SAMSON writes:

Well, it seems our family has another one for the “boycott” category. My wife and I had the recent experience of reading through the Sears Wishbook in anticipation of Christmas. We were shocked and appalled to find, in the midst of a section advertising children’s toys, a page completely devoted to Playboy-themed merchandise. We won’t be buying anything from Sears this year, I guess. Apparently we weren’t the only ones to have this reaction.

Laura writes:

Playboy used to be a symbol of female oppression. Where are the slutwalkers when you need them?

I hope readers will refrain from shopping at Sears or call their local store. Retailers do listen to complaints. According to the American Family Association, its boycott of Home Depot, which is pushing same-sex “marriage,” is having an effect.

—- Comments —-

Jane S. writes:

The Playboy shoulder bag offered by Sears is a sanitized version of the “F**k you” line of purses and other accessories.

Sears is now just a slightly less disreputable version of the Rock and Smoke Shop.

 Another example of dreary, totalitarian monoculturalism being enforced by commerce.

 Hannon writes:

Jane S. writes

Another example of dreary, totalitarian monoculturalism being enforced by commerce.

That is an excellent stand alone quotation. It is true but it also depressingly points up the idea that it is becoming difficult to find any major retailer that has a discernible regard for morality. I’ve seen lists of “Good” and “Bad” brand names and frankly they start to blur together. It’s a toss up. People have all sorts of reasons for favoring certain stores– location, prices, selection– and it seems very unlikely that many of them will change their habits based on the perceived moral stance of the seller. It is a closed circuit and one wonders where the consumer and the merchandiser can be separated. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile keeping track and taking some action because the needed change will come from us and not from amoral profiteers.

Often we hear the cry to support local, non-corporate enterprises. I think this is a great idea for many reasons. The proprietors of any of these businesses may be moral or immoral (we are not likely to ever know) but they will not be amoral with respect to their place in the community, their families and relations with employees and customers. Supporting these workers is NOT the same as shopping at the big box stores. Personally I do not want to buy merchandise or services from a company that provides bottom-of-the-barrel pricing by paying their people poorly, providing few or no benefits and often part-timing a large number of staff. So I pay a little more, sometimes quite a bit more. As far as quality and service, these seem to be enormously variable both within and between larger and smaller players, so they are a minor consideration.

Please follow and like us: