This way, when the pendulum swings in the other direction and they try to take advantage of us again by showing their support, we can point to the record and show people that it’s not sincere.

We shouldn’t allow them to play both sides of the fence like this.

  • manxu@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 days ago

    I don’t mean to be contrarian, but I do want to point to lots of queer-owned businesses that truly mean it when they celebrate the community!

      • Norah (pup/it/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        The be all, end all of businesses isn’t always to go public. Neither does the ownership structure of all businesses facilitate it, some are co-operatives. It would also be really hard for a business that exclusively deals in products for queer people, like a binder company, to just drop their only market.

      • huppakee@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        Even when that’s true, it still means they are genuinely supporting the gay community right now. An ally behaving imperfectly doesn’t make them an enemy.

    • onslaught545@lemmy.zipBanned
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Queer owned businesses aren’t ones that 99.9% of people interact with on a daily basis. I doubt there are 5 queer owned businesses that are publicly traded.

      • JillyB@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        It wouldn’t be queer owned if it was publicly traded. It would be owned by shareholders.

          • Norah (pup/it/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 days ago

            I’m sorry, but what exactly is a load of shit about the above statement? Capitalism =/= publicly traded. For a business to be both publicly traded, and queer owned, there would have to be some sort of covenant preventing shares from being sold to non-queer people. I don’t think that would actually be legal?

              • Norah (pup/it/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                Uhm, what? Like, come on, I hate capitalism as much as the next queer person, but you’re just spouting nonsense. Twitter isn’t publicly-traded, does that mean it doesn’t participate in capitalism?

                  • Norah (pup/it/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 days ago

                    Nope, from the first reply I was mainly calling you out for rudely saying something untrue. I think you’re just turning your hatred for capitalism against other queer people, and I think that behaviour sucks.

          • FurryMemesAccount@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 days ago

            Bad management is still a thing. And I’m not against using the levers of capitalism to force businesses to be queer-accepting and prove that queer-phobic managers are incompetent from their numbers.

            This isn’t a replacement for taking down capitalism, but still a tiny victory.