AIBU to be a little bit hurt by this? (LGBT related)

[GalacticBuscuit]

Hi all,

Ive been thinking about a discussion/meeting I was involved in and wonder if I’m being unreasonable in being a bit hurt/miffed by something.

Firstly, I am a lesbian. I am not really out to anyone other than a few very close friends as I grew up in quite a homophobic environment and I don’t feel I will ever be comfortable being openly out.

I work for a large corporation that trades globally, but which is a British business and is headquartered here.

In a meeting yesterday we were discussing some changes that need to be made to one of our products. One of the changes proposed was that we need to remove any references to LGBT people, as it’s hurting our growth in the Middle East. No one battered an eyelid at this, and it was passed through, in fact one person mentioned that doing this would be good for our global DEI targets as it would be a positive move toward better cultural sensitivity.

I said nothing, but I couldn’t help but feel a little bit hurt by this.

I know I am being unreasonable to compare or play what aboutry, but a little voice in my head whispered, well imagine if there was a region of the world that had a lot of countries with apartheid and segregation, so we need to remove any references to POC from our products. Or imagine a region of the world where they had a strong belief in eugenics, so we needed to remove any positive references to people with disabilities from our products for that region.

Both would be very very rightly shot down. So why do non-heterosexuals always seem to be the expandable minority?

I know it isn’t a competition between minorities, I was just trying to illustrate my thinking.

I’m not going to say anything, I just feel a bit hurt.

For reference, I do mean that it’s being removed from our actual product, not just the marketing or whatever. I don’t want to give away the industry incase it’s outing, but for something similar (but a different sector) imagine a history textbook contained information on key historical figures, but we’ve now decided that two of them are being cut because they were openly gay/lesbian/bi and the market in certain parts of the world doesn’t want material that represents these people in a positive light…

sorry for the rant. It has helped just getting this off my chest.

You don’t care about anyone’s sexuality because you have never had to hide yours. It should be a non issue but it isn’t hence why they’re removing any sign of it from foreign advertisements. It isn’t about telling everyone you're gay, it’s about living in a world or working for a company where it doesn’t matter if you are.

I think you are perfectly reasonable to have an issue with this but it's ridiculous to feel hurt - you say yourself no one even knows you're lesbian.

I think a lot of corporates have to take slightly different approaches in different markets to respect local customs. For myself, that makes me very uncomfortable and I would struggle to work with those organisations - so I completel yunderstand and agree with your overall feeling of discomfort.

I used to work for a large international organisation that had specific guidelines for its female executives when travelling to certain countries. I always hated that and even just on my much less hardcore trips to Dubai, was annoyed when I received a notification suggesting it would be unwise to use a particular restaurant/bar in the hotel I was staying in.

With your textbook example, I think there are differences depending on whether

1. They are removing LGBT people from all versions of the book or "just" from a specific edition/translation of the book that will be sold in that territory and
2. Whether they are removing people who happen to be LGBT and would otherwise be featured in the book because of their achievements/contributions or whether they were in the book originally because of their achievements/contributions to LGBT awareness/rights/anti-discrimination.

I would have an easier time accepting removal of prominent LGBT activist who was included in the RoW editions for their contributions to LGBT equality but wasn't in a specific targeted ME edition than I would with removing a successful person who happened to be LGBT but was included for their non LGBT related achievements in worldwide edition

Yes, and we should see through it. If they cared about LGB (TQ+ etc.(put both in case I am corrected by a pro-trans/gender critical)) they would include this material world wide. But they don't. They care about looking like they care, to people that they think care, or are at least not repulsed by them caring.

Same as the charity stuff. I pray no one labours under the illusion that their company cares about the 'mencap' or 'dogs for the blind' when it is just a great opportunity for publicity and networking.

I assumes at first you were talking about marketing - obviously it makes sense for your advertising to chime with the culture you are in. But if its actually the product, why cant you adapt the product for different markets? I think its hard to reply without knowing what the product is. I cant imagine many products that would contain references to LGBT apart from books and TV programmes.

The Equality Act 2010 states that you cannot be discriminated against for your sexuality. This entire meeting and conversation was discriminatory. Was it minutes or recorded? Send it to HR, even anonymously. Just because Trump and Farage go around bleating DEI, doesn’t change our laws.

Part of providing a good service for me is not judging the fact I am gay. Edited - just read you said you’re not heterosexual. Each to their own! For me, it is important. I can see your point fully though about removing it when it suits. It would be more meaningful if it was just the companies values full stop, like it or lump it.

You’re wasting your time being upset about this. It’s a business. It’s not personal, and the business thinking is probably right, even if morally it’s not. If they don’t put profit first, then you don’t have a job.

Save being upset, for things that are actually upsetting and you’ll have a happier life,

WTF does Trump have to do with the views of homosexuality in the Middle East? I’m pretty sure the major religions over there have had the same views for thousands of years.

I didn't say I was speaking for anyone in any bloody community?!
I was trying to offer advice to OP. I was not talking about trans people at all? You need to stop seeing things where there's nothing to see!

I don't see how a rainbow painted on a product helps you to know a company is not judging you? Are you only concerned about being judged as gay? What about for being female, or if someone is disabled, do they need a flag on products? It's utterly hollow in my opinion.

Why does sexuality need to be mentioned at all regarding your product?

"Lesbians just can't get enough of our latest widgets"

"Straight people love our designs"

It's just weird. No need for it either way.

It is about a companies values, the logo/flag signposts you to that. I would also expect them to celebrate diversity in all shapes and forms, not just sexuality. Like I said, each to their own! If we are at a place in society where everyone is accepted regardless and therefore we don’t need any logos or statements or flags or whatever it is, then great! But sadly we are not.

Re-read the last paragraph of OP's post. It talks of references to openly gay/lesbian/bi individuals being removed from something such as educational material/publications due to risk of offense from the target market. i.e. the target market are bigots and can't handle homosexuals being spoken of positively. That is a proper 'phobic' thing. OP isn't discussing rainbow washing

Im LGB and no, I wouldnt find it remotely hurtful.

Sexual orientation hasn't been the focus of LGBTQIA++ for years to the point that increasing numbers of the LGB just view it as a warning label.

The Middle-East is not a friend to homosexuality (or women) and likely never will be so, so its unsurprising that it's harming growth.

Given that the "community" is riven, i see no reason for companies to associate themselves with it if they want profit, which companies really do need to be viable.
Better to associate with the WWF/IUCN if they want to get on board with a cause.

YANBU

In the name of capitalism though I believe that skin colour and disability would be dropped like a hot potato if they threatened sales in certain countries.

This. I think it’s outrageous and a shitty thing to do what’s next the removal of any references of women?

And sorry you’ve come across homophobia op it’s shocking it still exists.

I dunno. Stuff like that happens all the time. In the west its most often the other way around, to add in a bit of diversity where it probably never existed in reality. But the principle of tweaking what's represented to suit a particular market is nothing new.

You are being very unreasonable to lump T with LGB when they’re mostly straight geezers. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I had a similar situation about 10 years ago. I decided in the end not to work for the big global company any more.

This is the cost of doing business in those markets, and while you can try an kick up a fuss, in the end they're never going to choose you over the money that they can make from those countries. So I chose not to be involved in helping them make that money any more.

Its not just homophobia either. There's a reason why the black character barely appears on the Chinese posters for the most recent Star Wars movies for instance. That was a choice that had to be made in a Disney marketing office somewhere.

I am sorry, OP. I imagine you felt really uncomfortable. And that feeling is probably growing now. I’m sorry you could not speak up during the meeting, especially as some people were actively supporting the change.

I am straight but not white and I would find it very difficult if anything to do with my skin colour was removed from the product. You must have felt very alone.

No, tailoring products to the target market is not new. But it is hugely hypocritical to market yourselves as a being inclusive, waving the rainbow flag to all a sundry, declaring your fealty to the religion of tolerance to nauseating degrees, and then one breath later airbrushing important figures out of their field to make sure we are tolerant of the intolerant through gritted teeth or otherwise, and not miss out on the mighty $.

Be principled, or don't be. Its this duplicitous false virtue that I truly despise.