Corporations & Pride: A Consequentialist Take
Some small words before we begin. these opinions are coming from an extremely privieleged queer woman, and I say this because the experiences we have lived through are bound to change our opinions and outlook. If you have differing opinions on Corporations and Pride that is completely valid, as long as you have justification for it. I am not presenting my opinions as the only way to analyse this matter, but it continues to be my opinion nonetheless. Everything we believe is mediated through our experiences, and being who I am, that mediates my own opinions and beliefs. Therefore, take everything I say with a pinch of salt, and consider other interpretations and beliefs, before forming your own.
As June begins, we are bombarded by corporations shoving down our throats that they support the LGBTQ+ community through excessive rainbow merch. june is Pride month, dedicated to celebrating the queer communities’ liberation, the struggles they face daily and the changes we’re in desperate need to reach equity. Of course, for corporations this provides (as most things do) to squeeze money for consumers through heartless moral grasps and a flimsy, yet desperately believable, facade of caring about human rights.
You see, for the most part, corporations could not give less of a f*ck about pride. What they do give a f*ck about however is the money that Pride makes them. A whole month where limited edition commodities, virtue signalling, and grasping at a community desperate for support which will rack in the millions. By suggesting that you are supporting a movement, all it’s supporters and people aiming to show their support, will dramtically increase the amount of sales, due to the increase in sporting rainbow gear. But pride merch doesn’t just increase sales in June. It’s an investment. People will be more likely to support brands which they consider ‘allies’ and ‘ethical’. Someone caught not supporting Pride- or even worse, actively going against it- is going to face a huge loss in customers, and their sales will take a hit. Corporations are geared to make money, not to care about social issues.
It’s pretty easy to commodify a movement such as Pride due to the sheer amount of supporters and the positive, progressive mantra is portrays. However, more often than not, corporations not only don’t care about LGBTQ+ people in any month other than June, but go out of their way to harm them, all whilst sporting rainbow tuxedos. And the list of them is pretty much endless. Adidas, for example, had the Pride Pack which involved selling rainbow merch and also supporting the Russian World Cup which has a whole host of anti-LGBTQ+ laws. H&M too; they have Pride merch almost every year, and also have manufacturing plants in China (which not only use exploited labour and slavery) which has, like Russia, legislation against the LGBTQ+ community. The company which got me thinking about this originally was Urban Outfitters. During the height of the Prop 8 (legislation surrounding the legality of gay marriage in the early 2000s) donated to Rick Santorum’s campaign in 2005- who was actively against gay marriage. Just 3 years later, they were proudly sporting a float at the San Franscisco Pride. How can you donate against something you so publically support? The contradictions seem to pile higher. I could continue listing corporation after corporation but I don’t see the purpose of it. However, before I continue with my analysis I would like to speak about (in my opinion) the most morally devoid example. Gilead is a pharmaceutical companu which produces PrEP (a drug which can reduce the transmission of HIV by 99%). This is an incredible discovery which could save thousands of lives in the LGBTQ+ community. So of course, how could this corporation be against the community it is quite literally saving. But statisitcs show they truly are only in it for the money. The majority of people that contract HIV are black men in homosexual relationships, but they only make up 9% of those taking PrEP, solely because they mostly cannot afford the insurance needed to cover it. It seems ridiculous that the corporations literally saving the lives of people within the LGBTQ+ community are actively disservicing them. These corporations do not care about the communities they harm- they just care about money, and the money oppression can get them. The LGBTQ+ community is no less oppressed by these corporations than by the rest of the homophobic society. From seeing the raw and emotional videos and content of people in the community to seeing the cold facade of companies that have no investment other than monetary ones never ceases to shock me. The difference online between the real people and the corporations becomes painfully marked.
What says to me even more that it is simply about profit for many of these corporations is that they clearly do not care about the quality or meaning behind their merchandise. Many of them simply slap some rainbows and funky fonts and call it a day. There is little thought behind the pieces. There is no consideration for the messaging behind these pieces. There is no support for the LGBTQ+ community and the messages they may need. There is no consideration for subtlety that may be necessary for people living in discriminatory households. Of course, taste is subjective, and what one may hate, another may love. But it’s undeniable that putting rainbows on prexisting designs is not revolutionary, nor does it show any level of education in regards to Pride. It is nothing more than a quick and easy way to make money from an already oppressed community, look good, garner support and compliments, whilst exerting mininimal effort. I am going to explain my examples, with mentioning companies. Of course, as aforementioned, what one may like, another may not. I am not criticising the design but rather what I believe it represents. All opinions differ and therefore, if you like it, that is your prerogative, in the same way that this is mine. Vans in 2021, released an extensive Pride line. Most of them were simply preexisting designs but in rainbow form. For example they had white canvas shoes which had squares of each letter in LGBT in a different colour. The design is not necessarily to my taste to begin with. But beyond that, it seems to me, pretty insensitive and very little effort for the company. They simply took the most fundamental aspect of pride and put it with a rainbow. But pride is about more than just the rainbow and the acronym LGBTQ+. It’s about struggle; it’s about fighting just to be who you are; it’s about loss and love; it’s about centuries of oppression and loving nonetheless. It’s an insult to believe that just by having the right letters and colours that you are supporting the meaning of pride. Anyone and everyone can do that. It’s about more than that when you are pledging to be an ally. It’s about understanding the struggles and the way you uphold the systems which perpetuate it. Rainbow shoes don’t take away the oppression you perpetuate, especially as a major corporation. Furthermore, we see statistics from companies about how their Pride merch just ‘doesn’t seem to sell’ and that’s no surprise when the people they are catering to more often than not don’t feel represented by these clothes, cannot wear them due to discrimination they may face or simply aren’t predisposed to buy the overpriced merch which doesn’t directly help the community. It doesn’t seem like a good investment especially when thousands of small business pour time, effort and emotion into making products which are for the people they are attempting to support and that try to encompass the struggle and love within Pride. It just feels fabriacated and exploitative- nothing more than a dramatic attempt to earn money.
But what about the corporations that donate to charities? This is a pretty valid question, afterall these comapnies are fiscally backing the things they seem to so desperately care about. Companies such as H&M and J.Crew, that have large yearly displays supporting gay pride, donate between 10–50% of their earnings on these collections to charities aiding the LGBTQ+ community. Since 2012, Nike has donated over $2.7 million to pro-LGBTQ+ communities. And at first glance this seems amazing, a step forward to humanity. But this to me seems to rub salt in the wound. Firstly, we know already that many corporations donate but this does not mean that they support the LGBTQ+ community or have any principles in who they invest and support. But furthermore, for these corporations, the millions they are donating are worth nothing. H&M is worth well over $18.82 billion, and Nike over $35 billion. So donating 2 million seems like nothing in comparison and is just a cheap attempt at virtue signalling that they care about the oppressd communities. Of course, I am more than sure that there are employees in all of these companies that more than support Pride fully and genuinely, and I am also not implying that these corporations fundamentally hate the LGBTQ+ community. I am simply stating that they are geared for money, not to care about minority groups and that there very overt support is nothing more than a way to make money both in the present and the future. They can gain loyal followers who will back them, because they are supporting good. It seems to me a low effort way to look good, without putting in the effort or making sure there money is going to real and systemic change, which realistically is what is needed. And finally, I have a gripe with the concepts of charities as a whole which fits quite nicely with this topic. Charities are a good way for the government to deflect responsibility. For all I have said about the money in corporations and their ability to do more, ultimately that responsiblity lies with the government and officials. The government should be protecting the LGBTQ+ community with legislation and institutional change, rather than relying on donations from others. It hardly seems fair that LGBTQ+ lives should be protected by people and their kindness, rather than their protection being considered a basic human right. It’s brilliant that all this money and activism is going towards supporting charities and organisations which are protecting members of the community, however it would be so much more beneficial is this could be used to drive real institutional and systematic change, which will for the better ensure the safety of the community is entrenched within the law, rather than relying on individuals. With the government remaining seemingly neutral or at least not creating legislation it makes it appear as though the rights of the LGBTQ+ community are not basic necessities but rather that they can be contested. That protecting people and ensuring their safety is merely an opinion, and something we can differ upon, and this is simply untrue. The government remaining netural is a statement, a statement that they don’t care about the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and rescind their responsibility to charities and organisations. If there were no longer people donating to these, then it’s simple, many LGBTQ+ people would lose their rights and support.
All of this being said, I would like to take a different approach to companies and Pride. I’d like to take a more moral or philosophical approach. Me personally, I consider myself to take a utilitarian and consequentialist outlook. I believe that the morally correct thing to do at any time, is what increases happiness or decreases suffering for everyone involved (with more emphasis placed on the latter), and that this happiness or lessening suffering comes from the consequence of your actions. There is much more in depth explanation into both the subjects but for the sake of brevity we’ll leave it there. Of course, as with anything there are hidden consequences (ones which are not directly felt or usually considered a consequence for an action) which are difficult to analyse or sometimes even identify, but are the consequences of corporations supporting Pride as bad as I have described above. Because when you consider it, it is much better for corporations to actively support Pride (even if it is for the wrong reasons) than to actively advocate against it. Of course we have seen croporations do this by donating to campaigins or organisations which harm the LGBTQ+ community, but for the most parts, the performative activism simply serves to promote and normalise the support for the LGBTQ+ community. It means that it is no longer a small and select group of people (mostly within the community) celebrating Pride. It becomes instead a widespread event and encourages companies to at least partially educate their consumers. Corporate Pride can be frustrating, and sometimes dangerous, but for the most part it seems to have one main purpose. And that is to normalise Pride. To see our feeds and streets covered in rainbows and at least outright (maybe not pure-intentioned) support for the LGBTQ+ community it means that there is less space for outright discrimination. IT normalises support and somewhat ups the bar for what to expect from corporations. It means that it is much harder to get away with neglecting to support Pride. It may not serve for much, but if it serves for one thing (and this is the main consequence I see from corporate Pride) is that there is an increase in support, education and some sort of advocacy for Pride. It means there is a barrage of somewhat positive opinions towards the communities. It is, therefore, undeniable that it is more constructive and way more positive for the companies to support Pride rather than take an active stance against it. Again, there are companies which advocate and continue to actively harm the LGBTQ+ community. But there are many that don’t- no more than anyone who lives under our current social and economic system. And these brands are promoting to their audience, many of which have an incredibly wide reach, that supporting Pride is a good thing. That supporting the LGBTQ+ community is seemingly a given. Although it would be infinitely better for a brand to support Pride through more than just merch, it is interesting to consider that it is positive for them to at least appear to truly support the movement, afterall, the majority of the audience will only see this side, and therefore view supporting the community and movement as a thing they too should and can do. Consequentially, there is a more positive impact of companies going out of their way to spread awareness and support for Pride. Although their activism may be performative, and just another way to virtue signal that they are a good company and must be supported, it sets a precedent and sends a message. It creates an atmosphere, especially online of support towards the LGBTQ+ community. The consequence of these actions are overwhelmingly positive, even empty positive messages are better than negative ones.
None of what I have said is to say that the corporations are doing the most they can (or anywhere near enough) and there is still more than too much to consider about the ethics of corporations making you think they are good. But to me, it is crucial to consider consequentially and to consider about the harm and happiness actions bring. On the presumption that a corporation is not actively, nor passively homophobic and their only involvement within the community is Pride merch and low level support for LGBTQ+ people, we can consider that empty words of support and rainbows all over brings more happiness, and may even reduce harm to a large group of people. It increases and amplifies support. It creates a space online which is actively pro-Pride as well as upping the standards for companies. To me, as I have said countless time, it is much better for everyone to have some sort of message (even if it is fake) than to have nothing at all, and of course is miles better than active and rampant homophobia. I believe there is still a long way to go, and that under the current economic system we cannot find any corporation which does not exploit (actively) oppressed groups. However, it is all about minimising harm, which is most important to me, and although I despise the rainbow-washing we see in June, it symbolises to me, a slight reduction in harm towards the LGBTQ+ community. It further symbolises that enough people on the consumer side view supporting the LGBTQ+ community as something they consider when shopping. If consumers didn’t seek for it, then why would corporations engage with it? Slowly and surely we are making moves in the right direction. These are less than baby steps but they are more than nothing, and to me, this is key.
