Dear Abercrombie and Fitch, you suck.. big time..... and response to the Corporation film

Dear Abercrombie and Fitch,
How is the company? We are relatively unacquainted as far as corporations and citizens go, so I will tell A&F that I am a college student at a University, and I would just like to point out some interesting things I have noticed. Abercrombie and Fitch may find them interesting as well.
To start, Abercrombie and Fitch is a clothing store, correct? So, why is it that when one walks into an Abercrombie store or views an advertisement for Abercrombie clothing, more often than not one sees what appears to be naked, in the process of becoming naked, or partially clothed people? Is there a reason the models don’t want to wear the clothing? Is it itchy or uncomfortable? Does it smell funny? It makes me think I shouldn’t want to wear the clothing either if the models can’t even stand it long enough to have a photo taken. I’ve never really understood the concept of advertising clothing with people who are clearly not wearing the clothing in the advertisement. Maybe Abercrombie and Fitch could clear up a little of this confusion for me.
To continue, I was also wondering why on the application to be an A&F model, there is a place to fill out your weight. I’m not sure if A&F is aware, but people carry their weight differently, and weight is not a correct measure of an adipose to muscle tissue ratio. If you received an application from someone who was a number of pounds over the companies weight range for models, but he/she appeared to be a healthy individual, would you turn them down? Last I checked, A&F had more than one size of clothing in the store available for purchase. It would be nice to see more than one size advertised, you know, when clothing is actually used in the advertisements to start with. I recently read a book called Culture Jam, and learned that “Nine out of ten North American women feel bad about some aspect of their bodies, and men are not far behind.” I feel as though this could be due to the advertisements such as the ones put out by A&F and other companies that only show one type of person (and unfortunately all the companies seem to have latched onto this same body type) as the beautiful and desirable body. Maybe its time to show people that there is more than one type of beautiful in the world, and A&F embraces all beauty. Vary it up, you know? Open your minds, see the beauty in every body, and show that in your advertisements, and stop asking for people’s weight in your application. It just sounds shallow.
While I’m on the topic of clothing models, I would also just like to point out the long standing complaint many people have with A&F regarding the lack of diversity present in every aspect of the store. Not only is there a lack of diversity among the models, but also among the clothing and the employees. I have noticed that pretty much all of the tee-shirts sold by A&F have a giant A&F logo on them, usually followed by some random sport or obscure year, or the words athletic department. What is so significant about the years on the shirts? And does A&F actually have an athletic department? It might be a good idea. A&F could start an athletic department, and have sports teams that actually back up the ones on the shirts. It would promote a healthier America as well as getting up and getting outside. Just a suggestion.
I have also heard incidences of A&F stores firing or not hiring various employees or applicants because they do not fit the A&F “look.” This is much less than satisfactory. I would have expected more from a store than advertises all around cool casual-ness. Just so all parties involved in this letter are aware; the word casual is defined as free and easy, natural, unplanned, and marked by blithe unconcern. Trying to stuff all employees into a mold that fits the “look” of A&F doesn’t seem, to me, to be following along with the casual outlook of the company. Seems to be a lot more stuck-up and pompous in a silver-spoon-up-the-ass kind of way. A better way to accomplish this would be to just accept everybody for who they are and not hire only those who fit the mold, or can be made to fit. I’m not quite sure I understand this obsession A&F has with fitting everything into a specific and previously defined band of human.
Also, I was just wondering why there was a need for clothing that promotes the objectification of women and drinking. I would not call myself a feminist, but I am definitely all for equality. I mean, if A&F is going to make shirts that objectify women, why not objectify men too? There is a shirt for guys in on the A&F website that has a picture of a women’s lower body wearing underwear that says “I love College.” I have some ideas on what this shirt is trying to say, but I was just wondering what A&F was thinking the message of this shirt was. Why can’t A&F have a female equivalent to the shirt with a picture of a guy’s lower half in boxer briefs with “I Love College” written on his butt. Last I checked, both guys and girls “Love College.” Correct me if I‘m wrong, but I believe A&F’s target consumer is between the ages of 18 and 22. So, why is it that you have shirts for both genders promoting drinking, when the majority of the target audience is below the legal drinking age? Just doesn’t seem quite right. Why not promote activities the target age group can actually legally engage in? Just seems more practical.
Lastly, I would like to congratulate Abercrombie and Fitch on its induction into the 2010 Sweatshop Hall of Fame by the International Labor Rights Forum. I would just like to make it publically known that I strongly disagree with A&F’s activities at the Alta Mode Factory in the Philippines. Is there a legitimate reason for putting 100 of the union members on forced leave, other than the fact that they were exercising their right to unionize? Also, it would prove to be much better, especially for the workers and their families if A&F did not switch its production around from factory to factory so much. Stop being so afraid of commitment ad form some relationships with your workers. Without them, A&F is really nothing more than a false sense of casual and a severely misplaced moose logo. I was also wondering what the production quota was for this factory is. Supposedly it is set beyond human capacity, but I really wanted to hear both sides of the story, so I figured I’d give A&F a chance to weigh in on the matter. Also mentioned in Culture Jam was this idea of corporations as legal people. Personally, I do not recognize corporations as people, but if A&F wants to be seen as a legal person, maybe it should find its moral compass, and realize the wrong its doing and has been doing in places like the Alta Mode Factory, and stop.
That’s all. I look forward to hearing back from Abercrombie and Fitch. And please be rest assured, if I do not receive a reply, A&F will be receiving this email for the next 70 some odd years until a legitimate response is received. Thanks so much for your time.
Sarah Schipelliti


The Corporation:
One thing that surprised me from the film was the ability to patent all non-human forms of life. This is insane. A one-man company now has the ability to own a form of life. Way to make corporations able to play God. Soon, everything from batteries to the idea of a human will be patented, and the only thing left to patent will be the actual human itself. What happens when a company patents a disease, and then you unfortunately get that disease? Are you going to have to pay the company that owns your disease? Because if by some horrible chance I get a disease that’s patented by a company, I am sure as hell not paying them a single penny. If anything, they should be responsible for it and have to pay my hospital bills. People cannot own life. The only life you own should be, well your own. In all honesty, I don’t even think house pets are really owned. Yeah, you are paying for their food and providing them with shelter, but if my dog ran away, that’s his choice. I’d be sad, and miss him. But I don’t own his life. Nobody should be able to own any other life than their own. That’s my take on the whole situation.
One thing that really agitated me from the film was Monsanto’s control over the story on Milk that was trying to be aired by Fox journalists. Monsanto got involved only to cover up the true detriment that milk, especially milk with RBGH in it (so Monsanto’s milk), can cause. If there was nothing wrong with RBGH, then they wouldn’t have stepped in. I can’t believe that only a 90 day study on 30 rats, with most likely misreported findings (thank you Monsanto) is being used to justify the use of RBGH in milk for humans of all ages for all lengths of time. And I can’t believe the Fox producer guy just folded right under pressure from Monsanto and agreed to do anything for Monsanto. What really got me was when he said that “…the news is what we say it it…” Wow, way to make me loose faith in all news. No, wrong, its not what you say it is. I don’t care what law says that falsifying news is not against the law. Its against every moral law. Get a back bone, stick up for what’s right. Just because it’s a law doesn’t mean you should do it. As a news station, they have a responsibility to report honest and upfront news to the population. And as a company that presides over essentially all the food for America, Monsanto has a responsibility not to kill its consumers with its chemicals and “food” and hormones. It really bothers me that Sodexho is run by Monsanto. I want nothing to do with this corrupt company.
On significant item of new learning I had from this film was learning about the appalling involvement of American companies in Nazi Gemrany during the war. One such involvement was the creation of Fanta Orange. Fanta Orange was created by Coke so it could still make profits in Nazi Germany during the war…while people died. An IBM system was used by the Nazis in every concentration camp and railroad system used to get prisoners to the camps. It was punch card system where the cards needed to be printed out. And to print the punch cards out,the Nazis used machines that were leased out to them by IBM. Then the machines needed on site maintance done once a month. So IBM can’t say they didn’t know…They did. They even collected profits from it after the war. Its just atrocious and appalling and if I had no respect for Coke before, I don’t know what you would call my lack of respect for them now. It’s a shame they have exclusive pouring rights at UVM. Boycotting beverages sold at UVM? I think so…
One question I had during the second half of the film was is there any way to get Monsanto and Coke off of the UVM campus or is that impossible in the eyes of the administration?
I found the second half of the second half of the film to be more hopeful than the first 3/4ths. Even though I found the majority of the film to be, not depressing, but frustrating (not the film itself but the content), I really liked it. It made me want to go out and fix things and “jam” the corporate world so to speak. Actually, after last class, before this assignment was posted, I sent a letter to American Eagle about their new advertisement that says “What hot people wear” and “Hot people wear shorts” and how dumb it was and how I disagreed, except with much more polite and eloquent language. I’m waiting to hear back. If not, they too will be receiving emails from me for an indefinite amount of time. But then this assignment was posted and I have to admit I was quite excited about the excuse to write to another company and give them a piece of my mind. But the video opened my eyes to quite a few things that I had never known or heard of before, and I’m glad it did. As a side note, I thought that was amazing when Michael Moore brought the smokers to sing Christmas carols to the cigarette company.