Last month my blog was in the form of a letter I sent to Barclays Bank about the use of Pride colours on their App logo. So many people have asked whether I received a response that I have decided to write about this again. In fact I'm going to mention four responses that I have received.
Firstly, yes, I did receive a response from Barclays Bank. Only days after my letter was sent I was phoned up by an employee of the Bank to discuss the issue. So full marks to Barclays, they took what I had written as a long term customer, seriously enough, to make a personal phone call. I'm reluctant to give much detail about this as the discussion is dependent on my memory and I could misrepresent some of what was said and I'm bound to imply that my opinion was the one best expressed! The tone of the phone call was both polite and respectful and in no way pushy or patronising. It was a bit of circular conversation with us going round and round on the issues I'd raised. Two things I will mention. My caller really admitted it was a commercial decision to use the Pride coloured logo, so I understand that to mean that they saw the opportunity for financial advantage. Most interestingly, I was told that it was unlikely that the Bank would change their policy on this issue unless there was a big enough response from the public. To my mind this shows the importance of lots of people writing to the Bank with letters similar to the one I sent. We won't see any change through inertia, but it seems that the Bank does take notice of how people respond and so if we feel strongly about this, then contact Barclays Bank.
Secondly, and inevitably, I was charged with being homophobic. I'd like to make a more general comment about language here. I've noticed that something that happens today is to lay a word on people that is intended to label them beyond any worth or respect. This happens in international relations. You have national leaders who slap the word 'colonialist' on another national leader or nation and it's meant to render them totally dismissed. Whatever your personal view about President Macron of France this happened to him recently when expressing genuine concern about the destruction of the Amazon rain forest. Brazil's leader shouted 'colonialist' and that's the ultimate charge intended to dismiss President Macron's views as being of any worth. So it is with 'homophobic'; if you can slap that charge on anyone it's a way of dismissing that person's views being of any value whatsoever. 'Homophobic' is defined in dictionaries as 'a strong and unreasonable dislike of homosexual people', and 'intense hatred of homosexual people' and 'discrimination against homosexuals'. By those definitions I am not homophobic. I have known and very much liked a number of homosexuals. I disagree with a homosexual lifestyle, but I have never hated any individual homosexual and as far as discrimination is concerned my point in the letter I wrote to Barclays is that it is people who don't subscribe to approving a homosexual lifestyle that are now being discriminated against. I believe that in a genuinely open and tolerant society I have the right to object to a Bank promoting a Pride lifestyle via the App that I'm using to do business with the Bank.
Thirdly, I received an email from an employee of Barclays Bank. They told me that they were ashamed that I had written the letter. They also majored on the inclusive employment policy of Barclays Bank. But this was to miss the point entirely. I wasn't commenting on Barclays employment policies; indeed I would applaud their inclusive policy. I was told that the Bank wasn't forcing homosexuality down people's throats as I had said. But in fact I never did say that in my letter, so it's bit difficult to defend something you haven't actually written! I wrote back politely to make these points. It's important in these discussions that we 'hear' one another and don't charge people with saying what they haven't said and don't make out a case for something that is different to the actual issue which is being raised.
Lastly, the most surprising response was the number of 'hits' my previous blog has received which so far has numbered thousands and is over 4 times higher than the number of hits for any previous blog I have written. Comments on social media have largely been very positive. However, I don't consider this a win as most of my readers are surely Evangelical Christians who's views would tend naturally to coincide with mine on this subject. What would be a win is if every reader who agrees with me writes to Barclays Bank or indeed other companies who seem to feel that they have the right to promote a particular view on sexuality to their customers.