McBride, "Why I Hate Abercrombie"

In the reading “Why I Hate Abercrombie” by Dwight McBride, he explains his discuss for a popular clothing label that has throughout its history be sold and advertised towards white males and more recently white females. The brand itself was started back in 1892 by David T. Abercrombie. The store sold products that were geared towards “hunters, fisherman, campers, and explorers” (62). Later in 1900 Abercrombie entered into a business deal with Ezra Fitch and thus “Abercrombie & Fitch” was born. This store which began in New York City had a very high end list of clientele. This is where McBride makes the notion that this is where the condition of promoting to white, elite men began. McBride states that, “celebration of whiteness, and of an elite class of whiteness at that, in the face of a nation whose past and present are riddled with racist ideas, politics, and ideology, is not entirely new” (64). The company went through several stages when the owners retired and the company changed hands. “Abercrombie & Fitch” had its major return to the United States clothing market in 1992. The newly refurbished company kept with the same advertising strategies as in its previous years, advertising to the whites. Due to the high price of the merchandise usually only middle class or above could afford these overpriced pieces of clothing. McBride throughout his piece reiterates how Abercrombie is associated with whiteness and its power in our American society. He explains how, “Abercrombie & Fitch has devised a very clear marketing and advertising strategy that celebrates whiteness – a particularly privileged and leisure-class whiteness – and makes use of it as a ‘lifestyle’ that it commodifies to sell otherwise extremely dull, uninspiring, and ordinary clothes” (66). U may ask how is it that Abercrombie became so associated with whiteness. Perhaps this can somewhat be explain simply by those that they hire as “Brand Reps”, who are the initial sales people located in the stores. McBride explains how in the employee handbook also known as the “Look Book” it tells the employees what their appearance must be. Now this is common for most employers, however Abercrombie & Fitch take it to a higher level that had resulted in law suit against their highering practices. For example the book tells which hair styles are appropriate. All the hair styles listed are classic “White America”, however such hair styles such as dread locks which are typically associated with African American culture are forbidden. Also it states that men can not wear gold chains. This goes against the ethnic culture of black males. It is clear from lawsuits that have been placed against the company that there is clear cut discrimination in terms of who they will hire to represent their product. Usually in pictures, advertisements, and their sales staff a certain whiteness is always presented. This is not to say that the company does not higher Blacks or other racial groups; however they are usually hired to stock and work in the back of the store where they are less visible. If a person of color does work out on the sales floor they are not allowed to show anything that may represent their ethnic culture. They must dress and act white.
As someone who is familiar with this brand of clothes I completely agree with McBride’s evaluation of the company. I have only ever seen mostly white, attractive people working at an Abercrombie & Fitch store. I remember a pretty girl that I went to high school with got a job there. Although she was pretty and skinny she was not very smart and had a poor work ethic. I am positive that there were many people who may not have been as pretty but would have been much more qualified for the job. It is no wonder that so many lawsuits have been brought upon the company. There is something about McBride’s article that does confuse me and he brings it up right at the very beginning. This is the association that he makes between the Abercrombie & Fitch clothing line and gay males. He made it seem that the label was almost a way of determining whether someone was gay. For example he made it seem like if he say a man out in a bar and he was wearing the brand then he could automatically be labeled as gay. This really did not make sense to me when he continued his argument about whiteness and the power that it held. Johnson probably explained it best when he talked about privileged and power. So it confuses me as to why McBride would use homosexuality and the power of whiteness is what seems like the same context. I believe from what I have learned about power and oppression that they two issues are not on the same level. After reading McBride’s article it has been made clear to me that whiteness and the political and ideological ideas about race and power are present throughout our society, even in the clothes on our backs.