M&S added the LGBTQ+ Pride flag to its logo on June 1 to mark the first day of Pride Month.
It’s a common move for brands who want to signal (and cash-in on) their support for the community. But naturally, there has been backlash.
Despite the extraordinary amount of advertising, products and marketing that Marks & Spencer has produced ahead of the Queen’s platinum jubilee, some patriotic royalists accused the chain of “overshadowing” and “forgetting the jubilee”.
“For goodness sake M&S!! It’s the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee – an event so special we will NEVER see one again,” said one commenter, telling the brand to “show a bit of patriotism.”
Another commenter claimed: “Increasingly, the majority are being ignored now. It’s great to have diversity but please remember everyone else too.”
Of course, Marks & Spencer could hardly forget about the jubilee, which is being marked with a £28 million, four-day celebration.
Surprisingly, it appears that a $3.74 billion company with 70,000 employees can, in actuality, celebrate two events at once.
It currently has 96 items on sale to help people celebrate the jubilee – which, as one Facebook comment noted, doesn’t really compare to the Facebook icon, some t-shirts, and a sandwich in a rainbow box.
Not everyone jumped in to lambast the company for marking Pride. Some pointed out that this year’s Pride festivities, in particular, are very important as it marks 50 years since the UK’s first ever Pride march.
“Every year the same bigots comment on here. Happy Pride Month. God save our Queens,” one commenter said.
Another linked to a statistic from the anti-monarchy institution Republic, saying that, according to YouGov, 54 per cent of people are not interested in the jubilee, compared to the 11 per cent who are “very interested.”
Others were more frustrated with what they called “virtue signalling” and “performative” allyship, with one user asking: “I like you M&S, but this virtue signalling needs to stop.”
M&S recently apologised after staff told a queer, disabled woman was told she wasn’t disabled, prevented her from using the disabled toilets, which read “not every disability is visible”, and was “shooed” her into the men’s toilets “like cattle”.