Mike Lenhart (bio)

Mike,

I live in a small city with a large gay and lesbian population. And while I don't follow brands I do know from my friends that they will shop at places that are known to be friendly to them. And will actively shun and talk down places that aren't.

I have a lot of reasons to NOT shop Wally world (Wal-Mart) and their anti-Gay stance is among them. If you don't like my friends I have no reason to like, or want to shop at, your store.

Fortunately, I work for a company that is reasonably Gay friendly. We have gay employees and the rest of the staff doesn't care that they are. We know they are our customers and they get the same courtesy and service as anyone else. And that's the way it should be.

If those other companies can't learn from the success of others, well, maybe they don't need to succeed.

Label me confused.
The winners and losers were ranked by manner of a survey.

The survey measured habits and preferences -and most tellingly "perception".
There is no mention in your essay about winners or losers in relation to the actuality of their policies and practices.

Did loser companies like Duncan Donuts get low rankings because of real actions (or innaction) -or because of the gay consumers' preferences, buying habits and perception -which may or may not have any connection to legitimate concerns?

Firstly, what a HYPOCRITE! That last paragraph of your rant is just as bigoted as those you accuse of bigotry. While I am against hate aimed at any particular group of people base on religion, race, lifestyle or whatever, I believe hate as a means of defending equality and inclusiveness is beyond ridiculous. To lump all religions and traditions together into people hiding behind their 1950s Gods and Bibles is as harsh and judgmental as any closed-mindedness against those you defend. If people want respect and equality, they must treat all others with respect and equality; in other words, live the Golden Rule (which happens to be from the Bible, by the way; it also condemns hypocrisy, coincidentally).

Secondly, every business has a target demographic that is automatically going to exclude other markets; that doesn't make them haters. It's like saying that Fisher Price neglects the age 65+ market; should Fisher Price start catering their toys and commercials to the aging population's needs because otherwise they would be guilty of ageism? This is obviously an unintelligent accusation. Now, it is a different situation all together if the company engages in activities and advertising that actually promotes hatred against a group as opposed to simply aiming their messaging to their market niche. Be careful making such sweeping accusations against businesses that may just be focussed marketers.

Lastly (with just a whiff of humor), I don't know a gay or lesbian person who would want to shop at WalMart or eat Dunkin' Donuts anyways! Hardly anyone else I know wants to either! And as for Levi's pristine inclusiveness, isn't there maybe some hidden messaging in their styles of jeans that you have missed? After all, they do make a STRAIGHT leg, but not a GAY leg :)

P.S. Just curious; what is it about Samsung that includes it on the not-so-gay-friendly list of companies? Does anyone know? Or are they just not a popular brand in the gay community? Those lists are good information to have, just like knowing which companies are greenest, as long as they are based on something factual and not just assumptions.

I'm a little confused. I was under the impression that gay people were just regular ordinary people who were attracted to their same gender. I've known a few in my life and other than their sexual preference they were just the same as everybody else. Are you saying that they are in fact a different kind of human that requires some specific marketing? Are you saying that beyond the age, sociological, ethnic and economic factors that determine how a product is marketed there should also be some sort of gay subcatagory? What would qualify as a gay friendly donut or gasoline. I believe based on my own life experiences that gay people are just like everybody else except that they happen to be attracted to their own sex instead of the opposite. That there are fat ones and thin ones and some of them are jerks and some are great people. That some gay men love sports and hate show tunes just like heterosexual men. And that the vast majority of them I would never know they were gay until such time that they revealed it to me.

I'm sorry but after your previous well thought out and well written article I find this one to be a great disappointment. To me it is pandering to the same stereotypes that the anti gay crowd like to tote out. It's saying that gay people aren't the same as you and me and I don't believe that is a message anybody should be promoting.

I am disappointed that my reply to this post has not yet been posted. Did I say something that was offensive that would cause it to be rejected? If so, I apologize. However, if my response was offensive, it was no more offensive than the original post itself. If you don't add my post to this blog (after encouraging more people to reply to your blogs because so few do), I would like to ask that this post be removed; it is totally one-sided and narrow-minded, guilty of what it supposedly condemns. In saying this, I want to make clear that I DON'T HATE GAYS AND LESBIANS. The offensive part of the above post is its closed-mindedness towards religious traditions and opposing points-of-view, lumping all belief systems that contradict that of the author as "losers", etc. and it's grand-sweeping generalization of brands that don't cater to the gay and lesbian markets. Doesn't everyone have a set of beliefs that others disagree with? Shouldn't there be respect for the rights of others even when they don't think the same as you do? The hypocrisy of the above post in making hateful assumptions towards people who may have done nothing to be hated for while upholding what they believe without disrespect for others is my major issue. Second, EVERY BRAND CATERS TO A TARGET MARKET. So what if they don't market to alternative audiences? There are brands that cater exclusively to gay and lesbian markets; should heterosexual audiences be offended for not being included in those marketing efforts? In such a diverse world-wide economy, the choosing of an appropriate market in a focussed, if somewhat exclusive, manner is essential to making a place for yourself within the economy. If a brand has never actually committed an act of blatant hate towards any religion, race, lifestyle, etc. or endorsed the activities of an organization or event that does endorse hate, then it is ridiculous to jump to the conclusions that have been made in the above post. Accusing brands that gays and lesbians don't prefer to use as being anti-gay is preposterous. I don't like McDonald's, but that doesn't mean I find them offensive to my demographic; I just prefer other places to eat. I think this is more the case with the survey referred to in the above post; brands might not be hateful, but alternative markets don't choose those brands simply out of personal preference rather than out of making unsubstantiated accusations against those brands. Again, if this is somehow offensive, I am sorry, but it is no more offensive than Mike's original post.

Mike,

I found the link to this article on the e-newsletter that I get from this site and thought it might be a worth while read and it was.

Though I am not a lesbian, I do support both Gays and Lesbians and I support their businesses and businesses that support them.

If some businesses want to turn a blind eye to both of these markets that's their grand loss. The rest of us are moving onward to the future and they can stay behind the times as far as I'm concerned.

It's the new generation (and some of us oldies) that is accepting and forward thinking. Those old boys will go to their graves along with their dusty, antiquated belief system and the world will be a better place.

Thanks for enlightened read,
~Danita