The brouhaha over the sock-club’s sorrow has cooled down, but there’s one last thing I’d like to mention. Several commenters on various blog-posts about Blue Moon’s bank nightmare have noted that the bank may have backed out over experiencing some sort of inconvenience over having to put through a huge wad of bank charges all made within the same few days. Which is what happened when Blue Moon put through all its bank charges for a sock-knitting club that starts in January, and billed several hundred people for shipping them a half-dozen sock-knitting kits over the course of the calendar year.
It seems that according to some commenters, there’s a precedent for banks being unwilling to work with customers that run through lots of charges very quickly, with little activity over the rest of the year. Which would make the bank’s actions selfish and self-protective dumbassery, but not discrimination.
Based on my own experiences out there in the world, I found it ridiculuously easy to believe that Blue Moon’s woes were caused by bank officials discriminating against a woman-owned business. I easily envisioned clueless bank officials simply not being able to believe that a woman selling expensive, fiddly craft kits — mostly though not exclusively to other women — could make a killing doing so. But perhaps the bank’s decision was just one of selfish disregard for the well-being of its small client. That too I find ridiculously easy to believe.
I may never know what really happened. But in light of my coming to believe that the bank’s decision might rest in corporate self-interest rather than garden-variety discrimination… I just wanted to make sure I was on the record as showing that I’d come across another believable reason for the seemingly inexplicable actions of the bank.
It’s just that so many of my own experiences and others’ made discrimination the most obvious choice to explain the bank’s extreme and almost punitive behavior.