I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this:

http://adage.com/news.cms?newsId=48473

It seems BMW/MINI has been listed as not gay friendly. It shows how a corporation can really blow it.

I'm not trying to start a flame war by any means. I just don't understand how or why the labeling is needed. Can't we all just drive MINIs and be happy? It is my understanding the anger came from a new webiste called http://gaywheels.com
a site by BMW.

 

I think the aim of http://gaywheels.com/ is to educate readers and ultimately persuade corporate policy into recognizing GLBT relationships.

 

I don't want to register. Can someone give me a synopsis of the article? Thanks.

 

The article points out the hypocrisy of BMW marketing in GBLT specific publications while denying health benefits to GBLT employees' significant others.

Seems fair to me. If you as a corporation tell me that the person with whom I'm in a relationship isn't family, isn't eligible for family health benefits, doesn't qualify me for family leave when ill, then don't expect me to spend money with you and don't think you're going to fool me by advertising in targeted magazines.

 

Here's the gist of it: BMW advertises in gay publications, but doesn't offer domestic partner benefits.

 

By the same reasoning, neither are they straight friendly. They don't offer benefits to heterosexuals living together either.

Damn, I didn't realize the MINI was so hateful!

From the gaywheels website:
Influential? Yeah, my wife saw a MINI on "Queer Eye" so I thought I'd pick one up.


Paul

 

Well plenty of companies and states do recognize the life partnerships and provide benefits. You can't compare it to straight people living together since they have the option of getting married, which then allows for the benefits.

As for being influential they do have a point since so many people in entertainment and related industries are gay and have a hand in what products are used and thus promoted to the public and considered stylish/fashionable. They do not nec mean cars specifically but it seems like a general statement like any similar document would have to describe a group of people trying to make a point.

It does seem rather hypocritical of BMW to target an audience they do not support.

 

BMW CRITICIZED FOR ADS TARGETING GAYS
Gaywheels.com Calls Automaker's Campaign Hypocritical
March 29, 2006
QwikFIND ID: AAR55U
By Jean Halliday
DETROIT (AdAge.com) -- Here’s a paradox: BMW of North America is under fire from a gay-advocacy auto Web site for advertising in gay and lesbian magazines.
Gaywheels.com called BMW hypocritical, pointing out that the automaker targets “the deep pockets” of gays and lesbians by advertising in publications like The Advocate but doesn’t offer domestic-partner benefits to employees.

“Gay and lesbian consumers want to spend their money with gay-friendly companies,” Joe LaMuraglia, publisher of Gaywheels.com, told Advertising Age. “A lot of people will see companies advertising in gay media and assume they are gay friendly.”
Using domestic-partner benefit programs as a criterion, Gaywheels.com lists some 30 “gay-friendly” and nine “non-gay friendly” auto brands. Seven other auto brands are listed as “still investigating” as the publisher waits to hear about the status of their benefits programs.
A BMW spokeswoman said the automaker, in an effort to stay in line with New Jersey laws, does not offer domestic-partner benefits to any staffers.
Growth in buying power
The issue is gaining momentum among shoppers in the community. Gay and lesbian buying power is projected to reach $641 billion this year, according to Witeck-Combs Communications, a Washington-based ad agency specialist in the field.
In December the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights organization, issued its first-ever “Buyers Guide for Equality,” a handbook that gives brands scores based on the group’s annual Corporate Equality Index. The index rates major corporations on criteria including staff policies, advertising and event sponsorships. Some 200,000 guides were downloaded during the first two weeks it was on the group’s Web site, a spokesman said.
Sixty-nine percent of gays and lesbians said that a Buyers Guide recommendation would very likely or likely influence their shopping decisions, according to a recent survey by Harris Interactive and Witeck-Combs.
DaimlerChrysler, Ford Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Co. USA all received perfect 100 ratings in the rights group's most recent index. General Motors Corp., Volkswagen of America and Subaru of America each scored 86. But Nissan North America scored the worst among top automakers with a 29. Not surprisingly, Nissan receives a “non-gay friendly” classification on Gaywheels.com.
~ ~ ~
Gay-friendly brands, according to Gaywheels.com
DaimlerChrysler’s Dodge, Jeep, Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz and Maybach
Ford MotorCo.’s Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo, Aston Martin and majority-controlled Mazda
Toyota Motor Sales USA’s Toyota, Lexus and Scion
General Motors Corp.'s Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Hummer, Pontiac, Saab and Saturn
Volkswagen of America's Audi, VW and Bentley
Subaru of America
Isuzu Motors America
Mitsubishi Motors North America
Non-gay-friendly brands, according to Gaywheels.com:
American Honda Motor Co.'s Acura and Honda
BMW's Mini and BMW
Hyundai Motor America and affiliate Kia Motor America
Nissan North America’s Nissan and Infiniti
American Suzuki Motor Corp.
Brands the group is still waiting to hear from:
BMW's Rolls-Royce
Porsche
Lotus
Panoz
Fiat’s Ferrari and Maserati
Lamborghini

 

I'm just guessing, but with BMW making money hand over fist, I don't see them changing their policy based on the "influence" or "buying power" of the gay community.

 

You never know - but I think the point is just the "outing" the company policies in order to have the knowledge to make informed choices about where you spend your money. I know that when I find a company endorses or does things I do not agree with I do not spend my hard earned money with them (i.e. Walmart). I don't expect them to go out of business but I'd rather not personally contribute to their success, and I think that is what the above is about - just being able to make informed decisions.

 

Getting married is an option. Why require it? Are you saying gays living together are more committed than straights living together?

Paul

 

Of course I'm not making a dumb generalization like that

I'm saying that it is an option that straight people have if they want all of the benefits right now that gay people do not - its just not fair to compare because the option is there for one not the other.

Edit: The irony is that both straight and gay people get married to people just for this reason, as well as green cards, etc, so the system does not exactly work...

 

Gay friendly cars . What is this world coming too????

 

We need to get this article out in the general press. Maybe bubbas and red necks will quit refering to the MINI as a "Gay" car

 

It has something to do with the stickshift, but that's all I'm saying about that.

Paul

 

Who cares? If you hadn't posted the website, no one here would have read them.

 

Slooooowwwwwww news day

 

Oh, I see. What you're saying then is that since straight people DO have the option then they should act on it simply for benefits. No wonder the divorce rate is so high. And in your edit, you completely contradict your prior statement about gay people getting married.

 

What??? My word, maybe you better read it again... I say straight people can married for those reasons therefore it cannot be compared, not that they should geez. And in my reference to gay people getting married its obviously not to their partner, which is the option straight people have that was the issue being discussed with domestic partners and companies providing benefits, but rather I was musing that they can get hitched to other people of the opposite sex just in order to share benefits if they want to.

 

IBTL

 

chow4us you were in already tho

Somedays you just can't have a intelligent conversation about things. I figure someone posts something and if you are interested you talk about it, pros cons whatever in a reasonable way, if you are not interested you click off. I guess this subject is beyond some people to discuss without prejudice. Me, I'm always interested to find out about company policies that are good or bad for all types of people, and like I stated earlier it seems that the point of the orginal article was just to share info among the group involved so they can make informed purchasing decisions.

 

Seems like any thread about this subject becomes too emotionally charged for some to handle, or entices some to make snarky comments instead of just shutting it.

Same as it ever was.

 

I am gay. I will be driving a MINI. If that is their corporate policy so be it. I work for a company that is family owned and they do not offer domestic partner benefits. It is a large company. I am sure many of you have used our products at some point. Does this stop me from working there? No. Does it stop me from using the products we sell? No. Does it stop me from buying a MINI? No. Sometimes things are what they are. A policy. There is no hate involved. They are running a business and if it is something that does not make sense to the bottom line, why should they do it? To appease a small group of people who like to ***** about every thing? believe me I know these people, I live in Seattle, land of the NIMBY. Everyone has an opinion and this is mine. I will be driving a MINI and if that makes me a motoring hypocrite, so be it. At least I will be smiling all the way.

 

The way I see it is no car company until recently offered domestic partner benefits. Since the majority of car companies in recent years have instituted such policies, there is a good chance that at least some of the remainders will follow suit. It's been established that it makes good business sense for the company itself as well as their employees. While some might consider BMW hypocritical for advertising in gay publications, at least they are doing so and not bowing to (IMO dubious) pressure from religious hate groups threatening boycotts. And who knows? BMW might just institute DP benefits to keep from losing people to Daimler or elsewhere. This exposure alone might kick them into gear.

The company I work for quietly instituted DP benefits several years ago and as a result gained some respect among it's peers in the defense industry. Again, it's widely considered good business which actually gives more of a return to the companies hosting such benefits than it might cost them.

 

Agreed, it's quite absurd.

Like I said in post 2, that site's aim is to "ultimately persuade corporate policy into recognizing GLBT relationships."

I'm glad some of us were able to keep this intellectual.