FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 26, 2012
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Jen Campbell (703-683-5004)
"In declaring a war on marriage, General Mills is declaring war on their own customers." —Brian Brown, President of NOM—
Washington, D.C.—The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced that they will be initiating a protest of General Mills, including a new website at www.DumpGeneralMills.com, in response to General Mill's announcement that they, as a corporation, support same-sex marriage.
"In declaring a war on marriage, General Mills is declaring war on their own customers. Now, rather than seeing the flowing "G" trademark as a symbol of General Mills, consumers across the world will equate that symbol with gay marriage," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "For a company that reaps billions of dollars of sales from families with children this is a spectacularly foolish decision. It goes to show what happens when a company puts special political interest groups ahead of their business interests."
On their website, General Mills makes the commitment to respect diversity. Not just diversity of things like gender, skin color, or sexual orientation, but also respecting diverse values, preferences, and beliefs. This protest will be designed to hold General Mills accountable to that promise.
In addition to well-known General Mills products like Cheerios, Kix, and Wheaties, the boycott will also include brands that many consumers might have thought stood alone—brands like Pillsbury, Yoplait, Betty Crocker, Bisquik, Green Giant and more. A full list for interested shoppers can be viewed at: www.DumpGeneralMills.com.
###
To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, or Jonathan Baker, Director of NOM's Corporate Fairness Project, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Jen Campbell, jcampbell@crcpublicrelations.com, at703-683-5004.
28 Comments
Pretty soon you won't be able to eat anything or shop in any stores.
I am amused at the social liberals that applaud these companies for siding with their agenda but then turn around and blast them for making too much money or for endorsing conservative causes.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
@Ad
We have a family Farmers Market four blocks from our house every Friday just across the lagoon. These large corporations used to be mom and pop shops and now that these monsters have lost connection with humanity it’s time for us to lose our connection to them.
They need us a hell of a lot more than we need them and now we get to prove it.
Is it, or could be remotely possible that General Mills, their executives, marketing analysts and other experts may have carefully thought this through and have strong evidence that Americans who are now aware of their gay relatives, neighbours, and co-workers are becoming more accommodating about the issue of s-s marriage? Ot perhaps NOM and all its loyal, fervent adherents are absolutely right believing that unlike countless other modern western nations, s-s marriage will NEVER come to the USA and that no American will ever see gay marriage in their lifetime. Wish we could put all these early 21st century comments and rants in a time capsule and come back in twenty years.
What is nice is that most grocery stores have generic brands for Cherrios, Wheaties, Kix, and Green Giant.
A "protest" of General Mills? Did the word boycott poll-test poorly or is NOM just so used to obfuscating that they can't stop?
@Zack... surely the same can be said for conservatives who applaud companies getting involved in conservative issues (e.g. low taxes, less regulation) but then demand they "stay out" or stay neutral of social issues such as gay marriage.
I must say, im in full support of MItt Romney when he says corporations are people. They are in essence, just a collection of individuals together to achieve a stated aim (most likely profit). They should be allowed and even encouraged to get involved in a wide range of political activities.
Try a real genuine boycott of companies that oppose your viewpoints.
http://www.nomorelost.org/2012/06/21/come-on-pro-family-groups-lets-have-a-real-boycott/
Prove yourselves not to be hypocrites.
Yesterday, Oreo cookies showed its support for Pride on Facebook by posting a rainbow-filled cookie along with the message “Proudly support love!” So is NOM gonna start boycotting Kraft Foods and its Nabisco division which make Oreos?
In short, no... or if they ever do, it'll be an incredibly stupid move.
You see, even though General Mills is one of the largest food and beverage manufacturers in the U.S., so is Kraft. And to boycott both of them them, they'd have to ask "supporters of traditional marriage" to give up at least all of the following everyday brands:
Cheerios, Betty Crocker, Bisquick, Pillsbury, Fruit Roll-Ups, Häagen-Dazs, Green Giant, Hamburger Helper, Old El Paso, Progresso, Yoplait, Oscar Mayer, Philadelphia Cheese, A1 Steak Sauce, California Pizza Kitchen, Cracker Barrel, Jell-O, Kool-Aid, Cool Whip, Nilla, Premium Saltine Crackers, Tang, Tombstone Pizza.
Can you just imagine NOM waging war against Betty Crocker, the Pilsbury doughboy, the Kool-Aid Man, the Oscar Weinermobile and America's favorite gelatin dessert? Housewives and schoolchildren around the world would hate NOM, no matter how they feel about homos marrying each other!
Furthermore, NOM would eventually also have to boycott all the American companies and organizations that support same-sex marriage including Apple and Microsoft (no more computers for NOM!) and the Ford Motor Company and Boeing
In short, the National Organization of Marriage would have to ask its supporters to basically drop out of American life and go live in a cave where they can eat insects, drink rainwater, strap cornhusks to their feet and use rocks and fire to communicate to each other.
There is a difference between providing benefits to gay employees and customers and making the legal redefinition (de-gendering) of marriage a corporate objective. The former does not concern me. The latter is a piece of political activism that attempts to legally redefine everyone's marriage and affects all of family law. That does concern me.
How many of the above corporations have made legally redefining (de-gendering) marriage as a core corporate objective?
(also posted elsewhere on this blog)
Pseudo-Ash in comment 7 (as I'm sure you all know).
@Ash, we know that's not you in comment 7.
People can love whomever they want. But nobody has a right to redefine the institution of marriage. It's quite simple.
When companies regurgitate the shallow "Freedom to Love" talking point (or some similar catch phrase) they're only demonstrating that they don't understand what the debate is about.
@Barb,
"They’re only demonstrating that they don't understand what the debate is about"
I respectfully disagree; only because it is my firm belief that not only do these miscreants know what this debate is about they have taken upon themselves to parrot the oppositions talking points in an obvious attempt to lend an appearance of credibility to the false narrative their handlers are pimping as truth.
These scoundrels know they cannot win this argument on merit so they are simply seeking to dictate the acceptable parameters of this debate in order to keep their opponents from accessing the vast arsenal at their disposal; the laws of nature and natures God.
The 1st Amendment is the Elephant in this room.
Publius
Well said. And a rainbow cookie marketing ploy isn't the same either.
Thanks, Barb.
The regular commenters know when I’m being impersonated. I guess I just like to make note of it whenever possible so that anyone reading the threads in the future (or those who may be new to the blog) can know what’s up.
Great post, by the way.
We really need to bring back the original symbolism of the rainbow.
@ Randy E King - I work in a farmer's market. Guess how many of the independent sellers there are gay? Quite a few. Guess how many of them support equality? Almost all of them.
AD,
The actuals do not support your ridiculous assertions to the contrary. Independent support of this subject is not the issue here; corporations tying the weight of their brand image is. If I see a rainbow flag I shop somewhere else; this was not the case five years ago.
Identifying people by their proclivity is elitism in its rawest form.
AD,
Its becoming increasingly hard each day to believe what a gay supporter says to be facts...just sayin!
Go ahead and live in your own sheltered reality. Just leave the rest of us alone, that is all we ask.
AD,
Go ahead and live in your own sheltered reality. Just leave the rest of us alone, that is all we ask.
Likewise, we the 97%+ OF THE POPULATION, don't care what the LGBT community does, just as long as they keep their perversion in the closet where it belongs, or what they like to do in the bedoom, to be kept to themselves .
@Randy: "If I see a rainbow flag I shop somewhere else; this was not the case five years ago." -- I guess that refers to the time BEFORE you went through the so-called "conversion therapy"? We know, Randy. We know...
@Layne,
"I guess that refers to the time BEFORE you went through the so-called "conversion therapy"? "
No; that was before finding out that I was played on the expanded Civil Union legislation. The same emotional appeals of "all we really want is..." you are using today only to find out after the fact that your agenda is far more sinister.
Most people are creatures of habit and once they get in a habit of not shopping somewhere for whatever reason it is nearly impossible to get them to reverse course. I now associate the rainbow flag with deceit and dishonesty and you have nobody to blame but yourselves for the enemies you have created.
Well, Randy, I'll take that as a big fat "yes" to my original question. And while I respect your propensity for loutish posturing as a means of subliminating your very real closet-case self-loathing, I can't think of any person in the community who'd consider you an enemy. In fact, we sympathize with your plight and hope that you'll eventually come around to accepting yourself for who you are.
You were played all right, but not by us, but rather by the people who sold you a line of goods about this whole gay thing being "curable".
Leo, keep your religion and your sexuality in the closet then.
AD,
I'm not religious, but religion has been around befor you and I was born... And, I'm part of the 97%+ crowed, it is you who needs to evolve.
You don't know me, but I am certainly not out there fighting to take people's rights away. And I'm not religious, but I know that helping people is the right thing to do, and hurting people is wrong.
Randy, the fact that you will not even patron a store owned by a gay person implies so many more negative things about your own character than it does about said business owner. The fact that you won't even buy a product from someone you know is gay shows what we all already know: You're a very shallow, spiteful, and vindictive individual. I feel very sad for you.