Target Stays Neutral on Marriage Amendment: The Community Want to Know Why
By Andy Birkey
Leaders of Twin Cities Pride 'appalled' at chain's neutral stance
Twin Cities Pride is asking the LGBT community for feedback over the decision by Target to stay neutral on an anti–gay marriage amendment that will appear on the ballot in 2012. The Minneapolis-based big box retailer has long been a major sponsor of Twin Cities Pride, one of the largest LGBT celebrations in the country, but political giving to candidates who oppose LGBT rights has prompted Twin Cities Pride to defend itself over accepting Target’s sponsorship.
Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel told shareholders last week that the company would not take a stance on the amendment, and that has fueled further controversy over the retailer’s sponsorship of Pride.
Target’s independent campaign expenditures to Minnesota Forward in support of Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer sparked outcry and protest during the 2010 election, but Twin Cities Pride defended its decision two weeks ago when it announced Target as a major sponsor.
“Twin Cities Pride strongly opposed Target’s contribution to Minnesota Forward and deeply regrets that a Pride sponsor chose to align itself with this particular PAC,” the group said in a statement. “However, Pride draws a clear distinction between the views of the candidate in question, and companies that chose to support this PAC. Target is a model employer in the community and a champion of LGBT equality in the workplace.”
The group, which holds its annual festival June 25 and 26, said that Target continues to make donations to LGBT causes that exceed $500,000 each year in Minnesota and cited changes that Target announced in February to its political giving process.
“A continued sponsorship is a step in the right direction for Target and excluding them from this year’s event would unfairly prevent Target from repairing their reputation in the LGBT community,” the group said.
But Steinhafel’s statement on the anti-gay marriage amendment at a shareholders meeting last week reignited the controversy. “Our position at this particular time is that we are going to be neutral on that particular issue,” he said, “as we would be on other social issues that have polarizing points of view.”
To that Twin Cities Pride said, “Our Board of Directors was appalled this week to learn that Target has publicly stated a neutral position on the Constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman.”
The group says it will use the opportunity to educate Target about the amendment and solicited comments on its Facebook page to send to Target. Those comments ran the gamut.
“I don’t like how it is seeming that Target is jumping on the ‘band-wagon’ when it benefits them, but then jumping off or feigning neutrality when asked to stand by their actions,” wrote one community member. “You can’t have your cake and eat it too Target. Choosing to throw themselves in the ring politically and by sponsoring Pride, I feel, opens them up for needing to state where they are on this issue.”
Another commenter had even stronger words. “Pride is a sacred space because it is often the only time LGBT people get to experience full inclusion and welcome in a public space. It is HIGHLY offensive that a company who has funded politicians who are virulently anti-gay would be allowed to have a presence at our event. There will be a very public response.”
Others were eager to give Target a pass based on the chain’s pioneering work on workplace inclusion and hefty giving to LGBT charities.
“Guys, these companies are LEADERS, I’ll say it again, LEADERS in GLBT equality in the workplace. Just because they don’t shout from the heavens like Home Depot has done, doesn’t mean they aren’t equally as important to the GLBT community,” wrote a commenter.
Wrote another, “Yes, it is upsetting that they are ‘neutral,’ but given their strong internal non-discrimination policies I think we can take a “we are disappointed but we’ll wait and see.”
Some called for pulling support from any business that stays neutral on the marriage amendment. “With the anti-gay amendment on the ballot next year, we have to ask ourselves if we really want the support of ‘neutral’ businesses,” one comment read. “We should be embracing the companies that actually appreciate us and want us to have equal rights! Neutral will not give us civil rights.”
And another commenter snarked, “Target is like getting medical care from someone who just shot you on purpose.”
posted at: minnesotaindependent.com
Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel told shareholders last week that the company would not take a stance on the amendment, and that has fueled further controversy over the retailer’s sponsorship of Pride.
Target’s independent campaign expenditures to Minnesota Forward in support of Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer sparked outcry and protest during the 2010 election, but Twin Cities Pride defended its decision two weeks ago when it announced Target as a major sponsor.
“Twin Cities Pride strongly opposed Target’s contribution to Minnesota Forward and deeply regrets that a Pride sponsor chose to align itself with this particular PAC,” the group said in a statement. “However, Pride draws a clear distinction between the views of the candidate in question, and companies that chose to support this PAC. Target is a model employer in the community and a champion of LGBT equality in the workplace.”
The group, which holds its annual festival June 25 and 26, said that Target continues to make donations to LGBT causes that exceed $500,000 each year in Minnesota and cited changes that Target announced in February to its political giving process.
“A continued sponsorship is a step in the right direction for Target and excluding them from this year’s event would unfairly prevent Target from repairing their reputation in the LGBT community,” the group said.
But Steinhafel’s statement on the anti-gay marriage amendment at a shareholders meeting last week reignited the controversy. “Our position at this particular time is that we are going to be neutral on that particular issue,” he said, “as we would be on other social issues that have polarizing points of view.”
To that Twin Cities Pride said, “Our Board of Directors was appalled this week to learn that Target has publicly stated a neutral position on the Constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman.”
The group says it will use the opportunity to educate Target about the amendment and solicited comments on its Facebook page to send to Target. Those comments ran the gamut.
“I don’t like how it is seeming that Target is jumping on the ‘band-wagon’ when it benefits them, but then jumping off or feigning neutrality when asked to stand by their actions,” wrote one community member. “You can’t have your cake and eat it too Target. Choosing to throw themselves in the ring politically and by sponsoring Pride, I feel, opens them up for needing to state where they are on this issue.”
Another commenter had even stronger words. “Pride is a sacred space because it is often the only time LGBT people get to experience full inclusion and welcome in a public space. It is HIGHLY offensive that a company who has funded politicians who are virulently anti-gay would be allowed to have a presence at our event. There will be a very public response.”
Others were eager to give Target a pass based on the chain’s pioneering work on workplace inclusion and hefty giving to LGBT charities.
“Guys, these companies are LEADERS, I’ll say it again, LEADERS in GLBT equality in the workplace. Just because they don’t shout from the heavens like Home Depot has done, doesn’t mean they aren’t equally as important to the GLBT community,” wrote a commenter.
Wrote another, “Yes, it is upsetting that they are ‘neutral,’ but given their strong internal non-discrimination policies I think we can take a “we are disappointed but we’ll wait and see.”
Some called for pulling support from any business that stays neutral on the marriage amendment. “With the anti-gay amendment on the ballot next year, we have to ask ourselves if we really want the support of ‘neutral’ businesses,” one comment read. “We should be embracing the companies that actually appreciate us and want us to have equal rights! Neutral will not give us civil rights.”
And another commenter snarked, “Target is like getting medical care from someone who just shot you on purpose.”
posted at: minnesotaindependent.com
Comments