Each year, evils abound at Pride celebrations around the world. Sodomites hold hands, kiss, and even express the gruesome desire to wed, despite their shared chromosomal make-up. But of all the evils one could possibly fathom, no one could have expected a one-hundred-year-old cookie to take the cake. That’s right, a cookie.
Last week, as part of the Oreo’s centenary celebrations, Kraft Foods released a picture of a rainbow-coloured version of their famous cookie. Comments poured in from thousands of cookie lovers either praising the company for supporting love or blaming it for the demise of Western civilization.
In light of last week’s article in which I denounced the use of Pride to sell a product, I was left conflicted in the face of the colourful treat. Is there really anything so wrong with the Pride-cookie, as my previous article would make it seem? No, there isn’t. The difference is in whether queer rights are being used to sell a controversial product or whether the motive is to affirm the existence of a marginalized group, as it is with Kraft.
The simultaneously overt and ambiguous nature of the ad is pitch perfect.
What could possibly be ambiguous about about a towering, rainbow-bright cookie, you say? Well, take a look at the ad and what it actually says. One giant cookie next to one boldfaced word: “Pride”.
In its simplicity, Kraft has allowed the ad to have a wide variety of meanings to many people, without actually having to directly say anything. The only message from Kraft’s spokespeople was that the poster was in line with the company’s history of “celebrating inclusiveness and diversity.”
The relative ambiguity of the ad allowed the company to appeal to a huge swath of the Western world that is generally pro-gay, while maybe not pro same sex marriage, without appearing to sidestep the issue.
Of course, there are those taking on the task of fighting this message of love, despite the odds. And yes, One Million Moms is the group leading the charge. “Moms are aware that Kraft manufactures a long list of popular products,” the group said in a (not-so-threatening) threat. “But Kraft needs to know that there are competitors that make similar products.”
“[Kraft] announced to American consumers where it stands on the controversial ‘gay’ marriage issue,” OMM went on to say. The only thing is, though, that this isn’t true. At no point did Kraft say anything about marriage, but rather that people should be proud of their love. Of course, it wouldn’t make a particularly effective campaign to attack love, so the specter of marriage was brought into the equation.
OMM stopped short of calling for a boycott, because they’ve probably realized that Kraft foods manufactures a significant amount of cheap products their members consume and won’t go without.
They’ve also undoubtedly realized that another of the other largest food manufacturers, General Mills, has taken an even more overt stance than Kraft by coming out against a same-sex marriage ban in Minnesota.
I almost feel bad for these so-called “conservative activists”. It must be difficult to wake up every morning to have the sky fall around them. But, then again, there’s something perversely enjoyable about watching world fall apart.
What’s going to happen to these people as it becomes more acceptable and less risky for companies to acknowledge their gay customers as legitimate human beings? Will they retreat into the woods to hide from the pro-gay capitalist society?
I hope not, simply because they’re so entertaining.
In any case, twenty years from now, this won’t be an issue. Companies won’t have reason to take a stance either way, because our rights will, for the most part, be fully enshrined in Western countries—at least I hope so.
