Inclusion vs. Exclusion
Or
How to pretend your beliefs excuse your shitty behavior.
There is a fascinating part of human behavior that allows us to criticize others without realizing that the same criticisms sometimes apply to ourselves. It’s more than simple hypocrisy because the offender tends to be completely unaware of how dumb they look. You see this when a vegan who touts their diet as healthy then goes outside every 15 minutes for a cigarette. When a morbidly obese person makes snide comments about another persons (lack of) weight. Or, when people who claim to be “family first” and “full of God’s love” ostracize and debase anyone who doesn't conform to their hetero-normative, patriarchal world view.
Recently, this “moral high-ground” bigotry has been in the news because of Indiana’s recent religious rights bill. Previously, Chick-fil-A exercised this right to allow refusal of service to gay customers. The fallout from allies was quickly countered by those who consider themselves among the religious right and the restaurant has more or less been unrepentant for their ways. These same bigotry supporters are also responsible for the criticism of pro-lgbt companies.
When the “Rainbow Oreo” was released, it triggered a boycott from these fabulous examples of compassion and humanity. As a result of these and similar events, incompetent critics try to justify their bigotry by claiming that boycotting a gay-bashing company is just as bad as boycotting a gay-friendly company. I sample of how this conversation typically happens is included below:
“WHEN CHICK-FIL-A DOES IT IT’S WRONG, BUT WHEN OREO DOES IT IT’S ‘BUSINESS RIGHTS’. CHICK-FIL-A IS JUST EXPRESSING ITS RIGHTS AS A PRIVATE BUSINESS.”
This is the point where I would make a confused face while I wait for my brain to work out the anti-logic of such a statement. It’s a false equivalence. The reason why these examples are in fact completely different can be explained with an easy to follow analogy.
Say you’re a child in elementary school. You’re going about your day being a kid and worrying about hamsters and shit and you encounter a group of your peers all gathered together. You approach them, but when you get close one of their members shouts “You’re not allowed to play with us!”. The rest of the group turn and nod their heads and wait for you to leave. How would that make you feel? You just wanted to play with these other kids but they shunned you. On the other side of the room, however, is another group. And this group has a big sign over it that says “Everyone welcome!”. You walk over and, as expected, you are welcomed in without any questions or fanfare.
You get it? When you ban an entire group of people from your services, it is your right as a business, but you’d better damn well expect that this group and anyone who is friends with this group is going to be upset as a result. By excluding people, you are implying that there is something undesirable about them. Something wrong or otherwise dangerous. It announces to the public that you consider millions of people second-class, lacking the right to access your services and spurring like-minded people to do the same. On the other hand, when a company comes out as supportive of a group that has to deal with the former types of companies and the people who support them (and thus support the bigotry), it makes everyone feel welcome, not just those who are being oppressed.