From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Aspects of Boycott
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:37:21 GMT


I was asked by phone today by a friend who lives and works
in Colorado Springs to post for her (since she herself
can't) to urge everyone here to support and participate in
boycotting Colorado.  She further says that lots of her
friends and associates in LGB-support groups are strongly
supporting the boycott concept.

She didn't say so explicitly, but I had the pretty strong
impression that she was mad as hell about how things are at
the moment.

For myself, as well as others, I'm sure it will be very helpful
to have a reliable list of Colorado businesses that

(a) clearly supported CO-2 (and the form of that support);
    presumably these are the bad folks and we want to be
    sure they feel the pinch.

(b) clearly opposed CO-2 (and did other LGB-positive things);
    presumably these are the good folks, and opinion has been
    divided on whether they should be spared the pinch.

Here's one kind of thing I'm concerned about.  I understand
that Denver, Boulder, and Aspen (or maybe that was Pitkin
County) have explicit anti-discrimination provisions.  I
guess these provisions are nullified by the new amendment,
though I expect this will probably be the thing that brings
the whole issue into court.  I further understand that Gov.
Romer and other high-ranking Colorado figures are planning
various measures to oppose the amendment.

So OK, all that is presumably good stuff.  Let me zero in on
one particular thing.  Let's say Aspen continues to be
highly visible in its opposition to the amendment.  Let's
say a major promotion of the "LGB Ski Week" sort is
scheduled there.  The argument here so far has mostly been
that Aspen being good folks and doing the right thing, they
should be spared the boycott treatment.  I must say, that
makes some sense to me, because it probably complicates
things for us for our friends to get nicked because of what
their fellow citizens did (or do).  Somehow it doesn't seem
quite fair to me to expect them to pay for being "good."

But (always a but)...

An Aspen ski week brings income to businesses elsewhere in
the state.  The airlines, other transport vendors, phone
companies, clothing and food providers, hoteliers not
operating only in Aspen, gas and oil companies, car rental
firms, ski equipment concerns, etc, all participate in what
is after all significant amounts of related business.

It seems to me an economic boycott needs not to overlook
these not-trivial sources of income.  One way of putting
this is to say that Aspen itself, good though it may be, is
not the only factor in an Aspen LGB ski week.  Now I am not
arguing here against the event itself, but I think we need
to consider such issues as those I mention, as well as
(probably) others.

I would be interested to learn what others think about such
things.


-- 
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
<>  <>  <> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <>  <>  <>
Newsgroups: soc.motss