Why has fried chicken become political?
All week, we’ve been bombarded across social and regular media sites about Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy’s recent comments about gay marriage and he and his company’s opposition to said issue.
Since those statements, calls for bans and protests for the Southern chicken chain have come swiftly from the left, with cries of support and undying devotion coming from the right.
Boston mayor Thomas Menino has said he hopes to ban the eatery from opening locations in his city until they change their minds on the issue of marriage equality.
Facebook events for “Same Sex Kiss day at Chick-fil-A” and “One Man, One Woman - Let’s Support Chick-fil-A Day” have popped up, with activists promising to blanket local locations and let their voices be heard.
Even the Muppets have weighed in on this hot-button issue, severing their ties with Chick-fil-A and donating any profits from the company to gay rights causes.
The fine people at Nabisco caused a similar brouhaha a few weeks ago when they released online an image of a rainbow-colored Oreo in support of Gay Pride Week and equal rights efforts. The company experienced similar backlash/praise from various factions in this particular fight, getting over 20,000 comments on Facebook.
While I’ve always believed it’s important to stay informed and have opinions on the major political and social issues of our time, I feel forced to take a step back from this situation and try to view it from a different sort of seeing space.
At the end of the day, I’m forced to come to this conclusion - it’s just food.
The views and opinions of a company’s owners and employees on various political issues could be, I suppose, a factor in whether or not they get your business, but I worry we begin our way down a slippery slope if we start to let those opinions vary our purchasing decisions.
If you’re going to ban Chick-fil-A for their “intolerance” or Nabisco for their “permissiveness,” you better go ahead and make a chart with every major American restaurant chain and company and figure out where you can and can’t eat.
If you like the gays, you may have to stop going by Wal-Mart for your groceries and other sundries - the company has long supported “traditional family values.” You may want to avoid Lowe’s, too.
If you’re a militant traditional marriage enthusiast, you’ll have to avoid shopping at JC Penney and Best Buy.
You’ll also get the treat of explaining to your children why we can’t see Pixar’s latest flick “Brave,” because the company has always been known to support gay rights. Ditto any other Disney film, for that matter.
If you limit your purchasing to only the companies whose views align with your own, you may find that your new world will consist of few places you can shop and enjoy.
While you may not love a business’s stance, the idea of banning or shunning said business seems to be unnecessary and more than a bit silly.
To be honest, while I fully support marriage equality efforts personally, I won’t let my stance on the issues affect where and when I shop.
I love Chick-fil-A. You can’t taste the intolerance, try though you might.
Take a step back, breathe and let’s all think before we make rash decisions like this.
We live in a country that’s already too divided and fractured on almost every major issue.
Rigorous, unchecked partisanship is now the norm.
Please, I beg you, don’t add business bans and protest lunches to that insanity.
My poor stomach just can’t take it.
Author's note: If you really want to do something about marriage equality, contact your elected officials and people who can make the legislative decisions that actually affect this issue. A chicken restaurant has little to no ability to craft and pass sweeping legislation.
AMEN!
ReplyDeleteIn a post-Citizens United world, it's becoming less and less relevant what the constituent wants than what the big money and campaign donors want. We are increasingly living in not a democracy, but a corporatocracy, and when a certain business donates millions of dollars to an organization that actively seeks to ensure my status as a second-class citizen, then I believe it's my duty to make people aware of it. I think that it's our duty to stay informed, and I think it would be even better for corporations to stay out of politics. I know that's far-fetched, but until that day comes, we've got to make our voices heard somehow.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Jon Mark, that it would be great if corporations kept their conks out of politics. Money isn't speech, despite what the Citizens ruling and others tell us.
ReplyDeleteI guess my concern, though, is if you ban one anti-gay business, you really ought to apply it to all of them, so no Wal-Mart, no Delta, et cetera. And most folks aren't going to take the time and effort to research the political leanings of their purchases. We're a lazy, complacent country.
How much does your purchase even matter? Consider this: http://www.webpronews.com/the-brands-that-own-the-brands-infographic-2012-04
ReplyDeleteThank you. I'm really surprised that people were so shocked at his beliefs to begin with anyways! A fast food restaurant closed on Sunday's... And I can't believe the people who say they hate him for what he believes. He is free to believe what he believes, just as everyone is free to not support his company if they so choose. But to say they hate him for it is just uncalled for. If anything, I respect him for standing up for what he believes in, even though it's the unpopular belief.
ReplyDeleteCliff I love your insight on this issue as it is something I have a huge concern with. Corporate giants and the havoc they cause. Chick-fil-a has been one of my go to restaurants for years. Especially during college on campus for my morning breakfast. I am very outraged about this since I feel as if my dollars are in some way and have potentially in some way affected the rights of myself and peers. Your article though does reflect on something we often don't research or even think about, the other companies that support and don't support human equal rights. Now I am not gonna say that I will no shop at the anti or pro companies, but I will be more aware what affect my monies my have.
ReplyDeleteYeah, especially after Citizen's United, it's becoming increasingly difficult to divorce yourself from the politics of where you spend your money. I disagree with Dan Cathy's stance on LGBT issues pretty strongly, and folks definitely have the right not to shop at his business because of it.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm sure I make tons of purchases every day that conflict with my personal beliefs. I have an account in a bank that's involved in a rogue trading scandal, I have some clothes from countries with poor worker safety records, and my cell phone provider is notorious for laying off its employees while giving enormous executive pay raises.
I'm not saying there's no point in standing up for what you believe in or that it's pointless to be ethical with where you put your dollars. I think that's a great impulse, actually. But if I wanted to completely align my political beliefs with every single purchase I made every day, I might as well quit my job, join some anarcho-syndicalist commune, and spend the rest of my days making homespun and artisanal soaps.
John Mark,
ReplyDeleteI have to say your hyperbolic rhetoric was a little strong seeing how they didn't donate millions to any one organization (They only donated 1.9 million to a variety of different organizations). And seeing how they made general contributions to organizations that then made the donations to the "antigay" groups, many of which aren't actively seeking anything of the sort of keeping you as a second class citizen. Most of them are passively seeking it at worst and more realistically just use the funds to maintain operations that have no impact on the LGBT community.
That being said, you do bring up a good point about the move towards corporatocracy.