National Organization For Marriage Clings To Plateaued ‘Dump Starbucks’ Boycott

The National Organization for Marriage is still clinging to its “Dump Starbucks” boycott, objecting to the company’s support for marriage equality. Earlier this week, they tried to claim they’d found a “neutral” coffee alternative in Jitters & Bliss, a small coffee company that proceeded to censor pro-equality comments on its Facebook wall. (J&B’s Facebook page has remained inactive since Tuesday.) Even though DumpStarbucks’ momentum plateaued many weeks ago, the anti-gay group continues to boast petition signature numbers on Twitter:DateSignaturesJuly 4, 201245,414June 26, 201245,136June 19, 201244,772June 11, 201244,194June 7, 201243,800June 1, 201243,064May 30, 201241, 908May 25, 201239,982May 17, 201239,268May 14, 201238,057May 7, 201235,858Compare these numbers to the 640,000 people who thanked Starbucks in a counter-campaign back at the beginning of April. Even though the “Thank You Starbucks” campaign essentially ended then, the numbers still climbed to over 650,000. And Starbucks’ stock has only benefited from its support of marriage, reaching its highest value ever during the height of NOM’s boycott in late March and April.

NOM is now applying this same failed strategy to General Mills. A week after NOM launched “Dump General Mills,” the food company boosted its dividend by 8 percent. Its stock remains unfazed by the week of protests.

The strategy of boycotting pro-equality companies seems an odd choice for NOM. They complain when LGBT groups threaten to protest anti-equality businesses, claiming victimhood and religious oppression, yet seem to have no problem employing the same tactic. They are obviously inconsistent — and thus devoid of integrity — in regards to their targets, ignoring companies like Microsoft, Google, and Nike whose products aren’t pourable. And this notion that they side with “neutral” businesses is a blatant farce, because any company that agrees to treat the LGBT community as invisible or unwelcome is anything but “neutral.”

For as large as NOM has grown in the mere five years of its existence, it’s compelling that they would now invest so heavily in doomed campaigns in a desperate attempt for media relevance. These failed boycotts exemplify how out of touch NOM is with the swift national momentum toward equality and justice for same-sex couples and their families.