Abercrombie & Fitch: "Sorry, We Don't Hire Negroes.

[VinceZeb]

Goat, in your weak attempt to try and insult me, you actually made my point. You target your main consumer. With FUBU, you target the "young urban african-american". With A&F, you target the "young collegiate anglo-saxon". It isn't racism, it is good business practice.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Immortal Goat

Vince, do you even know what FUBU stands for? If not, then I will enlighten you. It is a company owned by black people, and the company name stands for "For Us, By Us", referring to a predominantly African-American target audience. THAT is why the FUBU catalogue does not have tons of non-blacks in it.

And you're defending THIS?! You're all over the place. When you make up your mind and intelligently decide one way or the other, feel free to post again.

[Big Papa Goat]

An employer has the right to discriminate when he's hiring, but that discrimination shouldn't be on the basis of race, religion etc. I don't know the law for you guys down in the states, but I'm pretty sure that goes against our constitution up in Canada.
But back on topic, the thing about men and flat chested women not being hired by hooters. In hooters case, men and flat chested women are not suited to the job, which is being a big jugged waitress. For Ambercrombie and Fitch, there is no reason for them to claim blacks and hispanics are not qualified for the job on the basis of their race. FUBU does it with blacks? Well, they're just as wrong, and both of these companies are perpetuating neo-segragationist policies that are only driving people of different cultures apart, with no possible benefit for any. I mean, what difference does it really make if there is a black salesmen selling you you're shitty ambercrombie and fitch sweater, or a white guy selling you whatever the hell FUBU sells, we have to work our way past our fear and discrimination against people that aren't like us through tolerance and understanding and if I sounded like a hippy, then give me some pot and a hacky sack and call me a hippy dammit!

[mburbank]

I stopped shopping at A&F when they started their whole 'Branding' bullshit. I think anyone who wears their product should carry a sign that says "I'm marginally less of a moron than people wearing Tommy Hilfiger crap."

The collective argument tha businesses should be allowed to do whatever they want is A.) Not what our current laws allow for, and I'm always amazed by how little reggard for and knowledge of law is held by so many upstanding patriots

and B.) Dangerous. Unfettered business would grind you up for dogfood if their was a profit margin in it. You may object to speciffic regulation, or the scope of regulation, but keep in mind the unregulated business produces child labor, forced labor, the manipulation and addition of physically addictive ingredients, carcinognes in your backyard etc. etc. etc.

How many of you think your boss is really great person who has a healthy respect for you as an individual and wants to work with you for the betterment of your company? If your hand is up (and by the way, mine is) you're damn lucky.

Now how many of you think your boss would get you to work unpaid overtime if he thought he could get away with it?

[Isaac]

Vince, theres a problem in your argument, beacuse I've also seen you say that blacks and other minoritys aren't discriminated against, that they need to pull them selfs up, but you have to acknowledge that in some areas, with out anti-descrimination law suits, blacks and other minortys would never get a fair wage for there work, like in the south, nor would they get a job equal to there skill...either a)you don't acknowledege this as a result, b)you don't see how these things relate, c)your a bigot, or d)some combination of previos

[Immortal Goat]

I do not think that segregation is right. A company is allowed to have a target audience, such as FUBU has blacks, but that does NOT mean that FUBU should only hire blacks to work in thier store. If their catalogue has only blacks, that is fine, but they should not segregate in the workplace. If they want a predominantly black staff, then hire the white people for the janitorial jobs and the blacks as the front-of-store employees.

[The_Rorschach]

Just for note, I do know the law, and I stand by my previous statements. I think he butted heads on a similar issue in the past when we were discussing the Robber Barons, so I won't bother repeating an old argument, but I will say this:

If I owned a house, and invested into its property value through landscaping, restoration and buying furnishings and fixtures to make it more attractive, I would be in the right. If, after having done these things, I found I had too little time to upkeep my investment due to my work schedule, and I hired someone to do the yardwork and housework, I would still be in the right. Now if I wanted expressly a French Maid and a Scottish groundskeeper, why would I be in the wrong? It's my house, and my money going into their pockets. Why must I placate the first minority who applies if I do not desire them?

People are not entitled to work, they are not entitled to jobs. They are entitled to certains rights, which the law cannot curtail, and certain liberties the law can restrict. They cannot, however, demand placement, and it is folly for society to think they can.

[WorthlessLiar]

Rorschach, placement is not the issue here. No one is necessarily claiming the right to get hired. That's just something you've cynically imposed upon the person bringing this case forth. The right in question here is the right not to be judged by an employer soley on the basis of factors such as skin color. Obviously, you've made it clear that we still differ in this regard, which is fine, but don't try to set up a straw man here. I find your posts arrogant and dismissive of the real issue.

Why is it that you wish to shop at abercrombie more often?

Is it the kiddie thong underwear or the Asian bashing t-shirts?

Probably just for that rich white prick look.

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Immortal Goat

If their catalogue has only blacks, that is fine, but they should not segregate in the workplace.

Why? Modelling is a job too. It's the same situation, only you're less familiar with it and therefore more familiar with talking out your ass.

If they want a predominantly black staff, then hire the white people for the janitorial jobs and the blacks as the front-of-store employees.

Isn't that already what A&F is doing, with the roles reversed? Even if it wasn't, how is that a solution anyway? One race would be getting higher pay, and you'd have something else to cry about.

[kahljorn]

Victorias secret won't hire men. I find that offensive. I applied there and they said no men, even though I told them I'm profecient in bra fitting and other such procedures. IM SUEING.