tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34249799.post1467646581983052025..comments2024-03-29T16:58:01.576+13:00Comments on AmeriNZ Blog: NZ gym chains says ‘soya’Arthur Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10568299067544221996noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34249799.post-30557293666011531872010-01-27T21:05:09.230+13:002010-01-27T21:05:09.230+13:00Personally, I believe businesses should just stick...Personally, I believe businesses should just stick to running their business. So when one goes off-track and starts acting out in the political/religious arena, I don't buy their products anymore.<br /><br />In this case, I used to be a member of Club Physical. It's a shitty, stinky gym with outdated or broken machines and no air conditioning (at least the branch I went to). I left a couple years ago when an exercise instructor made a fellow classmate cry and the front desk people were not only indifferent, but completely unsurprised. Glad I left!dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16687492454625470270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34249799.post-84725374813566362592010-01-27T09:13:56.398+13:002010-01-27T09:13:56.398+13:00No, he found it ON the original publishing source—...No, he found it ON the original publishing source—the viscously anti-gay wingnut site is, as far as I can tell, the only place it's ever been published apart from the christianist's own site, possibly also printed by his church, and probably re-posting on other rightwing sites.<br /><br />He claims, much as you suggest, that he picked it to get comments, and tried to get people to believe that he really didn't pay any attention to it. That's a disingenuous claim, for the reasons I set out in the post.<br /><br />I disagree with your second point. It's irrelevant whether I think he's a jerk (and I never said). Instead, given the preponderance of evidence, it seems likely that any money given to him would find its way to anti-gay causes or efforts, probably indirectly through his church. The issue for me isn't just that they don't like me or they might spend money on some small cause I don't support, but that they could spend my money against ME.<br /><br />I assert that I have every right not to participate in my own oppression, and because of that, I don't patronise businesses or organisations where my money is likely to go to organisations working against my human and civil rights.<br /><br />Plenty of others who agree with them—or don't care—patronise those businesses and organisations, so they continue on—just without my money.<br /><br />You're right that his actions suggest that he wouldn't be good at providing health/nutrition advice. I didn't say that he or his franchisees couldn't run a gym—clearly they can (though I wonder about the common sense of someone who would deliberately piss-off customers). However, for me neither has any relevance to my purchasing decisions: Given a choice, I simply won't patronise businesses who do or are likely to work against me.<br /><br />This is not "the same line of thinking that says it's okay to fire/demote someone based on political/religious beliefs." If anything, it would be similar to refusing to hire someone in the first place (which most private businesses do to some degree). In any case, you're ignoring the power relationship in an employer/employee relationship.<br /><br />As it happens, I'm not in the market for any gym, so my opinion is irrelevant. Also, I'm generally more inclined to engage in "buycotts" (seeking out and choosing to spend money with businesses that spend money in support of me and my rights). But there are businesses that I avoid because of their anti-gay stance (or that their money will go to support those who are anti-gay) and I will absolutely continue to do so.Arthur Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10568299067544221996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34249799.post-39350072389230197402010-01-27T00:11:53.783+13:002010-01-27T00:11:53.783+13:00I give this a big shrug.
Probably found it far re...I give this a big shrug.<br /><br />Probably found it far removed from the original publishing source and thought it would drum up comments... and it did, and a flamewar ensued, and everyone looked bad.<br /><br />In the meantime, I am saddened to see you subscribing to the "I'm going to boycott [store] because it's run by someone I perceive to be a jerk who doesn't like me and might spend money on causes I don't support". It's the same line of thinking that says it's okay to fire/demote someone based on political/religious beliefs.<br /><br />I could understand the "if he uses a pseudoscience article, he won't be good at suggesting supplements" but the idea that he doesn't know how to run a gym or train people because he's maybe believed a dumb article enough to put it in a newsletter nobody really cared about... pleh.epilonioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05532230027733099956noreply@blogger.com