Readers Write: Target’s commitment to Pride, cell service in the Boundary Waters, the role of women

Opinion editor’s note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I’m writing in response to the May 17 Star Tribune article, “Target’s pullback on Pride questioned.” This is not a commentary on the LGBTQIA+ community; it’s about customer expectations of organizations.

How did we get to the place where special interest groups try to influence a company’s business direction and decisionmaking through demands and pressure? Listening to the customer is smart business, but expecting organizations to support certain groups creates challenges for the company; supporting one group can cause friction with another. You can never please all the people all of the time.

The original business motivation for the Dayton organization to open Target in 1962 was to combine department store best practices with the pricing of a discounter. This core business model has served it well, and Target has responded positively by giving back financially to the community.

My feelings aren’t hurt if Target doesn’t support the causes I do. I trust that it is working within a business model that corresponds with its corporate goals, consumer research and the free market.

I support causes in my own way. I don’t expect businesses (or my dentist or my gas station) to cater to my belief system.

Shelley Klaessy, Minnetonka

Last summer, I had the pleasure of traveling to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness on a five-day canoe trip with my four sons. Three of the four had never paddled into the Boundary Waters. We had an amazing trip of paddling, fishing, hiking and just plain enjoying each other’s company. Each night we enjoyed a meal around a fire, talked, laughed or just sat in silence listening to the crackle of the fire, hearing a loon’s call in the distance or staring up at an amazing array of stars. A big part of that enjoyment was because there were no distractions other than the wild itself. Our cellphones were used on the trip for one purpose: taking pictures (”Cellphone satellite coverage may soon come to BWCAW,” May 18).

When I returned home, I commented to my wife that the best part of the trip was being off the grid, where none of the boys were searching the internet or checking their emails on their phones. And why would anyone paddling through the Boundary Waters want it any other way? There’s a legitimate, wholesome and healthy reason to be off the grid. Why is cellphone service needed in a designated “wilderness area”? SAT phones can be packed for an emergency. But let the Boundary Waters wilderness remain a wilderness. That’s the reason our ancestors had the forethought to fight so hard to preserve it, to show us that such wonderful wilderness places like the Boundary Waters can survive and continue to exist for the benefit of future generations.

John T. Peterson, Waverly, Minn.

In the May 17 issue of your paper, Adam Zyglis’ political cartoon depicted Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker kicking a woman while saying, “Your place is in the kitchen.” I really wonder if the cartoonist even listened to what Butker said during his commencement speech about women. He simply told the students that a woman can have a great and fulfilling life by being a homemaker. I don’t know a single one of my friends who would put any of their work or monetary achievements over the joy they’ve received by being a mother and raising a family. The greatest joy in my life has come from being a wife and mother, and nothing could ever compete with that.

Liann Schneider, Otsego

•••

I read with great concern the Kansas City Chiefs kicker’s message regarding his thoughts on what a married woman should do in her life. In a nutshell: “Stay home, cook, clean and raise kids.” Interesting input from a man who makes $5 million a year to kick a football for five months. I wonder if he also doesn’t represent the Taliban, as this sure fits their ideal role for a woman.

Ron Ray, Laporte, Minn.

•••

Butker felt the need to slip into his sexist, homophobic and transphobic diatribe these words: “Congress just passed a bill where stating something as basic as the biblical teaching of who killed Jesus could land you in jail.” This is the old antisemitic trope, easily (though inappropriately) derived from the Gospel of John’s use of the phrase “the Jews” and that “the Jews” killed Jesus. This sentiment has led a myriad of antisemitic acts, and Butker seems to be right in line with that kind of thinking.

Congrats on your triple play of fear-laden misogyny, homophobia/transphobia and antisemitism, Butker. And for the record, “the Jews” didn’t kill Jesus. The trembling fear within religio-political circles of one raising up and fighting for marginalized communities did. Sorry, but when it comes to white mainline Christianity, the “them” who killed Jesus is us.

The Rev. Paul Baudhuin, St. Louis Park