaines for comment via Instagram direct message and an email to Magnolia, a company they founded. Target has also been approached for comment by email.
Erik Carnell, a London-based transgender designer, created LGBTQ-themed tote bags and clothing after being contacted by a Target distributor.
The 29-year-old had previously designed items using a Satanist theme, including a medallion reading "Satan respects pronouns," which sparked a firestorm from sections of the Christian right.
Speaking to the Washington Post, Carnell insisted he wasn't a Satanist, commenting: "For starters, I don't believe in Satan.
"If I believed in Satan, I'd have to believe in the Bible — and I consider myself an atheist."
You used the word "homophobes" three times in this. It is nice you just spew the agenda but some of us don't need political clap trap for every single thing in our daily lives. It isn't about having an irrational fear of homosexual people.
So.... you can't actually debate the points made but you don't like a word he used 3 times. Ok.
So you can't actually say anything else?
Calling everything "homophonic" is lazy and intellectually bankrupt. It is an attempt to group everyone into a single group and the try to call it all hate.
I don't drink Bud Light. I tried it and it stinks. I don't use products, or avoid them, for the spokesperson. The candel culture of "your an *ist or *phobic" is horse manure.
Calling everything "homophonic" is lazy and intellectually bankrupt.
That's a cheap way of dismissing what has actually inspired all of this. Is that saying everyone who has joined this boycott is homophobic? Not at all. No matter how many times you repeat that it isn't so. But that's most certainly the motivation and inspiration behind it.
"Don't talk to mah kids about there bein' gay people! Boycott anyone who advertises to those weirdo trans things! Murica!"
We've actually seen someone call them mentally ill as well as calling them perverts on this very board. Stop trying to deny the obvious.
Calling everything "homophonic" is lazy and intellectually bankrupt.
That's a cheap way of dismissing what has actually inspired all of this. Is that saying everyone who has joined this boycott is homophobic? Not at all. No matter how many times you repeat that it isn't so. But that's most certainly the motivation and inspiration behind it.
"Don't talk to mah kids about there bein' gay people! Boycott anyone who advertises to those weirdo trans things! Murica!"
We've actually seen someone call them mentally ill as well as calling them perverts on this very board. Stop trying to deny the obvious.
The obvious is you take one example and try to turn it to "everyone". You speak in such generalities and think you speak for "everyone" ad nauseum. Are there people who won't drink the beer because they don't like trans people? Sure, but trotting out the homophobic nonstop and trying to gas light us that it is everyone is nonsense. Repeating a fiction over and over does not make it truth, no matter how many times you do it.
You used the word "homophobes" three times in this. It is nice you just spew the agenda but some of us don't need political clap trap for every single thing in our daily lives. It isn't about having an irrational fear of homosexual people.
So.... you can't actually debate the points made but you don't like a word he used 3 times. Ok.
So you can't actually say anything else?
Calling everything "homophonic" is lazy and intellectually bankrupt. It is an attempt to group everyone into a single group and the try to call it all hate.
I don't drink Bud Light. I tried it and it stinks. I don't use products, or avoid them, for the spokesperson. The candel culture of "your an *ist or *phobic" is horse manure.
You didn't debate or challenge anything that was said - you said because a poster used a word three times somehow his points were invalid. That's not a good argument unless you are still in kindergarten where it might get you somewhere. idk.
To the best of my knowledge no-one claimed you did or didn't drink Bud Light? If they did and I missed it - it's because I am not following this thread closely and just happened to read your post and commented on how it doesn't create a counter point to anything Pit said.
As for Cancel Culture - Trump is the very best there is at that. And it's funny, when it suits some people will say it's a free economy and society and people vote with their money or however they want to frame it to say that it's all cool and dandy if someone wants to boycott/exercise their free will to do/no do something ... and then the next day when it's a topic about something and someone else they call it cancel culture.... Go figure.
You didn't debate or challenge anything that was said - you said because a poster used a word three times somehow his points were invalid. That's not a good argument unless you are still in kindergarten where it might get you somewhere. idk.
To the best of my knowledge no-one claimed you did or didn't drink Bud Light? If they did and I missed it - it's because I am not following this thread closely and just happened to read your post and commented on how it doesn't create a counter point to anything Pit said.
As for Cancel Culture - Trump is the very best there is at that. And it's funny, when it suits some people will say it's a free economy and society and people vote with their money or however they want to frame it to say that it's all cool and dandy if someone wants to boycott/exercise their free will to do/no do something ... and then the next day when it's a topic about something and someone else they call it cancel culture.... Go figure.
I didn't make the post you thought I should, yes, I know that seems to be a issue around here with some people. Send me the script you wish me to use so I can put it in the bit bucket for you.
Whew... I was getting worried. Over ten posts in a row without TRUMP!
The cliche about rent free is overused at times, but that doesn't make it less true.
You guys are funny. No-one does Cancel Culture like Trump does Cancel Culture. But easier to try and deflect and belittle than accept or tackle a relevant comment about a topic another poster introduced.
And acting like as if Trump isn't relevant and the overwhelming favorite to be the nominee for the Republicans in T-minus 17 months..... disingenuous.
You used the word "homophobes" three times in this. It is nice you just spew the agenda but some of us don't need political clap trap for every single thing in our daily lives. It isn't about having an irrational fear of homosexual people.
So.... you can't actually debate the points made but you don't like a word he used 3 times. Ok.
So you can't actually say anything else?
Calling everything "homophonic" is lazy and intellectually bankrupt. It is an attempt to group everyone into a single group and the try to call it all hate.
I don't drink Bud Light. I tried it and it stinks. I don't use products, or avoid them, for the spokesperson. The candel culture of "your an *ist or *phobic" is horse manure.
Lol I guess being grouped into this or that basket of deplorable’s who actually do spread hate stings in these forums when folks around here defend those deplorable acts.
Lol I guess being grouped into this or that basket of deplorable’s who actually do spread hate stings in these forums when folks around here defend those deplorable acts.
Companies use spokespeople to attract people to their product. Not being attracted to the product because of the spokesperson isn't spreading hate or being deplorable. But you do you and drink all that horrible Bud Light up so you can virtue signal and everyone will know how enlightened you are, regardless of the reality.
Whew... I was getting worried. Over ten posts in a row without TRUMP!
The cliche about rent free is overused at times, but that doesn't make it less true.
You guys are funny. No-one does Cancel Culture like Trump does Cancel Culture. But easier to try and deflect and belittle than accept or tackle a relevant comment about a topic another poster introduced.
And acting like as if Trump isn't relevant and the overwhelming favorite to be the nominee for the Republicans in T-minus 17 months..... disingenuous.
Uganda leader signs law imposing life sentence for same-sex acts and death for "aggravated homosexuality
Johannesburg — Uganda's president signed one of the world's harshest anti-LGBTQ bills into law Monday morning. The law signed by President Yoweri Museveni calls for life imprisonment for anyone found to have engaged in same-sex sexual acts.
Anyone convicted of something labeled "aggravated homosexuality," defined as same-sex sexual acts with children, disabled individuals or anyone else deemed under threat, can now face the death penalty.
"His Excellency, the President of the Republic of Uganda, General Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, has executed his constitutional mandate prescribed by Article 91 (3) (a) of the Constitution. He has assented to the Anti-Homosexuality Act," announced Anita Among, speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, adding call for Uganda's law enforcement agencies to "enforce the law in a fair, steadfast and firm manner."
Uganda's parliament passed legislation outlawing same sex relations in March, making it a criminal offence to even identify as LGBTQ, with a possible life jail sentence.
Last week, Deputy President of South Africa, Paul Mashatile, said his country's government did not agree with Uganda's anti-LGBTQ stance and promised to try to persuade Museveni's administration to back down from the new legislation.
Mashatile joined a chorus of voices from Western countries and the United Nations imploring Museveni not to sign the bill, all of which the Ugandan leader and military commander appeared to have brushed off.
Homosexual acts are illegal in more than 30 other African nations and LGBTQ activists fear the new law in Uganda will embolden neighboring countries such as Kenya to consider stricter legislation.
Uganda holds "thanksgiving" event for anti-gay laws
Same sex relations were already banned in Uganda before Museveni signed the new law, but opponents say it goes further in targeting LGBTQ people. The law has instilled fear across the gay community in Uganda, prompting many to flee to neighboring countries or go underground.
The international organization Trans Rescue, which helps transgender people and others escape dangerous situations immediately tweeted a plea for financial support upon the bill's passage, urging anyone to help save the lives of vulnerable Ugandans and warning that it was preparing for an "onslaught of requests" for help.
The group said it has been fundraising to secure warehouse space to store the personal items of people fleeing the country.
Museveni, who's been Uganda's president for 37 years, ignored the calls from around the world to reject the new legislation and said in a televised address on state media in April that his "country had rejected the pressure from the imperials."
Ugandan authorities have acknowledged that the new law could hurt the Ugandan economy, which receives billions of dollars in foreign aid every year.
Someone started talking about cancel culture ... That's directly relevant to Trump. He's called for more boycotts than anyone, ever, and from a supremely influential platform.
It would be like someone bringing up secure email servers, and not expecting Hilary to be mentioned.
Someone started talking about cancel culture ... That's directly relevant to Trump. He's called for more boycotts than anyone, ever, and from a supremely influential platform.
It would be like someone bringing up secure email servers, and not expecting Hilary to be mentioned.
Selective memory isn't a good look. The left has been trying to cancel anyone that doesn't agree with them, on just about every single topic. Make a joke 20 years ago, you must go!
The old whatabout? "Yeah but the left did it too." And of course you hate us talking about trump. But you see, he is currently the front runner for the GOP to get the presidential nomination in 2024. So for as much as you hate it, he's still the GOP party leader and quite relevant. Don't blame us for that. We certainly didn't do it. But as long as he's still relevant he's still fair game and making it sound like it's someone elses fault for bringing him up is an issue of you and some others, not us.
The Long List of Things President Trump Wants to Boycott
President Donald Trump has long embraced the act of boycotting major companies that he feels have disrespected him, his administration, American values, or all three.
From CNN to Oreo cookies to Scotch whiskey, the MAGA president has urged his supporters to cancel a long list of products or institutions, usually launching his rallying cry on Twitter. On Wednesday, he added to the ever growing list, discouraging Americans from buying Goodyear tires after the company apparently told Kansas employees in a presentation slide that attire promoting MAGA (or any other political causes) were not allowed, while Black Lives Matter and LGBT causes were.
“Don’t buy GOODYEAR TIRES - They announced a BAN ON MAGA HATS. Get better tires for far less!” Trump tweeted Wednesday. He added in parentheses, “This is what the Radical Left Democrats do. Two can play the same game, and we have to start playing it now!”
And while Goodyear issued a vague statement stating that the slide wasn’t “created or distributed by Goodyear corporate, nor was it part of a diversity training class”—Trump already declared the American company canceled. Never mind the fact the presidential limo, known as The Beast, exclusively uses Goodyear tires.
Along with Goodyear, here are all the things Trump has urged his supporters to boycott, because he said so. HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTORCYCLES
In mid-2018, Trump encouraged his supporters to boycott the Wisconsin motorcycle company after it said it would move some of its production overseas to avoid new tariffs imposed by the European Union.
Although the motorcycle brand was one of several companies that vowed to move production overseas after the EU retaliated against Trump’s steep tariffs on steel and aluminum, Trump only hit at Harley-Davidson. The Hill reported that the company suffered a 13 percent sales loss over a two month period—the steepest decrease in eight years—even after CEO Matt Levatich reportedly told staff and dealers that motorcycles sold in the U.S. would be built in the U.S.
APPLE
In February 2016, Trump called for his Twitter followers to “boycott all Apple products” until the company agreed to a government request to unlock the cell phone of the mass shooter involved in the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack that killed 14 people.
Apple didn’t fold—but that hasn’t stopped Trump from using an iPhone for years. In 2019, he even complained that his iPhone no longer had a home button.
After investigators tried for months to break into the San Bernardino shooter’s phone, a magistrate ordered Apple to provide software that would allow authorities to unlock it. CEO Tim Cook called the demand “chilling” and said it would “undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.”
CNN
CNN is a frequent target of Trump’s ire for its liberal-leaning coverage and frequent criticism of his administration. “Great, and we should boycott Fake News CNN. Dealing with them is a total waste of time!” the president tweeted in November 2017.
He doubled down in 2019, urging supporters to stop “using or subscribing” to the news organization’s parent company AT&T because of what he felt was biased coverage.
But The New York Times reported in April that he can’t stop hate-watching the network.
MEGYN KELLY’S FOX NEWS SHOW
The president is infamous for attacking news organizations and anchors who are critical of him and his administration. But in March 2016, he took it a step further, proposing a boycott of Megyn Kelly’s Fox News show amid a spat between the then-candidate and the news host. The feud began in 2015 when Kelly asked Trump in a presidential debate about his derogatory comments on women, and Trump later told CNN that “blood was coming out of her eyes, blood coming of her whatever.” Trump eventually admitted to Kelly in an interview that he understood why she asked the “unfair” question.
MACY’S
The Trump family has had a complicated relationship with the department store chain. Macy’s once carried Trump’s clothing line but cut ties in 2015 after he called Mexicans “rapists” in his speech announcing his presidential campaign.
“Macy’s is a company that stands for diversity and inclusion,” the store said at the time. “We are disappointed and distressed by recent remarks about immigrants from Mexico... who have made so many valuable contributions to the success of our nation.”
In response, Trump, naturally, called for a boycott. He neglected to mention that his daughter Ivanka’s clothing line was still sold in Macy’s. It was nearly dropped after a viral online petition.
UNIVISION
At the start of Trump’s 2016 campaign, the New York real estate mogul called for a boycott of the Spanish-language network Univision after it announced it would end its relationship with the Trump Organization over comments the then-candidate made about Mexican immigrants.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said in June 2015. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
Univision also said it would no longer air the Miss USA pageant and would sever ties with the Miss Universe Organization, which Trump was a part-owner of. In response, Trump did what he did best. He tweeted.
ROLLING STONE
In July 2013, Donald Trump urged Americans to “boycott & cancel subscriptions” to Rolling Stone magazine after the publication featured Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover. Trump’s outrage matched others’ criticism. The Boston mayor said the story “rewards a terrorist with celebrity treatment”—prompting the magazine to defend their interview and stress their “commitment to stories and thoughtful coverage.”
HBO
In 2013, HBO talk-show host Bill Maher mocked Trump for spreading baseless conspiracy theories about Barack Obama’s birthplace. He offered to donate $5 million to charity if Trump could produce a birth certificate proving he is not the “spawn of his mother having sex with an orangutan.”
A year later, when Trump was still just a real estate tycoon and reality TV star, he again instructed his millions of followers to boycott HBO for continuing to air Maher’s show Real Time With Bill Maher.
MEXICO
Trump’s relationship with Mexico has long been contentious. Years before he announced his candidacy for president, Trump tweeted that his supporters should “Boycott Mexico” amid news that a Marine reservist was imprisoned for crossing the borders with guns. Sgt. Andrew Paul Tahmooressi was arrested in Tijuana, Mexico on March 32, 2014, after customs agents found three firearms in his truck in violation of the country’s federal gun laws.
Tahmooressi was released in November 2014, after spending seven months in a Mexican jail.
ITALY
In 2011, Trump chimed in about the Amanda Knox scandal. Knox, an American who spent almost four years in an Italian prison for the 2007 murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher, was fighting a prolonged legal battle to return to the U.S.
“Everyone should boycott Italy if Amanda Knox is not freed—she is totally innocent,” Trump tweeted on September 30, 2011. A month later, Knox and her former boyfriend, who was also implicated in the gruesome murder, were found not guilty.
Eight years later, President Trump hosted the president of Italy and his family at a White House functioning celebrating the Italian republic.
GLENFIDDICH SCOTCH WHISKEY
Trump has a long, contentious, relationship with Glenfiddich whiskey. After the brand selected Michael Forbes, a farmer who refused to sell his land to Trump for a controversial golf course, as “Top Scot” of 2012, Trump immediately hit back.
Business Insider reported that Trump then banned every brand of whiskey sold by Glenfiddich’s parent company, Williams Grant & Sons, from his resorts and hotels. In a statement, the future president said that the whiskey brand was jealous of his own in-house single malt brand and called for a boycott because there was no way the “Top Scot” results were “made by the Scottish people.”
It’s not clear if any Trump-brand restaurants and bars serve Glenfiddich now.
OREOS
No brand is safe in Trump’s world— even milk’s favorite cookie.
Trump declared in 2017 that he would not be “eating any more Oreos” after Mondelez International, the parent of Nabisco, which produces Oreos, announced it would move some of its Chicago operations to Mexico.
Trump claimed the move would cost 2,000 American jobs; the actual number was closer to 600. Accuracy aside, the president’s supporters obliged, even joining in on an impassioned chant of “no more Oreos” at the president’s behest during a rally in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Maybe if people wish to stop hearing about trump hey should stop acting like trump or supporting and making excuses for the people that do act like trump.
You mean the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination for 2024? Yeah, no need to keep talking about him.
You just don't get it. Talk about Trump in a thread about Trump all you want. What people are sick of is you and your ilk derailing EVERY thread into Trump Trump Trump. After all the threads the liberals have hijacked, now they are in this thread telling people stay on topic. Priceless.
The topic, since it seems you missed it, is about Republicans boycotting things. Then we have people making excuses why targeting businesses who make products for and market products to the gay and trans communities is fine. So you and some others don't like the fact that we post when and where this type of thing became so popular with the GOP. It became popular under trump. Before trump they accused the left of being the party of cancel culture. Now that they've adopted the ways of trump they claim we shouldn't bring that up. It's so precious! I think you and your ilk are the ones who just don't get it.
You know how it is. Snowflakes gonna snowflake. I mean how dare anyone bring up that this all started in the GOP with their orange God. Let's have a thread about it and then ignore what started it all. In their world that makes perfect sense. They're so offended and have to defend trump while claiming they don't support him.
Careful, the would be moderator around here likes to chastise people for posting memes and pictures.
You don't want him wiping the floor with you ya know.
Often times the best way to attempt to communicate with people is in the manner they seem to best understand no matter how empty and void of substance that manner may be.
You know how it is. Snowflakes gonna snowflake. I mean how dare anyone bring up that this all started in the GOP with their orange God. Let's have a thread about it and then ignore what started it all. In their world that makes perfect sense. They're so offended and have to defend trump while claiming they don't support him.
You think cancel culture started with Trump?
Another selective memory with time starting at an arbitrary point.
No one is deflecting anything, Wonder Woman. We're all just pointing out how every thread turns into a Trump b*tchfest. Have at it. Talk about him all you want. That's why every thread is filled with 90% posts from your Libtard League of Justice... talking about Trump.
"Companies going woke!" -- Trump's fault. "Time for more boycotts!" -- Trump's fault. Cancel culture -- Trump's fault.
Like I said, there's really nothing that isn't his fault.
Go on with the narrow-minded talking points, Trump it up!
Within the GOP it certainly became far more popular than it ever was before. The GOP used to point out how wrong it was. But it seems they only did that when the other side did it. Since trump they have adopted it as one of their own and fail to see the irony in that. But that's okay, keep pretending that isn't true.
The entire GOP boycott movement is all on trump. Before him they pointed the finger at the other side, claimed it was wrong and called it cancel culture. Now they use it just like the very people they hurled insults at for doing the exact same thing. The fact you're trying to deflect away from that reality won't change it. Instead you try to place the blame on those who point it out.
No surprise there. When you don't have an actual rebuttal to legitimate points being made, muddy the water and shift the blame.
You mean like trying to blame people who point out why the whole boycott thing became so popular within the GOP in a thread about the GOP boycotts? I can see why that would bother you and you would like to dismiss it or make it sound like somebody else has a problem for pointing that out.
Careful, the would be moderator around here likes to chastise people for posting memes and pictures.
You don't want him wiping the floor with you ya know.
Ummm - not sure who you're referring to. But all the Kewl Kids just post meme's and no words. I am just trying to fit in.
As for Trump and cancel culture. He didn't invent it. He didn't create it. I don't know how much more popular he has made it within our culture .... but he has, more than any individual I know - and with an astronomical amount of influence - called on more things to be cancelled and boycotted than anyone I know. Your claim that it's a leftie thing is way off the mark. Like nearly all things in life - both sides do it.
As I said - funny how some folks complain about cancel culture when they want to and then champion individuals freedom of choice when someone wants to boycott something they don't like.
I don't know much else about the other posts here - this isn't an important topic. But you brought cancel culture into the conversation - the overwhelming favorite to be the Rep candidate in 2024 wears this hat proudly for king of cancel culture. It was a relevant observation despite your attempts to deflect and cry whaddabout. You can accept it or you can keep on keeping on like Wonder-woman. I don't care other than to call you out on it.
The only argument that you and some others have made is that if a company markets to people that the GOP are offended by, hold great disdain or hatred toward, boycotting those companies are fine. But when the other side did it it's labeled it as cancel culture. That targeting companies that market to a group or groups the GOP has decided to rail against it's about freedom and when the other side does it it's about politics. Maybe it's time you pay attention to to the GOP politicians that are supporting this be done then explain how it's not politics.
History is full of instances where "those people" have been targeted. It's just that who "those people" are changes depending on who the hate is geared towards at the time.
The only argument that you and some others have made is that if a company markets to people that the GOP are offended by, hold great disdain or hatred toward, boycotting those companies are fine. But when the other side did it it's labeled it as cancel culture. That targeting companies that market to a group or groups the GOP has decided to rail against it's about freedom and when the other side does it it's about politics. Maybe it's time you pay attention to to the GOP politicians that are supporting this be done then explain how it's not politics.
History is full of instances where "those people" have been targeted. It's just that who "those people" are changes depending on who the hate is geared towards at the time.
That's nit the argument I made. That's the argument you are trying to make up I made.
Uh oh! They found out Chick-Fil-A is "inclusive". Now even their beloved Christian symbol of what a business is supposed to be is under attack......
Chick-Fil-A Branded 'Woke' After Right-Wingers Find Old Diversity Statement
Fast food franchise Chick-fil-A is under fire for being “woke” after conservatives caught wind of a seemingly innocuous statement about diversity that the company made months ago.
What appeared to be a tepid corporate nod to diversity, equity and inclusion provoked massive outrage this week with right-wingers opposed to any social justice efforts.
“Chick-fil-A restaurants have long been recognized as a place where people know they will be treated well,” Erick McReynolds, Chick-fil-A’s Vice President and Executive Director of diversity, equity and inclusion wrote in an online statement that dates back to at least last fall.
“Modeling care for others starts in the restaurant, and we are committed to ensuring mutual respect, understanding and dignity everywhere we do business,” he continued. “These tenets are good business practice and crucial to fulfilling our Corporate Purpose.”
Chick-fil-A is closed on Sundays in a nod to its Christian roots.
Though the months-old statement seemed uncontroversial, right-wingers took to Twitter to air their grievances.
“Chick-fil-A has gone woke,” whined commentator Ian Miles Cheong.
Turning Point USA’s Jon Root incorrectly complained, “Chick Fil-A just hired a VP of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion… Is this just checking off a corporate box or do they believe in this Marxist nonsense?”
In fact, McReynolds became Chick-fil-A’s vice president of diversity, equity and inclusion in November 2021 after being the executive director of diversity, equity and inclusion since July 2020, according to his LinkedIn. He has worked at Chick-fil-A for more than a decade.
Wade Miller, executive director of Citizens for Renewing America, tweeted, “Everything good must come to an end. Here @ChickfilA is stating [its] commitment to systemic racism, sexism, and discrimination. I cannot support such a thing.”
The right-wing criticism is strange considering Chick-fil-A’s strong ties to the conservative world.
Chick-fil-A is famously closed on Sundays and promotes its fish sandwiches in spring during Lent, when many Christians abstain from red meat and poultry.
Founder S. Truett Cathy, a devout Southern Baptist, said he based his business on Biblical principles and the company’s website says its mission is “to glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us [and] to have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.”
In a 2012 interview, Chick-fil-A chairman Dan Cathy said he believes in “the biblical definition of the family unit,” prompting people to take a closer look at his company’s charitable contributions.
That same year, Forbes reported Chick-fil-A’s charitable endeavor, the WinShape Foundation, donated $5 million to anti-LGBTQ organizations from 2003 to 2012.
Following extended criticism, the company ceased donations to the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, both of which have advocated for so-called “traditional marriage,” in 2019.
The Chick-fil-A controversy comes amid a tense time for corporate inclusion efforts. In recent months, brands Bud Light and Target have both received backlash for their attempts to connect with LGBTQ customers.
That's nit the argument I made. That's the argument you are trying to make up I made.
Staying silent when groups of people are being wronged is pretty much the same thing. And not only haven't you been silent, you've made excuses for such actions by others.
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me
The field of GOPer POTUS candidates is now like 20 deep, Trump will cruise to the nomination if he doesn’t go to jail. Decent republicans that are still with the party are as rare as 20 pound gold nuggets. Hell, I’d call them true unicorns. The only thing that the the Republican Party knows now is vindictive hate filled lies and fascist tears. Watching this GOPer party die a slow motion death has been fascinating, but I’m ready for the death knell and hope it comes this cycle.
Hate and fear have always been huge motivators. Don't expect that to change any time soon. "They're not like us!" has always worked pretty well for them. Far more so lately.
I see a day coming when politicians like Trump and DeStains will be beaten with sticks in the streets. Of course, by then, it will be far too late to undo the damage they’ve done. But I wish them both a Gaddafi-esque ending.
I'm certainly not a fan of hate mongers or those that target marginalized groups of people.
You mean the fascists and would-be dictators that want to undo 250 years of democracy because they don’t like being the new minority? Yep, that 30% of American voters is vile, and America would be better off without them. No doubt.
There are only 30% of voters that identify as Republican. Some say even slightly less than that. You seems you like lumping all republicans as being the same and that all have a trumpian mentality. Actually many voted for him because he became the republican nominee and not because they thought he would be a good president. They had to hold their nose to vote for him. Sadly much the same thing I had to do in order to vote for Biden.
All Republicans do not have a trumpian mentality. It would be no more true than claiming that AOC represents all democrats which is also not true. But I see the extremes on both sides to that all the time so it's certainly not an original idea.
You mean the fascists and would-be dictators that want to undo 250 years of democracy because they don’t like being the new minority?
You want to silence half the country and label anyone that disagrees with you a facist and a terrorist. Seems a bit putin-ish. Doesn't sound like you care for democracy, you just want your side to be the dictator.
This is what I find funny. Liberals hate the private sector. They always complain about company profits. You would think seeing companies lose money would make them happy. Yet, here they are, complaining about. I think they flipped sides just because they like to argue.
What was the response from these companies once they started losing money? They folded like a lawn chair. Proof that boycotts work. Now, imagine if liberals could get a movement going to boycott companies that pay crap wages or have crap benefits. Think of the change they could make. People like to complain about capitalism, yet, we the people have the tools to keep them in check, people keep giving these companies money for whatever reason.
You mean the fascists and would-be dictators that want to undo 250 years of democracy because they don’t like being the new minority?
You want to silence half the country and label anyone that disagrees with you a facist and a terrorist. Seems a bit putin-ish. Doesn't sound like you care for democracy, you just want your side to be the dictator.
You want to find the furthest right on the board? Just let them self identify.smh.
I’m sorry if it offends you that I have nothing good to say about the party of traitors who are cool with an attempted overthrow of the duly elected government. And the sliver of the population who continues to show up for Trump, DeStains, and the other MAGA MAGAts can all be pretty much written off. They have lost the capacity to rationalize and reason.
That's nit the argument I made. That's the argument you are trying to make up I made.
Staying silent when groups of people are being wronged is pretty much the same thing. And not only haven't you been silent, you've made excuses for such actions by others.
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me
It works the other way as well. Just human nature I suppose.
You mean the fascists and would-be dictators that want to undo 250 years of democracy because they don’t like being the new minority?
You want to silence half the country and label anyone that disagrees with you a facist and a terrorist. Seems a bit putin-ish. Doesn't sound like you care for democracy, you just want your side to be the dictator.
I mean if we're going to deviate completely from any discussion and just sling mud and point fingers .... What would you say happened when "Everyone" / "Most" / "Very Many" on the "Right" was calling anyone and everyone on the Left a communist ? I mean as a Democrat Biden is pretty damn centrist, certainly he's way center from Bernie and others - it's why he's managed to reach across the isle and get at least a little bit of bipartisan support and agreements in place... and yet Many/Most on the hard right want to tell you either - he's a puppet for AOC and the communists or he is a communist. It wasn't a single disenfranchised, angry poster on a message board it was the entire right wing media apparatus. . . . They used it to influence the public to believe their country was under attack and the American way of life was in danger.
"So I recently told my parents that I may be a little bit romantically interested in women and that was a big shock for them considering the past 10 years of coming out as gay, then queer, then non-binary, then trans. And I think it was just a little bit of a shock. So I tell my dad and he goes- "I would love to see you get a woman pregnant," and I said- "oh no no no no no, she’d be getting me pregnant."
Seems to me Dylan is the one touring the media circuit and putting focus on his own sex life. So, you want to boo the crowd for reacting? Seems strange.
This is what I find funny. Liberals hate the private sector. They always complain about company profits. You would think seeing companies lose money would make them happy. Yet, here they are, complaining about. I think they flipped sides just because they like to argue.
Ah I see. You have either misunderstood the message or are purposefully misrepresenting the message. What liberals are against are companies that make huge profits while not offering their employees healthcare. A situation that forces American tax payers to foot the bill for their children's healthcare as they line their pockets. What liberals are against are companies that make huge profits while paying so little, taxpayers have to foot the bill for food assistance to their employees. What liberals are against is how there's a legalized system of bribery where a company can pit small communities and states against one another to bid for their businesses to locate there. Placing all of the tax burden on the employees and workers in the community while they avoid paying their fair share.
There's nothing wrong with capitalism. But just as with anything when it becomes unbridled and left to run amuck it becomes abused. That's where we are right now. I hope that helps clear things up for you.
Quote
What was the response from these companies once they started losing money? They folded like a lawn chair. Proof that boycotts work.
Proof that if you can get enough people motivated by hate, you can punish which ever group you decide to. History has pointed this out time and time again but many seem not to have learned anything from it.
Seems to me Dylan is the one touring the media circuit and putting focus on his own sex life. So, you want to boo the crowd for reacting? Seems strange.
Since when did you start following trans people and their sex life? When did that become of interest to you? It seems you have been sucked into a web of following along with something you never gave a damn about before. But then so have a lot of people lately.
Seems to me Dylan is the one touring the media circuit and putting focus on his own sex life. So, you want to boo the crowd for reacting? Seems strange.
Since when did you start following trans people and their sex life? When did that become of interest to you? It seems you have been sucked into a web of following along with something you never gave a damn about before. But then so have a lot of people lately.
That's just it. I don't follow them -- they follow me, everywhere I go. It's plastered on the screen every time you turn around, DUH.
Maybe it's the channels you've chosen to watch. I hadn't seen anything about it until you posted it and I read a lot of different news sources on a daily basis. I hadn't seen a thing about boycotts against marginalized people in our society until the far right started these boycotts. For a party that claims to be pro business it seems that only applies when businesses choose not to market to certain portions of our society.
It wasn't a "channel I chose to watch". It was a rabbit-hole that started with your Chick-fil-a link and continued through another Yahoo article about "Anti-LGBTQ backlash".
And I wouldn't classify this as "boycotts against marginalized people", but I understand why you would... It's the easiest way to circle around to "the party" and how evil it is.
Alas, my post was merely a look inside the irony that Dylan has seized the 15 minutes and dusted his hands of the controversy; enjoying the spotlight while everyone else screams in the aisles of social media.
If you don't consider the LGBTQ community as marginalized, what exactly is it then? Surely you're not trying to say it isn't a huge target of the right and is most certainly a small portion of our society? What do you call it when a political element places a huge target on the backs of not only the LGBTQ community, but also on anyone who even dares to advertise to them? You do realize this looks very similar to things we've seen in the past correct?
Maybe next they'll give them different water fountains to use. I mean surely they don't want to catch their cooties.
Walmart sticks with Pride Month merchandise despite heavy backlash at Target
Walmart said it won’t be making any changes to its LGBTQ-friendly merchandise in honor of Pride Month — even as rival Target has pulled some of its Pride collection from stores in the face of customer backlash.
“We have merchandise that we sell all year that supports different groups,” Walmart chief merchandising officer Latriece Watkins said Wednesday. “In this particular case, we haven’t changed anything in our assortment.”
Minneapolis-based Target has removed some items from its collection for Pride Month, saying threats from irate customers made workers feel unsafe.
But Watkins said Walmart stores hadn’t experienced any threats over its Pride-themed merchandise.
“In this particular case, when we think about security … we have not done anything in particular differently related to security in our stores,” the marketing officer said.
Walmart — which boasts more than 4,500 locations nationwide — has released clothing bearing similar messages to those that have generated controversy at Target, including T-shirts that say “Some people are gay. Get over it,” “Gay AF” and “Woke up gay again.”
Onesies for infants, meanwhile, boast sayings like “Proud love,” “I love my 2 moms” and “Love will win.”
Walmart also has a whole collection of LGBTQ-friendly trinkets and accessories as part of its “Pride & Joy” collection, which includes flags, pins, tote bags, clothes for dogs and more.
One woman took to TikTok to share a sarcastic video of herself shopping for Pride-themed clothes for her baby at Walmart.
On a rack with clothes for infants age zero to 12 months, she pulls out a onesie that says “Proud love” with a sticker saying the garment is made for infants and is “gender inclusive.”
Another rack was full of infant-size rompers that say “Love wins.”
“Oh, there’s even one for me,” the woman adds sneeringly before showing an adult T-shirt that says “Proud parent” with a similar sticker marking the shirt as “gender inclusive.”
The Post has reached out to Walmart.
The TikTok, which garnered more than 230,000 views in less than a week, was also posted to Twitter, where one user questioned if “this [is] actually Walmart, or just a bit?”
Another user replied: “They didn’t see Target lose 9 billion over this?”
If you don't consider the LGBTQ community as marginalized, what exactly is it then? Surely you're not trying to say it isn't a huge target of the right and is most certainly a small portion of our society? What do you call it when a political element places a huge target on the backs of not only the LGBTQ community, but also on anyone who even dares to advertise to them? You do realize this looks very similar to things we've seen in the past correct?
Maybe next they'll give them different water fountains to use. I mean surely they don't want to catch their cooties.
The marginalization only becomes problematic when it is advertised for everyone else to see with the undertone that those outside of the LGBTQIA+ community have to accept it without question. The LGBTQIA+ community wants some things that are difficult to understand (see women athletics) so when there is push back (in terms of fairness), everyone gets upset.
It is not an easy subject and different people have different levels of acceptance. Acceptance for workplace issues that can be addressed by law are different than an individuals personal level of acceptance.
And I used the full syntax LGBTQIA+ just to illustrate the difficulty because they are not all the same thing.
Trying to figure out what + means can be a challenge as well, one permutation is LGBTQQIP2SA: any combination of letters attempting to represent all the identities in the queer community, this near-exhaustive one (but not exhaustive) represents Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Pansexual, Two-Spirited, and Asexual.
Here’s the thing, if those initials don’t apply to your (whoever) sexual lifestyle/preference, then do you really need to know or understand? And if you do, the net is full of explanations and google is your friend. If you find talking about or seeing inclusivity in action offensive, turn the page, change the channel, or just simply ignore it. Don’t want it in your face? Filter it, period. It’s not going away. And all the BS book bans, don’t say gay bills, or hate directed at the lgbtq community isn’t going to make it go away, it only makes those fighting to protect their rights that much more determined to do so… including corps.
GOPers want everyone to listen to their points of view and feelings on various subjects, yet would silence the opposition at every turn. Bunch of KARENS.
Being WOKE is a good thing, not a shameful thing. It means you can see farther than your own basic needs or situation. It means you have compassion for those who are vulnerable to attacks like we’ve seen on trans kids from the fascist puritan right. If you’re offended by WOKE, something in your brain is BROKE.
The problem is you can't filter it, or look the other way if it is there every time you turn on the TV, changing the channel is easier for a movie/series, not so much for a commercial.
I have a strong disdain about laws being passed to regulate exposure, but we should have laws that promote equality in the workplace.
And while there is general acceptance of what LGB involves, the other permutations may be more challenging than others especially when children begin to ask.
That's not a facist puritan right position, its a belief that some of the permutations are just to complex to explain to a child.
If the fact that I care about exposure makes me not WOKE, I can live without being WOKE, and I will have to live with just being for non-discrimination.
You know, I tend to agree with you to some extent. But then do you really agree with any movement or political party? I sure don't. When it comes to trans people competing in women's athletics I too think that's going too far. But you see, you can stand up for trans rights without agreeing with everything they say, claim or want. What happens is those who rail against trans rights use the most extreme examples such as them competing in women's sports as a means to totally rail against them. We could use the extreme examples of anything and everything to dismiss the rights of any group of Americans.
Because my take is that in the end, that's what they are, Americans. And as Americans they deserve to be treated as well as the rest of us. Using a "yeah but they want to play in women's sports" to dismiss them equal treatment as a whole is IMO only using an excuse to discriminate against them.
And while there is general acceptance of what LGB involves, the other permutations may be more challenging than others especially when children begin to ask.
That's not a facist puritan right position, its a belief that some of the permutations are just to complex to explain to a child.
You mean teaching them about evolution and or creation is simple enough for them to learn, but teaching them about the LGBTQ is too complex? Teaching them that love is love is too complex? Telling them that some people feel they aren't the actual sex they were born is somehow too complex?
Pretending these people are non existent by refusing to address this with children is what's complex. Trying to censor them and hide them from the public light is what will in the end be the most confusing.
As of now look at what our children are learning. In red states across the country the message is clear. Don't talk about them, don't teach about them. It is too perverted to speak to children about. What message do you think that is sending?
What happens is those who rail against trans rights use the most extreme examples such as them competing in women's sports as a means to totally rail against them.
Where? Not here. Please show me where someone is using the sports angle to discriminate against their sexuality.
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
We could use the extreme examples of anything and everything to dismiss the rights of any group of Americans.
Isn't that exactly what takes place when any parent concerned with the balance between education and indoctrination, concerned about the fact that they're told "it's none of their business"; is called a homophobe? I certainly don't see you or your clan saying things like "yeah but they want to play in women's sports a role in what they're children are taught".
Educating children about the actual world around them has now been labeled indoctrination. The perfect excuse to rail against anything being taught to children that would help prepare them for the real world of which some parents disapprove. Using the word indoctrination to discriminate isn't as clever as you think it is. But certainly claiming that has sucked in a lot of people.
And yes, in case you haven't noticed, which I think you have, this entire "but they want to play in women's sports" issue has been raised over and over again when it comes to trans rights and why people are against it.
And yes, if you want to hide your children from learning about, hearing about or seeing anything having to do with gender equality or teaching them about homosexuals, obviously it's something you fear them learning about. That sounds pretty homophobic to me. All they are learning as of now is that there must be something wrong with these people since it's so wrong to speak about in their schools.
Here's what THIRD GRADERS are learning to prepare them for the world...
"The main academic goals for the third grade is the mastery of multiplication and division, cursive writing, the parts of speech and the composition of the formal paragraph. The development of responsibility, self reliance and independent work habits is a major focus of this grade level."
A bill is drafted to eliminate instruction from teachers about sexual orientation or gender identity... From grades kindergarten through third grade.
The bill also prohibits schools “from prohibiting parental notification and involvement in critical decisions affecting a student's mental, emotional, or physical well-being.”
Pretty, pretty crazy stuff, eh??
Because, "you see", the absolute best time for kids to learn this stuff is right between 'show and tell' and subtraction flash cards. Right?? < Please answer without moving goalposts so we all know where you stand.
Your side calls this the "Don't Say Gay Bill". 🤣
Your side has made such a complete mockery of itself, the ideals it stood for that people could see themselves meeting in the middle for seem like ancient history.
Trying to downplay this is yet another way of saying that when children enter the real world they should not have been educated about the people they will encounter in that world. It's another way to downplay what children are actually seeing is a movement to not only stop them from learning about such things but also to punish businesses from even marketing products to them or advertising to them as consumers. That's not just refusing to teach them about these things but them seeing an obvious attack on anything and everything having to do with the trans and gay community. And people not only act like that is okay, but support such repugnant behavior.
But you go ahead and act like that is okay. I mean maybe we should go back to how it was when I was in school when we grew up thinking anything that was gay was nasty and deserved to be mocked because nobody taught us any better. Murica!
Well, evolution is not human sexuality, and creationism is a religious belief that could never be explained to me. So you went on a tangent that is not relevant.
There is a time and a place for everything when it comes to a parents obligation to raise children in a manner that they believe is appropriate.
Love is different than sex and sexuality.
And while you may disagree with another's approach, they may disagree with yours and that is what makes the subject complex. Does that make you or them a bad person? No. People have their inherent beliefs that cannot be changed. Part of the aspect that love also involves being respectful of the differences in beliefs held by others.
I was once told that there are three items that should never be broached in casual discussions, Politics, Religion, and Raising Children. I found this to be true. We hit all three...
No it's not the same thing. But evolution is most certainly more complicated than teaching about why some people are gay or trans. That's not a tangent. Showing how absurd it is to claim informing children about gay and trans people is so complicated while they are being taught about evolution is most certainly a valid point.
Quote
Part of the aspect that love also involves being respectful of the differences in beliefs held by others.
Oh the irony. And you described the issue perfectly here. When it comes to love it's obvious that the problem is exactly as you have described. When it comes to love people wish to block out anything involving people with differences in beliefs held by others. You seem to suggest that being trans or gay is a "belief" like religion is. It's not. It's a fact of life and a part of our society.
Trying to downplay this is yet another way of saying that when children enter the real world they should not have been educated about the people they will encounter in that world. It's another way to downplay what children are actually seeing is a movement to not only stop them from learning about such things but also to punish businesses from even marketing products to them or advertising to them as consumers. That's not just refusing to teach them about these things but them seeing an obvious attack on anything and everything having to do with the trans and gay community. And people not only act like that is okay, but support such repugnant behavior.
But you go ahead and act like that is okay. I mean maybe we should go back to how it was when I was in school when we grew up thinking anything that was gay was nasty and deserved to be mocked because nobody taught us any better. Murica!
Come on man. You're smarter than that.
The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity from grades 4-12, unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take. Florida currently bans such lessons in kindergarten through third grade.
The bill makes it an elective. Didn't you yourself say that's the way it should be??
And again. Everyone is acting like all this information is then locked in a box and stowed away so that no one can ever learn of it. Sequestered forever in lieu of being taught in 2nd grade. Is that what is happening?? Children are being prevented from learning about gender identity... forever? Or is your stance that there is no way to trust parents to talk about this so it must be taught right after recess?
Can you show if any such state standards actually even exist? The bill only makes it elective if any such state standards exist in the first place. You see the devil is in the details. I'm not saying such standards don't exist. But if they do I sure as hell haven't been able to find them. One thing I can say for sure is that being gay or transsexual doesn't seem to have much if anything to do with how human beings reproduction process.
If such state standards actually exist and parents are given a choice in the matter I would agree with you. So far I only see where Florida's state education board has banned such teachings all together...
Florida bans teaching of gender identity and sexual orientation through 12th grade
Florida’s state education board voted Wednesday to ban teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity through high school, expanding the scope of a contentious state law that last year thrust Gov. Ron DeSantis to the forefront of the cultural clash over classrooms.
The law DeSantis signed last year prohibited the instruction of these topics from kindergarten through third grade or in a way that was not age appropriate for all other grades. The decision Wednesday by the State Board of Education clarified that outside of health or reproductive courses, such instruction is not appropriate at any grade level.
Teachers who violate the new state policy could be suspended or have their teaching licenses revoked.
“We’re providing clarity on what the students are expected to learn. Nothing more than that,” said Esther Byrd, a board member appointed by DeSantis. “This really isn’t a complicated thing.”
Public comment on the vote lasted an hour as some supporters lined up to encourage the board to vote in favor of the proposal while others pushed them to reconsider.
“I want to be sure we are preserving spaces that are safe for students who are like me,” said Jennifer Webb, a former state lawmaker who was the first out queer woman to serve in the state House of Representatives.
The law DeSantis signed last year sparked national outrage from Democrats and LGBTQ advocates and prompted Republicans to propose similar legislation in state houses across the country.
At the time, DeSantis argued young children should not be exposed to concepts like gender identity, and he did not push for the ban to apply to upper grade levels. Indeed, in his new book, “The Courage to Be Free,” DeSantis accused the media of dishonestly suggesting he was blocking older students from these topics. In one exchange with a reporter he highlighted in his book, DeSantis asked a reporter whom the ban applied to. The reporter responded, “Grades K to 3.”
DeSantis responded: “So five-year-olds, six-year olds, seven-year-olds, and the idea that you wouldn’t be honest about that, and tell people what it actually says. It’s why people don’t trust people like you because you peddle false narratives.”
The passage of the legislation was the catalyst for an escalating war between DeSantis and Disney that has become central to the Republican’s narrative as he lays the groundwork for a presidential campaign.
After taking a tepid stance toward the legislation last year, Disney employees pressured then-CEO Bob Chapek to speak out against the bill. When he did, DeSantis fired back, accusing Disney of trying to appease “woke” progressives. After DeSantis signed the bill into law, Disney vowed to fight to get it repealed, prompting the governor to target the company’s special taxing district in Central Florida.
That fight has continued for the past year. On Wednesday, as the state education board met to expand the ban, his political allies now overseeing the special district also met to take steps toward punishing Disney.
“Gender ideology has no place in our K through 12 school system,” DeSantis said from South Carolina on Wednesday. “It’s wrong for a teacher to tell a student that they may have been born in the wrong body or that their gender is a choice and so we don’t let that happen in Florida.”
Florida lawmakers were already considering legislation to extend the prohibition to eighth grade, which also prohibited teachers from using students’ preferred pronouns and banned schools from requiring a student be called by a sex that differs from what is on their birth certificate. It’s one of several bills related to LGBTQ topics that is quickly moving through the state legislature this session.
Later Wednesday, lawmakers will consider a bill that allows the state to fine, suspend or revoke the license of an establishment that allows children into an “adult live performance,” widely interpreted by LGTBQ advocates as a crackdown on drag shows. The Republican-controlled legislature is also expected to take up a bill that would ban gender affirming health care for minors.
Since Florida's state education board has made it perfectly clear their standards make it wrong to teach on such topics I'm inclined to believe that they simply wrote that into the bill as a distraction that really holds no meaning.
When it comes to love people wish to block out anything involving people with differences in beliefs held by others.
You seem to suggest that being trans or gay is a "belief" like religion is. It's not. It's a fact of life and a part of our society.
First statement...
What are you trying to say here? I can't agree with "people with to block out anything involving people with differences in beliefs held by others" statement because the exact opposite is the case. That is a xenophobic philosophy, and a bit unexpected, and not a characteristic of our society held by the majority of people. We know or are taught that there are different cultures and religions and approaches to government in the world. This country was founded on the principle that "all men were created equal" in the declaration and that was ultimately amended in the constitution to mean other races and women. Every social studies class teaches about cultural differences. Hopefully we gain an understanding of them, even though we may not fully understand them, or agree with them, we can be respectful of them.
Second statement.
I never suggested that at all. I certainly don't believe that. People have personal belief about politics, religion and child raising. I can respect that.
Regarding the difference in human sexuality, people can be wired differently from birth, by preference or experiences, some by trauma (that is also true).
I have observed a lot of differences in child raising approaches. Even though I may not fully understand them, or agree with them, I can be respectful of them.
The ultimate question is when/if is it appropriate to legislate a belief into law for the greater good of society. I don't agree with the approach to ban the subject, and will simply say that any formal instruction before fourth grade is probably too soon, and K-12 is unrealistic.
Give me evolution any day of the week and twice on Sunday. This is far more complex.
Regarding the difference in human sexuality, people can be wired differently from birth, by preference or experiences, some by trauma (that is also true).
Just so long as nobody tells the children about it.
Can you show if any such state standards actually even exist?
Nope. Have absolutely no desire to jump off the edge and argue your hand-picked peripheries.
"Can't teach children about: sex, genders, transexuals, queers, gender reassignment and keeping secrets from their parents... until after third grade" is something that anybody capable of critical thought would normally put about two seconds of thought towards; and reach a conclusion of "well that sounds reasonable". But they refuse... because GOPers, because "insurrection!"... because Trump (or his evil little brother: DeSantis). Because it's an attack!
Regarding the difference in human sexuality, people can be wired differently from birth, by preference or experiences, some by trauma (that is also true).
Just so long as nobody tells the children about it.
Again. Because all this info is locked in a box, sequestered. Never, ever to be seen if not before third grade recess...
Can you show if any such state standards actually even exist?
Nope. Have absolutely no desire to jump off the edge and argue your hand-picked peripheries.
"Can't teach children about: sex, genders, transexuals, queers, gender reassignment and keeping secrets from their parents... until after third grade" is something that anybody capable of critical thought would normally put about two seconds of thought towards; and reach a conclusion of "well that sounds reasonable". But they refuse... because GOPers, because "insurrection!"... because Trump (or his evil little brother: DeSantis). Because it's an attack!
That seems like an odd thing for you to say when I posted the evidence that "Florida’s state education board voted Wednesday to ban teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity through high school, expanding the scope of a contentious state law that last year thrust Gov. Ron DeSantis to the forefront of the cultural clash over classrooms." This happened back in April.
You refuse to give any evidence that any such state requirements exist yet keep acting as though they do. I've shown you where Florida's state education board has closed the door on any provisions that may have allowed for it before, going all the way through grade 12. Yet with zero evidence to the contrary, you keep repeating the same thing as if it means something clinging onto the outdated third grade contention.
Quote
Have absolutely no desire to jump off the edge and argue your hand-picked peripheries.
My hand-picked peripheries? You do realize this is the very evidence you provided as to why students could still be taught this subject material with the parents permission, right? Yet now you claim i hand-picked it? All I am asking for is some evidence they ever existed in the first place. And your answer is to blame me for asking for some evidence to back up the claim you made in the first place. Which it seems obvious you can't.
An honest discussion doesn't seem like anything you're willing to engage in here.
So is it grade 3 or is it grade 12 that is the topic?
From the article above.
“Gender ideology has no place in our K through 12 school system,” DeSantis said from South Carolina on Wednesday. “It’s wrong for a teacher to tell a student that they may have been born in the wrong body or that their gender is a choice and so we don’t let that happen in Florida.”
That sure looks like grade 12.
And I think that the way DeSantis characterized teaching is hyperbole and not accurate at all.
I honestly don't even know what you're raving about at this point. I guess ignoring what I've posted and going off on some tangent that I haven't shown "blah, blah, blah" is now the part of your "honest discussion".
For the last time:
The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity from grades 4-12, unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take. Florida currently bans such lessons in kindergarten through third grade.
All that stuff is available as an elective...
☐ Yes ☐ No
Now that we've colored by numbers, do you understand? Or would you like to argue about rainbows and unicorns now?
It was most certainly expanded through grade 12. I mean we have FATE trying to rely on the original legislation which was only through the third grade but that is no longer applicable.
Secondly he is trying to use this....
Quote
The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity from grades 4-12, unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take. Florida currently bans such lessons in kindergarten through third grade.
Which thus far I have seen no evidence to show, nor has any evidence been presented that even suggest such requirements ever existed in the first place.
And he seems to act as though nothing has happened since which it most certainly has.
Quote
Florida’s state education board voted in April to ban teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity through high school, expanding the scope of a contentious state law that last year thrust Gov. Ron DeSantis to the forefront of the cultural clash over classrooms.
Which certainly seems to have closed the door on any such requirements that were suggested to exist in the original bill which narrowed it to K through third grade.
See, I'm not a proponent of teaching any type of sex education or about gay people and transgender people in our society to small children. Although I think it's crazy that a teacher can't answer their questions if they arise. But some people wish to keep it focused on that in order to divert the conversation from what this has all turned into.
We see businesses being boycotted, threats being made to their employees, laws against our kids seeing or hearing anything that pertains to gay or transgender and then claim we shouldn't be sending messages about such topics to the children. I think we both understand that the very things they are doing and saying is sending a message. And that's the message they want to send. That there's something so wrong with these people we don't want our children to even hear about or see anything having to do with "these people".
History should have taught us how messages like that have turned out.
First, your source is from March of 2022. Before any of the changes I posted were made. At this point in time it's clearly outdated. It was published long before Florida’s state education board voted to ban teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity through high school, expanding the scope of the law. Secondly there is still zero evidence that there were or are ANY State standards or requirements that it be taught in schools whatsoever. No matter how many times you bold it or highlight those words.
Hey, but at least schools aren't required to out every gay or transgender student in their school to the entire community. What a relief.
Ok, that was the 2022 bill, is there not a later bill?
I will just say that culture wars are something that I try to stay away from, and DeSantis thinks it is a winner for him. I hope voters think otherwise.
Which means any school board can choose not to make it a part of reproductive health instruction. So that still doesn't mean every student and parent will be given a choice.
Quote
Florida’s state education board voted in April to ban teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity through high school, expanding the scope of a contentious state law that last year thrust Gov. Ron DeSantis to the forefront of the cultural clash over classrooms.
And of course you refuse to admit this changed everything. I'm not the one raving here. I'm not the one dismissing that much has changed since that original bill was passed. I'm not the one refusing to accept that your proposed stance isn't what it was then based on the information I have provided while refusing to admit things have changed since that time. Is that your perception of everyone who has an opposing view to yours? That they're raving or ranting?
Ok, that was the 2022 bill, is there not a later bill?
What one has to do is look at what the bill actually says and who has the power to change the education requirements and options which directly impact what that bill means.
Quote
The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity from grades 4-12, unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take. Florida currently bans such lessons in kindergarten through third grade.
As we have seen, it seems nobody can point to any such state requirement that lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity ever be taught in the first place.
Now let's get to the second part.
Quote
unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction.
Now who makes the decision on what "state standards" are? That would be the Florida Board of Education. They just voted to ban such teaching all the way through high school. So by doing so that also changed what the state standards on reproductive health instruction was state wide. So not only is it no longer any type of standard, it's not allowed.
So the bill remains the same but what that actually means has changed. The power as to what state standards in education is, is in the hands of the state board of education. They held and used their power to to change those standards to no longer exist in the state of Florida.
BTW- check the link you posted. It takes me to an non working page.
I'm just curious. It seems to me the very same thing could be used to stop the teaching of evolution. I mean there are millions and millions of Americans who believe strictly in creation with no room for evolution in their belief system. Actually it would be my guess that it would probably include many of the same people railing on the current issue we are discussing. So where does this all stop? If we're going to use complexity and beliefs to standardize education, whose differences and beliefs are going to rule over the differences of others?
My theory is to prepare children for the real world. That goes for everything from Reading, Writing and Arithmetic to being inclusive towards all people. We live an a very diversified world. I saw the results of not doing that in the 70's. Where anyone who was gay was called names, ostracized and considered an outcast. If I had been taught that they were no different than anyone else and as such deserved to be treated like everyone else, it wouldn't have taken me so long to understand that. My hopes were that as a society we could do better than that. For a while I thought we could. Now I'm far less sure of that.
Pride Month was once an easy win for brands. Now, the stakes are much higher
Companies have long embraced Pride Month in June as an uncomplicated way to market to members of the LGBTQ+ community while telegraphing progressive values. But this year won’t be nearly so straightforward.
In recent weeks, two major brands, Target (TGT) and Bud Light, were targeted by right-wing media and on social platforms for relatively small LGBTQ+ initiatives: Bud Light’s Instagram partnership with a trans influencer, and a subset of Target (TGT)’s line of goods marketed to trans customers and allies.
Right-wing commentators, politicians and others called for boycotts, and the brands’ employees were threatened with violence. In both cases, the companies seemed cowed: The CEO of Bud Light owner Anheuser-Busch (BUD) released a vague statement calling for unity and Target pulled items from shelves. Both brands say they continue to support the LGBTQ+ community: Bud Light on Tuesday announced a donation to the National LGBT Chamber of Commerce in support of LGBTQ+ owned small businesses, and Target has continued selling much of its Pride merchandise in stores.
But the backtracking shows that backlash and threats could create a chilling effect for companies, and leave them without a clear path forward.
Executives “are becoming much more skittish about taking these stands and making strong statements,” said Daniel Korschun, associate professor of marketing at Drexel University. “The pendulum is swinging a bit back … toward a more conservative approach, where they’ll be less vocal.”
Although support for gay rights has increased over the years, gaining acceptance among most Americans, trans acceptance is a more contentious issue. About 43% of adults said society had “gone too far” when it comes to accepting people who are transgender, according to a March survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal and Norc. About 33% said society “has not gone far enough,” with 23% saying society has reacted “about right.” When it comes to accepting people who are lesbian, gay or bisexual, a smaller percentage -— 29% -— said society had “gone too far.”
Campaigns that may have been considered low-risk are now drawing ire from public figures who oppose trans rights along with their supporters, creating a PR mess that may hurt sales. Backing away — rather than quelling the negative reactions — has dismayed the very demographic the campaigns were supposed to reach and may close avenues for future inclusive marketing efforts.
“Allyship is sometimes uncomfortable,” and businesses are learning that, said Jared Todd, press secretary of the Foundation at the Human Rights Campaign, which maintains the Corporate Equality Index, a measure of companies’ LGBTQ+ practices. “I don’t think people realize that quite enough.”
They might realize it now. Anheuser-Busch lost its spot on the HRC Foundation’s Best Places to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality in 2022 list over its response, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom called out Target’s CEO for “selling out the LGBTQ+ community to extremists.”
The current landscape “is alarming,” Todd said. “It’s alarming to businesses, it’s alarming to executives — and it should be.”
Staying quiet may once have been an antidote to potential boycotts, but “there’s not as much of a neutral space anymore,” Korschun said. “That middle ground is going away.”
So this year, companies that want to participate in Pride have to be prepared to take a real stance.
A new phase
The conventional wisdom about boycotts was once simple, Korschun noted: Angry customers will likely lose interest or get distracted by another perceived corporate transgression.
But it “feels that we are moving into a new phase now, where politicians are getting much more involved,” Korschun said. Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) tweeted that Target “decided to wage war on a large share of its customer base,” adding “I no longer shop at Target.”
That involvement from politicians is “mobilizing consumers in a way that they might not have mobilized otherwise,” Korschun said.
Some of those lashing out have described a campaign against Pride itself, rather than Bud Light or Target (TGT) specifically. “The goal is to make ‘pride’ toxic for brands,” right-wing commentator Matt Walsh said on Twitter. “If they decide to shove this garbage in our face, they should know that they’ll pay a price. It won’t be worth whatever they think they’ll gain.”
It’s no coincidence that the anti-trans assault comes as trans rights are under legal attack across the nation. More than 200 bills have been introduced targeting transgender and non-binary people this year, HumanRights Campaigns reported in late May. Transgender people are more than four times as likely to be victims of violent crime than cisgender people, according to a study from the UCLA School of Law.
“This has been a well-funded and a coordinated effort to silence the LGBTQ community,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of GLAAD, which aims to build acceptance for the queer community through media. “It’s an all-out assault.”
Yet groups like GLAAD have seen this reaction before — and it ended up turning around. Reviving an old playbook
Though Pride has been mainstream for years, there was a time not long ago when featuring gay and lesbian people in ads could spark negative response, noted Ellis.
“Ten years ago, we used to have war rooms behind when a company would have a new ad that included LGBTQ people,” she said. “There were a couple of years it was a little rough going.”
Eventually, sentiment turned toward mainstream acceptance. Now, “I think we’re at that inflection point again,” she said.
A 2022 poll conducted by Morning Consult for the Trevor Project found that about 29% of US adults personally know someone who is trans. The remaining population, said Ellis, is “being filled with misinformation … and hate and discrimination.”
Demystifying trans lives for more Americans will lead to greater acceptance, she said, noting that this is a “critical” moment for trans rights and acceptance. “We need corporate America and we need these powerful CEOs to help.”
GLAAD has organized a “corporate rapid response team for Pride,” Ellis explained, designed for brands to prepare for and address possible outrage. The goal is to prevent “quick decisions that end up hurting our community, ceding space to bullies and violent folks,” she noted, adding none of the companies that partner with GLAAD have backed away from LGBTQ+ initiatives.
The Human Rights Campaign is taking a similar approach, said Todd: “We are in the business of sitting down with these companies and making sure that they have a clear pathway for inclusion and supporting diversity.”
It’s not just about goodwill, advocates say. Companies that have remained committed to polarizing positions are often rewarded financially. Nike (NKE), for example, didn’t waver from its campaign with football player and civil rights activist Colin Kaepernick. The ad was supported by the coveted young consumers demographic and won Nike (NKE) an Emmy. In the years since the campaign, Nike (NKE)’s share price has increased.
Most Americans “believe that representation matters,” Todd said. “When companies lean into that, and prove that through what they do and say, they come out on top.”
Plus, noted Drexel’s Korschun, customers tend to punish companies when they go back on their word.
The dangers of corporate hypocrisy
Shoppers are willing to overlook certain changes in stores, noted Korschun, like price increases or temporary shortages. But customers bristle at what they see as hypocrisy.
“Consumers react very poorly when companies say one thing and do another,” Korschun said. “Inconsistency is very disconcerting to many consumers.”
That’s partly because when companies walk back decisions, customers wonder whether they’ll do the same in business dealings — like return policies, for example.
As Korschun put it, “If I come to the store with a problem in the future, related to just a regular purchase … are they going to walk back promises there, too?”
These days, companies that want to benefit from marketing to marginalized groups have to be ready to back those decisions, agreed Jared Watson, assistant professor of marketing at New York University.
“When brands are deciding to participate in advocacy in any format, they need to think about what that long-term advocacy looks like,” Watson said. “Whether they’re willing to internalize that support as a value for their brand, or not. And if they aren’t, then it’s maybe not something that they should be championing.”
Ultimately, Watson suspects the higher stakes will have a polarizing impact on brands.
Some might decide to play it safe. But others, he said, will lean in. North Face this year moved forward with a Pride marketing campaign that features Pattie Gonia, a drag queen and environmentalist — and the company isn’t backing away despite calls for a boycott from some Republicans.
Some brands will think, “‘What’s happening to Target is an attack, not just on the LGBTQIA+ community, but all of us,’” Watson said. “’We need to show we’re not afraid.’”
Sorry, if you want to learn about evolution, a school classroom is the place to be. Creationism can be taught at a christian church. Evolution has withstood scientific scrutiny, creationism has not. Separation of church and state.
Part of the reason that I believe in "the time and place" mantra, is that I recall those days as well. I understand that some children with "a trinket of information" can be really brutal, mean, or whatever term will fit, and that can be harmful to other children. I have seen it. It is difficult. My perspective has changed over time as well. I follow the, "that does not effect me, so its none of my business" position.
Some parents are more restrictive than others, I was perhaps more on the less restrive side, because I felt that exposure and discussion when appropriate would give children the tools to approach a situation when the parents were no longer around. I have seen some questionable (to me) approaches to child raising when my thought would be "that may not turn out well" both sides restrictive and non restrictive perspectives.
And while there is general acceptance of what LGB involves, the other permutations may be more challenging than others especially when children begin to ask.
That's not a facist puritan right position, its a belief that some of the permutations are just to complex to explain to a child.
You mean teaching them about evolution and or creation is simple enough for them to learn, but teaching them about the LGBTQ is too complex? Teaching them that love is love is too complex? Telling them that some people feel they aren't the actual sex they were born is somehow too complex?
Pretending these people are non existent by refusing to address this with children is what's complex. Trying to censor them and hide them from the public light is what will in the end be the most confusing.
As of now look at what our children are learning. In red states across the country the message is clear. Don't talk about them, don't teach about them. It is too perverted to speak to children about. What message do you think that is sending?
Ikr, BACK TO THE CLOSET! Y’all make me uncomfortable… smh. That’s how I feel about religious zealots and right wing fascist white supremacist troglodytes. Maybe we can pass a law driving them back into their holes! Genius!!!
All these third world theocrats on the right would have been a million times better off if they had learned as third graders that people don’t have to fit into their imagined box to be American. You can’t make this up. Hate is like life, it finds a way to thrive.
And while there is general acceptance of what LGB involves, the other permutations may be more challenging than others especially when children begin to ask.
That's not a facist puritan right position, its a belief that some of the permutations are just to complex to explain to a child.
You mean teaching them about evolution and or creation is simple enough for them to learn, but teaching them about the LGBTQ is too complex? Teaching them that love is love is too complex? Telling them that some people feel they aren't the actual sex they were born is somehow too complex?
Pretending these people are non existent by refusing to address this with children is what's complex. Trying to censor them and hide them from the public light is what will in the end be the most confusing.
As of now look at what our children are learning. In red states across the country the message is clear. Don't talk about them, don't teach about them. It is too perverted to speak to children about. What message do you think that is sending?
Ikr, BACK TO THE CLOSET! Y’all make me uncomfortable… smh. That’s how I feel about religious zealots and right wing fascist white supremacist troglodytes. Maybe we can pass a law driving them back into their holes! Genius!!!
I’m confused. Are you calling out Woofer or are you just agreeing with Pit? Maybe both?
That’s how I feel about religious zealots and right wing fascist white supremacist troglodytes.
My dad could string together a more coherent list of profanities any day of the week... LOL, check the space between your ears, it appear to be void of original thought.
And while there is general acceptance of what LGB involves, the other permutations may be more challenging than others especially when children begin to ask.
That's not a facist puritan right position, its a belief that some of the permutations are just to complex to explain to a child.
You mean teaching them about evolution and or creation is simple enough for them to learn, but teaching them about the LGBTQ is too complex? Teaching them that love is love is too complex? Telling them that some people feel they aren't the actual sex they were born is somehow too complex?
Pretending these people are non existent by refusing to address this with children is what's complex. Trying to censor them and hide them from the public light is what will in the end be the most confusing.
As of now look at what our children are learning. In red states across the country the message is clear. Don't talk about them, don' .!t teach about them. It is too perverted to speak to children about. What message do you think that is sending?
Ikr, BACK TO THE CLOSET! Y’all make me uncomfortable… smh. That’s how I feel about religious zealots and right wing fascist white supremacist troglodytes. Maybe we can pass a law driving them back into their holes! Genius!!!
I’m confused. Are you calling out Woofer or are you just agreeing with Pit? Maybe both?
Yet Texas is currently running a bill through it's legislation that would force schools to display the Ten Commandments. I don't think you see what's currently going on in front of your own two eyes.
Quote
Part of the reason that I believe in "the time and place" mantra, is that I recall those days as well. I understand that some children with "a trinket of information" can be really brutal, mean, or whatever term will fit, and that can be harmful to other children. I have seen it. It is difficult. My perspective has changed over time as well. I follow the, "that does not effect me, so its none of my business" position.
So you stand up for children going out into our society once they're grown still having to learn that being gay or trans doesn't make them somehow inherently evil or perverted? What is the time and the place? I've shown you how the Florida Department of education is insuring nothing about this can be taught all the way through high school.
Quote
Some parents are more restrictive than others, I was perhaps more on the less restrive side, because I felt that exposure and discussion when appropriate would give children the tools to approach a situation when the parents were no longer around. I have seen some questionable (to me) approaches to child raising when my thought would be "that may not turn out well" both sides restrictive and non restrictive perspectives.
So the answer is to just allow a certain portion of parents decide for all parents when the time and place is appropriate?
1. The topic has been Florida. I know about the Texas thing and believe this that is totally inappropriate. See "Prayer in School" culture war in the 1960's.
2. I actually think that this started off as a law that addressed a problem that did not exist to create a culture war issue. From K-3 there should be no formal instruction (lesson plan) on sexual identity with imprecise wording that left it open to interpretation. I can't imagine sexual identity studies showing up in state Department of Education curriculum K-3. Time and place could also mean age appropriate. DeSantis appears to have doubled down and extended that to K-12, which is totally inappropriate.
3. No, this is really on the Florida governor, legislature and/or Florida Department of Education. As you have pointed out there are some weasel words that any outsider to the Florida Department of Education wont know how to interpret. The words being "unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take." Imprecise or intentionally vague wording in the law can be a culture war strategy.
Next we’ll see Florida board of educators will be policing and telling home school parents how they can home school their kids and what books they can or can’t read. Pfft.
The thing is, I don't think it is "just" conservatives who feel this way.
The deal is I am not a big boycott person. If I like a product, I will buy it. Transgender stuff is getting close to the trigger but I can't say it is the actual rigger point.
I don't like them and think they are simply freakish people, but to each their own. I have always felt "live and let live". If someone wants to worship satan, good luck to them.
What I don't like is trying to make it seem like things like that are normal and exposing children to such thinking. I grew up in a different time and possibly was sheltered from such things, but I didn't even know what a homo was until maybe the 8th-9th grade.
I don't have a problem with drag shows. I have been to a drag show or two in New Orleans. Have them in a "21" and over place...I guess 18 now, cool, but not public open places where children or people who don't want to see that can be exposed. Some things are meant to be ADULT.
If we go in to a strip club we expect to see naked women...at least the strip clubs I would go to, but if I go in to a Pizza Hut, I expect to see sub-par pizzas and juke box over in the corner, not naked women on a pole.
I don't think people object because it exists, we know that, but more the shoving it in your face. Nobody likes that.
I think you are sort of putting your finger on the problem. You mentioned drag shows and strip clubs as a comparison. Those two things are in no way comparable. A man dressed up as a woman or a woman dressed up as a man is nothing like public nudity. People dressed in drag and drag shows have been going on for decades in public as well as private. So why the sudden backlash? Why has it suddenly a big deal? I'm not quite sure how "sheltered" any of us were from it.
We have seen TV personalities perform in drag on family friendly shows since the 1950's. That's pretty public. And I don't even believe all conservatives feel this way. Some still believe that the freedom of expression, barring nudity, still means something. At least up to this point, even a trump appointed judge. And my guess would be he is a conservative............
Trump-appointed federal judge rejects Tennessee’s anti-drag law as too broad, too vague
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Tennessee’s first-in-the-nation law designed to place strict limits on drag shows is unconstitutional, a federal judge says.
The law is both “unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad” and encouraged “discriminatory enforcement,” according to the ruling late Friday by U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
“There is no question that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. But there is a difference between material that is ‘obscene’ in the vernacular, and material that is ‘obscene’ under the law,” Parker said.
“Simply put, no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit — but not obscene — speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech,” he said.
The law would have banned adult cabaret performances from public property or anywhere minors might be present. Performers who broke the law risked being charged with a misdemeanor or a felony for a repeat offense.
Parker used the example of a female performer wearing an Elvis Presley costume and mimicking the iconic musician who could be at risk of punishment under the drag law because they would be considered a “male impersonator.”
Friends of George’s, a Memphis-based LGBTQ+ theater company, filed a complaint in March, saying the law would negatively impact them because they produce “drag-centric performances, comedy sketches, and plays” with no age restrictions.
“This win represents a triumph over hate,” the theater company said in a statement Saturday, adding that the ruling affirmed their First Amendment rights as artists.
“Similar to the countless battles the LGBTQ+ community has faced over the last several decades, our collective success relies upon everyone speaking out and taking a stand against bigotry,” the group said.
Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, a Republican who was one of the law’s main sponsors, said he was disappointed with the ruling.
“Sadly, this ruling is a victory for those who support exposing children to sexual entertainment,” Johnson said, adding that he hoped the state’s attorney general will appeal the “perplexing ruling.”
Initially, the complaint listed Republican Gov. Bill Lee, Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Shelby County District Attorney General Steven Mulroy as defendants. But the plaintiffs later agreed to dismiss the governor and top legal chief — although Skrmetti continued to represent Mulroy for this case.
A spokesperson for both Skrmetti and Mulroy did not immediately respond Saturday to requests for comment on Parker’s ruling.
Tennessee’s Republican-dominated Legislature advanced the anti-drag law earlier this year, with several GOP members pointing to drag performances in their hometowns as reasons why it was necessary to restrict such performances from taking place in public or where children could view them.
Yet the actual word “drag” doesn’t appear in the statute. Instead lawmakers changed the state’s definition of adult cabaret to mean “adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors.” Furthermore, “male or female impersonators” were classified as a form of adult cabaret, akin to strippers or topless dancers.
The governor quickly signed off on the statute and it was set to take effect April 1. However, to date, the law has never been enforced because the federal judge had sided with the group that challenged the statute in March, and he temporarily blocked the law.
Parker also cited how the law’s sponsor, Republican state Rep. Chris Todd, had previously helped lead an effort to block a drag show in his district before introducing the drag ban proposal. Todd later confirmed that he hadn’t seen the performance, but nevertheless pursued legal action to stop the show and the event was held indoors with an age restriction.
This incident was among the several reasons to believe that the anti-drag law was “geared towards placing prospective blocks on drag shows — regardless of their potential harm to minors,” Parker wrote.
The drag law marks the second major proposal targeting LGBTQ+ people passed by Tennessee lawmakers this year. Lee signed into law GOP-backed legislation banning most gender-affirming care, which is being challenged in court.
You see, I'm not a fan of drag shows. However, if I still had a small child I would much rather explain walking by a drag show than a Klan rally. And as much as it pains me to say this, I still believe in the rights of the Klan being able to hold rallies as well. For me it's an all or nothing proposition.
There are existing laws against public indecency and public nudity. But when you start to go beyond that based on the personal preference of one's moral beliefs it creates a situation where one group is infringing on the rights of others. And that's the point I think we're at as of now.
The thing is, I don't think it is "just" conservatives who feel this way.
The deal is I am not a big boycott person. If I like a product, I will buy it. Transgender stuff is getting close to the trigger but I can't say it is the actual rigger point.
I don't like them and think they are simply freakish people, but to each their own. I have always felt "live and let live". If someone wants to worship satan, good luck to them.
What I don't like is trying to make it seem like things like that are normal and exposing children to such thinking. I grew up in a different time and possibly was sheltered from such things, but I didn't even know what a homo was until maybe the 8th-9th grade.
I don't have a problem with drag shows. I have been to a drag show or two in New Orleans. Have them in a "21" and over place...I guess 18 now, cool, but not public open places where children or people who don't want to see that can be exposed. Some things are meant to be ADULT.
If we go in to a strip club we expect to see naked women...at least the strip clubs I would go to, but if I go in to a Pizza Hut, I expect to see sub-par pizzas and juke box over in the corner, not naked women on a pole.
I don't think people object because it exists, we know that, but more the shoving it in your face. Nobody likes that.
Let me ask you a serious question; would you want your rights as a human being challenged because somebody you don’t even know is uncomfortable with your sexual preference or lifestyle? I don’t see how your feelings, or anyone else’s feelings have anything to do with their rights, regardless if they are an adult or not. That said, maybe instead of banning books and terrorizing the trans community, we could simply make those books available to kids with parental permission, and unavailable to those who do not have permission. But heck, kids talk and compare notes, so little Johnny (the conservative’s KID) is going to hear about it elsewhere. You’re not going to scrub it from the internet. You’re not going to take the idea of it out of the minds of the community. The only thing being accomplished now is hate, fear mongering. And senseless attacks on already fragile at-risk kids. Anybody who can’t see that those are wrong shouldn’t have a voice in the debate.
'Boycott Target' Song Reaches Number One on Billboard Rap Charts
A hip-hop track aimed at retail giant Target has hit number one on the Billboard charts in the genre, as the campaign to boycott the company continues.
Pro-Trump rappers Jimmy Levy and Forgiato Blow created the song "Boycott Target" in response to the retailer's Pride Month merchandise and transgender-friendly clothing in its collection.
Despite Levy's claims his hit faced the most "censorship on a song I've ever seen," it just hit the top spot on Billboard's rap digital song sales chart.
"It's Official #BoycottTarget Billboards #1 Let's Keep Fighting Against The Indoctrination Of Our Children The Boycott Target Remix Is Out Now Let's Get It On The iTune Charts," Blow tweeted in response.
And Levy took to his Twitter to celebrate: "We got a #1 Rap Billboard! Thank you to everyone who helped make this happen by getting the song on iTunes! Glory to God for giving us a voice!"
The rappers released their song on May 25 and gained wider attention after Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene endorsed "Boycott Target" on Twitter.
"American Conservatives are once again showing who has the real buying power. It's not the woke mob, they only bully and riot," she wrote a day after the song's release.
Target has faced a backlash over its Pride Month marketing and LGBTQ+ merchandise, with reports of customers confronting workers and tipping over displays. Some stores even evacuated staff after receiving bomb threats.
The retailer then announced it was removing some of the products and relocating displays, saying it was for the safety of employees, but was adamant it remained committed to LGBTQ+ rights.
"This is the MOST censorship on a song that I've ever witnessed in my life," Levy wrote three days after the song's release.
He claimed the song was being hidden from the search on Apple's iTunes store, and Instagram demanded he remove the link from his account bio "so that people can't get a copy of the track."
"They are scared of the awakening," Levy added.
The Target controversy comes as other brands have faced boycott campaigns by conservatives over their partnerships with LGBTQ+ people. Beer brand Bud Light is still under fire for sending a commemorative can of beer to transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney and some people have even called for a boycott of conservative news network Fox News for its acknowledgment of Pride Month.
As the campaigns continue across the country, the Human Rights Campaign has called for a "state of emergency" for LGBTQ+ people.
It cited legislation introduced in 41 of the 50 states as the "worst year on record."
More than 525 bills focusing on the LGBTQ+ community were introduced in different states and 220 of those bills specifically targeted transgender people. Many of the bills focused on access to gender-affirming health care for transgender people, especially minors.
Of the 525 bills, 76 had been signed into law so far which is more than any year on record and more than double over last year.
But there was a glimmer of hope for the community when a Tennessee judge appointed by former President Donald Trump ruled a drag show ban in the state was unconstitutional.
Thomas Parker said the Adult Entertainment Act encouraged "discriminatory enforcement."
The law targeted drag shows by redefining them as "adult entertainment" and prevented them from being watched by minors. GOP lawmakers in other states have also tried or are trying to pass similar legislation.
School board's Pride month vote leads to fights, protests, arrests in Glendale, Calif.
The school has recognized the LGBTQ+ community in past years.
A California school district meeting where administrators voted to recognize Pride month, which celebrates the LGBTQ+ community, erupted into protests outside the venue involving several hundred people, according to the Glendale Police Department.
Protesters of the Glendale Unified School District policy to recognize Pride month were met by counterprotesters in support of the district's decision. Physical altercations broke out, according to footage captured by ABC affiliate KABC
The district has celebrated Pride month in years past, but a recent rise in anti-LGBTQ+ political sentiment has led to growing tensions against the community.
According to the ABC affiliate KABC, the district said misinformation was spread on social media about the district’s effort to acknowledge LGBTQ+ identities.
“While most of the protest was peaceful, a small group of individuals engaged in behavior deemed unsafe and a risk to public safety,” the Glendale Police Department said in a statement.
At least three people were arrested for unlawful use of pepper spray and willfully obstructing officers in the course of their duties, police said. A dispersal order was given just after 6 p.m., according to officials.
Meeting attendees were told to shelter in place while police ordered the crowd to disperse.
Footage of the chaos captured by KABC showed protesters throwing punches and pushing one another.
The protests come just days after the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education also faced protests against its resolution to incorporate lessons and programs related to the LGBTQ+ community and history. Separately, a transgender teacher's Pride flag was burned by an intruder at the North Hollywood elementary school in late May.
Who's challenging there rights as a human being? Be specific.
Republican agendas! And the freaks that go out and spew the hate toward these kids. And by extension anyone who supports somebody with this MAGA BS agenda. I did see that some conservatives are finally trying to drag the party back to the middle/center the lady couple weeks. Too bad half the country can’t trust any of them.
It's actually LGBTQIA+ now. I'm sure there are more letters on the way, wouldn't want to 'exclude' anyone. It will eventually look like someone fell asleep on the keyboard as they've got a lot of ground to cover...
AGENDER Describes a person who does not identify as male or female or some combination of male and female. Some agender individuals see themselves as genderless, while others see themselves as gender neutral.
ALLY Describes a person who supports, both publicly and privately, the LGBTQ community and equality in its many forms. Heterosexual and cisgender people can be allies, as well as individuals from within the LGBTQ community.
ASEXUAL Describes a person who is not sexually attracted to others and has no desire to engage in sexual behavior. Asexuality differs from celibacy in that a person who is celibate is sexually attracted to others but chooses to abstain from sex. Sometimes, asexual is abbreviated as “ace.”
BIGENDER Describes a person who has two genders. People who are bigender may experience two gender identities at the same time or at different times. These gender identities can be binary — male and female — or include nonbinary identities.
BISEXUAL Describes a person who is attracted to both men and women. A person does not need to have had specific sexual experiences — or any sexual experience — to identify as bisexual.
CISGENDER Describes a person whose gender identity matches the sex — male or female — originally identified on their birth certificate (i.e., people who are not transgender). Cisgender, which is pronounced sis-gender, describes only a person’s gender identity — not their sexual or romantic attractions. Sometimes, cisgender is abbreviated as “cis” in casual conversation.
COMING OUT Describes the process of a person first coming to understand their own sexual orientation, then revealing it to others. However, it is not necessary to have sexual experiences or to even tell others in order to come out. One may be out to just one’s self. Coming out is often correlated with rates of youth homelessness.
ENBY Describes a person who does not identify as exclusively male or exclusively female and usually prefers“they” as a pronoun. Enby is the phonetic pronunciation of“NB,” which stands for nonbinary. Not all nonbinary individuals prefer or use this term.
GAY Describes a person who is attracted, emotionally and/or physically, to someone of the same gender. The term can be used by men, women or individuals who identify as nonbinary. A person does not need a specific sexual experience — or any sexual experience — to identify as gay.
GENDER A social construct used to classify a person as a man, woman or some other identity. Fundamentally different from sex assigned at birth, gender is often closely related to the role that a person plays or is expected to play in society.
GENDER AFFIRMING SURGERY A surgical procedure that enables an individual’s body to be more congruent with their gender identity. Also referred to as sex reassignment surgery or gender confirming surgery.
GENDER DYSPHORIA Describes the extreme discomfort that a person feels because their assigned sex at birth does not match their gender identity. This sense of unease or dissatisfaction can cause depression and anxiety and negatively impact an individual’s daily life.
GENDER EXPRESSION How individuals communicate their gender to others through their clothing, speech, mannerisms and other factors. Gender expression is not the same thing as gender identity. A person can express one gender yet identify with another.
GENDER FLUID Describes a person whose gender expression or gender identity — or both — changes over time. Not everyone whose gender identity or expression changes identifies as gender fluid.
GENDER IDENTITY A person’s internal identification as male, female, something in between or something other than the two conventional gender options. A person’s gender identity is not visible to others and can match or differ from their assigned sex at birth.
GENDER NEUTRAL Describes not identifying as being of a particular gender. It can apply to several different aspects of life. People who identify as gender neutral typically don’t subscribe to gender stereotypes and may use the pronouns “they/them/their” as well as others.
GENDER NONCONFORMING Describes a person who does not adhere to the traditional expectations — in terms of their appearance or behavior — of their assigned gender. Some of these individuals identify as transgender but others, for example, masculine lesbians, do not.
HETEROSEXUAL Describes a person who is attracted — physically and emotionally — to individuals of the opposite sex. Otherwise known as a straight person.
HOMOSEXUAL Describes a person who is attracted — physically and emotionally — to people of the same sex. This term is outdated and disfavored in the LGBTQ community, as it was commonly used to ostracize others.
INTERSEX Describes a person born with sex characteristics that are not typical for male or female bodies. Sex characteristics are physical features relating to sex — including chromosomes, genitals, hormones and other reproductive anatomy — as well as secondary features that emerge from puberty. Intersex is an umbrella term, and intersex characteristics and traits are not always apparent or identified at birth. The “I” in the longer version of LGBTQ (LGBTQIA+) stands for intersex.
LESBIAN Describes a woman who is attracted, emotionally and/or physically, to other women. A woman does not need a specific sexual experience — or any sexual experience — to identify as a lesbian.
LGBTQ An acronym used to describe lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning persons or the community. Avoid using the term“gay community,” as it does not accurately account for the community’s diversity.
NONBINARY Describes a person whose gender identity falls outside of the two-gender construct (male or female). For example, nonbinary can describe an individual whose gender changes over time, who does not identify as male or female or who associates with elements of both genders. Some individuals who identify as nonbinary prefer the term enby.
PANSEXUAL Describes a person who is attracted to — or has the potential to be attracted to — people of any gender or gender identity. This attraction can be emotional or physical.
QUEER An adjective used by some people, particularly younger people, whose sexual orientation is not exclusively heterosexual. Queer was once used a pejorative term and has been reclaimed by some — but not all — members of the LGBTQ community.
QUESTIONING Describes a person who is still discovering and exploring their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or some combination thereof. Using this term enables an individual to identify as part of the LGBTQ community while avoiding other labels and recognizing that their process of self-identification is still underway.
SEX The classification of a person as male or female. At birth, babies are assigned a sex that typically corresponds with their external anatomy. Yet an individual’s sex is influenced by a larger combination of factors, including their chromosomes, genes, hormones, reproductive organs and secondary sex characteristics.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION An enduring emotional and/or physical attraction (or non-attraction) to other people. Sexual orientation is fluid and encompasses a variety of labels, including gay, lesbian, heterosexual, bisexual, pansexual and asexual.
SOGIE An acronym for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. Every person has a sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
STRAIGHT Describes a man who is attracted to women or a woman who is attracted to men. Can be used as a synonym for heterosexual.
TRANSGENDER Describes a person whose gender identity and/or gender expression do not match their assigned sex at birth. Transgender people may be straight, lesbian, gay, bisexual or queer.
TRANSGENDER (OR TRANS) MAN Describes a person who was assigned a female sex at birth but identifies as male. This person may or may not actively identify as trans.
TRANSGENDER (OR TRANS) WOMAN Describes a person who was assigned a male sex at birth but identifies as female. This person may or may not actively identify as trans.
TRANSITION A complex process by which transgender people align their anatomy (medical transition) and gender expression (social transition) with their gender identity. Transitioning is a multiple-step process that occurs over a long period of time. It can include such steps as using a different name, using new pronouns, dressing differently, updating legal documents, hormone therapy and surgery. The exact steps involved in a person’s transition varies.
TWO SPIRIT Describes a person who identifies as having both a masculine and a feminine spirit. It is used by some Native American and Alaska Native people to describe their sexual, gender and/or spiritual identity. It may encompass same-sex attraction and also include relationships that could be considered poly.
Make sure you memorize these or you'll be racist!!
It's sad how anyone different than yourself offends you. And then there's the term "freak" that Peen uses to describe anyone unlike himself. This is something that has been repeated throughout history. Not one time has it ended up being a good thing.
OOOOPS! Now they've made the alphabet brigade mad as well. Consumers -- mad; Pridesters -- mad; Stockholders -- mad as hell. Where do they go from here?
Target faces criticism from artists involved with Pride month products over response to boycott: ‘Quick to fold’
The removal of Pride products is a retreat from prior LGBTQ support, they said.
ByMax Zahn June 7, 2023, 2:38 PM
Kennedy Davenport, a drag queen, rejoiced when she learned last year that she would be featured on apparel in the forthcoming Pride collection at Target.
"You never imagine opportunities like this," Davenport told ABC News, comparing the breakthrough to her previous role competing on the TV show "RuPaul's Drag Race."
For Davenport, elation turned to disappointment last month when Target announced it would remove some Pride products from stores in response to anti-LGBTQ harassment faced by employees, she said. Davenport says she does not know whether products with her image were removed.
"The bigwigs at Target should continue to take a stand with us and not be so quick to fold," Davenport said, calling on the company to return the full Pride collection to their shelves. "I would love for Target to put on their boxing gloves and fight."
Davenport is among five artists and organizations tied to this year's Pride collection at Target who criticized the company's response to the backlash in interviews with ABC News.
Critics acknowledged the difficult position faced by Target when anti-LGBTQ backlash nationwide boiled over last month into a boycott and reported employee harassment, including bomb threats at stores in Utah, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
However, some critics said, the decision to remove Pride products marked a retreat from the company's longstanding support of the LGBTQ community that could further embolden extremists and imperil vulnerable people.
"The thing that's so disappointing is that the leadership that Target has shown over such a long period of time seems to be wavering in a moment when the attacks on our community are increasing," Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, the executive director of LGBTQ advocacy group GLSEN, which has partnered with the company for more than a decade, told ABC News.
Rob Smith, the founder and CEO of The Phluid Project, an LGBTQ-owned clothing company that has placed products in Target stores for three years, expressed disappointment over the decision to remove some products from the Pride collection nationwide rather than focus on specific stores at heightened risk of threats.
"It's a big blanket decision that didn't seem appropriate," Smith told ABC News, noting that he does not think his products were among those removed. "I would've made a different decision if I was in charge."
An LGBTQ designer who contributed products to this year's Pride collection at Target -- and requested anonymity because they did not want to be publicly identified speaking about the company -- said the response to the backlash leaves them "questioning how committed to the LGBTQ community these companies really are and how much we can trust their word."
Target, which has seen its stock decline about 13% since the boycott began last month, did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.
MORE: 'Thrown in their faces': Bud Light salespeople say boycott is hurting commission In a statement last month, Target said it removed some products from this year's Pride collection because the company "experienced threats impacting our team members' sense of safety and well-being while at work."
"Our focus now is on moving forward with our continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year," the company said in the statement.
More than 200 LGBTQ advocacy groups, including GLSEN and the Human Rights Campaign, signed a public letter on Monday calling on Target to make all Pride products available for sale online and in-store, reaffirm the company's commitment to the LGBTQ community and ensure employee safety.
The boycott of Target follows a similar consumer protest against Anheuser-Busch InBev over a Bud Light promotion in April from a trans influencer. Bud Light sales have declined for seven consecutive weeks, and Anheuser-Busch's stock has plummeted about 20%.
Meanwhile, the boycott of Bud Light gained momentum after the company's initial response was perceived as conciliatory by some LGBTQ advocates, prompting frustration on the left.
MORE: The boycott against Bud Light is hammering sales. Experts explain why. "It's my hope that other corporations see what's happening to Anheuser-Busch, see what's happening to Target and choose a different path," Willingham-Jaggers said.
To be sure, some of the people tied to this year's Pride collection identified the root cause of the unrest as a rise in right-wing extremism centered on the LGBTQ community, which they said has put companies like Target in a difficult position.
"On the one hand, they risk losing sales from individuals who oppose the LGBTQ+ community," a second designer who contributed to this year's Pride collection told ABC News. "While on the other hand, they risk alienating the pro-LGBTQ+ community, which may result in a loss of sales as well."
PHOTO: FILE - A Target Corporation logo is seen displayed on the exterior of their store. A Target Corporation logo is seen displayed on the exterior of their store. SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images, FILE As of last month, more than 520 anti-LGBTQ bills had been introduced in state legislatures, including over 220 bills specifically targeting transgender and non-binary people, the Human Rights Campaign found.
Smith, who said he has been in contact with Target often since the decision to remove some Pride products, said he remains optimistic that the company will respond more forcefully to the backlash.
"Target has continually done a good job and been a good leader," he said. "They just need a moment to reset and recalibrate."
So you don't see how all the backlash has silenced them. It's so funny that your snowflake bunch has lashed out to try and, and in some cases succeeded at silencing businesses. That they've punished them in any way they can. They've threatened their employees. They've called in bomb threats and then you wish to make others out to be the snowflakes. Target did fold too quick. Allowing those trying to deny rights to groups they disagree with never turns out well. And giving those of the world who hate people unlike themselves more power has never worked out.
It seems you promote discrimination and celebrate any chaos it causes. I wonder who you think will be there to stand up for you when others come after your kind? Hopefully there will people there to make fun of you as well since that seems to be the only language you understand.
I mean maybe I'm being pedantic --- maybe it's my confirmation bias. I don't see the equivalency here.
One group actively calling for a boycott and actively spreading hate ...
The other group (three or so people being interviewed - not really a group but ...) offering criticism ??? I am sure there might be more protests about the decision - but I don't see the same vitriol.
"The bigwigs at Target should continue to take a stand with us and not be so quick to fold," Davenport said, calling on the company to return the full Pride collection to their shelves. "I would love for Target to put on their boxing gloves and fight."
"The thing that's so disappointing is that the leadership that Target has shown over such a long period of time seems to be wavering in a moment when the attacks on our community are increasing," Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, the executive director of LGBTQ advocacy group GLSEN, which has partnered with the company for more than a decade, told ABC News.
"It's a big blanket decision that didn't seem appropriate," Smith told ABC News, noting that he does not think his products were among those removed. "I would've made a different decision if I was in charge."
By comparison - the boycott and those against the LGBQT support shown - 1. actively boycotting 2. Hate messages and death threats.
But then things fell apart. About a week and a half ago, Carnell said, he started receiving hundreds of hateful messages including death threats, some of them incorrectly saying the collection was being marketed to children
I think you're fairly accurate in pointing out the contrast. But for the record, I wasn't promoting this as "equivalency"... not by any stretch.
And since you're one that can at least take an honest look without resorting to childish antics; a certain bias does show through with your "one group, one group" statements... Is the "one group actively calling for a boycott and actively spreading hate..." really a group? You say the one group is really too small to be called a group, I would infinitely argue that the other is much too large. Much too large to be said to be "actively spreading hate" as a whole.
I would also argue that the largest swath of people are simply being tired of told what to say, what to do, how to act, what they're allowed to laugh at, tired of being trained on pronouns (and severely scolded if they don't stand in a straight line with their tongue out to take the pill). If they're white -- tired of being told they have privilege. If they have Christian values -- tired of being told they 'shove their religion down people's throats'. If they're middle-class -- tired of being told they owe something to someone else and should be more than happy to pony up more. If they're conservative -- tired of being told they're evil "because: TRUMP!!".
I think we're just at a point where a certain part of America is tired of being told their values don't matter and are merely responding with their wallets. That was once an honored response on the left... until the right started doing it.
So yes, Dylan Mulvaney (who has decided he digs chicks now... talk about 'played like a piano' ) and the Target Pride displays are just more straws on the camel's back imo. And then, the snowball effect follows right behind critical mass... as we dumb down to the lowest common denominator. How many people won't even order a Bud because they think it might be embarrassing; or someone sitting at the bar may have a smart-ass comment? Target hires a Satan worshipper to design some of the products for the Pride collection?? lmao That should go over well, right? Pretty soon the low-info crowd is spreading rumors that they're selling a shirt that says "Satan Loves Pronouns".
Here's the bottom line: corporations should already be smart enough to avoid the hot issues like the plague. In this state of social-media, and sadly, main stream media distortions (with no accountability and not a sh*t to give); it's pretty dumb to grab the torch by the flame thinking the end result will be 'sales' and nothing else.
I think the people making up the numbers that are actively boycott Target or Bud Light etc are a diverse group with many different reasons. I think the 'hard core' segment that actively "hates" the LGBQT community is probably quite small. I bet there's others that think they are protecting their kids - I'm sure many feel like you say and don't want values of others pushed on them.
Personally I think we should be able to have inclusivity without backlash. I mean when it's "Secretary day" or "Bosses Day" - or whatever day or event .... I roll my eyes and choose to ignore. It'd be nice if everyone did the same thing with any LGBQT event or promotion they don't like or agree with. With Bud Light I think they made a huge mistake with who they used to promote their product as much as anything. And honestly - looking at Bud Lights target demographic I'd have been fine if they never tried to embrace or promote to the LGBQT demographic. I think they tried to be cute - and got burnt. Not certain how sincere their embracing of that 'culture' really was. I think more sincere support would be simply to do it without fanfare or marketing.
In many ways I'm like Clem - it's a group I don't/didn't actively pay attention to. As a minority that does suffer prejudice and hate - I'd support them and defend their rights. But no more than other minorities that suffer also. The noise in the media at the moment seems disproportionate to the amount of suffering and the % they represent in our society. That I find a bit annoying but I can choose not to pay attention.
I think the people making up the numbers that are actively boycott Target or Bud Light etc are a diverse group with many different reasons. I think the 'hard core' segment that actively "hates" the LGBQT community is probably quite small. I bet there's others that think they are protecting their kids - I'm sure many feel like you say and don't want values of others pushed on them.
I have to ask. Target and many other businesses have marketed such items and supporte3d the LGBTQ community for years now. They have marketed products for pride month for years now. Yet this is the first time we've seen anything close to this kind of backlash over it. While I don't disagree with you is that their motivation is to "protect the kids" by a great many of them, the reason for that is the media they read and feed into has made that the message they have perpetrated and as such these parents believe that. I'm pretty sure that after years of these types of things being marketed by such corporations they didn't suddenly wake up one day and say "We have to stop this to protect the kids!"
And this entire "don't want values of others pushed on them" malarkey is just that. Seeing clothing or an ad showing transsexuals doesn't cause anyone or force anyone to become a transsexual. The real attempt being made is to silence them and pretend they don't exist. They want everything pushed back into the closet and people to be afraid to speak out about who they are. They want businesses to fear them as well by punishing them if they support or advertise to them. Because you see, they have no problem when people that share their views and express it in advertising or the marketing of their products. It's a simple matter of if they believe in it it's fine. Anything that runs counter to that will be punished.
These are the messages repeated to them over and over again until they began to believe it. They swallow it hook, line and sinker as an excuse to persecute others. This has been done before throughout history and has never turned out well. At least not for the people they use these tactics against.
Hey, if y’all want some lgbtq gear, print on demand printing company “PRINTFUL” will hook you up and make a donation on your behalf. Fate, Peen, other GOPers don’t pass up this deal. Fate, you could get one for every type you listed.
Personally I think we should be able to have inclusivity without backlash. I mean when it's "Secretary day" or "Bosses Day" - or whatever day or event .... I roll my eyes and choose to ignore.
The problem (and the point I think Fate was making) is you can't ignore it. It's everywhere. It's not pride day, it's pride month. Rainbow flags and parades and other events everywhere. It's breaking news everytime someone comes out. Have to fillout pronouns now on every form I fill out. People have lost their jobs for not using the correct pronouns. Girls are getting beat by guys that compete in womens sports. At the high school level, I imagine this ticks off the parents. I'm not surprised people are pushing back. If someone wants to be lgbtq, good for them, it's none of my business. If they want this to be normalized, then stop making a giant spectacle out of it.
Did I really need to make it purple and stick my tongue out? Or are you just being funny?
Trying to be funny with you.
Sorry, couldn’t decide what that was. And they just get stuck on the bumpers of cars with Trump stickers. It’s called direct messaging. And Soros bought them, if you were a MAGAt you would know that…
Did I really need to make it purple and stick my tongue out? Or are you just being funny?
Trying to be funny with you.
Sorry, couldn’t decide what that was. And they just get stuck on the bumpers of cars with Trump stickers. It’s called direct messaging. And Soros bought them, if you were a MAGAt you would know that…
Sounds more like vandalism.
Maybe Soros will pay for the paint jobs to remove them too...
The problem (and the point I think Fate was making) is you can't ignore it. It's everywhere. It's not pride day, it's pride month. Rainbow flags and parades and other events everywhere. It's breaking news everytime someone comes out. Have to fillout pronouns now on every form I fill out. People have lost their jobs for not using the correct pronouns. Girls are getting beat by guys that compete in womens sports. At the high school level, I imagine this ticks off the parents. I'm not surprised people are pushing back. If someone wants to be lgbtq, good for them, it's none of my business. If they want this to be normalized, then stop making a giant spectacle out of it.
You mean the same thing that's been going on for years now? Yet suddenly now that the far right politicians and media have made them out to be an enemy, everyone suddenly cares? I like many think some of the things they condone goes too far. But how is that any different than the far left or the far right? They too promote things that are extreme and ridiculous. But all of a sudden, after pride month has been going on for years now, it has become an issue. It's because their leaders and their media have created outrage by their followers. And they've decided, "Everyone must pay!"
Gentlemen, it's time to sort through all of your porn. You'll need to trash all of your Jenna Jameson porn now. She has officially crossed over to the other side.
Former Porn Star Jenna Jameson Marries Girlfriend Jessi Lawless
The 49-year-old mother of three said she now wonders why she ever dated or married men.
Former porn star Jenna Jameson just got married for the third time — her first to a woman.
Jameson, 49, told People on Thursday that she married her girlfriend, 40-year-old Jessi Lawless, in Las Vegas last month, and has ”found the person that I truly should have always been with.”
Jameson first said she was bisexual in 2004, but told Fox News in 2008 that she was “totally hetero.” She told People that she now wonders why she ever dated or married men at all.
“It’s selfish and bad to say, but I think my driving force were children,” said Jameson, a mother of three. “And now that I’ve really found myself, I’m just accepting of everything that I feel inside and don’t shove everything down.”
Jameson and Lawless met after Jameson became a fan of Lawless’ TikTok videos and started commenting on them.
Lawless, a social media personality and hair stylist, didn’t recognize Jameson at first.
“I was like, ‘Who is this Jenna Can’t Lose?’” she told People. “It’s Jenna f'ing Jameson. Oh my God.”
Jameson was interested in pursuing Lawless, who had a girlfriend when they first connected. Because of that, Lawless said she didn’t act on Jameson’s advances until that relationship ended last year.
The two began dating in January.
“I knew I would get what I wanted,” Jameson said. “She was worth it. But she presented a challenge and I’m very driven when it comes to challenges, so I knew I just had to lie and wait. And she came back around.”
Lawless admitted that after the breakup, she considered having some casual encounters, but said she’s “happy that it went to a more serious level, and I’ve never been so comfortable with anyone.”
The wedding took place May 23 in front of a few people at Little Church of the West in Nevada, which is also where Lawless’ parents exchanged vows. The couple plans a bigger wedding in the future.
Jameson’s dad is dead, so Lawless asked her own father to walk her bride down the aisle.
“I was standing up there waiting for her, and I looked at the back of the church and I saw her standing there and I looked at my dad and I said, ‘Dad.’ And he looked over at me and I said, ‘Go walk Jenna down the aisle right now,’” Lawless said.
Jameson said she plans on taking her wife’s last name, and already refers to herself as “Jessi’s girl” on her Instagram page.
I mean Bud Light advertising to transsexuals probably stung just a little. And of course seeing clothing sold in stores for anyone other than straight people made your snowflake skin crawl, but this one really has to hurt you deeply.
Cracker Barrel faces backlash for posting celebratory Pride Month rocking chair: 'Showing true colors'
Conservative accused Cracker Barrel of going 'woke,' and vowed to stop supporting the restaurant
One of America’s oldest restaurants chains, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, is facing backlash from conservatives for going ‘woke’ after the restaurant posted an image on Instagram of one of its restaurants with a rainbow-painted chair to announce the celebration of Pride Month.
The company known for its antique decor, Southern country-themed menu and affordable prices, took many by surprise following the controversial Instagram post.
"We are excited to celebrate Pride Month with our employees and guests. Everyone is always welcome at our table (and our rainbow rocker). Happy Pride!" the post read.
Following the post, one outraged guest shared their "shock" over the post, Cracker Barrel's Twitter account responded, saying that their team, "takes pride in creating a welcoming, safe atmosphere."
"Thanks for sharing," Cracker Barrel's Twitter account responded. "Our teams take pride in creating a welcoming, safe atmosphere where people can enjoy time with family and friends the moment they walk through our doors."
Others patrons chimed in, expressing their displeasure in the southern restaurant- and sharing that they will no longer eat there.
"Unfollowed and won't ever eat at y'alls or wear any of y'alls mech," one outraged person wrote in the comment section.
"Not you guys too," another wrote with a crying emoji. "Go woke, go broke."
"Businesses need to stay out of this crap. You're ruining your business," another former customer wrote. "You should not have to put this crap up. We already know everyone is welcomed."
Texas Rep. Ronny Jackson also joined in on the protest, tweeting: "BYE BYE CRACKER BARREL! I will NEVER eat there again!!"
The Texas Family Project, a conservative political advocacy nonprofit organization, posted screen grabs of the restaurant's ongoing initiatives on diversity and inclusion.
"We take no pleasure in reporting that @CrackerBarrel has fallen," Texas Family Project wrote in its tweet. "A once family friendly establishment has caved to the mob."
On Cracker Barrel's website, the company highlights their diversity and inclusion initiatives, saying that, "discrimination, overt or through unconscious bias, has no place," at the restaurant.
"We have a responsibility to live up to our mission of Pleasing People each day, ensuring that every member of our team and every guest feels at home, feels cared for like family, and feels like they belong," Cracker Barrel's diversity, equity and inclusion website says. "Our teams work hard to create a culture of hospitality that’s welcoming, respectful and inclusive to everyone who walks through our doors. Our food and décor celebrate warm memories of the past, and our inclusive culture and beliefs help us make way for an even brighter future, together. Discrimination, overt or through unconscious bias, has no place at Cracker Barrel Old Country Store."
Others cheered the restaurant's post, congratulating them for their "wonderful" stance.
"Love that. I’ve always loved Cracker Barrel. Love them even more now," a customer wrote, replying to Cracker Barrel's post. "It’s a small gesture, but you know what? It’s those small gestures of kindness that matter the most."
The Tennessee-based restaurant chain responded, "We want everyone to feel welcome at our table, and that will never change."
"This makes me so happy!!" another wrote.
"I am just so impressed by how my favorite restaurant is making such positive statements!" another wrote. "Thank you for all of your inclusiveness and positivity!"
Cracker Barrel Old Country Store did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
This really gets my goat! My wife and I just had dinner there on Thursday. Had we have known this we would have went elsewhere to eat. They tricked us by not having one of these damned Pride chairs on display outside of our local Cracker Barrel location. Bunch of woke idiots thinking everyone should feel welcome. What a communist load of BS! Murica!
Garth Brooks Explains Why He's Refusing to Ban Bud Light From His Bar
Garth Brooks has explained why he won't be banning Bud Light from his new bar, as the beleaguered beer brand faces continued backlash and boycott calls.
In recent months, the number of large U.S. brands being targeted with boycott calls has grown dramatically, as a host of different companies unveil products supporting Pride Month, which takes place every June. Companies supporting the LGBTQ+ community outside of Pride Month have also faced backlash from conservatives.
Bud Light was initially targeted in April for a small branded partnership it had with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. In a video posted to Instagram on April 1, Mulvaney said that the beer brand had sent her a can with her face on it to commemorate 365 days of her living as a woman.
Mulvaney's partnership with Bud Light drew condemnation from several conservative figures, including Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw. Many issued calls for a boycott of the beer brand and there has been overt scrutiny of an increasing number of companies over their pro-LGBTQ+ marketing initiatives.
However, while his fellow country stars Travis Tritt and John Rich are among those who have publicly declared their aversion to Bud Light following its collaboration with Mulvaney, Brooks has stated that he does not plan to discriminate.
Speaking with Billboard executive editor Melinda Newman at Billboard Country Live in Nashville on Wednesday, Brooks touched upon his Friends In Low Places Bar & Honky Tonk, which will open imminently in the city's popular South Broadway District.
"I know this sounds corny, I want it to be the Chick-fil-A of honky-tonks," he told Newman. "I want it to be a place you feel safe in, I want it to be a place where you feel like there are manners and people like one another."
Alluding to the Bud Light backlash, the musician added: "And yes, we're going to serve every brand of beer. We just are. It's not our decision to make. Our thing is this, if you [are let] into this house, love one another. If you're an a**hole, there are plenty of other places on lower Broadway."
It was announced last year that Brooks planned to open the entertainment space, which will be housed within a three-story, more than 40,000 square foot property, that the star purchased in December 2021.
"We feel very lucky to have the chance to be part of Lower Broad, which is arguably THE hottest spot in the country," Brooks said in a statement at the time. "The goal is a classic honky-tonk that welcomes all and encourages love and kindness while playing the greatest music in the world in the home of country music!"
Amid the fallout and reports of plummeting sales, some Bud Light executives took a leave of absence, including marketing head Alissa Heinerscheid and Daniel Blake, who oversees marketing for Anheuser-Busch's mainstream brands.
The furor over Bud Light's association with Mulvaney reflects anti-transgender sentiment that has been growing in the U.S., with bills targeting the rights of transgender people having been embraced by Republican governors and statehouses across the country.
In recent weeks, a number of social media users have also shared photos and videos of unsold Bud Light on store shelves and at venues, in a bid to illustrate the purported success of their boycott of the beer brand.
Brooks went against the grain in January 2021, when he performed at the inauguration of President Joe Biden—a move that angered a number of country music fans.
"The message they're pushing is unity, and that's right down my alley, man," Brooks said at the time. "If we're gonna get anywhere, we're gonna get there together."
Brooks also teased in the leadup that he would likely be "the only Republican at the ceremony."
Throughout his career, Brooks has performed for every U.S. president since Jimmy Carter, with the exceptions of Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. He was invited to sing at Trump's inauguration in 2016, but declined because of scheduling conflicts.
arguing with conservatives on twitch and Youtube confirmed that these dudes still have no idea what 'woke' even is
Well, that's what happens when you appropriate another culture's vernacular and try to weaponize it for your own purposes. Something always gets lost in translation, and the appropriators always come off sounding dumb and awkward.
You and I know what woke means. GOPoliticians and their parrots-not so much. I can't help laughing every time I hear DeSantis use the word. It hangs off him like an ill-fitting suit.
from what I can tell it was the manner in which these companies are going about things. For the most part, 80% of Republican support gay marriage, marijuana being legal, and are ok with many abortion rights.
Now, I think the Republicans have issues with what is being promoted and taught in schools around LGBT+ etc
So since they don't like what's being taught in schools, they think the answer is to attack corporations like Bud Light and Target? Can you tell me how that makes any sense? And what exactly is "being taught in schools" that they don't like?
CHICAGO (AP) — When it comes to baseball and LGBTQ+ inclusivity, Billy Bean often flashes back to his playing days.
Ending his career without telling his parents about his life as a closeted gay ballplayer. Shielding his secret from teammates like Brad Ausmus and Torey Lovullo. The regret of not sharing his “full self,” he says.
It’s a message Bean has delivered in clubhouses, and it resonates with today’s ballplayers — hyper-focused on staying in the majors, and being a good teammate. It’s also the lens through which Bean views baseball’s ongoing LGBTQ+ issues.
“There’s some parts of my job where I feel like some days I just, you know, I’m floating,” said Bean, a senior vice president for diversity, equity and inclusion with Major League Baseball. “Then there’s other days when I see some pushback, I’m reminded that we have 8,000 human beings connected to the sport as an athlete in one way or another, and you’re not going to always have 100% of those people agree on the same thing.”
That friction has been on display in recent seasons as MLB teams court the LGBTQ+ community during Pride Month, simultaneously showing how much has changed and how much remains the same within the National Pastime — a sport with a strong connection to segments of the U.S. and Latin America where many view homosexuality as a sin.
Almost 80 years after Jackie Robinson broke the majors’ color barrier in a landmark moment for the American Civil Rights Movement, the dueling expressions of LGBTQ+ support and pop-up opposition recalled the question of when MLB might welcome its first active openly gay player — a barrier already cleared by the NBA and NFL.
“If somebody in here called a meeting and came out as gay, I think everybody would embrace that, have their back and literally just move on and focus on winning the games, which is really the important thing and what matters,” Milwaukee Brewers outfielder Christian Yelich said. “It doesn’t matter what somebody’s sexuality is.”
While Seattle slugger Julio Rodríguez, Chicago Cubs pitcher Marcus Stroman and Toronto pitcher Kevin Gausman are among a group of players who have publicly celebrated Pride Month, the Los Angeles Dodgers have faced criticism for including the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence in the team’s upcoming 10th annual Pride Night on Friday.
Dodgers ace Clayton Kershaw disagreed with the decision but said his objection was based on the Sisters’ satirical portrayal of religious figures and had nothing to do with LGBTQ+ support. Washington pitcher Trevor Williams said he was deeply troubled by the team’s move, decrying what he felt was the group’s mockery of his Catholic religion.
The objection to the Sisters, a group of mainly men who dress as nuns, comes a year after some Tampa Bay players cited their Christian faith in refusing to wear Pride jerseys. A couple hockey players also opted out of wearing rainbow-colored jerseys on Pride nights during the most recent NHL season.
Last month, veteran reliever Anthony Bass expressed support on social media for anti-LGBTQ+ boycotts of Target and Bud Light, and then apologized for sharing the post on his Instagram stories.
Asked if MLB’s inclusivity efforts with the LGBTQ+ community had stalled, Bass referenced baseball’s “many different beliefs” and ”many different walks of life.”
“I wouldn’t say it’s causing a barrier,” Bass said before he was cut by the Blue Jays last week. “Everyone should be able to express their feelings and views, so I think that’s what we’re seeing and I don’t think it’s causing a barrier to the acceptance of the Pride community.”
Bass was booed loudly by Toronto fans after his social media post, and others seem wary of how far their favorite teams are willing to go in terms of LGBTQ+ support. Texas is the only big league team that isn’t holding a Pride Night this month.
For Mason Dunn, who grew up in a diehard Dodgers family in Southern California, it has been an emotional couple of weeks. Dunn wrote an anguished post on Facebook after the Dodgers rescinded their invitation to the Sisters, and then expressed relief when the team changed its mind.
“I really truly hope the Dodgers are using this experience to learn more about allyship,” said Dunn, who identifies as nonbinary and works for the Massachusetts LGBTQ Chamber of Commerce. “It isn’t just about rainbow logos. It’s about showing up when things are difficult and scary.”
Asked about not holding a Pride Night, the Rangers said they are committed to making everyone feel welcome and included.
“That means in our ballpark, at every game, and in all we do — for both our fans and our employees,” the team said in a statement.
For Pittsburgh Pirates general manager Ben Cherington, access to the best possible employees — on the field, in the front office, everywhere in the organization — is a major reason why LGBTQ+ inclusivity is important.
“It is our belief that to win at the level we want to win at, at the major league level, means that we simply can’t discriminate,” Cherington said. “If you’re around really good teams, World Series teams, teams in other sports that achieve at the highest possible level, you will see that the only way to build a team like that is to have zero bias as it relates to where people are coming from, what they look like, what their beliefs are, how they choose to spend their time away from the field.”
Dale Scott became the first out major league umpire in 2014, and there have been a handful of out players in the minor leagues. Anderson Comás, a minor league pitcher in the White Sox organization, announced that he was gay in an Instagram post in February. Phillies pitcher Taijuan Walker, Mets outfielder Mark Canha and Royals first baseman Vinnie Pasquantino responded with supportive messages on Twitter.
Speaking to reporters on June 2, the 23-year-old Comás cited the help he received from the organization as a key element of his decision to come out. He declined an interview request made this week by the AP.
Bean came out after his playing career. Glenn Burke’s sexual orientation was known within baseball, but the former big league outfielder did not come out publicly until 1982.
Burke, who died in 1995 at age 42, felt he was blackballed by the sport. “A gay man in baseball? Uh, uh. No way,″ he told the AP.
Bean, 59, said he doesn’t think the absence of an openly gay player is the right way to evaluate inclusivity in the major leagues, just like he doesn’t think the sport should be evaluated by a comment that might not be supportive.
When it comes to the timing for the majors’ first active openly gay competitor, Bean said he understands why a player would want to focus on his career instead of dealing with the challenges that go along with breaking that barrier.
“It’s really hard to play in the big leagues and you don’t get into the big leagues in 2023 unless you are front and center a baseball player first,” Bean told the AP. “And that is how an athlete would be defined.”
“Baseball is a really hard game,” he continued. “And I think that it’s more about a business decision than a cultural one at the moment. And I have respect for their personal choice there.”
The objection to “The Sisters” has nothing to do with pride. They are a vulgar, anti-Catholic hate group that uses religious symbols in their act. I stand with those who are against them getting any recognition from MLB. The Dodgers went too far and most Christians know it. If this was a group going after any other religion they would be deservedly shamed.
So your take away is that the Dodgers hate Catholics? I just find it odd how one side who hates the other side is considered a hate group while religious groups who hate others and try to inflict their morals on our society aren't considered hate groups.
The Catholic religion doesn’t hate anyone. They simply view homosexuality as a sin. You really should watch some of the sisters act. Then come here and tell us that we are wrong (those that believe such as me) for feeling as we do.
No, I don’t think the Dodgers hate anyone. I think they didn’t do their homework on this group to begin with.
I'm not claiming whether or not The Sisters hate anyone or not. But I do find it odd that you are defending a religion who moved their officials from location to location to to hide their sexual crimes against children. Now you can certainly claim that isn't hate but it certainly is not a religion that deserves defending, that's for sure.
The Catholic religion doesn’t hate anyone. They simply view homosexuality as a sin. You really should watch some of the sisters act. Then come here and tell us that we are wrong (those that believe such as me) for feeling as we do.
No, I don’t think the Dodgers hate anyone. I think they didn’t do their homework on this group to begin with.
What would Jesus say about hating any of his children?
The Catholic religion doesn’t hate anyone. They simply view homosexuality as a sin. You really should watch some of the sisters act. Then come here and tell us that we are wrong (those that believe such as me) for feeling as we do.
No, I don’t think the Dodgers hate anyone. I think they didn’t do their homework on this group to begin with.
What would Jesus say about hating any of his children?
When someone is a politician without any valuable ability to contribute in a positive way, you gotta find something you can corrupt into a cause.. Like taking "woke" and turning it from something positive to something they can Rail against. They need a target to attack because they don't have an original idea to present that will help Americans.
I'm not claiming whether or not The Sisters hate anyone or not. But I do find it odd that you are defending a religion who moved their officials from location to location to to hide their sexual crimes against children. Now you can certainly claim that isn't hate but it certainly is not a religion that deserves defending, that's for sure.
You're equating a religion to a portion of the people practicing said religion (an influential portion, but a portion of the population nonetheless). This is just as wrong as when people say Muslims are terrorists.
I think one must be realistic here. First I never claimed members of the Catholic religion did anything wrong which would be an actual comparison to the analogy you are attempting to draw here. Secondly, I don't know about you, but if I had a young son I certainly would not permit him to be an alter boy if I were Catholic. Would you?
It has been proven this was a systemic problem in several areas of the catholic church. There's a difference between using a broad brush and stating the facts as we've watched them unflod.
The Catholic religion doesn’t hate anyone. They simply view homosexuality as a sin. You really should watch some of the sisters act. Then come here and tell us that we are wrong (those that believe such as me) for feeling as we do.
No, I don’t think the Dodgers hate anyone. I think they didn’t do their homework on this group to begin with.
What would Jesus say about hating any of his children?
In the “Barbie” world, facts may be inconsequential, but that isn’t the case in real life. The upcoming film has received criticism from U.S. lawmakers and countries for including a hand-drawn map of the world containing a disputed border line.
The map features a dotted line, similar to the “nine-dash line” that China used to draw a border in the South China Sea after World War II.
According to The Los Angeles Times, the Chinese government claims everything within the U-shaped border is theirs because of “historical rights.” Other countries in the region say they also have a claim over the area.
As a result, Vietnam banned the film while the Philippines is contemplating the same.
“We do not grant license for the American movie ‘Barbie’ to release in Vietnam because it contains the offending image of the nine-dash line,” said Vi Kien Thanh, head of the Department of Cinema, a government body in charge of licensing and censoring foreign films, as reported by a state-run newspaper.
In response to the ban, some GOP lawmakers spoke out about curbing China’s influence on Hollywood.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas tweeted: “I guess Barbie is made in China….”
A spokesperson for Cruz told The Daily Mail that the senator “has been fighting for years to prevent American companies, especially Hollywood studios, from altering and censoring their content to appease the Chinese Communist Party.”
Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., chairman of the select committee on the Chinese Communist Party, also took a jab at the movie’s choice to showcase a dashed line.
“While it may just be a Barbie map in a Barbie world, the fact that a cartoonish map seems to go out of its way to depict unlawful territorial claims illustrates the pressure that Hollywood is under to please CCP censors,” he said.
Meanwhile, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said on Twitter that Hollywood is “more concerned with selling films in Communist China.”
“The ‘Barbie’ movie’s depiction of a map endorsing Beijing’s claims to the South China Sea is legally & morally wrong and must be taken seriously.”
A spokesperson for Warner Bros. told Variety that the dashed line isn’t “intended to make any type of statement.”
“The map in Barbie Land is a child-like crayon drawing,” the spokesperson said. “The doodles depict Barbie’s make-believe journey from Barbie Land to the ‘real world.’ It was not intended to make any type of statement.”
The map appeared in the movie when Barbie, played by Margot Robbie, faces an existential crisis — stay in the Barbie world or go to the real world, as seen in the trailer. All the continents on the map are wobbly drawn.
This isn’t the first time a film has faced censorship over the nine-dashed line. The 2022 film “Uncharted,” starring Tom Holland, was also banned in Vietnam, and the Philippines followed suit.
Filipino Sen. Francis Tolentino told CNN Philippines that the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board of the Philippines will ban “Barbie” if the “invalidated nine-dash line was indeed depicted in the movie.”
Right-wing preacher calls for "curse" on upcoming Barbie movie
American right-wing preacher Kent Christmas is advocating for a “holy judgement” on the new Barbie movie that is, in his words, “full of transsexual, and transgender, and homosexuality.” Yep. I have no idea what that’s supposed to mean either.
While the movie has yet to be released, the Tennessee-based pastor seems to believe it’s already out, calling on God to “curse” it for being queer. If he has some kind of future vision of what the film’s storyline is, I want to see it.
The comments were made in one of Christmas’ recent sermons which he delivered at Regeration Nashville, a church he founded with his wife. Videos of his rant were shared on social media, soon gaining attention for their absurdity.
To date, the plot of Greta Gerwig’s Barbie has been a pretty closely guarded secret, and there’s no definitive proof that the film has any LGBTQ+ references besides the fact that some of the main actors are openly queer. That’s it.
Now, Christmas could yet be right about the film’s homosexuality, but not in the way he might think.
Fans have been speculating that the movie will portray Margot Robbie’s Barbie as a lesbian, citing her interactions with Ken in the trailer clips as their main piece of evidence for the theory.
In a scene from one of the teasers, Ken asks Barbie if he can stay the night at her place because they’re boyfriend and girlfriend, except neither of them actually know what they’re supposed to do as a couple spending time together. The scene’s awkwardness is the source of its humour, but many fans say that this clip makes it pretty obvious that Barbie doesn’t want anything to do with Ken, at least romantically.
This stands in stark contrast, many fans say, to a more recent trailer clip where Robbie’s Barbie gazes longingly into the eyes of Gloria, a Mattel employee played by America Ferrera, who finds Barbie after she enters the real world. The clip is just a few seconds long, but fans can feel the tension, and so can I.
Ultimately, we’ll have to wait until the film releases in cinemas on July 21 to see if the preacher really “cursed” the Barbie movie with queer joy, and I’ll be the first in line to find out.
And now it's the new Barbie movie they're throwing a tantrum over........
Ben Shapiro, 39, Films Himself Setting Fire to Barbie Dolls Because He Is Manly and MAD
In order to prove how much he loathes “Barbie,” the right-wing troll pieced through his “pages and pages” of notes on the movie, which he apparently watched while dressed as Ken.
Ben Shapiro has a new obsession: Greta Gerwig’s summer blockbuster Barbie.
In a wild 43-minute-long tirade posted on YouTube, the 39-year-old conservative political commentator appeared to try and spark mass protests against the PG-13-rated film. Shapiro begins by burning Barbie dolls, then launches into a rant where he shames a trans woman cast as a Barbie, and walks through his other criticisms in the “pages and pages of notes” he took about the film while watching it.
Shapiro saw Barbie on Wednesday. Though he hasn’t officially made the connections, social media users pointed out that he wore the same outfit Ken (Ryan Gosling) wears in the movie.
“If you look in the audience, it’s mostly moms,” Shapiro recalls of his viewing experience. “Young-ish moms, middle-aged moms with their 6-, 7-, 8-year-old girls. That’s the entire crew.” (And let’s not forget Shapiro himself, who was obviously in the audience.)
In the caption for the video, Shapiro whined that Barbie was “one of the most woke movies I have ever seen.” He goes on to explain in the video that he was upset by Ken’s portrayal. Shapiro argues that Ken has become “annoying and ridiculous,” which contradicts the original Barbie dolls.
Then, Shapiro takes interest in Hari Nef’s Barbie. Nef is a trans woman and plays a bubbly Doctor Barbie in the film.
“One of the Barbies is a trans Barbie,” Shapiro says. “And this is true! Totally normal, as if this is a female Barbie—with a voice deeper than my own.”
He also claimed the film was “explicitly designed to divide men from women,” describing it as “angry feminist claptrap that alienates men from women.”
Social media users have flocked to tease Shapiro for his fixation on destroying the Barbie movie. “Ben Shapiro is a 40-year-old man who’s so upset over a kids’ movie about Barbie dolls that he made a 43-minute review,” one Twitter user shared. “It’s… pathetic.”
In the time it would take a viewer to finish this video, they would already have sat through almost half of Barbie.
Ted Cruz keeps attacking the Barbie movie as ‘Chinese communist propaganda’ even though he hasn’t seen it
Ted Cruz once again accused the upcoming Barbie movie of pushing “Chinese communist propaganda” - even though he hasn’t seen it.
For weeks, the Texas senator has zeroed in on a scene from a trailer showing a world map of a contested area in the South China Sea.
Sen Cruz said in an interview with The Daily Signal: “There’s a scene in ‘Barbie,’ where there is this map of the world, and it’s drawn like with crayon. I mean, it’s really a very simple cartoon. And so they have this blockish thing that is called ‘Asia.’ And then they’ve drawn what are called the nine-dashes.”
He was referring to the “nine-dash line” used on Chinese maps, showing what it claims is its territory within the South China Sea.
“This is Chinese communist propaganda in which the Chinese are asserting sovereignty over the entirety of the South China Sea,” the Texas Republican continued. “And they don’t have any right to it under international law, but they are trying to take it away from their neighbors there.”
This isn’t the first time Mr Cruz has made these accusations about the highly anticipated movie. Earlier this month he accused the film of “pushing Chinese propaganda” when the trailer was released.
His spokesperson told The Daily Mail at the time: “Senator Cruz has been fighting for years to prevent American companies, especially Hollywood studios, from altering and censoring their content to appease the Chinese Communist Party.”
Sen Cruz also isn’t the only one upset about the movie—even before it has debuted in theaters. Vietnam also said it would ban the movie from being released in the country due to the controversial map.
The wife of Florida Republican Rep Matt Gaetz also voiced her qualms about the film. “Thinking about watching the Barbie movie? I’d recommend sticking to getting outfit inspiration and skipping the theater,” Ginger Gaetz tweeted, alongside photos of herself and her husband dressed in pink outfits.
She continued, “Here’s why: The Barbie I grew up with was a representation of limitless possibilities, embracing diverse careers and feminine empowerment. The 2023 Barbie movie, unfortunately, neglects to address any notion of faith or family, and tries to normalize the idea that men and women can’t collaborate positively (yuck).”
Ben Shapiro, a 39 year old man, went out to the store and bought Barbie dolls just to burn them on YouTube and complain how woke Barbie is.
I mean…..at this point it’s just easier to chalk conservatives up to being insane. Seems to be a less stressful solution than actually engaging in dialogue with people who think/do things like this.
Between this and shooting at cases of Bud lite, it’s clear that while conservatives aren’t ok with violence in the neighborhoods, they are most certainly are ok - and actively encourage- violence based on politics and social issues.
I mean, burning Barbie’s and shooting at Bud lite is the very snowflake behavior that they claimed to dislike. Why would I vote side by side with those psychopaths?
And still the third best selling light beer on the list. The anti woke crowd has cost hundreds of Americans their jobs. Something I'm sure they're all proud of.
So what you're saying is that consumers are required to continue buying a product if they have done so in the past, otherwise the lost jobs are on their hands. So this is all the consumers' fault and the corp bears no blame? The same corp that disparaged those that pay the bills by saying they wanted to get away from the "frat boy" image and snubbed their nose? Literally saying "onward and upward"?
Here's a possibility... Some consumers were offended, others became immediately embarrassed, many of them tried other beers and realized BL tastes like pig piss?
Too far-fetched?
Of course it is... it doesn't fit the victim mentality.
The problem with what you said is they didn't "disparage" anyone. They simply decided to expand their advertising to other people as well. I mean you do understand they are people too, right? No the "victim" claim you're making is what those who decided to boycott Bud Light claimed to be because it hurt their sensibilities. You know, that snowflake thing so many claimed was only a problem with Democrats. They were so offended that Bud Light decided to expand the customer base they were marketing to that these people threw a tantrum.
They never would have "tried those other beers" as you say if they hadn't been so hateful against the trans community and the fact that Bud Light was doing nothing more than trying to expand their consumer base by advertising to a wider demographic. They were still advertising to the redneck crowd all along and that never changed. Then a bunch of Karens acted like asses because they didn't cater to them exclusively. And the sad part of it is you're smart enough to know that.
It's about time you got it. Who but a bunch of rednecks would react this way when a company who caters to them also starts to include other people they obviously hate?
Quote
"I want y’all to drink this f---ing beer. I want y’all to drink this f---ing beer," he said in a video that emerged on TikTok. "I got three cases of Bud Light. Hey, and I want to say this.… If you’re gay, bless you. If you’re transgender, bless you. If you have a problem with that, f--- you!"
"I’m gonna buy some drinks for y’all. And I’m gonna buy Bud Light. And I’m gonna tell y’all something: All you rednecks or a--holes who don’t want to drink Bud Light, f--- y’all. Hey, y’all can’t cancel me," Barkley said..... Charles Barkley
We know who the real cancel culture people are. Just look at Florida.
I find it highly unlikely that enough people to move the needle spontaneously and simultaneously woke up one day and realized Bud light tastes like crap... and then that spontaneous mass realization happening at the same time as BL kicking off a marketing campaign with a person who's trans being a coincidence.
Yeah... I'll just stick with highly unlikely and leave it there. The narrative is accurate... so it's not hard to draw a line between these layoffs and the socio-political temper tantrum going on.
No Ooobs, there is no simultaneous Vulcan mind-meld going on. There is a bouncing ball to follow. A series of events. And it started way before the ad by Dylan. That's actually the real pulse of what's going on here. Many people are: tired of seeing it, tired of hearing it, tired of being told how they should feel, act and respond.
Anything that has anything to do with "trans" should be embraced with open arms. Open bathrooms, naked men in girls' locker rooms, women's sports being destroyed, the whole nine yards. If you say anything that doesn't toe the line, you're labeled a hater, transphobic, told you are the problem, and called out in public. Hell, even if you say nothing you are chastised. How many celebrities were "under attack" (phrase of the new millennium) for NOT posting their pronouns? People who couldn't give a crap less told they are the problem because they don't toe the line.
And yet, we have millions talking every day about the mere image of Christianity, in any form, equating to "religion being shoved down their throat". What exactly is being shoved down their throat? They saw a billboard? A JW knocked on their door in 2003? Hypocrisy much? "Trans" doesn't go four hours without a face in the media -- every form. People don't have a right to be fed-up with seeing and hearing it? Having it "shoved down their throats"?
So then, a marketing exec from a beer company tells you you're "out of touch" if you don't embrace a new ideology. Say's they're tired of their "frat boy image". Snubs a nose at their customer base and says "onward and upward". (These are all actual quotes, btw.)
Ball bounces again -- some people (idiots, rednecks, transphobes, etc) bounce it forward with a ruthless fervor. Now you have to see and hear about it 75 times a day because it's the politically divisive soup-du-jour that dominate every headline. Now many join the boycott purely because they're tired of endlessly being told how they should feel -- especially about a "movement" that is turning the world inside-out in some very real ways (bathrooms, sports, locker rooms, parental "rights", etc). At that point there are plenty of people that are embarrassed to order a Bud Light in a bar or wheel around a 12-pack in their cart... the ball is now bouncing down a hill.
The reality is there are about 45 million beer brands to choose from... and most of them actually taste better than Bud Light. I'm sure there are millions of people that simply changed a habit and haven't gone back. If that weren't true, sales would have rebounded weeks ago as the average American has the attention span of a flea. Meanwhile, Pitt calls the people that aren't buying the pig-swill rednecks and transphobes and blames them for people losing jobs... as if they should be eternally obligated to buy a product from a category in which they have endless choices.
Ironically enough, Bud Light is now being cancelled by the very group it was "defending"... accused of deserting its commitment to the LGBTQ+ community.
Trying to boil this down and coming up with this sequence of events:
-Company makes a business decision to market their product a certain way -A segment of their customer based had an adverse reaction to their marketing campaign -A different segment of consumers had an adverse reaction to the company's response (or lack thereof) when the company decided to backtrack on their marketing initiative -The company resizes their workforce (supposedly due to declining sales resulting from the fallout of the marketing campaign as heavily alluded to by the media)
At which point should the company be considered accountable for decision(s)? Do consumers have an obligation to support the company?
It's about time you got it. Who but a bunch of rednecks would react this way when a company who caters to them also starts to include other people they obviously hate?
Quote
"I want y’all to drink this f---ing beer. I want y’all to drink this f---ing beer," he said in a video that emerged on TikTok. "I got three cases of Bud Light. Hey, and I want to say this.… If you’re gay, bless you. If you’re transgender, bless you. If you have a problem with that, f--- you!"
"I’m gonna buy some drinks for y’all. And I’m gonna buy Bud Light. And I’m gonna tell y’all something: All you rednecks or a--holes who don’t want to drink Bud Light, f--- y’all. Hey, y’all can’t cancel me," Barkley said..... Charles Barkley
We know who the real cancel culture people are. Just look at Florida.
By itself, I'd be much more inclined to agree with most of your post. I do think folks are buying into fake outrage regarding "naked men in girls lockerrooms" and the like.
But this whole Bud Light thing is just another front in an ongoing culture war that's mostly perpetrated by a political group that doesn't bring much else to the table besides fake outrage.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not shedding a single tear for Bud Light. They make a terrible product and have for a long time. I never understood their sales numbers to begin with. On top of that, I'm all for the free market telling them (with their wallets) that their product is terrible. Unfortunately, that's not what happened here. A handful of right-wing folks got on social media and shot up cases of (paid for) bud light.
This is what happens when stupid people get triggered over stupid things. They cost hundreds of Americans their jobs. Murica!
Actually this part of America I agree with... stupid company tries to get too political... their base of consumers don't like it and choose another company..... sorry that people lost their jobs...hopefully they can get hired by the other beer companies that are picking up Bud's consumers...
Liberals: Hate capitalism, complain about corporate profits.
You've made a common mistake. Liberals hate unbridled capitalism which contains no checks and balances. Going back to the way it was in the 1920's isn't a positive thing.
Quote
Also liberals: How dare you stop buying a product and making a company lose money!
It's not "how dare you", it's at least man up and take accountability for the results of your actions. A temper tantrum by the right, you know, being snowflakes and using cancel culture to cause hundreds of every day working people to lost their jobs is exactly what happened here.
Quote
It's funny watching liberals flip flop.
Do you mean the way Republicans did on being snowflakes and using cancel culture? Yes, that is pretty funny.
This is what happens when stupid people get triggered over stupid things. They cost hundreds of Americans their jobs. Murica!
Actually this part of America I agree with... stupid company tries to get too political... their base of consumers don't like it and choose another company..... sorry that people lost their jobs...hopefully they can get hired by the other beer companies that are picking up Bud's consumers...
Just curious, who is it that claims trans people are political again? If you even thought about it for one moment, you would realize that those using politics by using some faux war against "woke" is who is making it political. They somehow find it offensive to advertise to anyone their politics feels is wrong or that they are sinners in their eyes. Republicans have created a war against anyone one or anything that markets to people who are trans. That's the only people that made it political
The saddest part of it is how many people support that idea. Creating a political war against a group of people because of their sexuality. It's like we just wound the clock back decades in terms of people being treated equally and some support it. That's rather disgusting if one stops to think about it.
Ben Shapiro, a 39 year old man, went out to the store and bought Barbie dolls just to burn them on YouTube and complain how woke Barbie is.
I mean…..at this point it’s just easier to chalk conservatives up to being insane. Seems to be a less stressful solution than actually engaging in dialogue with people who think/do things like this.
Between this and shooting at cases of Bud lite, it’s clear that while conservatives aren’t ok with violence in the neighborhoods, they are most certainly are ok - and actively encourage- violence based on politics and social issues.
I mean, burning Barbie’s and shooting at Bud lite is the very snowflake behavior that they claimed to dislike. Why would I vote side by side with those psychopaths?
He didn’t go out to the store, he went through his childhood play things.
Ben Shapiro, a 39 year old man, went out to the store and bought Barbie dolls just to burn them on YouTube and complain how woke Barbie is.
I mean…..at this point it’s just easier to chalk conservatives up to being insane. Seems to be a less stressful solution than actually engaging in dialogue with people who think/do things like this.
Between this and shooting at cases of Bud lite, it’s clear that while conservatives aren’t ok with violence in the neighborhoods, they are most certainly are ok - and actively encourage- violence based on politics and social issues.
I mean, burning Barbie’s and shooting at Bud lite is the very snowflake behavior that they claimed to dislike. Why would I vote side by side with those psychopaths?
He didn’t go out to the store, he went through his childhood play things.
Actually it's some fantasy you have either been convinced to believe or convinced yourself to believe rather than reality. And this sudden shift to cancel culture and the snowflake mentality that's now common among republicans goes against everything that they not so long ago railed against. And that's something impossible for you to wiggle out of.
Actually it's some fantasy you have either been convinced to believe or convinced yourself to believe rather than reality. And this sudden shift to cancel culture and the snowflake mentality that's now common among republicans goes against everything that they not so long ago railed against. And that's something impossible for you to wiggle out of.
LOl...I expected as much. Don't face the question and turn it around on me.
I'm glad you think you represent "the board". It's not my fault that your mind has eroded to the point you think everyone who thinks differently than yourself is a communist. I think most board posters understand that too. I did address it. You and some others have these preconceived notions in your mind that aren't true. I thought that was easy enough to understand.
All you righties just hate it when people show you the error of your ways. And rather than to have the courage to take on their message you attack the messenger. A truly trumpian strategy. No wonder Hillary said you guys were deplorable.
All you righties just hate it when people show you the error of your ways. And rather than to have the courage to take on their message you attack the messenger. A truly trumpian strategy. No wonder Hillary said you guys were deplorable.
" No wonder Hillary said you guys were deplorable." Uh...twisty twisty spinny spinny pit at it again.
And here you are trying to make people believe your nonsense. I do think it's understandable why someone would come to the conclusion that people such as yourself are deplorable.
Originally Posted by archbolddawg
" No wonder Hillary said you guys were deplorable." Uh...twisty twisty spinny spinny pit at it again.
At one point in time I thought English was your primary language. But from your quote above I may need to rethink that position. You sound like you're still in first grade.
My education, in school, and in life, if far, far better than yours. Period. Find a hobby. I don't think anyone likes seeing your name pop up constantly.
Then don't read it. I don't care what you or anyone else "likes seeing". That's a you problem. And if you're so educated, nobody could tell by what you posted above. I mean I understand when some people get to a certain age they can revert back into a second childhood. But aren't you a little young for that?
Leave it to Boebert to celebrate the loss of 350 American Jobs.. Not to mention how many jobs out in the distribution network that it may cost. Let's not forget that Coors is distributed by many of the same companies... This woman is about as dumb as humanly possible. What an idiot. Aren't our elected officials supposed to help create jobs. Seems like the only one doing that is Biden and this moron (and the arse in Georgia) wants to impeach him.
7 out of the top 10 fav US beers are imported. Says a lot. Maybe Bud is dying a natural death and has little to do with any boycotting.
Actually, a good point.
Sometimes it might take a little nudge, no matter the force.
People are going to buy what they want to buy. It can be as simple as changing the wrapper color. 'The stuff I like comes in a yellow wrapper, not a green wrapper".
In this case there was some backlash, but now that the business is lost, it's probably not coming back. At least any time soon. The "new" norm becomes the norm.
I went to the store to get some bread. The brand I was buying wasn't on the shelf, so I bought another brand. I liked it and have been buying it ever sense, all because the local breadtruck didn't get to the store early enough to stock the shelf
Nothing political about that. I went to the store to get some bread. Mine wasn't available. My choice was to go home without bread or pick up another brand. I bought the other, liked it and have never gone back, all because breadman slept in that morning.
Oh, so now you're jumping on a typo? I'll remember that.
In case you missed it, which yet once again you obviously did, a typo is a mistake you make while typing. That's not what this is. This was on purpose and sounds like a petulant child.
A Drag Queen Topped the iTunes Christian Music Chart
A drag queen currently has an album at the top of iTunes’ Christian chart, and her witty clapback to a homophobic pastor rocketed her there.
In June, drag performer Flamy Grant appeared in the music video for Christian musician Derek Webb’s song “Boys Will Be Girls,” an ode to queer Christians who have been shut out of their churches. Over the course of the video, Grant gives Webb a drag makeover, complete with a stunning blue wig.
The duo sing the final lines together inside a church worship space: “I heard Jesus loved and spent his life with those who / were abandoned by proud and fearful men / So if a church won’t celebrate and love you / they’re believing lies that can’t save you or them / ’cause you’re so beautiful by any name.”
Unfortunately, some Christians didn’t take the song’s message to heart, namely fellow Christian singer and “MAGA preacher” Sean Feucht, who recently took to Twitter to criticize Webb for being a “deconstructionist,” a term some evangelicals use to refer to Christians who reconsider their faith and give up traditional beliefs they now see as immoral, sometimes even leaving the church entirely.
“If you’re wondering the end goal of the deconstruction movement in the church, then look no further than former worship leader @derekwebb’s new collab with a drag queen,” Feucht tweeted alongside a photo of Webb and Grant together. “These are truly the last days.”
Ironically, Webb has never served as a worship leader, a role Grant served in for 22 years.
Grant soon replied to Feucht’s tweet, writing: “End goal? Baby we’re just getting started. 😘”
“Well good for us hardly anyone listens or cares what you do,” Feucht wrote back. “Bad for you is that one day you’ll sit before Jesus and give an account for the perversion you tried to force on kids.”
Rather than silencing her, Feucht’s tweets inspired Grant to aim for a new milestone: Getting her song “Good Day” to No. 1.
“Sean Feucht thinks hardly anyone is interested in a drag queen,” Grant wrote on social media. “Good Day deserves a spot on the #christianmusic charts, dontcha think?”
Fans made her goal come true and then some. “Good Day” briefly hit the top spot on the Christian iTunes chart on July 27. At the time of this writing, the song sits at No. 12. Meanwhile, Grant’s album Bible Belt Baby currently sits at the very top of the iTunes Christian album chart. Turns out people are more than happy to hear a drag queen’s music, thank you very much!
In an Instagram post celebrating the news, Grant gave a shout out to everyone who helped her achieve her goal: “A community of people who wholeheartedly and full-throatedly reject the notion that Christian faith has to look like the fearful, petty, weak evangelicalism that demonizes so many people and dominates too much of life in the US.”
If they would just stop lying and come out, I’d bet a fair percentage of the Trumpian MAGA crowd are secret drag queens and self hating lgbtq people. And ChRiStIaN Churches are full of them too. So sad living a lie, no matter the lie.
Stephen Miller’s legal group sues Target over LGBTQ Pride collection backlash
A conservative legal nonprofit led by Stephen Miller is suing Target on behalf of one of the company’s investors, saying it should have anticipated public backlash to its LGBTQ Pride displays in June.
America First Legal — founded by Miller, a former senior adviser to former President Trump — claims the company misrepresented the adequacy of its risk monitoring after its Pride month campaign led to employee harassment, bomb threats and a conservative online hate campaign.
The company’s stock dropped by nearly 20 percent after the backlash began in May.
The investor leading the suit, Brian Craig, owns about $28,000 worth of company stock which he purchased in April 2022. He claims to have lost close to half of his total investment.
The suit attacks the company’s Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies, both of which have become ripe political targets for conservatives.
Craig argues those policies allowed the company to “serve its divisive political and social goals — and ultimately lose billions,” the suit reads.
“Defendants knew their ESG and DEI mandates were a double-edged sword that risked backlash,” the suit says.
Target ran its first Pride month collection in 2011 and is one of the major retail industry’s more vocal supporters of the LGBTQ community. The collections, which have grown over time, sparked only minor criticism before this year.
Conservatives organized boycotts of Target, vandalized stores, and eventually forced some Target stores to take Pride month merchandise off shelves. That decision was criticized by those who support the LGBTQ community.
Hate against the LGBTQ community increased significantly in recent years, according to watchdog groups. The Anti-Defamation League tracked more than 350 anti-LGBTQ incidents between June 2022 and April 2023.
FBI hate crime data released this spring found that hate crimes against LGBTQ people increased by more than 50 percent from 2020 to 2021, the most recent year data is available.
The new lawsuit requests that the court overthrow the company’s board of directors and compensate Craig for his lost investment.
Reuters reported Wednesday that Miller’s group is also asking for an investigation into Kellogg Co, alleging its workplace diversity policies are unlawful.
I see you are still holding out hope for those still supporting Trump to suddenly become un-Nuts. When they start acting like human beings again, yell for blue, I’ll be the guy holding my breath… not. Write ‘em off.
I know you think everything us either black or white and as such there's no such thing as a gray area. There are a lot of voters not happy with either side or candidate. I'm not happy with either candidate myself. As it stands today there are a lot of people who don't actually "support" either candidate. That's the only people that still may be reached. And there's a lot of them.
ABV - Bud Light parent is selling 8 of its companies to help triage the revenue bleeding.
"Bud Light weekly volumes were down -29%, with sales down 26% (average over the last three months c.25%)
There continues to be contagion to the wider ABInBev portfolio, with Budweiser, Busch, and Michelob still weak" - Citi
- Profit down 28.2% - Sales to retailers & wholesalers down 14-15% -$390 million in quarter 2. - Lost top beer spot in America This has led to a $27 billion market cap loss
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
Nah, no room for voices of reason. Shame. Give yourself 40 lashes.
Everybody on the right has to be prejudiced, racist, religious zealots or it doesn't fit the narrative that it's collectively a class of people that are evil and disgusting.
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
Nah, no room for voices of reason. Shame. Give yourself 40 lashes.
Everybody on the right has to be prejudiced, racist, religious zealots or it doesn't fit the narrative that it's collectively a class of people that are evil and disgusting.
When a majority the right embraces a POS bigot for president who claims he’s the chosen one. What do you expect?
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
And you just posted the problem. Republicans decided to make advertising to people whose morals and lifestyles they disagree with political. Target and several other companies launched products for pride month for years. This year suddenly you allowed the fringe of your party to call it political. Don't blame others for the situation you decided to create because people such as yourself decided to turn something political that wasn't political, nor should it be political at all.
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
Nah, no room for voices of reason. Shame. Give yourself 40 lashes.
Everybody on the right has to be prejudiced, racist, religious zealots or it doesn't fit the narrative that it's collectively a class of people that are evil and disgusting.
When a majority the right embraces a POS bigot for president who claims he’s the chosen one. What do you expect?
A dumb comment from you that has nothing to do with the conversation. Expectations exceeded, again.
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
And you just posted the problem. Republicans decided to make advertising to people whose morals and lifestyles they disagree with political. Target and several other companies launched products for pride month for years. This year suddenly you allowed the fringe of your party to call it political. Don't blame others for the situation you decided to create because people such as yourself decided to turn something political that wasn't political, nor should it be political at all.
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
Nah, no room for voices of reason. Shame. Give yourself 40 lashes.
Everybody on the right has to be prejudiced, racist, religious zealots or it doesn't fit the narrative that it's collectively a class of people that are evil and disgusting.
When a majority the right embraces a POS bigot for president who claims he’s the chosen one. What do you expect?
A dumb comment from you that has nothing to do with the conversation. Expectations exceeded, again.
Lol you brought it up “Everybody on the right has to be prejudiced, racist, religious zealots” I just pointed out the obvious. What did you expect? You know considering the majority of the GOP supports the chosen one, career criminal, rapist, insurrectionist, and traitor. What did I say that isn’t true?
They hate when you point out the very catalyst that turned the republican party toxic. They wish to play the "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. That's not relevant." card.
They hate when you point out the very catalyst that turned the republican party toxic. They wish to play the "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. That's not relevant." card.
Yes. This. Everything must be related to Trump.
Global warming Asteroids The Canadian wildfires (I see he has now also set Hawaii on fire) My dog's recent urinary tract infection...
Try looking back at the Civil Right movement. I guess you're one of those who thinks racism no longer exists. And what you seem to be talking about are people having the ability to be free FROM religion. Instead of having other people's religious beliefs crammed down their throats by being included in our laws.
But you did a great job of moving the goal posts and refusing to own it. I mean even from your own post it seems you promote Republicans turning into what they used to claim they hated. Kudos.
Aw. Yet in this case it's very relative. He is the catalyst that's turned the Republican party into a bunch of screaming, hateful people set out to attack everything they don't like. The exact same thing they and you used to accuse others of. Much of the party has turned into the very things they used to claim to hate. Great job!
Aw. Yet in this case it's very relative. He is the catalyst that's turned the Republican party into a bunch of screaming, hateful people set out to attack everything they don't like. The exact same thing they and you used to accuse others of. Much of the party has turned into the very things they used to claim to hate. Great job!
And that changes what I said how? Like I said, Republicans have turned into the very things they claimed they hated. See January 6th for the comparison. Only they were trying to take over our country by installing a dictator.
I think the point they are trying to make is they want to keep politics out of their food and beverages.
And you just posted the problem. Republicans decided to make advertising to people whose morals and lifestyles they disagree with political. Target and several other companies launched products for pride month for years. This year suddenly you allowed the fringe of your party to call it political. Don't blame others for the situation you decided to create because people such as yourself decided to turn something political that wasn't political, nor should it be political at all.
Freedumb!
Republicans created cancel culture? 🤣
They may not have created it, but the sure have embraced it
Honest question, Pit. Do you think there would be a form of backlash if a company said Black people were not allowed to apply to the management training program??
I think if one looks at it objectively there are far more white people applying that already have management experience on their resume' who don't need management training to qualify for those positions.
And who is they? The same people who are whining about a national beer that tried to expand their customer base to people they rail against.
It's not me. What I would do actually has nothing to do with this. I will say if 90% of my applicants who were qualified for management positions were white, I may very well want to increase the percentage of people of color who would be qualified for those jobs. I've never been in that position before so one never knows exactly what they would do until they are in that position.
The latest crazy right wing conspiracy theory to explain why Kid Rock is still drinking Bud Light.
In a more likely scenario a somewhat washed up has been was seeking attention. He did what he needed to do in order to garner attention. And it worked. Only now it is coming to light what a fraud he really is.
California store owner shot dead in dispute over displaying Pride flag: Police
The suspect was killed in a confrontation with sheriff deputies.
A California clothing store owner and designer was killed allegedly by a gunman who confronted her about a rainbow Pride flag outside her business and shot her after making disparaging remarks about the display, according to police.
Laura Ann Carleton, a married mother of nine children, was killed Friday outside her clothing store in Cedar Glen, an unincorporated San Bernardino County community on the shores of Lake Arrowhead, according to a statement from the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office.
The suspected killer, who has not been publicly identified, fled the crime scene on foot, but was found by sheriff's deputies near Carleton's store, where he was fatally shot in a confrontation, authorities said. The sheriff's office said the assailant was armed with a handgun and refused orders to drop the weapon.
"When deputies attempted to contact the suspect, a lethal force encounter occurred and the suspect was pronounced deceased," according to a statement from the sheriff's office.
No deputies were injured during the incident.
Carleton was gunned down outside her store around 5 p.m. on Friday, according to the sheriff's office.
"Through further investigation, detectives learned the suspect made several disparaging remarks about a rainbow flag that stood outside the store before shooting Carleton," according to the sheriff's office statement.
The investigation is ongoing and the sheriff's office released no further details. Authorities asked that anyone with information about the shooting to contact homicide investigators immediately.
"This is absolutely horrific. This disgusting hate has no place in CA," California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a social media post Sunday night.
On her store's website, Carleton said she began her career in the fashion industry when she was a teenager. She attended the ArtCenter College of Design in Pasadena, California, before embarking on a career in fashion design, according to the website.
Eventually, Carleton joined Kenneth Cole Productions almost from its inception in 1982 and worked for the company for more than 15 years, becoming an executive, according to the website.
Cole posted a statement on social media confirming Carleton had been a friend and a long-time associate of his company. Cole called Carleton's slaying "an unnecessary and tragic death."
While Carleton and her husband have a home in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Studio City, the couple owns a 1920s fisherman's cabin on Lake Arrowhead, her store's website said.
"With a penchant for longevity, she has been married to the same man for 28 years and is the mother of a blended family of nine children, the youngest being identical twin girls," according to Carleton's website.
The Lake Arrowhead LGBTQ organization posted a message on its Facebook page honoring Carleton and describing her as a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights.
"Today was a very sad day for Lake Arrowhead and for the LGBTQ community. Our friend and supporter Lauri Carleton... was murdered defending her lgbtq+ Pride flags in front of her store in Cedar Glen, California," the group wrote in a statement. "Lauri did not identify as LGBTQ+ but spent her time helping & advocating for everyone in the community. She will be truly missed."
San Bernardino County Supervisor Dawn Rowe also released a statement, saying, "This senseless act of hate and violence is unthinkable."
"I stand with my mountain communities as we mourn this incredible loss," Rowe said. "Everyone deserves to live free of hate and discrimination and practice their constitutional right of freedom of speech. Lauri was a remarkable member of the community and I send my deepest condolences to her family in this time of grief."
Paul Feig -- director of such movies as "Bridesmaids, "The Heat" and the 2016 remake of "Ghostbuster" -- said in a social media post that Carleton was a friend.
"She was a wonderful person who did so much for the LGBTQ+ community as well as the community at large," Feig wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. "What happened to her is an absolute tragedy. If people don't think anti-gay & trans rhetoric isn't dangerous, think again."
Actress Bridget Everett -- of the HBO MAX dramedy "Somebody Somewhere" -- also mourned Carleton in a post on Instagram, saying it was not the first encounter Carleton faced over displaying the pride flag.
"In the past, when someone took down her flag or vandalized it, she'd put up another one," Everett said in her post, which was accompanied by a photo of Carleton. "The last time I saw Lauri was, oddly enough, at Lake Arrowhead Pride both in the parade and then at a party. All that anti-LGBTQ rhetoric has a price. And now, Lauri's husband Bort, her daughters, friends and community are devastated. And for what?"
The shooting came amid a rise in anti-LGBTQ+ extremism across the nation that has led to protests, threats and violence against the community.
A report this year by the Anti-Defamation League and the LGBTQ+ organization GLAAD shows there were more than 350 incidents of harassment, vandalism or assault from June 2022 to April 2023, which the report says coincides with an increase in rhetoric and legislation targeting the LGBTQ+ community.
No need for snark on that one, there were nine kids involved from a blended family. It's just sad that someone would shoot another because of a pride flag.
It is just a sign of the times and how some let internal hatred of others that have a different opinion becomes a crime.
There is no winner. But the saddest part is one of the losers simply had a differing opinion and it caused her her own life. But yes, they take pride in destroying people's businesses and lives like it's some badge of honor. So snark they will get. Because you see, any thinking adult should realize just by watching current events and the history of man, that when you turn up the rhetoric to 10 these kind of things all be the eventual results of it. Yet they try to pretend that isn't the cause of it.
Things ain't great when religious leaders are being told Jesus's statements are "weak", when love thy neighbor as thyself is laughed about, when walk a mile in their shoes is unthinkable---the MAGA folks love their guns, their interpretation of "selected bible " parts, and eating up every lie told by their supreme leader, Donald Trump. God help us.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/GEBC4sd.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/QiU5XzV.jpg)
![[Linked Image from media.giphy.com]](https://media.giphy.com/media/JDbx0yICUNdPW/giphy.gif)
![[Linked Image from media.tenor.com]](https://media.tenor.com/FDwYMy302gMAAAAM/tumbleweed-silence.gif)
![[Linked Image from media.giphy.com]](https://media.giphy.com/media/iMOk3wfmE5IoE/giphy.gif)
![[Linked Image from ]]( https://i.imgur.com/MkegL9t.jpg)
![[Linked Image from media2.giphy.com]](https://media2.giphy.com/media/26AHLBZUC1n53ozi8/200w.gif?cid=6c09b952vj2lk9r4mi80ity7q4phqhqztxfs4afy4sbxcloj&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200w.gif)
![[Linked Image from media.tenor.com]](https://media.tenor.com/UBwavZVvFvkAAAAC/burn-oh.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.dailymail.co.uk]](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/07/27/07/72987895-12343075-In_a_new_YouGov_poll_which_asked_1_468_people_the_public_approva-a-3_1690437769119.jpg)
![[Linked Image from media.cnn.com]](https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/200531033919-12-george-floyd-protests-0530-washington.jpg)
![[Linked Image from bostonreview.net]](https://www.bostonreview.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Elizabeth-Hinton-Minneapolis-George-Floyd-Martin-Luther-King.jpg)
![[Linked Image from dims.apnews.com]](https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/21a6d7c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3000x2000+0+0/resize/1486x991!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstorage.googleapis.com%2Fafs-prod%2Fmedia%2F0d1daac3ec5a4a5dad4a44362ba3fcca%2F3000.jpeg)