I was very surprised and a bit weirded out when I saw companies like Lockheed and Raytheon marching in Pride. I’ve even supported banning some groups - like some police groups - from marching due to their history or policies.
I am really conflicted on rainbow washing, though. I’m one of those people who has been around for a long time. I marched with ACT UP in NYC to get the government to conduct AIDS research, and I was beaten up pretty badly several times by people who just wanted to bash some queers. I remember when the only gay people we saw on TV were “not gay” gay-coded actors like Vincent Price and Rip Taylor, and performers like Elton John. Everyone denied that they were gay. It wasn’t allowed to be openly acknowledged. And that’s just the “open” folks - people like Rock Hudson were completely closeted. I know a guy who got booted just as don’t ask don’t tell was coming into effect because someone told on him, and I almost got fired from a national security job.
All of which is to say, I am really glad we’ve reached this level of representation. Lockheed doesn’t march in Pride so that gay generals are more likely to buy their weapons. There might be some publicity victory they’re getting, but Lockheed was doing just fine when all they did was make weapons (I know that’s not all they do).
When Lockheed marches, it’s because of their LGBT employees. The employees organize, start a resource group for mutual support, and do things like put together programs about trans healthcare in the employee insurance system. I respect that. It’s honestly the same thing for companies like Google and Netflix (Amazon’s group is called Glamazon). They get a bit more mileage out of it because they’re Bay Area companies, but it’s still more about the employees (current and candidates) than it is about the company.
One of the more openly homophobic companies (known for openly supporting right wing candidates and causes), Coors, was among the first to recognize same-sex partnerships as qualifying for benefits, solely as a result of employee action.
And, honestly, even if it’s just rainbow socks - I will take it over where we were and where we seem to be heading. Naomi Klein wrote a great book called No Logo back in 1999. One part that always stuck with me was that despite her very anti-corporate stance, she recognized that even obvious campaigns like United Colors of Benetton were doing good by making high end ad campaigns with a broad spectrum of people. Will and Grace was huge. Brothers (a Showtime show I had to watch late at night so I didn’t get caught) had a gay character whose beer drinking homophobic brother learned to accept. Queer as Folk. Ellen coming out. All of those things were absolutely huge.
We’re moving away from that now. I’m not expecting a big Pride presence from Budweiser this year. The LA Dodgers came close to pulling part of their Pride fest over complaints from a congressman from Florida. Target pulled rainbow-bearing clothes from their shelves under the threat of being bombed by christian domestic terrorist groups that act with near-impunity across the US. People are showing up with AR-15s at children’s libraries to threaten staff members, often without consequence. Transphobic and homophobic rhetoric is completely dominating half of the political spectrum - it’s literally the major plank in their 2024 platform. It’s bigger than tax cuts or terrorism this year. We are the number one target.
We’re going to have to fight to get back to the point where we can be cynical about Lockheed rainbow socks and rainbow Pepsi bottles, and it’s not going to be fun. And it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Thanks for this. This is the most insightful, thoughtful piece I’ve seen on corporate and queer rights in, like… ever, honestly. (And I can’t get over the fact it’s in response to an NCD meme!)
Ultimately the problem with rainbow washing (or the problem with the problem with rainbow washing?) is that rejecting allies for not being perfect has a tendency to leave you fighting alone.
Like, the Target and Budweiser examples. The phobes picked their new crusade targets and no one rallied a counter movement, because, you know, Bud sucks anyways and corporations bad but all it did was tell the liberals running things that the community won’t even pretend to have their back if they get boycotted by hateful hicks, meaning the actual smart move is to just wash your hands of the whole thing.
Obviously we have to draw the line somewhere, and maybe that should be Raytheon, but I’m not sure Budweiser and Target were bad enough to abandon in return.
I completely agree. There should have been a backlash, and there needs to be one in the future.
The Dodgers disinviting the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence brought a backlash that made them re-invite them. Dropping them because some politician in Florida thought it was offensive and the right wing tried to turn it into a thing was wrong and it was a terrible look. It was exactly what those in the community most complain about with regard to rainbow washing - that corporations (at least some of them) are fair weather friends. I have to give credit to Disney for going hard on that number, and the mouthbreathers are never going to come after Apple or Google because those are companies that have roots in place.
We need to hit back hard when they go after Target or Bud. We need to take it seriously because they take it seriously, and they know that getting Target to pull rainbow tee shirts is the thin end of the wedge in making LGBT something people should be ashamed of. We have to fight, not because rainbow wear at Target is important, but because LGBT rights are important.
The only place I’ll generally draw the line these days is with the Log Cabin crowd. I’ve never personally known an LCR who was active in the rights movement. The few that I know wore-Trump have become very quiet about it, or else we’ve simply stopped speaking. Those guys (and in my social circle they’re all guys) can fuck off.
I was very surprised and a bit weirded out when I saw companies like Lockheed and Raytheon marching in Pride. I’ve even supported banning some groups - like some police groups - from marching due to their history or policies.
I am really conflicted on rainbow washing, though. I’m one of those people who has been around for a long time. I marched with ACT UP in NYC to get the government to conduct AIDS research, and I was beaten up pretty badly several times by people who just wanted to bash some queers. I remember when the only gay people we saw on TV were “not gay” gay-coded actors like Vincent Price and Rip Taylor, and performers like Elton John. Everyone denied that they were gay. It wasn’t allowed to be openly acknowledged. And that’s just the “open” folks - people like Rock Hudson were completely closeted. I know a guy who got booted just as don’t ask don’t tell was coming into effect because someone told on him, and I almost got fired from a national security job.
All of which is to say, I am really glad we’ve reached this level of representation. Lockheed doesn’t march in Pride so that gay generals are more likely to buy their weapons. There might be some publicity victory they’re getting, but Lockheed was doing just fine when all they did was make weapons (I know that’s not all they do).
When Lockheed marches, it’s because of their LGBT employees. The employees organize, start a resource group for mutual support, and do things like put together programs about trans healthcare in the employee insurance system. I respect that. It’s honestly the same thing for companies like Google and Netflix (Amazon’s group is called Glamazon). They get a bit more mileage out of it because they’re Bay Area companies, but it’s still more about the employees (current and candidates) than it is about the company.
One of the more openly homophobic companies (known for openly supporting right wing candidates and causes), Coors, was among the first to recognize same-sex partnerships as qualifying for benefits, solely as a result of employee action.
And, honestly, even if it’s just rainbow socks - I will take it over where we were and where we seem to be heading. Naomi Klein wrote a great book called No Logo back in 1999. One part that always stuck with me was that despite her very anti-corporate stance, she recognized that even obvious campaigns like United Colors of Benetton were doing good by making high end ad campaigns with a broad spectrum of people. Will and Grace was huge. Brothers (a Showtime show I had to watch late at night so I didn’t get caught) had a gay character whose beer drinking homophobic brother learned to accept. Queer as Folk. Ellen coming out. All of those things were absolutely huge.
We’re moving away from that now. I’m not expecting a big Pride presence from Budweiser this year. The LA Dodgers came close to pulling part of their Pride fest over complaints from a congressman from Florida. Target pulled rainbow-bearing clothes from their shelves under the threat of being bombed by christian domestic terrorist groups that act with near-impunity across the US. People are showing up with AR-15s at children’s libraries to threaten staff members, often without consequence. Transphobic and homophobic rhetoric is completely dominating half of the political spectrum - it’s literally the major plank in their 2024 platform. It’s bigger than tax cuts or terrorism this year. We are the number one target.
We’re going to have to fight to get back to the point where we can be cynical about Lockheed rainbow socks and rainbow Pepsi bottles, and it’s not going to be fun. And it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Thanks for this. This is the most insightful, thoughtful piece I’ve seen on corporate and queer rights in, like… ever, honestly. (And I can’t get over the fact it’s in response to an NCD meme!)
Ultimately the problem with rainbow washing (or the problem with the problem with rainbow washing?) is that rejecting allies for not being perfect has a tendency to leave you fighting alone.
Like, the Target and Budweiser examples. The phobes picked their new crusade targets and no one rallied a counter movement, because, you know, Bud sucks anyways and corporations bad but all it did was tell the liberals running things that the community won’t even pretend to have their back if they get boycotted by hateful hicks, meaning the actual smart move is to just wash your hands of the whole thing.
Obviously we have to draw the line somewhere, and maybe that should be Raytheon, but I’m not sure Budweiser and Target were bad enough to abandon in return.
I completely agree. There should have been a backlash, and there needs to be one in the future.
The Dodgers disinviting the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence brought a backlash that made them re-invite them. Dropping them because some politician in Florida thought it was offensive and the right wing tried to turn it into a thing was wrong and it was a terrible look. It was exactly what those in the community most complain about with regard to rainbow washing - that corporations (at least some of them) are fair weather friends. I have to give credit to Disney for going hard on that number, and the mouthbreathers are never going to come after Apple or Google because those are companies that have roots in place.
We need to hit back hard when they go after Target or Bud. We need to take it seriously because they take it seriously, and they know that getting Target to pull rainbow tee shirts is the thin end of the wedge in making LGBT something people should be ashamed of. We have to fight, not because rainbow wear at Target is important, but because LGBT rights are important.
The only place I’ll generally draw the line these days is with the Log Cabin crowd. I’ve never personally known an LCR who was active in the rights movement. The few that I know wore-Trump have become very quiet about it, or else we’ve simply stopped speaking. Those guys (and in my social circle they’re all guys) can fuck off.