Gay Patriot Header Image

Marriott Offers Discounts, Benefits to Gay Guests

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 6:39 pm - April 20, 2012.
Filed under: Entrepreneurs,Gay America

Yesterday, I blogged that “many (if not most) private companies have sought to redress” past “unfairness by adopting non-discrimination clauses in their employment policies or developing ‘diversity’ policies to recruit gay and lesbian employees.”  Just today, I read about what one company (which, I believe, was founded and still run by a Mormon family) is doing to reach out to gays:

The Marriott hotel chain is known for its comfortable rooms and amenities. But in addition to a plethora of appeasing services, the popular company also offers value packages to individuals who are gay. Curiously, numerous hotels within the Marriott chain offer what they call “OUT” packages.

At the Renaissance Washington Marriott in Washington, D.C., for instance, the deal includes chocolate covered strawberries, sparking wine upon arrival and a copy of NaviGaytour Magazine, among other benefits. . . .

The main thrust of the deals seem to be predicated upon an urge to attract a gay customer base, while distinguishing the company as particularly diverse and accepting. The Marriott web site even has a section called “Gay Weddings & Events,” which is devoted to helping individuals plan their noteworthy occasions.

Kudos to Marriott.  A private company doesn’t need a government initiative to reach out to gay clientele.  Seems some businessmen recognize the benefits developing new policies to respond a changing marketplace.



  1. My history of the Marriott is that they have always ap preciated th MO’s money.

    Comment by rusty — April 20, 2012 @ 7:08 pm - April 20, 2012

  2. Appreciated the MO’s (as in homo) business and gay $$

    Comment by rusty — April 20, 2012 @ 7:09 pm - April 20, 2012

  3. “main thrust,” heh… I see what you did there.

    Comment by V the K — April 20, 2012 @ 9:18 pm - April 20, 2012

  4. Thought this might be of interest to you here.

    [What does this comment have to do with the post to which it is attached? –Ed.]

    Comment by Ryan Aaron — April 20, 2012 @ 10:09 pm - April 20, 2012

  5. Thank you Ryan!

    Comment by David in N.O. — April 20, 2012 @ 10:28 pm - April 20, 2012

  6. Does DGA from the “Can government make life fair for gay people? (Should it?)” post know about this. He/she will be crushed.

    Comment by Bastiat Fan — April 20, 2012 @ 11:21 pm - April 20, 2012

  7. I have mixed feelings about Marriott’s outreach to gays. I stay there often and am impressed with their lodging. However, by catering to gays, I feel like some minority that is being cowtowed to rather than just another ordinary customer. And when I turn 60, I don’t want all those senior citizen discounts. I want to pay my own way. Heck, seniors can more afford hotels and restaurants than families with children.

    Comment by davinci — April 20, 2012 @ 11:33 pm - April 20, 2012

  8. Davinci. Don’t worry about getting swamped with senior discounts when you reach 60. I will be 90 very soon and I can tell you for every discount that you get, there will be something taken away from you. One will be your drivers license.

    Comment by John R — April 21, 2012 @ 1:45 am - April 21, 2012

  9. After the news broke that Mitt Romney had hired homocon flack Richard Grenell to be his foreign policy spokesman, Politico dug into his Twitter history and revealed a history of viciously mocking Newt and Callista Gingrich.
    Since the start of the year, Grenell has mocked the Gingriches over Newt’s extramarital affairs, Callista’s appearance and her demeanor on the campaign trail. Most recently, he cracked on March 13: “do you think callista’s hair snaps on?” On March 6, as the Super Tuesday returns rolled in, he tweeted: “Calista stands there like she is wife #1” On January 26, he asked: “does callista speak?” His tweets on the Gingrich marriage(s) go back at least to January, when he tweeted during a Jan. 26 debate: “let’s have Newt rate all his wives….” And later in the same debate: “Newt: My 1st Lady knows what it’s like to be 2nd and 3rd….” And then later: “Newt compliments all the wives proving he can’t pick just one 1st lady.” At the debate before that, ahead of the Florida primary on Jan. 23, Grenell cracked: “newt will win this question because he had 3 families!” On the previous day, he wondered: “what’s higher? The number of jobs newt’s created or the number of wives he’s had?”

    On his very first day on the job, homocon Grenell has had to issue apologies for hating on the ladies of the GOP.

    [Please tell me what this comment has to do with to the post to which it is attached? -Ed.]

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 2:22 am - April 21, 2012

  10. BRYAN FISCHER Tweet . . .Romney picks out & loud gay spokesman. If personnel is policy, his message to pro-family: drop dead!

    [Please tell me what this comment has to do with to the post to which it is attached? -Ed.]

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 2:25 am - April 21, 2012

  11. BDB, so sorry for straying OT. . .off topic, just following up on Ryan’s comment. ME BAD.

    It will be interesting if GP will enact other forms of editing when commentators diverge from the topic of any future post. Very interesting indeed.

    I did find this very interesting though coming out of Ryan’s link

    In this case, you might find out something rather surprising, possibly even astonishing to you. Republicans, particularly those on the libertarian side of the ledger, are often more accepting of their homosexual brothers and sisters than many so-called liberal Democrats.

    My comments from 9 and 10 are just tied to Ryan’s link of the story of Mittens selecting Grenell.

    Guess my thinking was that the post was about Mormons changing their outreach to Gay Folk,

    Romney, a very influential Mormon, is picking up the baton and choosing Grenell, showing a little high five for the gays.

    but the post was kinda a story about out reach and well, I guess this little ditty stuck in my mind also

    Andrew Sullivan reacted too (to Grenell’s position): “For Romney to have an openly gay spokesman is a real outreach to gay Republicans, a subtle signal to moderates, and the Santorum faction’s reaction will be worth noting.”

    But Like I said, sorry BDB, my comments at 9 and 10 were completely off topic. and it will be interesting to see how other commentors will fair when they stray off topic or go off on an unrelated rant. . . over and over and over.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 7:52 am - April 21, 2012

  12. Oh, I made the assumption when it came to the editing. Guess it could have been another GP author.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 7:54 am - April 21, 2012

  13. GLOBAL REPORT—Cultivating the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender traveler can be challenging. A key question is whether hotel brands should target the LGBT market separately from others.

    Executives at Marriott International believe separate works. It recently refreshed its website for the LGBT traveler because its research shows that community “embraces companies that openly and progressively market to (it),” said Randy Griffin, VP of global sales for Marriott.

    Marriott partners with the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce; the International Gay & Lesbian Travel Association; the National Center for Lesbian Rights; and Parents, Families & Friends of Lesbians and Gays, placing their logos on its site. By providing such links, Griffin said, these groups “have in return marketed us to their membership bases.”

    The Bethesda, Maryland-based company’s efforts have not gone unnoticed. Marriott scored a 90% on the Human Rights Campaign’s 2012 Corporate Equality Index, which measures sensitivity to LGBT needs.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 7:55 am - April 21, 2012

  14. sparking wine? I don’t think the threat of electrical disaster makes for a romantic stay.

    Comment by Kevin — April 21, 2012 @ 9:40 am - April 21, 2012

  15. This is stupid and sad. Just more kowtowing to a minority group that’s not even a real minority. Gays aren’t a culture, a religion, a race, or an ethnicity. In short, they’re not “a people”; they’re a small, aberrant sex group. What’s next? Is Marriott going to reach out to the S&M crowd? The bestiality folks? Swingers? How about a special discount for Kody Brown and his four significant others?

    This decision by Marriott illustrates how successful gay activists have been in changing the perception of homosexuality from a behavior to an “identity”, which it is NOT. And it’s disheartening to see so-called conservative gays fervently and unquestioningly embracing this phony LEFTIST construct rather than challenging it, as you’d expect conservatives, i.e. non-leftists, to do.

    American Elephant once wrote here that there’s no difference between the agenda of the gay left and the gay right, and the thumbs up being given here to Marriott’s identity politics-based “outreach” to gays just proves that. Gay conservatives want social leftism to triumph over traditionalism as much as gay liberals do. Gay conservatives are as contemptuous of traditionalists as gay liberals are. And gay conservatives want the whole of society to be organized around the promotion and celebration of their sexual desire just as gay liberals want. The only difference is that gay liberals, to their credit, are honest about all of that. Gay conservatives aren’t, even when it shows like a bad stain. And that’s a shame.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 10:16 am - April 21, 2012

  16. SA, I’m curius. How is a religion an identity but heterosexuality/homosexuality is not?

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 10:54 am - April 21, 2012

  17. The purpose of religion is to change your identity. A common thread of most legitimate religions is that they seek to raise people above the level animal flesh and make us more godlike. Religions impose discipline on behavior and attitudes that go against the imperatives of the flesh. True religion is an identity. I know that’s tough for leftists to comprehend because most of them think of religion as a stupid superstition or, at best, a quaint hobby.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 11:08 am - April 21, 2012

  18. We’re coming to get you Seane-Anna! We’re coming to get you.

    We are in the schools, in your Dr’s office, in the grocery stores, behind the retail counter, in the salon(we always have been there)…we are the computer programmers, law enforcers, lawyers, judges, correction officers, city planners, mayors, legislators, . . .and now we have morphed into this unstoppable entity that gets discounts at hotels, restaurants and omg-d, the shocker Disney World.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 11:21 am - April 21, 2012

  19. Yes, private businesses should be allowed to do what they want. Except when a straight landlord chooses to run an apartment complex exclusively for straight people. Because that would be discrimination based on sexual orientation, y’know.

    I wonder how fans of this “gay discount” would react if Marriott offered a special deal to straight and monogamous guests to honor their upright, Bible-approved behavior and try to offset some of the hardship that comes from resisting the urge to sin. My guess is it would end in the earth falling off its axis, the chain being forced to shut down and more anti-discrimination legislation being passed.

    I agree it’s not the government’s place to force people to accept other people’s money. But I’m no fan of PC hypocrisy, either. This is not about promoting equality. It’s about promoting homosexuality. Their refusal to just say so is an insult to people whose I.Q. points outnumber their fingers.

    Besides, if enough businesses start rewarding gay clients, we’re going to have to establish some kind of official documentation of gayness to prevent scams. I had a boyfriend once. That might not look so good on my application.

    Comment by Ophelia — April 21, 2012 @ 12:01 pm - April 21, 2012

  20. I am wondering if Marriott might offer discounted packages to black families, offering soul food room service and African art in their rooms. They could also offer discount packages to Asian families that include coupons to local Asian restaurants and free chopsticks on your pillow. Equality does NOT mean giving one artificially created group special diacounts or packages over another. On that note, why is the equality group only concerned with a company’s treatment of LGBT people? Wouldn’t real equality come when all individuals are treated as individuals instead of members of a group?

    Comment by AZ Mo in NYC — April 21, 2012 @ 12:08 pm - April 21, 2012

  21. To Sandhorse @16, V the K @17 explained why religion is an identity better, I feel, than I could. Also, Sandhorse, if you believe that homosexuality and heterosexuality are identities then, to be consistent, you have to regard pedophilia as an identity as well. After all, it appears to be as inborn and unchangeable as gays insist homosexuality is.

    Rusty @ 18, lame attempt both at humor and trying to make gays appear to be more numerous than they really are.

    AZ Mo in NYC @19, you nailed it.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 12:22 pm - April 21, 2012

  22. Yes Seane-Anna, you are correct. The numbers are quite small. Some say 3%. Some say 7. Hell ya, some even go to 10%. That will probably be a fixed number. What is growing in numbers in an exponential rate is folk friendly and supportive of the Gheys. Business folk, church folk, even neighborhood associations and PTA and school boards.

    But the truth is Seane-Anna, they are coming to get get you. . .at least in your little world.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 12:31 pm - April 21, 2012

  23. Yes, Ophelia, yes! Marriott has the right as a private business to offer these benefits. And by the same token, a photographer should have to right to refuse to take pictures at a gay wedding.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 12:35 pm - April 21, 2012

  24. Here it be. . .Dual Income No Kids = $$

    And the Gheys like to take their kids to places where they are assured great service and little risk of embarrassment over the possibility of DOS.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 12:35 pm - April 21, 2012

  25. And since we continue to talk about infultration and religion. . .omg-d

    Originally published Friday, April 20, 2012 at 1:50 PM
    Mormon parents of gays do ‘It Gets Better’ video
    Mormon parents defend their gay children in a new video that confronts The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ disapproval of same-sex relationships.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 12:54 pm - April 21, 2012

  26. Ok, hands off hips now. . Off to relish a sunny day in Seattle

    Have a blessed day!

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 12:55 pm - April 21, 2012

  27. Smooches.

    Comment by rusty — April 21, 2012 @ 12:57 pm - April 21, 2012

  28. V, I wasn’t asking about the purpose of a religion. I was asking how someone can identify as a Christian, a Muslim, black, white, Irish, German, or Italian but one cannot identify as straight or gay. Especially considering all I did was ask a question and I’m immediately identified as a ‘Leftist’.

    Since the subject has shifted in this direction; I wonder. What qualifies as a ‘True religion’ and who decides if any given religion meets these qualifications?

    Back to the subject at hand. It’s interesting how numorous justifications are used to deny groups of people access to certain social and civil instituitions based on a particuler attribute. But as soon as a private company gives this group an advantage because of the same attrubute, they are berrated for giving them ‘special treatment’. IMHO, it’s very telling.

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 1:33 pm - April 21, 2012

  29. SA, I would submit that pediphelia IS an identity. It’s the ‘public square’ that decides whether that identity is given an advantage or disadvantige. Some may choose to give a pedophile an advatage because they are a pedophile, others may choose to put a pedophile at a disadvantage because they are a pedophile.

    However, you can’t allow one entity to discriminate negatively because of a certain attribute while not allowing another entity to discriminated positively because of that same attribute.

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 1:53 pm - April 21, 2012

  30. Being gay is only an identity if you let it be a primary determining factor of how you live your life.

    I identify as a hockey fan. Hockey fans are a subculture whose behaviors, dress, slang and so forth are as distinctive as that of the gay subculture. And, who knows, maybe I was genetically predisposed to love hockey. Yet, it’s not an identity. Nor do I demand any special privileges be accorded to me on that basis.

    And hockey fans definitely outnumber teh gheys, FWIW.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 1:57 pm - April 21, 2012

  31. As for ‘True Religion,’ real religion brings its adherents closer to God. False religion does not.

    Simple, really.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 1:58 pm - April 21, 2012

  32. If a hotel chain decided to give a ‘Hocky Fan’ discount and a local givernment decided to enforce a ‘Hocky Fan’ tax; is either treatment justified or unjustified?

    Regarding the other topic, how does one determine if a given religion is bringing it’s followers closer to God? And can more then one religion do this?

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 2:12 pm - April 21, 2012

  33. First, I want to apologize to AZ Mo in NYC. Your comment was #20, not @19. Sorry.

    And Sandhorse, I must say that I respect your honesty. Most people here would go off on a outraged, sanctimonious rant at any association of pedophilia with homosexuality, even if it’s only to illustrate a point. But you conceded that pedophilia is, or can be, regarded as an “identity”. I find it a bit upsetting, though, that you think it’s the “public square” that should decide which sexual lifestyles are acceptable and which aren’t. If that’s the case then ANY sexual behavior can become “right” and any disapproval can be judged “bigotry”. Not the world I want to live in.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — April 21, 2012 @ 2:30 pm - April 21, 2012

  34. “Givernment?” More like “Takerment.”

    It’s not really as hard to determine between right and wrong, between religions that enlighten their followers and those that merely exploit them, as the left seems to think it is. Maybe the lack of a moral compass makes these rather simple distinctions seem difficult.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 2:46 pm - April 21, 2012

  35. Maybe another way of looking at it is that no one can tell you what religion is true. God expects you to find that out for yourself.

    And this business of, “Oh, I don’t which one is true so I reject them all” is an obvious cop-out.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 3:01 pm - April 21, 2012

  36. SA, I never stated the ‘public square’ decides what is right or wrong, it doesn’t even have that capability. Only God justifies us. And we all as individuals need to be free to live Gods will for our lives. Thats a very personal thing and no individual, government or hotel chain can do that for us.

    There have been countless injustices perpetrated on humanity in the name of religion. Even Christianity has been guilty of this, and with no less ‘biblical authority’ then as now. But this only happens when we as Christians overstep our authority and seek to make our neighbor in our image. This is spiritial pride and is also a sin.

    The Son of God exercised his Authority by healing the sick, feeding the hungry, rebuking thoes using the Law to oppress, and…washing the feet of his friends. Including the one who would betray Him.

    This is the example He set. And it is how he requires us to treat each other. He said this is the behavior that will show the world we are His. Not by going to church on Sundays, not by paying our taxes, not by being heterosexual and not by holding ourselves and others to a particular moral code. But by treating others the way we we would want to be treated. This is what all the Laws and prophets were trying to get through our ‘thick sculls’. Loving God and loving each other is the only law our actions need be measurd against. And that is more than enough since we we even fail at thoes two miserably.

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 3:36 pm - April 21, 2012

  37. V, you’ll have to forgive me. I am currently on a road trip to pick up some furniture and have been typing these comments on a android with a four inch screen. No small feet, I assure you. So ‘givernment’ was a typo on my part, however apropos it may have seemed.

    But you didn’t answer my question. Would either scenero be just or unjust?

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 3:49 pm - April 21, 2012

  38. […] Marriott Offers Discounts, Benefits to Gay Guests […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Romney appoints qualified man* as foreign policy spokesman* (who happens to be gay) — April 21, 2012 @ 4:32 pm - April 21, 2012

  39. Well said, Ophelia @ #19 and AZ Mo in NYC @ #20.

    Every person should be treated as an individual and should be judged on their actions, as far as the government is concerned. Having said that, if a private company wants to cater specifically to gay people, that is fine, as long as a private company is also allowed to cater specifically to straight people (with the government remaining neutral in both cases).

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 21, 2012 @ 5:55 pm - April 21, 2012

  40. It doesn’t matter whether the choice is “justified” or not; certainly either entity can come up with an economic justification for it, and a local government could come up with a political justification for it were hockey fans to unite as a voting bloc. (This is how the government justifies special treatment to minority groups and special interests like labor unions, teachers, and farmers.)

    Justification isn’t the issue. The question is whether it’s a proper, constitutional role for Government to favor some groups over others. I would argue that it is not. If a private business or a person wants to discriminate, positively or negatively, I think that ought to be none of the Government’s business.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2012 @ 7:33 pm - April 21, 2012

  41. Aggreed Rattlesnake, but judging from the comments here we seem to have it backwards.

    How often on this blog are we told that the government ‘of the People’ (IOW we ALL own it) can take into account a spacific trait (or behavior as some would say) and treat us differently. But when a private company takes into account that same trait (or behavior) and also treat us differently (albeit favorably) these same voices speak condicendingly of being treated differently for that trait. (or behavior)

    Either it’s just that we be treated differently, or it’s just that we be treated all the same. You can’t have it both ways.

    Comment by Sandhorse — April 21, 2012 @ 7:36 pm - April 21, 2012

  42. Actually, I can think of another analogy.

    If I had a business, I could offer a discount to a group, but can’t allow people to smoke in my workplace. Does that seem right to you?

    Comment by The_Livewire — April 21, 2012 @ 10:45 pm - April 21, 2012

  43. A private company created and owned by Mormons.

    Comment by Leah — April 22, 2012 @ 11:04 am - April 22, 2012

  44. Really, what’s the difference between this and advertising to 18-30 year olds or early bird specials at a restaurants? It’s all about attracting clientele to your business.

    Personally, I’ve always liked La Quinta and Holiday Inn since there’s no HoJo restaurants anymore.

    Comment by TGC — April 22, 2012 @ 2:00 pm - April 22, 2012

  45. I’m surprised no one has mentioned the obvious; How do you prove to Marriott that your gay? What’s to stop two opposite-sex couples from posing as two same-sex couples to get the discount? After strawberries and sparkling wine, they’re a bit vague as to what the “other benefits” are.

    Actually, hotels have all sorts of differently themed discount packages. It’s not really about reaching out, it’s about filling rooms. Or put another way it’s just another case of capitalism making gay lives better.

    Comment by Draybee — April 23, 2012 @ 9:30 pm - April 23, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.