TOTALLY GEEKED!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Why the Target Boycott is different.


My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
RE: Why the Target Boycott is different.
Permalink  
 


Ohfour wrote:

Hypocrite....


 Who you callin' a hypocrite??!  furious  biggrin

 

I am the leader of a pack of amazons and warriors.  I shall kill you with a thousand lashes of my sword.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:

Hypocrite....


 Who you callin' a hypocrite??!  furious  biggrin

 

I am the leader of a pack of amazons and warriors.  I shall kill you with a thousand lashes of my sword.


That was a general statement.  You BETTER know how much I lurve you!!!!!!! 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:

I couldn't read beyond this statement:

Conservatives are conservative precisely because they value family and faith above politics. We do not virtue-signal in the manner (or to the extent) of typical progressives, for whom driving a Prius or noisily boycotting Israel is a source of instant self-satisfaction. Rather, conservatives seek to do their best for their families and to lead decent lives within given circumstances.

What BS.

flan


 So you didn't read the article?  Please don't bother to comment, then.  It would be an ignorant, ill-informed bunch of words and crap.


 You say that like it would any different from the norm.


 I don't understand why you talk about yourself like that...

flan


Well, this is it.  The final.  You have literally reverted to a 6 year old.  There have been comments here and there that were juvenile, but this one, well...it wins the all time most juvenile statement.   

You win!!!!!


 I was going to post something very similar.  

What's next - "I know you are, but what am I?  "

LOL.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And where was your concern for all those Canadian clerks that lost their jobs when t MN Target failed spectacularly in Canada? You and yours obviously didn't care enough about them to keep the stores open.


 I was not protesting target, I just didn't like the prices. They had nothing really to offer that the existing stores didn't have. 


 And the stores were not the same as US Target.  The products were of lower quality.  There was no benefit to shopping there.  It was pointless.  They imported junk from China, got busted by their market and went bankrupt.  For THAT I felt that the employees definitely got the short end of the stick.  If Target had done it properly it wouldn't have been an issue.


 So you had your reasons for not shopping there.  Other people have theirs.  Yours are not more valid or important.


 I disagree (not on the valid or important part) but I think that there is a difference between making a political choice to not support a business because their values or ethics don't align with yours or choosing to not shop somewhere because they have nothing you want to buy.


 Thank you, I was not trying to make a statement by not shopping there.  


 So you can choose not to shop there b/c you don't like their stuff or choices, but I can't choose not to shop there over the safety of myself and my kids????

 

That is whacked.  LOL.  



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And where was your concern for all those Canadian clerks that lost their jobs when t MN Target failed spectacularly in Canada? You and yours obviously didn't care enough about them to keep the stores open.


 I was not protesting target, I just didn't like the prices. They had nothing really to offer that the existing stores didn't have. 


 And the stores were not the same as US Target.  The products were of lower quality.  There was no benefit to shopping there.  It was pointless.  They imported junk from China, got busted by their market and went bankrupt.  For THAT I felt that the employees definitely got the short end of the stick.  If Target had done it properly it wouldn't have been an issue.


 So you had your reasons for not shopping there.  Other people have theirs.  Yours are not more valid or important.


 I disagree (not on the valid or important part) but I think that there is a difference between making a political choice to not support a business because their values or ethics don't align with yours or choosing to not shop somewhere because they have nothing you want to buy.


 Thank you, I was not trying to make a statement by not shopping there.  


 So you can choose not to shop there b/c you don't like their stuff or choices, but I can't choose not to shop there over the safety of myself and my kids????

 

That is whacked.  LOL.  


 No not really. I am not purposely trying to hurt them, you are. Do you see the difference? 



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

I, however, understand that the jobs will become available elsewhere when the people shop elsewhere. Even online retailers need warehouse packers and customer service personnel. Jobs don't get lost - they get shifted. People still need to buy shampoo and kitty litter and toys.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

I, however, understand that the jobs will become available elsewhere when the people shop elsewhere. Even online retailers need warehouse packers and customer service personnel. Jobs don't get lost - they get shifted. People still need to buy shampoo and kitty litter and toys.


 So now the issue is that Apple, because she is concerned for the employment of Target employees, doesn't understand the shifting of labour markets?



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And where was your concern for all those Canadian clerks that lost their jobs when t MN Target failed spectacularly in Canada? You and yours obviously didn't care enough about them to keep the stores open.


 I was not protesting target, I just didn't like the prices. They had nothing really to offer that the existing stores didn't have. 


 And the stores were not the same as US Target.  The products were of lower quality.  There was no benefit to shopping there.  It was pointless.  They imported junk from China, got busted by their market and went bankrupt.  For THAT I felt that the employees definitely got the short end of the stick.  If Target had done it properly it wouldn't have been an issue.


 So you had your reasons for not shopping there.  Other people have theirs.  Yours are not more valid or important.


 I disagree (not on the valid or important part) but I think that there is a difference between making a political choice to not support a business because their values or ethics don't align with yours or choosing to not shop somewhere because they have nothing you want to buy.


 Thank you, I was not trying to make a statement by not shopping there.  


 So you can choose not to shop there b/c you don't like their stuff or choices, but I can't choose not to shop there over the safety of myself and my kids????

 

That is whacked.  LOL.  


 No not really. I am not purposely trying to hurt them, you are. Do you see the difference? 


 Customers are allowed to make choices.  Target is not entitled to the consumer's money.  So, if their policies hurt them, who's fault is that?  Certainly not the consumers'.



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


 Why would I shop at a store that doesn't care about the safety of me or my child?  That feels the need to suddenly advertise and promote a policy that has long existed without issue, but now makes it clear that it applies to EVERYONE, not just transgenders?  

And their response to public concern has been horrendous.  They have basically said - your opinion doesn't matter.  That is not a welcoming or inclusive attitude towards me. They obviously don't care about my business or if I choose not to shop there.  So I won't.  

 

This is Target's doing.  Consumers can choose where to shop for any reason whatsoever - we have no DUTY to shop anywhere.  That seems to be lost on you.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.


Mine still has male and female dressing rooms.  I always just assumed that, well, women used the womens and men used the mens.  Now they are saying that anyone is allowed to use either.  If I had known this before, I would have stopped shipping there a long time ago... 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.


 And that was completely and totally their doing.  They publicized their policy in such a way as to open the doors to predators.  It was stupid.  They should suffer for it.

 

 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


 Why would I shop at a store that doesn't care about the safety of me or my child?  That feels the need to suddenly advertise and promote a policy that has long existed without issue, but now makes it clear that it applies to EVERYONE, not just transgenders?  

And their response to public concern has been horrendous.  They have basically said - your opinion doesn't matter.  That is not a welcoming or inclusive attitude towards me. They obviously don't care about my business or if I choose not to shop there.  So I won't.  

 

This is Target's doing.  Consumers can choose where to shop for any reason whatsoever - we have no DUTY to shop anywhere.  That seems to be lost on you.


 Awww.  This was a nice conversation until you tossed in the insult to my intelligence.  I'm sorry that happened.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


And trust me, LL does not take joy in them going out of business (I've been to her house.  90% of her stuff is from Target)  She wants them to change their policy. 

And if they want to stay in business, they are going to have to...

 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 It really doesn't matter why you didn't shop there.  They didn't please the customer.  For whatever  reason.  So, they deserve to go out of business.  That's life.



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


And trust me, LL does not take joy in them going out of business (I've been to her house.  90% of her stuff is from Target)  She wants them to change their policy. 

And if they want to stay in business, they are going to have to...

 


 LL is suffering from withdrawal. 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.


 And that was completely and totally their doing.  They publicized their policy in such a way as to open the doors to predators.  It was stupid.  They should suffer for it.

 

 


 I don't believe they should suffer for making their policy known. There are over 70 retailers in the States that have similar policy.

 



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


 Why would I shop at a store that doesn't care about the safety of me or my child?  That feels the need to suddenly advertise and promote a policy that has long existed without issue, but now makes it clear that it applies to EVERYONE, not just transgenders?  

And their response to public concern has been horrendous.  They have basically said - your opinion doesn't matter.  That is not a welcoming or inclusive attitude towards me. They obviously don't care about my business or if I choose not to shop there.  So I won't.  

 

This is Target's doing.  Consumers can choose where to shop for any reason whatsoever - we have no DUTY to shop anywhere.  That seems to be lost on you.


 Awww.  This was a nice conversation until you tossed in the insult to my intelligence.  I'm sorry that happened.


 No, I didn't.  You seem to think that people have a duty to not stop shopping there over differences in political issues.  My point is that people can shop anywhere they want, or NOT, for any reason. 

And it's NOT a political issue - it's a safety one.  I have never boycotted a store for their political beliefs.  

Did you even read the OP?  Because from your posts, it does not appear you have.  Either that, or you don't give a damn about anyone else's views or opinions. 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.


 And that was completely and totally their doing.  They publicized their policy in such a way as to open the doors to predators.  It was stupid.  They should suffer for it.

 

 


 I don't believe they should suffer for making their policy known. There are over 70 retailers in the States that have similar policy.

 


 And I disagree.  And in this, my opinion matters more.  You don't and never have shopped at Target.  Your feelings on the matters don't affect, anything.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  


 No, the governor of NC made this an issue, that seems pretty obvious.



__________________


Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

An issue that needed to be addressed...

__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  


 No, the governor of NC made this an issue, that seems pretty obvious.


 Most people don't understand the issue regarding the rights of states vs. the federal government.  The federal government has been responding to liberal pressure to open all public restrooms to any gender.  NC put a law in place to defeat federal preemption.  

It should have been left alone. The transgender community is EXTREMELY small, and accommodations could be easily made for them without trampling on the privacy rights of others. 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

And it doesn't matter. If your issue was caring about the jobs of the employees - you should have shopped there, anyway.


 Wasn't my issue.  My issue was why I refused to spend money there.


 Well, that wasn't apple's issue.  She's worried about the clerk's jobs.  


 That's Target's ob - which they obviously failed at by bringing in crappy merchandise.  Hence the refusal to spend money.  However, the intentional politically based attempt to destroy a retailer who isn't attempting to cheat customers with faulty merchandise because it disagrees with your personal views is different.


It doesn't have anything to do with my views.  It has to do with my children's safety... 


 But Target's policies haven't changed - they've only just become politicized.


 And that was completely and totally their doing.  They publicized their policy in such a way as to open the doors to predators.  It was stupid.  They should suffer for it.

 

 


 I don't believe they should suffer for making their policy known. There are over 70 retailers in the States that have similar policy.

 


 It doesn't matter what you believe.  If we dont' want to shop there we won't shop there.  



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  


 No, the governor of NC made this an issue, that seems pretty obvious.


Governors are elected to address issues.  So, not sure of your point.



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

But it's OK for the left to boycott Chick-fil-A because of something that their owner believes? It doesn't affect anyone, just his belief. THe double standard is ridiculous...

__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

I don't understand this "I hate Walmart with the white hot passion of 1000 suns but i love Target" thing. It's truly bizarre. It's a store. You buy stuff. If you like the stuff they sell at the prices they sell and the layout, etc, then you shop there. If not, you don't. And, if they come out and politicize things and you disagree and want to shop elsewhere, well the business made that choice.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

I, however, understand that the jobs will become available elsewhere when the people shop elsewhere. Even online retailers need warehouse packers and customer service personnel. Jobs don't get lost - they get shifted. People still need to buy shampoo and kitty litter and toys.


 So now the issue is that Apple, because she is concerned for the employment of Target employees, doesn't understand the shifting of labour markets?


 Apple is trying to guilt the boycotters b/c refusing to shop at Target will lose them jobs.  And if that is her concern, she is missing the point of shifting labor markets, and the failure of companies to please their customer base.  

 

And quite frankly - I do NOT understand the liberal mindset on this one.  Target has family unisex bathrooms in every store I've been in.  This isn't about a transgender being able to safely use a restroom, this is about making a political point.  When you do that - you alienate those that don't agree with you.  And businesses who have a duty to their shareholders, and their employees, should not be doing that.  

And WHY do liberals think it is ok to ignore safety concerns?  There are more registered sex offenders in this country than there are transgenders. It is not a stupid concern.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  


 No, the governor of NC made this an issue, that seems pretty obvious.


Governors are elected to address issues.  So, not sure of your point.


 This governor pushed his own personal agenda and in fact, the State of NC and its people are suffering the consequences. 

 

 There’s been a serious backlash from businesses, echoing the response when other states considered or passed similar laws dealing with LGBT rights. Major Old North State companies like Bank of America criticized the law, and a slew of big corporations announced they would reverse or halt plans to create jobs in North Carolina. PayPal canceled a planned 400-job center in the state, and Deutsche Bank announced Tuesday morning that it was freezing plans to create 250 new positions. The Raleigh visitors bureau reported the law was already having a negative effect on conferences in the capital.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/pat-mccrory-north-carolina-hb2/477936/



__________________


Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

No, I'm not. They have made a choice that the safety of women and children does not matter, so I'm choosing not to shop there.

If it was just a political issue, I would have boycotted them years ago.


 The difference is huge. I did not choose to not shop at Target because I wanted to see them fail and go out of business. 

My choice was not out of malice but was simply because they did not offer anything price wise or quality wise that interested me. 

I did not take joy in the fact that they went out of business.


 I don't want them to fail and go out of business.  I want them to change their policy.  I don't want to shop at a store that cares nothing about me or my children.  They have made a political choice.  That is their choice.  They had and have other options.  They have family bathrooms already.  They are choosing to take sides in a political issue that they should have stayed mum on.  


 They simply responded to that nutbag governor in NC who made the law, he is the one that started all this. The former status quo was working, why did he choose to stir the pot....I'll give you one guess.

“The governor chose to embrace a law that discriminates against North Carolinians, and he’s the only person who can answer why.”


The status quo was working fine until the liberals made this an issue.  I have never even NOTICED if a transgender has been in the bathroom with me, nor would it even phase me.  The people who made this an issue are the ones forcing it into the schools, forcing it into the public.  The law that was passed was in reaction to that.  


 No, the governor of NC made this an issue, that seems pretty obvious.


Governors are elected to address issues.  So, not sure of your point.


 This governor pushed his own personal agenda and in fact, the State of NC and its people are suffering the consequences. 

 

 There’s been a serious backlash from businesses, echoing the response when other states considered or passed similar laws dealing with LGBT rights. Major Old North State companies like Bank of America criticized the law, and a slew of big corporations announced they would reverse or halt plans to create jobs in North Carolina. PayPal canceled a planned 400-job center in the state, and Deutsche Bank announced Tuesday morning that it was freezing plans to create 250 new positions. The Raleigh visitors bureau reported the law was already having a negative effect on conferences in the capital.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/pat-mccrory-north-carolina-hb2/477936/


And the citizens of NC agree with the governor... 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

The TN boycott, just a few years ago. We voted on same-sex marriage. 81% voted no. There were financial implications at the beginning. We knew there would be. We still stood our ground.

This is nothing unusual coming from this governor. He was elected by the people that knew exactly where he stood.

__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

I, however, understand that the jobs will become available elsewhere when the people shop elsewhere. Even online retailers need warehouse packers and customer service personnel. Jobs don't get lost - they get shifted. People still need to buy shampoo and kitty litter and toys.


 So now the issue is that Apple, because she is concerned for the employment of Target employees, doesn't understand the shifting of labour markets?


 Apple is trying to guilt the boycotters b/c refusing to shop at Target will lose them jobs.  And if that is her concern, she is missing the point of shifting labor markets, and the failure of companies to please their customer base.  

 

And quite frankly - I do NOT understand the liberal mindset on this one.  Target has family unisex bathrooms in every store I've been in.  This isn't about a transgender being able to safely use a restroom, this is about making a political point.  When you do that - you alienate those that don't agree with you.  And businesses who have a duty to their shareholders, and their employees, should not be doing that.  

And WHY do liberals think it is ok to ignore safety concerns?  There are more registered sex offenders in this country than there are transgenders. It is not a stupid concern.


 "Apple" is not trying to guilt the boycotters into anything other than understanding that the joy some seem to be taking thinking they can shut down Target has consequences to real, hard working, innocent people who just want to do their job.

Target has not changed their policy, they had the same policy when you so happily shopped there.

 



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Target has opened the doors to sexual predators being able to use any bathroom or dressing room they like. They have now made it clear that their policy does not just apply to transgenders, but it "inclusive" to everyone.

But thanks for ignoring the valid concerns of parents.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is, Sasha!

Status: Offline
Posts: 5883
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

Target has opened the doors to sexual predators being able to use any bathroom or dressing room they like. They have now made it clear that their policy does not just apply to transgenders, but it "inclusive" to everyone.

But thanks for ignoring the valid concerns of parents.


 Nobody is ignoring your concerns - just pointing out the fact that it's surprising that the concerns so suddenly appeared when the policy hasn't actually changed.



__________________

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not today, Satan.  Not today.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1944
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

Target has opened the doors to sexual predators being able to use any bathroom or dressing room they like. They have now made it clear that their policy does not just apply to transgenders, but it "inclusive" to everyone.

But thanks for ignoring the valid concerns of parents.


Same policy as always. I guess people didn't care enough to check before.

Policy has not changed...you have.



__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

We should be more concerned with protecting children than adults who have the ability to make their own rational choices.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

apple wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

Target has opened the doors to sexual predators being able to use any bathroom or dressing room they like. They have now made it clear that their policy does not just apply to transgenders, but it "inclusive" to everyone.

But thanks for ignoring the valid concerns of parents.


Same policy as always. I guess people didn't care enough to check before.

Policy has not changed...you have.


 I disagree.  Target's public announcement and resulting responses to questioning have made it very, very clear to the public and predators that they will not police their bathrooms at all.  They have further made it clear that their thoughts on "inclusiveness" do not include concerned parents and the safety of children.  

 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

Tignanello wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

Target has opened the doors to sexual predators being able to use any bathroom or dressing room they like. They have now made it clear that their policy does not just apply to transgenders, but it "inclusive" to everyone.

But thanks for ignoring the valid concerns of parents.


 Nobody is ignoring your concerns - just pointing out the fact that it's surprising that the concerns so suddenly appeared when the policy hasn't actually changed.


The policy hasn't changed, but the pervs out there (just like us) didn't know it was such an open policy.  Now they know.  And I will not subject my kids to that... 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

I would still like to know why the boycott of Chick-fil-a was all good, but the Target one is not...

__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Target has chosen to take a side in the political battle and have basically told more than half of America they don't give a damn about them or their opinions.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
 

And quite frankly - I do NOT understand the liberal mindset on this one.  Target has family unisex bathrooms in every store I've been in.  This isn't about a transgender being able to safely use a restroom, this is about making a political point.  When you do that - you alienate those that don't agree with you.  And businesses who have a duty to their shareholders, and their employees, should not be doing that.  

And WHY do liberals think it is ok to ignore safety concerns?  There are more registered sex offenders in this country than there are transgenders. It is not a stupid concern.


 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 

«First  <  1 2 3 46  >  Last»  | Page of 6  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard