Pioneer Press: General Mills Boycott Urged Over Marriage Amendment Stance


Julie Forster with the Pioneer Press:

Earlier this month General Mills came out in opposition to Minnesota's marriage amendment ballot measure. Now supporters of the proposed amendment have launched a boycott of General Mills, imploring consumers to dump their Cheerios, Yoplait, and the myriad other products the Golden Valley manufacturer makes and markets.

The National Organization for Marriage said Tuesday, June 26, that it is initiating a protest of General Mills and has launched a website with an online petition in response to General Mills taking a public position on the amendment, which seeks to preserve Minnesota law that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

The website,, said it had gathered more than 8,000 signatures by Tuesday evening.

"We'd like (General Mills) to step back and say they respect the views of all of their customers and employees," said Jonathan Baker, director of the Corporate Fairness Project for the National Organization for Marriage. "Eating Cheerios for breakfast shouldn't have to be a moral choice about marriage."

Well past 10,000 and counting...


  1. Sam
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Dear NOM,

    While you're dumping General Mills and Starbucks, in order to make sure that you're not being hypocrites, please also start boycotting every other corporation that supports marriage equality, including Apple, Microsoft, Dell, IBM, Google, Best Buy, JCPenny's, Sears, Target, Macys, Nike, Proctor and Gamble, Pepsi, Coca Cola, McDonalds, RiteAid, Wallgreens, Chevron, Shell, BP, MetLife, Citi, Prudential, All State, State Farm, Blue Cross, Chase, Bank of America, Boeing, AA, Delta, Southwest, Alaska, United, UPS, Marriott, Hilton, Disney, Ford, GM, and the list goes on and on and gets longer every year. YOU ARE LOSING.

  2. Publius
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 11:30 am | Permalink


    Which of these companies are actively participating in an on-going election on the redefinition of marriage?

    I would add every state where the issue has gone before the people, one side has indeed always lost.

  3. John McLaren
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    It's easy to sign a petition but there's no proof that people will actually stop buying General Mills products. They are a multi-billion dollar, multi-national company. It would take millions and millions of people around the world to make even a small dent in their bottom line profits.

  4. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    GM is misguided in taking an official stance on this issue. They claim to be "inclusive," but by taking this position they are excluding and alienating their customers and employees who happen to hold a different opinion.

    If GM had come out in favor of the amendment I'm sure the opposition would be upset about it. Any position they take is going to alienate people. That's why they should remain neutral.

  5. Michelle Roberts
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Barb, Maybe NOM should remain neutral.

  6. Son of Adam
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    Corporations have absolutely no control over how marriage is defined. The people do, however. And everytime the people have been allowed to vote, marriage has won every time. Marriage is protected by the people's votes, not corporate endorsements.

  7. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    That's silly, Michelle. Maybe HRC should remain neutral.

  8. Zack
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink


    There is a difference between offering benefits and political activism.

  9. Zack
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Permalink


    "Barb, Maybe NOM should remain neutral."

    NOM is a non-profit activist organization. It isn't a company.

  10. Scott Wooledge
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    Instead of a generic picture of a product, why not show the protest? I'd like to see how many turned out to protest them.

  11. RC
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    Scott - Protest turnout was lame; bad photo op. Some NOMmie claimed 50-70 (lame), but a quick n' dirty headcount of what's shown in a video of the non-event shows something more like 25-30 people (ultra lame).

  12. Posted June 28, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

    When companies express a opinion that differs from yours, you demand apologizes and boycotts. When a company accepts your opinions or works with your opinions they are great wonderful companies....

    Of course what do you expect from Nom...

  13. Tom
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    Are you saying I shouldn't eat my Cherrios, and I shouldn't drink my Starbucks coffee for breakfast?

    And this is important because you don't want gay people to have the same rights that straight people have?

    My Christian faith does not allow me to should show anger against corporations because they treat all of their employees equally.

  14. John McLaren
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    One Million Moms and NOM and other conservative evangelical movements including (remember?) The Moral Majority have mounted countless boycotts that have never ever been successful. Hands up all those NOMERs who have forbidden their children and grandchildren from Disney theme parks, products, Christmas gifts, movies and The Disney Channel. Gay Days at Disney theme parks has been going on for twenty-one years and Disney has not suffered in attendance from any boycott.

  15. AD
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    Large companies will always be pro-gay, because they have many gay employees and many gay customers.
    Promoting intolerance and inequality goes against all good business sense. NOM is the tiny minority here.

  16. Publius
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    I have no problem remaining neutral on companies extending benefits as they see fit.

    I have a problem with a company that is actively campaigning to change the definition of marriage. If most voters when given a choice reject the proposed change in the definition of marriage, it says a large portion, quite possibly a majority, of the employees, stockholders, and consumers disagree with the company management.

    Corporations have a right to be politically active, but they do so at their own peril, not only in the U.S., but also in other parts of the world if the word gets out. See
    The peril is very real, which is why the anti-NOM forces are very concerned.

    Of course, you have to believe that advertising and selling heavily sugared cereals to children is a good thing to believe that General Mills is really a socially responsible company.

  17. Zack
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 4:13 pm | Permalink


    Well said.

  18. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

    Walked right past the Yoplait to the yogurt made locally. The local stuff is a lot tastier and a lot cheaper. My family used to eat 20 containers of Yoplait every week. Now we're sticking with the local fare. The store brand Cheerios are also delicious. Our daughter didn't even notice until I told her.

    Thanks Gay Mills. We didn't know what we were missing :)

  19. Zack
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    While I disagree with anti-capitalist sentiment as seen in the OWS and most members on the left. I'm starting to understand the frustration towards corporations who throw their money behind political causes.

  20. Sammy
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    And still no Microsoft boycott?

  21. Living Straight
    Posted June 29, 2012 at 12:20 am | Permalink

    This is an excellent opportunity to discover lower cost alternatives to general mills products. and believe me there are many superb bargains to be had. Many store brand items can and do stack up to the name brands.
    The store brand of honey nut cheerios at my local food lion is just as good and actually better because it is a dollar less. I am sure your local grocer has just as many and just as good alternatives.

  22. M. Jones
    Posted June 29, 2012 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    I've developed a meal plan for each day of the week, listing products that I will use, that are not contaminated by the homosexual agenda.

  23. leviticus
    Posted June 29, 2012 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    Our children are getting very good at picking out products only Jesus would buy.

  24. Tom Baker
    Posted July 4, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

    The gays are trying to tar us for putting pressure on companies that oppose our beliefs. Of course the gays do exactly the same thing. The Boycott Target page is still on Facebook, even after the company has tried to mollify them with a pro gay tee shirt.

  25. Chairm
    Posted July 8, 2012 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

    I think that companies ought to remain neutral -- in principle and in practice.

    But if they decide to take sides, then, the conflict will be part and parcel of leaving neutral ground. When a company takes sides, boycotts may become part of the new territory they decided to occupy.