Inclusion. Again.
Don’t worry, folks, they’ve done it again!
Two years ago, I wrote a post about Target’s handicapped Halloween costumes. Well, more specifically, my issue with their ableist advertisement of them.
I said things like, “By separating this commercial, and photographing these kids individually, it’s kind of defeating inclusivity, right?” and “The trouble with being loudly and proudly inclusive is actually being exclusive in the process.”
Basically, I loved the costumes but hated how their “inclusive” commercial separated the abled from kids with disabilities. To me, it felt like the company was using these kids for self-promotion, kind of like Inspiration Porn. Awwwwww. I even ended it with “Unless they can somehow monetize disabilities for Christmas.”
Well, yup.
While searching for the perfect wrapping paper (oh, heyyy mom guilt!) I came across Target’s new INCLUSIVE line:
I say it like that because that’s how it’s specifically labeled.
So, again, I LOVE that there are kids in wheelchairs featured on commercial paper… but who decided it needed to be marketed separately from all of the other wrapping paper!?
Oh, sorry, not ALL. Let’s not forget the gift wrap with Pride Rainbows or the one with black Santas. Those are labeled INCLUSIVE, too. They are not “normal” wrapping paper, and Target wants to make sure you know that.
It’s ok – if you DO want “normal” there’s always the “People Playing in Snow” gift wrap. No marked inclusivity there!
See how easy it would have been to just INCLUDE a wheelchair-using kid right in there with those snow players? Maybe put a black Santa on the same paper as the white guys? You could even throw some rainbows on there, too.
Do you get how ironic it is to sell a SEPERATE inclusion line? How Target is saying, “You’re different! But isn’t it nice of us to include you in our store? Not with the other products – y ou’re DISABLED, not a person playing in snow. Why incorporate diversity when we can monetize it separately?”
Also, guess who’s (probably) buying these products? I highly doubt typical parents are searching high and low for wrapping paper displaying wheelchair users. Unless their kid IS a wheelchair user.
It’s representation, NOT inclusion. Good product, bad marketing.
I really was going to write a post commending certain companies on inclusion.
My one friend just showed me a young, disabled model who was photographed using her mobility aid:
Another friend told me how Disneyland recently added some wheelchair-using dolls to a few countries in It’s a Small World:
Note: She’s not advertising an exclusive, accessible pajama line. And Disney did not create a separate room called Inclusion Land featuring all black, gay, disabled characters…Target, take notes.
(Plus, isn’t it cool how non-disabled people are recognizing and sharing this?! This blog really has a positive effect on a lot of different readers – I’ll go ahead and brush my shoulders off…)
“Inclusive,” very simply, means “to include.” It is not a cute adjective for “any underrepresented minority experiencing hardship and discrimination.”
Nice try?