bhrubin

SPG hotels has a similarly large proportion of franchised hotels that can manage their properties as they see fit. The entire Luxury Collection is built on that same model, as is the smaller Tribute Portfolio.

If you weren't concerned about franchises within Starwood, there is no more reason to be concerned about franchises within Marriott.

This thread is an example of someone having a false premise based on fear and ignorance and spreading that false premise, probably without intending to do so.

itsaboutthejourney

As the OP I'm posting the original post below so you can see why I consider your (bolded by me) word choice grossly offensive. Did you even read post #1 ?

FWIW: this thread has been enlightening and I really appreciate the info all of the other posters (except bhrubin) have contributed.

bhrubin

I read the original post. I still find the query to be based on the faulty premise that somehow SPG was better than Marriott in working with and including LGBTQ persons. There is no evidence for that premise, other than the obvious judgment that Marriott hotels somehow must be or even might be less inclusive simply because the owner is Mormon. That is just as offensive as assuming a gay guest might be more problematic. Judgment and intolerance go in both directions, I'm afraid.

This is looking for--and reinforcing--a problem and stereotype in my view. I expressed that view. I'm sorry that all gay people don't have the same view or perspective that you do, but I do not. I therefore shared that sentiment. It's that simple.

KENNECTED

I agree. I also think this is two seperate issues.

1. How does Marriott & Starwood the company (corporate and corporate owned properties) value their LGBT employess and how they deal with LGBT topics and issues?
2. How private and public owned hotel owners (individual and group hotel owners/developers) value and deal with LGBT issues and consumers?

The subject has be be broken into two categories as many hotels are NOT OWNED by Marriott/Starwood yet use/license the Marriott/SPG systems. Marriott or Starwood is not solely to be worried about, but how individual hotel owners treat their own employees and guests.

bhrubin

^^^

We don't always see eye to eye, but it's quite glorious when we do.

itsaboutthejourney

It appears you have some intolerance for people seeking answers and asking difficult questions. Sure my OP came from a skeptical premise that Marriott was less than SPG in terms of working with and treatment of LGBTQ persons and their community. Part of my assumption was based on brand perception: Marriott tends to be more conservative and values consistency (can be read as traditional) while SPG and many Starwood brands are more innovative and appear to market/cater to the LGBTQ and LGBTQ-friendly community. There can be no wrongs in seeking information, especially info that this thread produced calming my fears and changing my perceptions (partially) of Marriott.

As to the Mormon factor, you can talk about judgment and intolerance going in both directions, but the social and political agenda of the Mormon Church as an organization (hello Prop 8, etc.) has goals to restrict and limit my liberties; so your chiding LGBTQ persons to be more tolerant comes across as lacking empathy. Of course on an individual level, we shouldn't assume every Mormon hates the gays, but its fair game to question the Church as an organization and it's historical ties to Marriott. Which to your point: it's one thing to assume Marriott is anti-gay and be steadfast with that assumption, and another to read this thread and be informed/have your opinion changed.

Again, I think your word choices earlier were inflammatory and offensive, especially if you take the premise of this thread into account and see the amazing amount of information, first-hand, and second-hand knowledge that was contributed by our fellow members as well as the historically civil tone of this forum which I believe you are fairly new to posting in. (Again, kudos to SkiAdcock for her research throughout this thread).

(And I'm shocked to be in agreement with KENNECTED on something, but fully agree that focus/scrutiny is likely more important for the franchisees/individual owners of the SPG/Marriott brand properties.)

bhrubin

I find the premise to be faulty and prejudiced. Any offense anyone takes to that is on them. There's nothing offensive about my statements except for people who can't handle someone who recognizes prejudices and calls them out for their own. Two wrongs don't make right.

chrisny2

There's no way that after the amount of money that the Mormon church put into Prop. 8 in California that opening up a question about a Mormon-owned firm that puts the book of mormon in hotel rooms can be seen as faulty and prejudiced.

The answer might be that the corporation is open-minded or unrelated to the church. But it's not a crazy question to ask.

KENNECTED

Why are people shocked to agree with me?? I'm a little verklempt about this revelation.

98103

I stay at Marriott a lot. I don't mind their bland cookie cutter rooms (I'll never be an A-list gay) or the books in the drawers. If the room is clean, the mattress firm and the water pressure healthy, I'm good.

But I do always check out the Book of Mormon. They get vandalized quite a bit, some quite humorously. While evangelicals will write bible verses on the cover page warning of hellfire and damnation, the best are saved for the picture plates, where captions have been added. My favorites:
- one of distraught people on some sort of ship, wailing about something. Caption: "Holy ...., we're out of coffee!"
- a portrait of Joseph Smith. Caption: "Joseph was a quiet man with a taste for fine wines and under aged boys"

Kagehitokiri

its a public company. where is the secret transfer of profits?

even at corporate managed hotels, its dependent on staff.

no comments about hotels owned by qatar, UAE, etc?

KENNECTED

Check my previous posts.

Kagehitokiri

most managed are not owned. but even when managed, for example, a bad manager can sneak through, in terms of being problematic, or not dealing with problematic staff. we agree that there can be problems drawing conclusions based on, for example, one (unreported) bad manager.

when i say dependent on staff, part of my subtext is majority of staff being local. locations vary. hiring/training/supervising has limitations.

qatar and UAE own a bunch of well regarded starwood hotels. and keep buying more. starwood talks up qatar as an owner partner. there is also a 'private company' in qatar (my prior comment is about government owned hotels) that owns more starwood, and may be connected to government, but i have not really seen much discussion along those lines.

bhrubin

Playing the victim and seeking martyrdom are unfortunate qualities that manifest themselves in many if not most or all minority groups. Even as a gay man, I see it in the LGBT community (among many others).

So, as they say, it isn't about you--it's about them. Hence, you can't do much about it.

Wondering if Marriott is somehow homophobic or transphobic because of a placement of a Mormon Bible or Mormon ownership is legitimate, of course...until you realize that most Marriott hotels are not managed or owned by Marriott. The front line employees of those hotels then aren't as "controlled" by the supppsedly worrisome Marriott ownership. As if any big corporation can control so may employees. Regardless of policy.

The fact that the same was true of Starwood is what begs the question about the central premise of this thread. People are assuming wrongly that not having a Bible beating ownership at Starwood somehow means that Starwood hotels are "better" or "less likely to discriminate" than Marriott hotels. Despite the fact that there is no evidence to support that premise.

The premise itself is prejudicial, based on fear of a Mormon owner Marriott corporation rather than the non-Mormon owned Starwood corporation.

Hence, logic has gone out the window. Replaced largely with fear and prejudice. The LGBT community is so accustomed to being the victim of fear and prejudice that its members aren't always good at recognizing when they might suffer from the same vices.

KENNECTED

HE HE. I was being sarcastic. What other people, who do not know me, think about me, is none of my business.

I have to agree, that at time our community has a self defeating mentality. I don't think the ownership of the loyalty program or holding company will make me worry about anything. Is there really a need to be concerned?