Consumer Boycotts

[Desertrose2023]

I posted the BDS list in the supporting Palestinian businesses thread and recent discussion on another thread re the backlash against Zara got me wondering how many others are participating in consumer boycotts linked to the conflict in Gaza (and the occupation in Palestine) or for different reasons.

there are a number of brands I’m boycotting usually for a mix of reasons, political, environmental and social. Interested to hear views from others.

Disclaimer: to avoid any misinterpretation or twisting of my words - I do not support any acts of violence or vandalism or boycotting based on religion/ethnicity.

all the ones on the BDS committee list

https://bdsmovement.net/

in addition to a few others (sample below)

Starbucks: overpriced shit coffee and they recently sued their union for tweeting in support/solidarity with Palestine.

Zara: I stopped buying stuff following the controversy of their head womenswear designer making disgusting anti-Palestinian comments. The reports of slave labour (Uyghurs and in Brazil) plus the recent tone deaf ad campaign was the final straw. Plus trying to be more conscious re reducing how much ‘fast fashion’ I buy anyway.

Nestle: a history of unethical corporate practices plus including ownership of an Israeli food company with production in OPT.

Ah I x posted with you @HeidiInTheBigCity

God this is literally what I've been talking about. People regurgitating any old shit they've read on the internet without even doing the most basic check to see whether it stacks up.

Hands up! I didn't know that, as the general message that has been being spread is that the Character is named after the massacre.

It's also something that is being taken into account by Disney due to the conflict and the character as written being extremely problematic. The film was greenlit before October.
https://www.newsweek.com/marvel-israeli-superhero-disney-sabra-captain-america-shira-haas-1839083

Ella and Heidi thanks for the background information, it's lovely learning something new.

Nah, this is good!

Look, we obviously are going to have to vehemently disagree "on substance" at every given opportunity!

That'll be because you are Israeli - and I have Palestinian family. Two out of my three best friends are also Palestinian. My much wanted daughter would have been Palestinian, had it not been for the accident of a miscarriage.

We interpret the facts differently, quite obviously and perhaps understandably so!

But I do hope we share a desire for "looking at facts, not fantasy". The disagreement we ought to be having is on their interpretation, not on their substance.

as the general message that has been being spread is that the Character is named after the massacre.

Is it? And yet it took a 2 second look at Wikipedia to demolish.

This is really depressing. When there is so much absolute toss on the internet, why are people not thinking more critically about what is being presented to them?

Particularly when they would pride themselves on being resistant to propaganda from the ‘other side’.

Again, to be fair: I don't think the majority of the controversy is about the name of the character but about, to quote the article just cited:

"The Sabra character, when juxtaposed with Captain America, unavoidably amplifies nationalist and political ideologies and convictions, and could inadvertently exacerbate tensions in the Middle East," Deepak Sarma, professor at the College of Arts and Sciences at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, told Newsweek.

The character could, in that sense, be named "Gemma from Newcastle" and still have the same inherent issues of being regarded as a representative of Israeli nationalism.

Personally, I just - quite literally - couldn't care less about the "Marvel Universe". One of my personal "pet peeves" is that Netflix, which I subscribe to, keeps on pushing "but don't you finally want to get into Marvel already?! (No, actually, I really don't - please suggest more documentaries and dark comedies and fewer "action" items. THANKS!)

Buy, yes, Sabra does seem to be an Israeli, nationalist character. And people disagreeing with Israeli nationalism - whatever their reasons! - may actively dislike the idea.

Good luck on your quest to demolish, whatever it is that you're fighting against.I put my hands up!

I had read the Lebanon article a few days ago after a Hezbollah rocket barrage in Israel wanting to find out more about the actions of Sharon and Reagan.

Like I said the massacre is the message that is being disseminated across social media (so much so that the film may be delayed).

Marvels going to need a large Cape to fight this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/comments/193vhf0/i_cant_even_this_is_so_in_bad_taste_sadistic/

https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelstudios/comments/xe7z5s/why_is_marvel_getting_backlash_for_including/

McDonald's pulled put of Russia in 2022 because of the humanitarian crisis Russia created. McDonald's could choose to pull out of Israel due the humanitarian crisis Israel have created. They are choosing not to do so. McDonalds may operate on a franchise basis but they can pull those franchises if they want to.

McDonald's gets paid handsomely for each franchise, boycotting will effect them. Its a shame individual franchise holders may be effected but that's the risk you take when you choose to attach your business to a large corporation.

I don't agree with hassling customers and for me personally boycotting McDonald's would be pointless as I haven't bought anything there in about 20 years but if others choose to do so I won't cry over it. Maybe McDonald's will be more consistent with their moral compass in the future. At the end of the day we all get to choose where we put our money, that goes for customers and franchise holders.

I’m sorry for your loss of your daughter 💔

I try to aim for facts and verified information where I can, but like you say, there are multiple ways of looking at the same information, depending on perspective.

edited for spelling typo

As much as I agree with you, that people jump on bandwagons without actually fully understanding what it is they represent or doing their own research (which lets face it the majority of the public don't do), I do think it is also a big own goal by Disney. At the end of the day if you are trying to appeal to the public with your brand it may be beneficial to also do your research and look at the risk of using certain names/ terms and how it may be misconstrued. Yes the name was there long before the massacre in 1982 but people are obviously linking it to that regardless and therefore unhappy with that and as a consumer we have the power to vote with our wallet. Disney has two choices stick with it and opt for damage limitation or change the name and risk annoying the hardline marvel fans (is it marvel? I hate all these type of films/comics).
The character name is not after the massacre but the fact that people are linking it to that, is a problem, and in my opinion Disney should have foresaw.

you moan about people not doing their research and yet you couldn't bring yourself to do a two second Google to get further information on why this Disney character is being boycotted, instead asking on here for people to explain further to you.

Imagine being schooled by people with actual lived experience and knowledge rather than jumping on a bandwagon?

It's like we don't have the internet.....

Yes the name was there long before the massacre in 1982 but people are obviously linking it to that regardless

Which I think is manufactured offence. Like the people who kicked off about the colour of the crackers in the M&S advert filmed in the summer and the people who kicked off about the ‘body bags’ in the Zara advert filmed in September.

I think if people have an issue with a company then they seem to be determined to portray everything they do in the worst possible light, even when it doesn’t make any sense. How are companies supposed to anticipate and account for that?

I asked you to explain something from your link given your stated eagerness to discuss the reasons for the BDS boycotts. Apparently you didn’t want to discuss them.

But I have actually googled the boycott of Disney and the main answer from Google isn’t that their character is the personification of apartheid Israel (which is still not clear given no one knows anything about the character from the film), but that Disney, in the immediate aftermath of the horrendous terrorist attack on Israel donated $2 million to Red Cross and Children’s charities working in Israel to support in recovery.

Personally I think that is not a good reason to boycott a company. Providing humanitarian aid is not a bad thing, even if it is to a country you dislike.

Disney were instantly moved by the plight of Israelis and jumped right in to donate $2 million yet they are seemingly unmoved by the killing and starvation of 10s of 1000s of children mere kms away? Why do Palestinian children suffering not elicit the same sympathy from Disney? Lots of people might see that as a red flag and a valid reason to boycott.

Isn’t the controversy that the super hero is a mossad member? Surely for many that’s the same as having a superhero trained in Russia by the KGB. I wouldn’t want to watch it personally. I think it’s glorifying the Israeli secret service which has blighted the lives of so many Palestinians.

I've watched and read a lot of Marvel stuff, but I'm not a fan of the Captain America stuff, it's all quite lacking in nuance and has some rather clumsy portayals of complex and distressing, relatively recent events and issues.

No, I’m not accepting a charitable donation in the wake of a horrendous terrorist attack, to humanitarian agencies framed as a negative thing.

Everyone should be free to support charities of their choice. Policing other people’s charitable donations and organising boycotts because they don’t meet your approval - where does that end up? No one donating to charity for fear that they piss off the wrong people.

Donate to Palestinians and piss off Yemenis? Or the Cats Protection League?

Funnily enough Black Widow is a popular Marvel superhero, who was a Russian spy in the KGB. I don’t remember people kicking off about it when she joined the MCU, and it was done differently in the films.

And equally everyone is free to not support a business based on who they choose to and choose not to support. If people don't want to give their money to Disney so they can gift it to Israel that is their choice.

You have a problem with boycotts and people choosing where their personal money goes but have no problem with large corporations choosing where their money goes. I'm not sure why you have that double standard, that is something you will have to examine for yourself.

I haven’t watched black widow and don’t know plot, but usually Russians are the bad guys in America productions.

Also if Disney is sending money to support Israeli children, that leaves the Israeli state with more money to use on its favourite activities of bombing or jailing Palestinian children.

People are obviously free to boycott who they like and I never said I had a problem with boycotting in principle, but if we are discussing reasons for boycotting then I don’t think ‘they donated money to help victims of a terrorist attack’ is a good reason.

Black Widow is one of the heroes.

I’d be a bit surprised if Marvel decided to have a film about a heroic mossad agent killing Palestinian children with no come back because that’s not normally how they do things but some people seem to be going with that as a basic assumption for some reason.

If you don't think choosing to donate to Israel but completely ignoring the 10s of 1000s of children affected by a humanitarian crisis entirely created by Israel is a good enough reason to boycott then don't boycott, it's that simple. It's great that you don't have a problem with boycotting, your posts on this thread nitpicking people's reasons for boycotting various multi billion dollar companies gave me a different impression so I'm glad to hear you support people standing by their beliefs.