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.

LGB people aren't being disadvantaged by not appearing in marketing materials.
LGB people arent being harassed by not appearing in marketing materials,
LGB people arent being vitctimised by not appearing in marketing materials.

Revoking positive action isn't discrimination.

I am not surprised that you feel this way @GalacticBuscuit

But chin up, as an employee you DO have some influence, even in a big corporation. If I was your manager I would be very open to you suggesting alternatives to this disheartening and regressive step.

Some things to consider:

The UK has recently signed new trade agreements. Check them - are there new developments that make other markets more appealing?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade_agreements_of_the_United_Kingdom

Instead of focusing on growth in the Middle East, are there some more easily won places to focus on that won’t require a product change? Changes cost money (do the company understand how much relative to the uplift in sales?)

How well does the company understand the reputational risk if other customers discover the proposed changes? Will gains made in the ME markets be balanced by losses elsewhere? How likely it is that the change will be uncovered? Will activists be highlighting this on social media in future? The risk profile is probably different if selling into businesses rather than directly to consumers.

If the management are decent, a rational and well prepared analysis like the above will put you in a positive light, even if it doesn’t ultimately succeed.

If the potential sales growth is in places with deep pockets such as Saudi, or there are multiple companies who will sell a similar product into these countries if your company doesn’t, making a principled stand as a business can feel pointless.

Perhaps if this is the case, you could suggest that since the earlier conversation did not sit well with you and is likely to cause dismay in your LGBT colleagues and allies, a percentage of profits from sales could be donated to a UK charity supporting LGBT people seeking asylum from said ME countries.

Another more general approach to corporate accountability is to suggest that your company consider becoming a B Corp. This is an ethical quality mark that is growing in influence and measures a company’s performance against social and environmental indicators. https://bcorporation.uk/news-stories-and-events/news/b-corps-outperforming-ordinary-businesses-new-data-shows/

Maybe, as @VimesandhisCardboardBoots indicated, the company doesn’t serve you as well as it used to, and it is time to plan your escape into something better aligned with your values.

Anyway, perhaps this is unwanted waffle if you just wanted to let off steam. But if it would make you feel better to respond positively to it along these lines, good luck 🤞 And DM me if you need further info.

And doesn't this exchange support the business decision.

Sorry op but reading back though the tread after someone said it could be a media company (which makes sense as to why they would be influenced to change approach) and answered my question why sexuality is out there in the product. These messages show why the issue is contentious in the "enlightened" western world let alone a religiously dominated region.

I'm not homophobic. I understand the struggles the gay community has faced but the push for trans rights has smashed a huge hole in a lot of the accomplishments of the last 50 years. Sadly the argument had been dominated by a very very small % of the population leaving a large number of lgb people to bare the brunt.