December 09, 2005

quench - tell me what you think about this

So, my friend just emailed me about this new thing that HRC is doing, or rather, just did, that is a guide so that you can buy things from LGBT-friendly companies.

You quenchers and quench readers are the smartest people I know. Tell me what you think about it.

(NB There's a Bay Windows/Gay Bimbos article about it here and the guide itself is here.

What do you think of this strategy?

And when will someone come out with such a guide that looks at companies exploitation along race and class lines along with sexual orientation and gender? Would this be a good thing?

[according to Bay Windows, the following criteria are used in this survey to rank the companies


* whether the company has a policy prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation,

* whether the policy also prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and expression,

* whether the company provides parity in health benefits to employees' domestic partners,

* whether the company recognizes an in-house GLBT employee group,

* whether the company's diversity training includes sexual orientation,

* whether the company has a corporate giving policy that provides donations to GLBT charitable groups, and

* whether the company gives to groups which oppose equal rights for gays.

]

2 comments:

queer little fellow said...

It seems like a good idea, but you point out a good thing when you point out that these guides need to be better integrated. As a wee one (well, I'm still wee, but wee-er sounded bad), I remember going through my sister's bookshelf and finding Shopping For A Better World. Reminded by this post, I went back and looked for it again, and it appears that it hasn't been updated since 1992 - a real pity, because it seemed like it was dealing with a lot of the issues of integration that the queer-specific list brings up - scoring across a broad range of issues, from animal testing to the environment to minorities and women. Now that was a good book... of course, things have changed since then, most notably the fall of apartheid in South Africa (which got its own category in the little check-boxes)...

Although now that I think about it, it might not have looked as closely as might be good (does it give money to lots of companies that then bribe planning commissions to evict everyone everywhere?) But it was a start, and I really wish I could find an updated version.

OK, I'm done sounding crazy now. More or less I think it's a good idea - it's hard to do all the legwork necessary to be a responsible consumer, but as you do point out, then collating everything becomes a big worry (what fish is it sound to eat? what if two issues cancel one another out? is it still bad to eat grapes?)

queer little fellow said...

So with the being wrong thing...

Another search on Amazon brought up this listing for the most recent edition of the book. Fine, but as it turns out my memory is getting spotty in my old age - a lot of the ratings have to do with women's and minority rights within the workplace, which is certainly important, but also not exactly the same as, say, a rating based on whether money is being given to support politics designed to erode reproductive rights. However, it seems like a good start for a category-search, which is probably why I shouldn't do it now, because I have a paper.