The Look Of Abercrombie & Fitch (60Minutes)

[Sizwe_X]

The Look Of Abercrombie & Fitch
""[The look] is dominated by Caucasian, football-looking, blond hair, blue-eyed males. Skinny, tall. You don't see any African American, Asian Americans."
Jennifer Lu, former salesperson
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/05/60minutes/main587099.shtml

Discrimination Lawsuit Filed Against Abercrombie & Fitch Co.http://www.afjustice.com/
On June 16, 2003, a coalition of four organizations, including the national law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund ("MALDEF"), the Asian Pacific American Legal Center ("APALC") and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., filed an employment discrimination class action lawsuit against Abercrombie & Fitch Company. The named plaintiffs allege that Abercrombie discriminates against people of color, including Latinos, Asian Americans, and African Americans, in the hiring, job assignment, compensation, termination and other terms and conditions of employment.

Man, just watched the 60Minutes profile on what they did to minorities who worked for them or tried to work for them. Egregious example of institutional racism. It makes me sad to see APAs wearing this mindless garbage of self-hate.

[TB4000]

Truth be told, their stuff never appealed to me. After going to Purdue University for all these years, that's all I see walking the halls are either stuff with Abercrombie, American Eagle, or Aeropostale logos on them...granted, seeing Sean John, FUBU, and Baby Phat logos constantly is just as annoying. And that A&F men's cologne....I've smelled that odor so often on dudes walking in the halls it ain't funny.

[tazadar]

Thanks for the heads up. It's 7 now. I am going to watch.

[nonamerasian]

I must say that I find it interesting that they'd depict minorities on their clothing and sell their merchandise to minorities, yet not want these same minorities working in their stores.

I'm glad they are getting sued. I never liked their stuff no way.

[Tao]

I must say that I find it interesting that they'd depict minorities on their clothing and sell their merchandise to minorities, yet not want these same minorities working in their stores.

I'm glad they are getting sued. I never liked their stuff no way.
they depict minorities on their clothing?...in a good way? when'd that ever happen

[bohbohboh]

theres nothing wrong with marketing a specific style of clothing to a specific ethnicity. fashion is driven by cultural influences, and if you decide to subscribe to a certain culture, you should be able to buy clothing that reflect said culture. i don't see (fucking) white boys walking around town flossing rice patty hats nor do i see asian guys sporting the hottest fubu wear. oh wait.

[nonamerasian]

they depict minorities on their clothing?...in a good way? when'd that ever happen

Aren't they the "wok-n-roll" and Chinese laundry t-shirt guys?

[Tao]

theres nothing wrong with marketing a specific style of clothing to a specific ethnicity. fashion is driven by cultural influences, and if you decide to subscribe to a certain culture, you should be able to buy clothing that reflect said culture. i don't see (fucking) white boys walking around town flossing rice patty hats nor do i see asian guys sporting the hottest fubu wear. oh wait.
problem is, they're saying they want an "all american" look, and last time i checked america was made up of more than white people.

[Tao]

Aren't they the "wok-n-roll" and Chinese laundry t-shirt guys?
yeah but that was more making fun of rather than including them as part of the brand. so it's actually not a good example for saying they "include" minorities

[bohbohboh]

problem is, they're saying they want an "all american" look, and last time i checked america was made up of more than white people.

but we can dream...

[nonamerasian]

theres nothing wrong with marketing a specific style of clothing to a specific ethnicity. fashion is driven by cultural influences, and if you decide to subscribe to a certain culture, you should be able to buy clothing that reflect said culture. i don't see (fucking) white boys walking around town flossing rice patty hats nor do i see asian guys sporting the hottest fubu wear. oh wait.

Actually, in a way, that is practically my stance. They are marketing to whoever, so whatever.

However, I don't like that the whoevers aren't the only people who are wearing their stuff, yet the others aren't respected enough to be given jobs. Or, they are given the job and then sent into the back room?

How dare they!?!

I'm more happy with the suit in a vengeful type of way.

[tazadar]

theres nothing wrong with marketing a specific style of clothing to a specific ethnicity. fashion is driven by cultural influences, and if you decide to subscribe to a certain culture, you should be able to buy clothing that reflect said culture. i don't see (fucking) white boys walking around town flossing rice patty hats nor do i see asian guys sporting the hottest fubu wear. oh wait.
That's not what the lawsuit is about, I don't believe. The "A&F Look" is not against the law, but to translate the look to hiring practices is illegal according to state or federal law which protects individuals against discrimination due to race.

[gimmecookie]

That's not what the lawsuit is about, I don't believe. The "A&F Look" is not against the law, but to translate the look to hiring practices is illegal according to state or federal law which protects individuals against discrimination due to race.

no

[stunninglyAsian]

A&F says they're image is "all-American", but I see their image in that preppy, college white fraternity style. Do you think this is the trend for fashion in America- companies catering to different "lifestyles" (read: racial groups)? You already have FUBU, Phat, Farm, etc. And I've read somewhere that there is a company fashion emulating Hispanic urban styles. And A&F, well that's as white as any company can get. With the increasing popularity/interest of Japanese fashion, do you think a company will emerge that caters mainly to Asian tastes? Like an Asian A&F?

[tazadar]

"Plaintiffs are young adults who allege that they were qualified for employment at Abercrombie and were not hired or were terminated because of their race, color, and/or national origin."

It is illegal under both Federal and State Law to discriminate in conditions of employment on the basis of a person's race or color.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

It is illegal under both Federal and State Law to discriminate in conditions of employment on the basis of a person's race or color.
well, why should it be? if abercrombie and fitch wants to appeal to a narrow market of white people by hiring the salespeople they presume could appeal best to that narrow market, let them, and let them deal with the bad publicity, and see if they get better or worse returns. A&F is not a welfare organization designed to give out jobs to everyone. It's a profit-making corporation who should be allowed to pursue the means they think (whether correctly or not) will lead to the greatest profit. If you don't like it, don't shop there, but don't imagine that you have the right to impede others from doing the same.

Besides, why should some groups (asians, latinos) be protected while others (e.g. nerds) aren't? I bet there are plenty of pale skinny geeky white boys from the CS department who wanted a job at A&F but were judged as not having the A&F "image" either, why don't they get to file a class action lawsuit?

[tazadar]

well, why should it be?
Why it should be? Why should we have laws that protect against racial discrimination in employment? WTF?

if abercrombie and fitch wants to appeal to a narrow market of white people by hiring the salespeople they presume could appeal best to that narrow market, let them, and let them deal with the bad publicity, and see if they get better or worse returns. A&F is not a welfare organization designed to give out jobs to everyone. It's a profit-making corporation who should be allowed to pursue the means they think (whether correctly or not) will lead to the greatest profit. If you don't like it, don't shop there, but don't imagine that you have the right to impede others from doing the same.
A&F can pursue any means they want to reach "the greatest profit" just don't break the law.

Besides, why should some groups (asians, latinos) be protected while others (e.g. nerds) aren't? I bet there are plenty of pale skinny geeky white boys from the CS department who wanted a job at A&F but were judged as not having the A&F "image" either, why don't they get to file a class action lawsuit?
If a geeky white boy gets discriminated based on not fitting the "A&F Look", there's not much legal protection for a case. If the "A&F Look" was beautiful Asians and he's discriminated against because of his race then there is a legal basis.

[SunWuKong]

well, why should it be?


well, there's an entire history of people being denied opportunities because of their race. the assumption that just because you are of one race, you are not qualified, is racist. add to the fact that most of the owners of production in this country are white, if they are to deny minorities the opportunities that they deserve, it will just perpetuate a racist society.

freedom and liberty are nice and all, but unless there're some socialist measures implemented, it would just make for a very unhappy society.

[mr. x]

^--- 11,000 posts?!?! geeze

anyway A&F has always been poser clothes to me

ive always known they were racist

bare with me here but my theory: Those LFO guys did that song "Summer girls" (or something like that) and they were like "...hate chinese food makes me sick" and "i like girls who wear A&F"

so if u take the message it goes like this: "hate: chinese food = chinese people by association"

so by that you get this "A&F hates chinese people"!

[coagulated fat]

^--- 11,000 posts?!?! geeze

anyway A&F has always been poser clothes to me

ive always known they were racist

bare with me here but my theory: Those LFO guys did that song "Summer girls" (or something like that) and they were like "...hate chinese food makes me sick" and "i like girls who wear A&F"

so if u take the message it goes like this: "hate: chinese food = chinese people by association"

so by that you get this "A&F hates chinese people"!

mr. x, your theory sucks. someone had to tell you

[mr. x]

mr. x, your theory sucks. someone had to tell you

:frown:

oh well, there's always my Chupacabra theory

[teaz0r]

omg. A&F is like so 3 years ago.
ick.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Why it should be? Why should we have laws that protect against racial discrimination in employment? WTF?
Try thinking about the question instead of cursing at me about it. Or if you're not willing to think about the question, don't reply at all, and that will take care of the "not cursing" part.

If a geeky white boy gets discriminated based on not fitting the "A&F Look", there's not much legal protection for a case. If the "A&F Look" was beautiful Asians and he's discriminated against because of his race then there is a legal basis.
So, as I asked before, why is the law like that? Especially given that looks are pretty hereditary, why should lookism be a legal action whereas racism is an illegal one? If we're talking about "qualification" in sales, a lot of that is related to your ability to establish a rapport with the customer. And people tend to trust those who look like them more. It's possible that the most highly "qualified" people of the A&F sales personnel are simply those who look the most like the customer base. And that customer base probably doesn't include an equal balance of all races, so why should the sales force be required to?

Notice, for example, Banana Republic hires a lot more minorities. I don't understand, if A&F is such a racist company, why do people want to sue them for the "right" to work there anyway? Wouldn't they rather go to a company which better matches them?

[etcj]

I think A&F only wants to involve the API community when it comes to cultural misappropriation. Yes, you know what I'm talking about. Even if they do manage to put MALE Asian models in their ad campaigns, I wouldn't even consider them to have gotten themselves out of that hole they dug themselves.

I would never tell people to not wear the clothes...my boyfriend has a big collection of their stuff. However, I always remind people that they should have a social and moral conscience when it comes to corporations that really don't care for their consumers. A&F might not be poisoning the environment or committing the ills that we normally would be outraged of, but they certainly are doing a number on people's perception of what is beautiful...and in their minds, it's the white, debonair frat jocks and busty hoochie who screams jail bait.

I'd wish that Margaret Cho would do a skit on A&F...

PS: No, I don't masturbate to their softcore publication mistakenly called their catalog.

[AngryABCGirl]

AF needs to die. I cringe whenever I see a person of color wearing their clothes.

[tazadar]

Try thinking about the question instead of cursing at me about it. Or if you're not willing to think about the question, don't reply at all, and that will take care of the "not cursing" part.
From reading your posts in the past, I was surprised you would asked such a question.

So, as I asked before, why is the law like that? Especially given that looks are pretty hereditary,
Hopefully, Rad gave you a satisfactory answer? Or, was it a rhetorical question to express your disagreement for the law?

why should lookism be a legal action whereas racism is an illegal one? If we're talking about "qualification" in sales, a lot of that is related to your ability to establish a rapport with the customer. And people tend to trust those who look like them more. It's possible that the most highly "qualified" people of the A&F sales personnel are simply those who look the most like the customer base. And that customer base probably doesn't include an equal balance of all races, so why should the sales force be required to?
Their customers aren't just whites, but that is besides the problem.

Notice, for example, Banana Republic hires a lot more minorities. I don't understand, if A&F is such a racist company, why do people want to sue them for the "right" to work there anyway? Wouldn't they rather go to a company which better matches them?
When a company breaks the law, it must be held accountable. What if Banana Republic only wants to hire whites? By your logic, they should move to any clothing retailer. Well, what if the Gap started the same practice. Where does this practice ends?

Your question of why people want to work for A&F is besides the issue.

[Faithless]

You’ve got the look, you’ve got the hook
U sho’nuf do be cookin’ in my book
Your face is jammin’
Your body’s heck-a-slammin’
If love is good, let’s get 2 rammin’
U got the look, u got the look


Just don't wear the A&B
Around me...

[younggiftedandblack]

AF needs to die. I cringe whenever I see a person of color wearing their clothes.

:eek: *YGB quickly throws out his A&F jeans*

[yangbahn50]

Plain and simple, Abercrombie clothes are rags. I use to have an Abercrombie t-shirt, but I now use it to polish my car and wipe the mirror in my bathroom.

[Emperor_Mike]

Look! The Racial Purists have their own clothing line!

[SunWuKong]

Especially given that looks are pretty hereditary, why should lookism be a legal action whereas racism is an illegal one? If we're talking about "qualification" in sales, a lot of that is related to your ability to establish a rapport with the customer. And people tend to trust those who look like them more. It's possible that the most highly "qualified" people of the A&F sales personnel are simply those who look the most like the customer base. And that customer base probably doesn't include an equal balance of all races, so why should the sales force be required to?

marketting only to a specific racial demography, in my opinion, is not justification to refuse hiring salespeople of other races. we may just agree to disagree on this, however. i personally think the responsibility to ensure racial equality is more important.

actually, i would like to see some stats on the racial makeup of A&F's non sales employees.

Notice, for example, Banana Republic hires a lot more minorities. I don't understand, if A&F is such a racist company, why do people want to sue them for the "right" to work there anyway? Wouldn't they rather go to a company which better matches them?

you do realise that many court cases go beyond the individual cases themselves, right? winning a case like this against A&F sets a precedence for other cases where companies are refusing to hire salespeople of certain races. what happens when a number of large corporations simply refuse to hire black salespeople and there's nothing to stop them?

to set into law these anti-discriminatory measures only infringes on the privileges of those companies that do discriminate. for those companies that don't discriminate, they would not be effected by these laws.

[etcj]

Well nonetheless, I don't think we, on YW, should underestimate A&F. There are perhaps thousands of other Asians and Pacific Islanders who are oblivious to this controversy. I think it would be best if YW folks then go to "educate" their peers to why these scumbag corporations need to rethink their target audience.

[hapakristina]

theres nothing wrong with marketing a specific style of clothing to a specific ethnicity. fashion is driven by cultural influences, and if you decide to subscribe to a certain culture, you should be able to buy clothing that reflect said culture. i don't see (fucking) white boys walking around town flossing rice patty hats nor do i see asian guys sporting the hottest fubu wear. oh wait.
problem is, they're saying they want an "all american" look, and last time i checked america was made up of more than white people.

i may get some heat for this, but i agree with bohboh's comments. i don't see anything wrong with things that are catered to market to specific race groups.. many companies do that all the time, whether people realize it or not. and yes, it may be discriminatory to say they want an "all american look" and be marketing to white people.. but mind you, 75% of this country is white and if they're choosing to market to white people, then so be it. that's 75% of the population that they'd have as potential consumers. the only problem is that they really should be looking at the percentages of white people with an income level to support their products.. A&F is overpriced grunge looking clothes that could easily be picked off at vintage stores.

now what i have qualms with is the whole equal opportunity employment issues. just because they want a "look" doesn't mean they should be denying potential employees based on race. for one, i believe it's illegal (which is why they're getting sued) and secondly, it's just not a very good marketing tool anyhow. if asians see an asian worker at A&F (well, at least before all this crap).. an asian may see that style on an asian and at least venture into the store. likewise, for hispanics and blacks.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

what happens when a number of large corporations simply refuse to hire black salespeople and there's nothing to stop them?
Nothing to stop them? You have heard of the NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Southern Poverty Law Center (who despite their name see fit to comment on things well outside the realm of law, like Mel Gibson movies), etc. Though I disagree with actions they often organize such as marches which impinge on public order and property rights of shopowners and have shown tendency to turn into riots, I can hardly object to them making as many speeches and writing as many op-eds as they want. Along with the media who would likely run all sorts of disparaging stories about such large corporations. If those corporations want to deal with all that negative publicity, why not let them? The government is not their Mommy. Telling corporations who and who not to hire is part and parcel of the same mindset which imposed steel tariffs and continued agricultural subsidies in order to prop up failing industries: it says businessowners are little children who can't make their own choices and accept their consequences. Not to mention, keeping all those forms for EEOC compliance is probably a drag on the economy.

[tazadar]

Nothing to stop them? You have heard of the NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Southern Poverty Law Center
How are these groups able to carry-out enforcement or imposed penalties on A&F?

Though I disagree with actions they often organize such as marches which impinge on public order and property rights of shopowners and have shown tendency to turn into riots, I can hardly object to them making as many speeches and writing as many op-eds as they want.
Sometimes protest can turn violent, but I don't see know this is relevant to the topic of discussion.

Along with the media who would likely run all sorts of disparaging stories about such large corporations. If those corporations want to deal with all that negative publicity, why not let them?
Because, A&F broke the law?

The government is not their Mommy. Telling corporations who and who not to hire is part and parcel of the same mindset which imposed steel tariffs and continued agricultural subsidies in order to prop up failing industries: it says businessowners are little children who can't make their own choices and accept their consequences.
Government subsidies to "failing industries" is not the same thing as why government need to have and enforce laws against racial discrimination in employment.

Not to mention, keeping all those forms for EEOC compliance is probably a drag on the economy.
Equal Employment Opportunity creates a diverse workplace results in a net gain for society and the economy, but that is the reason why the law exist.

[yoMAMA]

^--- 11,000 posts?!?! geeze

anyway A&F has always been poser clothes to me

ive always known they were racist

bare with me here but my theory: Those LFO guys did that song "Summer girls" (or something like that) and they were like "...hate chinese food makes me sick" and "i like girls who wear A&F"

so if u take the message it goes like this: "hate: chinese food = chinese people by association"

so by that you get this "A&F hates chinese people"!

My ex-girl friend, who is white, likes that stupid LFO song...but I was really offended by it....... :mad:

dumbasses...WTF does chinese food has to do with your freaking retarded songs?

[yoMAMA]

I kinda agree with the white dude who said in the interview that A&F is engaged in "institutionalized LOOKISM" :D

Actually, I know couple good looking white guys, and they hate A&F and that stupid preppy look.

Anyways, im more of a gap/jcrew kinda guy.....i hate A&F, AE, tommy fuckfinger and all that stupid crap they call "fashion"....

[hapakristina]

bare with me here but my theory: Those LFO guys did that song "Summer girls" (or something like that) and they were like "...hate chinese food makes me sick" and "i like girls who wear A&F"

so if u take the message it goes like this: "hate: chinese food = chinese people by association"

so by that you get this "A&F hates chinese people"!

i really don't think you can make that correlation though. it may have been offensive that they said that chinese food makes them sick, but is chinese food representative of chinese people? not really. it's the food that makes them sick.. didn't say anything about hating chinese people. i think that's kind of a shot in the dark to correlate the two.

and a song by LFO doesn't correlate A&F and chinese people either. i disagree with A&F's marketing and their lack of equal opportunity employment.. but to say that LFO even indicated they hated chinese people? c'mon now..

:confused:

[kasia]

Well nonetheless, I don't think we, on YW, should underestimate A&F. There are perhaps thousands of other Asians and Pacific Islanders who are oblivious to this controversy. I think it would be best if YW folks then go to "educate" their peers to why these scumbag corporations need to rethink their target audience.



no kidding. everywhere i go asians are oblivious to the fact that...the clothes simply aren't made for them!

the challenge is to educate others without sounding like an extremist, etc.

[kasia]

Nothing to stop them? You have heard of the NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Southern Poverty Law Center (who despite their name see fit to comment on things well outside the realm of law, like Mel Gibson movies), etc. Though I disagree with actions they often organize such as marches which impinge on public order and property rights of shopowners and have shown tendency to turn into riots, I can hardly object to them making as many speeches and writing as many op-eds as they want. Along with the media who would likely run all sorts of disparaging stories about such large corporations. If those corporations want to deal with all that negative publicity, why not let them? The government is not their Mommy. Telling corporations who and who not to hire is part and parcel of the same mindset which imposed steel tariffs and continued agricultural subsidies in order to prop up failing industries: it says businessowners are little children who can't make their own choices and accept their consequences. Not to mention, keeping all those forms for EEOC compliance is probably a drag on the economy.

title VII, anyone?

[yoMAMA]

Hey, the YW bar association should file a class action against A&F, and get a huge punitive damage against them and fine their dumb asses :D

[SunWuKong]

If those corporations want to deal with all that negative publicity, why not let them?

come on now. plenty of corporations have the resources to deal with negative publicity and continue to discriminate based on race. you know this is true.

The government is not their Mommy. Telling corporations who and who not to hire is part and parcel of the same mindset which imposed steel tariffs and continued agricultural subsidies in order to prop up failing industries: it says businessowners are little children who can't make their own choices and accept their consequences. Not to mention, keeping all those forms for EEOC compliance is probably a drag on the economy.

i know you are coming at this from a libertarian point of view, but i have to disagree that a completely free system will inherently have its own checks and balances against abuses of power. ultimately, businesses are there to make a profit, which is a goal that overrides the benefits of their employees and their customers (case in point: drug companies spend much more money on marketting than research - then they justify high costs of drugs with cost of operation. second case in point - Microsoft, 'nuff said). they have every right to make profits, but there are also important sociological factors that are more important.

[kasia]

i really don't think you can make that correlation though. it may have been offensive that they said that chinese food makes them sick, but is chinese food representative of chinese people? not really. it's the food that makes them sick.. didn't say anything about hating chinese people. i think that's kind of a shot in the dark to correlate the two.

and a song by LFO doesn't correlate A&F and chinese people either. i disagree with A&F's marketing and their lack of equal opportunity employment.. but to say that LFO even indicated they hated chinese people? c'mon now..

:confused:


first of all, the group most likely had to obtain A&F's permission to use the name of the corporation in their song. corporations are VERY concerned with the type of image that they set forth and therefore A&F most likely carefully scrutinized the lyrics of the song being entering into the agreement.

that being said, they were likely well aware that the song repeated the following phrase, "i like girls who wear abercrombie & fitch, chinese food makes me sick," at least 7 times. despite that, they did not object to the use of their corporation's name. would i say that it means that they are encouraging racism? maybe not. would i say that they condone it? most definitely.

as an admin of yw, i've always been concerned about how we represent ourselves to the general public. we're careful about how we state our goals, our mission, etc. before talking with the press, we have conference calls to ensure that none of us make the mistake of misrepresenting our organization. would i give anyone the authority to use yw's name and insult another ethnic group in the same sentence? no.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

How are these groups able to carry-out enforcement or imposed penalties on A&F?
I answered that question right below that sentence, which you ignored and dismissed as irrelevant to the discussion: they organize protest, boycotts, write articles, go on talk shows, all to generate negative publicity for A&F, which results in reduced sales to them. Why should the government (and hence, all taxpayers) be in charge of punishing A&F instead of private groups who actually feel themselves to be affected by A&F and who fund themselves on voluntary donations instead of taxes (aka confiscation)?

Government subsidies to "failing industries" is not the same thing as why government need to have and enforce laws against racial discrimination in employment
Try phrasing that more clearly? "Government subsidies" are money. "Why government needs to have laws ..." is a logical argument. Obviously Money is not the same thing as A Logical Argument (though in politics it often substitutes for one). If you're trying to say that the rationale behind subsidies is different than the rationale behind anti-discrimination laws, I'll expand on my earlier point: both of these laws are trying to protect one group (subsidies protect American workers in the targetted industry, quotas protect a targetted race) against the result of free competition and unfettered decision making by companies.

Because, A&F broke the law?
Again, for about the fifth time, I am not disputing the EXISTENCE of the law. I am wondering WHY WE HAVE SUCH A LAW.

Equal Employment Opportunity creates a diverse workplace results in a net gain for society and the economy
I see this asserted a lot, but without any proof. If you're going to say "net gain," you should tell me about the various benefits and costs of EEOC. One obvious cost is maintaining the paperwork, funding EEOC inspectors to come in and audit your paperwork to make sure you have the right racial balance of employees, etc. Regardless of your political position, you have to agree that this costs money. So what do we get out of it? I hardly see diversity for diversity's sake as any kind of benefit.

[kasia]

Hey, the YW bar association should file a class action against A&F, and get a huge punitive damage against them and fine their dumb asses :D


i believe that apalc is doing this already. a former co-worker, minah park, now at apalc, filed the lawsuit. i'm thinking of having her as our next role model. (btw, minah graduated from law school one year ahead of me. it's amazing she took this on at so early a time in her career.)

[hapakristina]

hmmm.. i have an A&F shirt. three actually. i guess i'm going to hell now, eh? :tongue:

[mr. x]

i really don't think you can make that correlation though. it may have been offensive that they said that chinese food makes them sick, but is chinese food representative of chinese people? not really. it's the food that makes them sick.. didn't say anything about hating chinese people. i think that's kind of a shot in the dark to correlate the two.

and a song by LFO doesn't correlate A&F and chinese people either. i disagree with A&F's marketing and their lack of equal opportunity employment.. but to say that LFO even indicated they hated chinese people? c'mon now..

:confused:

hehe, some clarification on my part is in order. im a very sarcastic person. that line in the song made me roll my eyes but i certainly dont think its racist

im not really the conspiracy theorist type

[tazadar]

I answered that question right below that sentence, which you ignored and dismissed as irrelevant to the discussion: they organize protest, boycotts, write articles, go on talk shows, all to generate negative publicity for A&F, which results in reduced sales to them.
Ah, no. It's not the same thing are governmental power and that's what I am asking.

[hapakristina]

hehe, some clarification on my part is in order. im a very sarcastic person. that line in the song made me roll my eyes but i certainly dont think its racist

im not really the conspiracy theorist type

ahhhhh.. i see. thanks for clarifying. makes sense now. sometimes i HATE the internet. written communication and lack of emotion that comes with it really bites sometimes! i agree with you, i just don't see it's correlation with it being racist. and i really do not see A&F's knowledge that the statement was following it's reference means that they were fine with it. i just think they, like myself and you, didn't see it as racist.

Mr. X + hapakristina = :rolleyes:

:tongue:

[tazadar]

Try phrasing that more clearly? "Government subsidies" are money. "Why government needs to have laws ..." is a logical argument. Obviously Money is not the same thing as A Logical Argument (though in politics it often substitutes for one). If you're trying to say that the rationale behind subsidies is different than the rationale behind anti-discrimination laws, I'll expand on my earlier point: both of these laws are trying to protect one group (subsidies protect American workers in the targetted industry, quotas protect a targetted race) against the result of free competition and unfettered decision making by companies.
I know this the similarity, but we're not talking about the difference.

Again, for about the fifth time, I am not disputing the EXISTENCE of the law. I am wondering WHY WE HAVE SUCH A LAW.
Why we have racial discrimination laws? There's too much to go into, but you're welcome to search Google.

I see this asserted a lot, but without any proof. If you're going to say "net gain," you should tell me about the various benefits and costs of EEOC.
Do you have proof why it's bad then?

One obvious cost is maintaining the paperwork, funding EEOC inspectors to come in and audit your paperwork to make sure you have the right racial balance of employees, etc. Regardless of your political position, you have to agree that this costs money. So what do we get out of it? I hardly see diversity for diversity's sake as any kind of benefit.
Like I said, the reason of whether it's a net gain or a net loss isn't the point.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Like I said, the reason of whether it's a net gain or a net loss isn't the point
Uh, then why do you assert that it's a net gain. If it's a net loss to society after everything is taken into consideration (positive effects on social cohesion, negative effects on profits and backlash against minority groups), why keep it?

[SunWuKong]

hmmm.. i have an A&F shirt. three actually. i guess i'm going to hell now, eh? :tongue:

i personally don't buy any A&F anymore. actually i never did in the first place because i hate the A&F logo that's on all their clothes. it's like i'm advertising for them for free.

but i'm not going to tell my friends not to buy their stuff. feels too much like i'm trying to sell them something.

[kasia]

hmmm.. i have an A&F shirt. three actually. i guess i'm going to hell now, eh? :tongue:


there's no reason to be extreme about it, just like there's no reason for people to make jokes to discount the significance of it.

[yoMAMA]

i believe that apalc is doing this already. a former co-worker, minah park, now at apalc, filed the lawsuit. i'm thinking of having her as our next role model. (btw, minah graduated from law school one year ahead of me. it's amazing she took this on at so early a time in her career.)

Nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tazadar]

Uh, then why do you assert that it's a net gain.
You said the opposite, but this is wrong. I did not say that I cannot support that equatable laws create a net gain for society. I can but I'm not going to spend the time to reason with you.

[hapakristina]

there's no reason to be extreme about it, just like there's no reason for people to make jokes to discount the significance of it.

ummmmm.. ooookay. it was a joke and it didn't need to be blown out of proportion as me trying to say that i'm "discounting the significance of it." the fact of the matter is, i have friends that have been confronted and teased for wearing A&F material because "asians shouldn't be wearing the brand." well, you know what.. people can do whatever the fuck they want. if they want to wear A&F, that's on them. no one should start being the PC "racist clothes wearing police" because they feel a certain way.

anyhow, now that my "joke" was completely blown out of proportion.. :rolleyes: back to the regular scheduled program of ranting, people.

[kasia]

ummmmm.. ooookay. it was a joke and it didn't need to be blown out of proportion as me trying to say that i'm "discounting the significance of it." the fact of the matter is, i have friends that have been confronted and teased for wearing A&F material because "asians shouldn't be wearing the brand." well, you know what.. people can do whatever the fuck they want. if they want to wear A&F, that's on them. no one should start being the PC "racist clothes wearing police" because they feel a certain way.

anyhow, now that my "joke" was completely blown out of proportion.. :rolleyes: back to the regular scheduled program of ranting, people.


similarly, my comment was just a passing comment and didn't require a one-paragraph response :)

people can wear whatever they want, sure. but there's nothing stopping us from believing that they're ignorant.

[eniblu]

Telling corporations who and who not to hire is part and parcel of the same mindset which imposed steel tariffs and continued agricultural subsidies in order to prop up failing industries: it says businessowners are little children who can't make their own choices and accept their consequences. Not to mention, keeping all those forms for EEOC compliance is probably a drag on the economy.

!

"...prop up failing industries..."

I assume you want to get rid of these 'failing' industries, which are a burden to other parts of our economy. So would many other people, myself included.

In the context of the discussion, however, the subsidies are being compared with equal opportunity laws. You are saying that equal opportunity laws are placing a burden on our society. Perhaps they are.

Thus your implication is that we should get rid of minorities as well, because the equal opportunity laws aren't worth the effort of the majority to keep them in place. I disagree.

I think you may not have meant it, but you sure as hell implied it.

[BeTheReds]

A&F says they're image is "all-American", but I see their image in that preppy, college white fraternity style. Do you think this is the trend for fashion in America- companies catering to different "lifestyles" (read: racial groups)? You already have FUBU, Phat, Farm, etc. And I've read somewhere that there is a company fashion emulating Hispanic urban styles. And A&F, well that's as white as any company can get. With the increasing popularity/interest of Japanese fashion, do you think a company will emerge that caters mainly to Asian tastes? Like an Asian A&F?


ROOTS.

But they don't sell well in the USA.

[Chester]

With the increasing popularity/interest of Japanese fashion, do you think a company will emerge that caters mainly to Asian tastes? Like an Asian A&F?
Done and done. They're called "Banana Republic" and "Club Monaco."

Throw in Armani Exchange as well.

[BeTheReds]

first of all, the group most likely had to obtain A&F's permission to use the name of the corporation in their song. corporations are VERY concerned with the type of image that they set forth and therefore A&F most likely carefully scrutinized the lyrics of the song being entering into the agreement.

that being said, they were likely well aware that the song repeated the following phrase, "i like girls who wear abercrombie & fitch, chinese food makes me sick," at least 7 times. despite that, they did not object to the use of their corporation's name. would i say that it means that they are encouraging racism? maybe not. would i say that they condone it? most definitely.

as an admin of yw, i've always been concerned about how we represent ourselves to the general public. we're careful about how we state our goals, our mission, etc. before talking with the press, we have conference calls to ensure that none of us make the mistake of misrepresenting our organization. would i give anyone the authority to use yw's name and insult another ethnic group in the same sentence? no.

Remind my to give you some Karma later. I can't right now cuz it says I need to spread around before giving you more karma, but I don't think I've given you any.

This is a very good post. I never thought of it that way actually. AF was totally not concerned with having its name associated with marginally racist remarks.

I never really liked that song to begin with, mainly because it sucks. It sucks because the rhymes have nothing to do with the message... i.e. "There was once a man named Paul Revere, It makes me feel good when you are near" The lyrics are insulting garbage that freestyle rappers and amateur poets everywhere can top without any preparation.

I have never shopped at AF, but I kind of agree with Eric on this one. If they want to be racist, then let them. It's their loss.

[TTChino]

Done and done. They're called "Banana Republic" and "Club Monaco."

Throw in Armani Exchange as well.

Do they really tho? I mean I was just about to post, I seem to see a ton of asians working at BR etc...

I wonder. Since their website and catalog doesn't really show asians. At least not that I've noticed.

[applehead]

ROOTS.

But they don't sell well in the USA.

i think they're big in canada?!

[mrazntre]

1) I don't wear that type of clothing because it reminds me of those trendy/grungy white people that are all over the media nowadays
2) Because A&F ARE racist.
3) Reinforcement of institutionalized discrimination, oppression and domination of minorities by the status quo.

btw, where the hell is this thread going again ?

It's upsetting that the very root of evil is being plastered on those that have been attacked by the oppressive monster. sure people can wear what they want to wear, but it's quite mind numbing to overtly see the subtle types of racism that has been institutionalized into clothing. it's just clothes!!! BUT it only takes a second to think critically to KNOW that particular brands of clothing have been known to promote negative stereotypes. Essentially, you might as well wear a shirt with "I'm a second citizen because I'm Asian/Black/Hispanic and I will serve the rich White masses." that's what I see everytime I see a minority sporting that A&F stuff.

It's just like that movie with the sunglasses/contacts where you can see the "robots" invading the earth. Unfortunately, it's not fiction people. Racism pervades every aspect of society and is not limited amongst "racial" groups, it is intra, as well as inter. Open your eyes.

[BeTheReds]

i think they're big in canada?!


Yes. Huge in Canada (as it is a Canadian brand) and they made a huge marketing push in Korea as well, featuring Korean (MALE!) models. In ROOTS stores in Canada which I have been to, there are even Asian (MALE!) mannequins. I think it is safe to say that they are trying to market to Asians.

[Faithless]

hmmm.. i have an A&F shirt. three actually. i guess i'm going to hell now, eh? :tongue:

...going to have wasted money. :frown:

From what I've seen of A&F stuff -- it's al wrinkled looking and overpriced.

[hapakristina]

...going to have wasted money. :frown:

From what I've seen of A&F stuff -- it's al wrinkled looking and overpriced.

actually, damn right i wouldn't waste my money on those overpriced pieces of stitched cotton. lol. they were gifts from friends. if i were to buy anything from A&F, i'd buy it from ross for half the price. but i am more of a gap, old navy, nike girl.

[tazadar]

I have never shopped at AF, but I kind of agree with Eric on this one. If they want to be racist, then let them. It's their loss.
No one or law is saying Abercrombie & Fitch cannot be a racist company if they want to. It's their action that results in consequences for others that is wrong.

[tazadar]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/12/09/RYAN.TMP
A&F's image problem: Racism
Joan Ryan

I didn't get her name but I'm guessing Brittany or Jordan. She was standing at the check-out counter yesterday of the Abercrombie & Fitch store at the San Francisco Center on Market Street. She was blonde, thin and wearing a spaghetti-strap camisole and a cut-off-jeans mini-skirt low enough on her hips to reveal the waistband of her Abercrombie & Fitch long johns.

"Can I help you?''

"I'd like to apply for job,'' I said.

"Oh,'' she said, momentarily flustered. "You want to check on an application?''

"No, I'd like an application.''

She handed me the form, then at my request left to fetch the manager. Huge photographs of fresh-faced blonds covered the walls. As I waited, two actual fresh-faced blond employees, trying not to be obvious, peeked around the wall to take a look at me for themselves.

Word had spread: A middle-aged woman in a turtle-neck and slacks was asking for an application. To work here. With us. I must have seemed to them like a slab of head cheese trying to sneak on to a plate of petit fours.

The fresh-faced blond manager couldn't have been nicer. He said all the right things: The store was always looking for good people, so drop off the finished application any time.

But I haven't turned in the application. I don't need another job, and I know -- and the surely manager knows -- I don't embody the carefully and expensively created A&F persona.

Neither, apparently, do young minority applicants, according to a class-action suit filed against the 602-store chain. The plaintiffs claim Abercrombie & Fitch discriminates against minorities by pressuring stores to hire sales associates who fit the "A&F look,'' which from their catalogs, advertisements and looping videos in their stores, is white, young and preferably blond. The plaintiffs claim they were denied jobs or squeezed out of jobs because of their race or ethnicity.

But as I watched a "60 Minutes'' piece on the suit Sunday night, I wondered about the balance of private enterprise vs. public values. How do we weigh a company's right to maximize its ability to attract its target audience against society's obligation to protect its citizens against discrimination?

For example, I wouldn't have much luck getting work at, say, Yank Sing restaurant or Hooters. My age and/or ethnicity do not best reflect the image the companies want to project.

So isn't it simply good business for a company appealing to a certain clientele to hire a staff that will attract that clientele? And if it's OK for a Chinese restaurant to hire only Chinese waiters to create a certain ambience and for Hooters to hire only buxom young things to please its customers, why is it not OK for A&F to hire almost exclusively young, white employees to sell to a mostly young, white customer base?

As black talk show host and lawyer Larry Eder said on "60 Minutes,'' "This is about a business deciding, pursuant to its best interests . . . that a particular kind of salesperson is more likely to generate more dollars. A&F ought to have the right to set their own policies for good or for ill.''

Well, no. Then it also would be OK for a restaurant owner in Selma, Alabama, to claim he doesn't hire African Americans because white waitresses and cooks make his white customers more comfortable and are better for business.

"And that argument died a long time ago,'' said Garry Mathiason, a senior partner at Littler, Mendelson, which represents about 30,000 employers. "It's not only legally wrong, it's not accepted by society.''

According to the suit, A&F is "enforcing a nationwide corporate policy of preferring white employees for sales positions, desirable work assignments and favorable work schedules.'' The suit says the company recruits employees from colleges, fraternities, sororities and sports that are predominantly white.

"They aren't recruiting from the basketball team,'' said Tom Saenz, one of the attorneys who coordinated the suit.

One UC Berkeley student, who is not white, alleges he applied several times at the downtown and Stonestown A&F stores in San Francisco. Despite retail experience, he was told there were no positions. But several weeks after his first application, four white male friends applied and were hired immediately and scheduled for shifts.

"A company can project whatever image it wants, but it can't use it as a cover for race discrimination,'' said Elaine Elinson of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights in San Francisco.

Abercrombie spokespeople have said on several occasions the retailer does not discriminate. It rejects the accusation that it is a racist company. One could argue that at least it isn't as blatantly racist as the national retailer who sold T-shirts last year depicting two Chinese laundrymen with the words, "Two Wongs can make it white.''

Oh, wait. That was Abercrombie. Never mind.

[AngryABCGirl]

Yes. Huge in Canada (as it is a Canadian brand) and they made a huge marketing push in Korea as well, featuring Korean (MALE!) models. In ROOTS stores in Canada which I have been to, there are even Asian (MALE!) mannequins. I think it is safe to say that they are trying to market to Asians.

They're big in Taiwan too, I bought some clothes from there. How random to have Taiwanese people wearing Canadian flags on their sweatshirts, anyway back to the topic.

[moJo]

ROOTS.

But they don't sell well in the USA.
Isn't that the Canadian equivalent of GAP? I didn't realize they were sold in the US at all.

[yoMAMA]

Done and done. They're called "Banana Republic" and "Club Monaco."

Throw in Armani Exchange as well.

Gap?

Jcrew?

:tongue:

[Shuriken]

I saw this report on 60 Minutes, and I just wanted to say: I think it was disingenuous of Larry Elder to compare "racial discrimination" at Black Entertainment Television to racism in the past. It was the mainstream's marginalizing of black culture that created BET in the first place. If the broadcast networks had featured black faces on their entertainment and news shows earlier on, BET might not have needed to come into existence. Besides, I've seen some Eminem videos on BET. Back in the early 1980s, MTV wouldn't show videos by black artists until Columbia threatened to withhold its performers. Let's keep this all in perspective, Larry.

[purezero]

Stats (Not really worksafe) (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=12&num=1187)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2092175/

[ChinaLama]

wow. i thought the softcore porn of A&F catalogues was a joke. excuse me.

[mr. x]

yeah its worse than playboy if u ask me, cuz its even more suggestive

what is UP with that one pic with the horse....

[ChinaLama]

wilbur ain't the only one gettin' hot lovin fr his wife tonight.

[nonamerasian]

Ingenious idea!

Using nudity to sell clothes.

[lethal]

Wow. I didn't even realize it was that blatant. The nudity.

[hooligan]

Stats (Not really worksafe) (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=12&num=1187)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2092175/
ah, ew

i never bought abercrombie in my life, i like to harass asian kids who do :D.

-ben

[coagulated fat]

[URL=http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=12&num=1187]Stats (Not really worksafe)
lol there's an American Decency Association?

[purezero]

yeah its worse than playboy if u ask me, cuz its even more suggestive

what is UP with that one pic with the horse....
It's an ass. It's an ass thing.

[hooligan]

It's an ass. It's an ass thing.
i thought it was a horse thing myself

[TB4000]

I'd like to think all of us on here have "ass things."

[Faithless]

I guess the same-old tattered look of A&F is wearing off on some consumers:

Abercrombie faces sales, legal troubles (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~33~1830020,00.html)
Think that sex sells Abercrombie & Fitch clothing? Think again.

A longtime downward sales trend spiraled further this year, even as images in its sexually charged A&F Quarterly grew more provocative.

The preppy teen retailer retired its racy catalog for good this month, after outraged parents took their case to the media.

The point may be moot, though.

Sexual imagery, however titillating for some teens, doesn't stand up to a stronger form of teen marketing: What their friends say and wear.

Max Benas is so over Abercrombie.

"Everyone wore it, so I don't want to wear it anymore," said the Louisville 15-year-old who now prefers the similar styles at American Eagle Outfitters.

Benas, on a recent shopping trip to FlatIron Crossing with his mom, called the nudity in Abercrombie's 2003 Christmas Field Guide, "not that big a deal."

Benas is witness to problems that go more than skin deep.


Advertisement

Sales are softening, and the retailer is fighting a handful of lawsuits, including discrimination charges.

Abercrombie's sales in existing stores, a common measure of a retailer's health, are down 8 percent for the year. In November, same-store sales fell 13 percent, prompting several analysts to downgrade the stock.

Several factors play into weakening sales performance among the 694 Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister Co. and Abercrombie stores - including a dozen in Colorado - that sell to young adults and kids.

Competition and the quest for cool are chief among them.

Abercrombie and dozens of other chains, including Aeropostale, American Eagle Outfitters, The Buckle, Forever 21, Hot Topic, Gap, Guess, Old Navy, PacSun, Urban Outfitters and Wet Seal, chase a crowd of teens who spend $170 billion a year, mostly on clothing, music and entertainment.

Clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch cost more, and the styles haven't changed much, said analyst Gabrielle Kivitz of New York-based First Albany Capital.


It's about time!