I was wondering...

[belamo]

... when Hollister or CF... ooops, sorry... Hollister or A&F opens a new store, do they use special carriers to bring their "sexy lifeguards" from one place to the others, like with the horses and cattle and poultry in general?

It's sunny but quite cold (as we can usually get over here) in this morning opening. I honestly can fanthom the reason why anyone would be so excited about the opening of a Hollister store and hang it on Facebook, unless they have a taste for flat-nosed, boysihly fluffy, flatbuttocked teenish manwhores.

Yeah, you got it: I was secretly hoping that, somehow (OF COURSE you can't count on the usual listing system to contact that sort of overpriced hos) , I could either tap some of them or, MOST likely, reaffirm myself in the conviction that this are definitely NOT my cup of ho.

[Kabluey]

Reminds me of...

[pat grimshaw]

So did you find an answer to your query?

[belamo]

So did you find an answer to your query?

Bleh......

[bankside]

I don't get it. How can a buch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

[belamo]

I don't get it. How can a buch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

Like a you can sell worthless ragcloths as glamorous items just because you use a lot of glitter and "angels" to peddle them.
Very American: do not bother to produce, just sell... Castillian people did not even bother to sell until they were forced to by those overbearing Anglo business people.

[HunterM]

I don't get it. How can a bunch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

[gsdx]

I don't get it. How can a buch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

For the same reason that women in skimpy bikinis can sell cars.

[JP.]

I agreed wit you Belam,..those brigade chickens are ashes and he's the lotion
Mimi sang that..

[jkom1f]

Sex appeal sells. It's not a hard concept to understand to be quite honest

[AlmondMilk]

Sex appeal sells. It's not a hard concept to understand to be quite honest

lol He was joking.

[belamo]

I don't get it. How can a buch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

They do not sell shirts, they sell sex: they sell sex to unsatisfied housewives who then buy the shirts for their hen-pecked husbands, who then act as walking ads for housewife-free people like me who, shocked and horrified, keep wondering "why the hell is EVERYBODY now wearing that sort of THING, and where the heck did that 'Hollister' come from?".

[Harke the Boeotarch]

They do not sell shirts, they sell sex: they sell sex to unsatisfied housewives who then buy the shirts for their hen-pecked husbands, who then act as walking ads for housewife-free people like me who, shocked and horrified, keep wondering "why the hell is EVERYBODY now wearing that sort of THING, and where the heck did that 'Hollister' come from?".

I think they also attract more than their fair share of desperate homos.

[xbuzzerx]

http://www.afjustice.com/

I knew two girls who were in the suit, btw. They were slightly overweight (like 15 lbs) Asian girls who worked in a local A&F and after the regional manager came in they were abruptly told the store was downsizing and laid off. When they stopped by the store a week later they saw new employees doing their previous job and the manager (who they were friendly with) sheepfacedly told them that after the regional manager had come in and inspected the store he pulled the store manager aside and said "See them?" and pointed at the cashiers, and then said "you're supposed to have people more like that," and pointed at the posters of the shirtless guys up on the walls.

[belamo]

I think they also attract more than their fair share of desperate homos.

By "they" meaning the hos, not the shirts: even a low-class outsider fag like me knows for sure that no self-respecting homo would EVER, EVER, EVER stoop to even touching with his fingertips any sort of A&F-related trash... unless you are thoroughly American, who are too prone to revealing themselves to be to fashion and style what Amanda Lepore is to beauty and sophistication.

[Telstra]

.
I would like to be there taking pictures.

[Harke the Boeotarch]

I knew two girls who were in the suit, btw. They were slightly overweight (like 15 lbs) Asian girls who worked in a local A&F and after the regional manager came in they were abruptly told the store was downsizing and laid off.

Like so?

By "they" meaning the hos, not the shirts: even a low-class outsider fag like me knows for sure that no self-respecting homo would EVER, EVER, EVER stoop to even touching with his fingertips any sort of A&F-related trash...

Lots of Dutch and German gay guys enter the bars I frequent in gear with the A & F logo.

[belamo]

Lots of Dutch and German gay guys enter the bars I frequent in gear with the A & F logo.

barbari Germani...

[xbuzzerx]

Like so?





Lots of Dutch and German gay guys enter the bars I frequent in gear with the A & F logo.

In the eyes of people who would idolize the imagery of A&F, yes, I suppose so.

[jkom1f]

Lol just because you all seem so interested:

I worked at ANF for four years. Firstly, we hired people based upon looks. A sales associate is actually a "floor model" so that they can legally fire/hire/monitor your looks, much the same as bunnies at the PlayBoy clubs. We actually have look-books of what type of faces we want to hire. There are also secret shoppers who rank workers on physical appearance, where men are rated 1-5 on 'handsome' and girls 1-5 on 'pretty.' They rank every model in every store, and the top 10 from each store have to submit pictures to corporate. From there, they make the look-book of the most attractive top-10 stores in the company. Then, they use that book to poach models for their advertisements. What they do is say 'come in for a screen test,' not pay you, and then use the photos on anything they want because, remember, they already employ you as a 'model,' so they own the rights to all your photos. It's an interesting place to work, lol, especially when your hours are distributed based solely on physical appearance.

[jkom1f]

Also, let me just say, that pre 2009 ANF clothes were nice, I hate their stuff now but they used to be nice (I remember when I could buy $150 jeans and cashmere sweaters there and they never had sales or promotions).

[refujiunderground]

I don't get it. How can a buch of people with no shirts actually sell any shirts?

that's a good question because i always wondered what was the point of using models to sell products in general. it seems like over the years, more and more commercials are becoming model galleries. it never used to be like this before. do they want people to pay attention to the model or the product? it's ridiculous. i'm tired of being bombarded with this "beauty, attractiveness, model, pretty people, superficiality" bullshit. it's NOT real. they got these kids, teens and younger adults actually believing that sorry shit, trying to relate to a false images and bullshit. trying to push pretty boy looking douchebags as the way of the culture. that's not real.

[xbuzzerx]

Lol just because you all seem so interested:

I worked at ANF for four years. Firstly, we hired people based upon looks. A sales associate is actually a "floor model" so that they can legally fire/hire/monitor your looks, much the same as bunnies at the PlayBoy clubs. We actually have look-books of what type of faces we want to hire. There are also secret shoppers who rank workers on physical appearance, where men are rated 1-5 on 'handsome' and girls 1-5 on 'pretty.' They rank every model in every store, and the top 10 from each store have to submit pictures to corporate. From there, they make the look-book of the most attractive top-10 stores in the company. Then, they use that book to poach models for their advertisements. What they do is say 'come in for a screen test,' not pay you, and then use the photos on anything they want because, remember, they already employ you as a 'model,' so they own the rights to all your photos. It's an interesting place to work, lol, especially when your hours are distributed based solely on physical appearance.

Your company has lost lawsuits over this, more than one, so I wouldn't be too hasty saying this is perfectly above board and fine and comparing A&F to a PlayBoy club.

[refujiunderground]

Lol just because you all seem so interested:

I worked at ANF for four years. Firstly, we hired people based upon looks. A sales associate is actually a "floor model" so that they can legally fire/hire/monitor your looks, much the same as bunnies at the PlayBoy clubs. We actually have look-books of what type of faces we want to hire. There are also secret shoppers who rank workers on physical appearance, where men are rated 1-5 on 'handsome' and girls 1-5 on 'pretty.' They rank every model in every store, and the top 10 from each store have to submit pictures to corporate. From there, they make the look-book of the most attractive top-10 stores in the company. Then, they use that book to poach models for their advertisements. What they do is say 'come in for a screen test,' not pay you, and then use the photos on anything they want because, remember, they already employ you as a 'model,' so they own the rights to all your photos. It's an interesting place to work, lol, especially when your hours are distributed based solely on physical appearance.

that sounds like a horrible place to work. just from that alone, i'd support a boycott of this store and would never shop there for clothes. would also encourage people to do the same. this is just unacceptable. i don't think people realize the impact that these stores and companies have on people especially the kids and young adults. you got these kids running around crying about not having "aesthetic jawlines" and not having "model faces". terrible.

[xbuzzerx]

Let's not forget these too lol

[maxpowr9]

It's funny because in the US/NA, the stores are closing more and more and rely on overseas to carry the profits. IMO, the brand is pretty much dead in the US but now the EU and in particular Asia, can be subjected to whitewashing.

[refujiunderground]

Let's not forget these too lol

yep, they're also racist as fuck too. still don't see why anybody would want to be associate with a company like abercombie knowing the nature of what the many things they represent.

[Harke the Boeotarch]

There's one opening in Amsterdam in two weeks.

[jkom1f]

lol look I hate the company because I worked for them, I mean I have a personal reason, which is a little different.

Secondly, I will go on the record and say that the CEO Mike Jefferies is a douche bag and he needs to be ousted. But don't take it out on the people that work there. Every day that I went to work, I busted my ass for minimum wage and dealt with customer after customer coming up to me and complaining about the company's business practices, its clothes, the marketing, the music, the cologne... and so on and so on. Seriously, we all hate it too, but it's a job and cut us some slack.

Boycott and do what you want but might I suggest leaving the store employees out of it? They're just trying to make a few bucks and get the heck out of there ASAP.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, on a side note, it's a fabulous place to work if you're good looking! lol

[xbuzzerx]

lol look I hate the company because I worked for them, I mean I have a personal reason, which is a little different.

Secondly, I will go on the record and say that the CEO Mike Jefferies is a douche bag and he needs to be ousted. But don't take it out on the people that work there. Every day that I went to work, I busted my ass for minimum wage and dealt with customer after customer coming up to me and complaining about the company's business practices, its clothes, the marketing, the music, the cologne... and so on and so on. Seriously, we all hate it too, but it's a job and cut us some slack.

Boycott and do what you want but might I suggest leaving the store employees out of it? They're just trying to make a few bucks and get the heck out of there ASAP.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, on a side note, it's a fabulous place to work if you're good looking! lol

I don't recall anyone even so much as hinting at walking into the store and abusing the employees.

I simply refuse to have anything to do with the brand name because they're a racist, homophobic company that blasted into super-mega-success with a homoerotic ad campaign to straight white people.

[belamo]

that's a good question because i always wondered what was the point of using models to sell products in general. it seems like over the years, more and more commercials are becoming model galleries. it never used to be like this before. do they want people to pay attention to the model or the product? it's ridiculous. i'm tired of being bombarded with this "beauty, attractiveness, model, pretty people, superficiality" bullshit. it's NOT real. they got these kids, teens and younger adults actually believing that sorry shit, trying to relate to a false images and bullshit. trying to push pretty boy looking douchebags as the way of the culture. that's not real.

Because now they sell smoke: they use people's, "models'" looks to sell an idea, a dream... the SoCa dream, the youthful dream, whatever... not that they did not do that before, but as a bite to sell the "nice" clothes, as a poster above commented. Now they do not need to care to spend time, work, money in producing a good product that will make you look good: you only need to look at their models and screw how the rags look on them, let alone on yourself.

In short, cheaper sells better.

They wanted to open a store at this address a couple of years ago, but with the preposterous staggering rates that only some Apple can consider to afford like nothing, and the Zara and the like around them offering more (and that considering how little they offer already) for less, it was not an easy move to make in a market that is becoming shaky even there were they are already established.

[belamo]

lol look I hate the company because I worked for them, I mean I have a personal reason, which is a little different.

Secondly, I will go on the record and say that the CEO Mike Jefferies is a douche bag and he needs to be ousted. But don't take it out on the people that work there. Every day that I went to work, I busted my ass for minimum wage and dealt with customer after customer coming up to me and complaining about the company's business practices, its clothes, the marketing, the music, the cologne... and so on and so on. Seriously, we all hate it too, but it's a job and cut us some slack.

Boycott and do what you want but might I suggest leaving the store employees out of it? They're just trying to make a few bucks and get the heck out of there ASAP.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, on a side note, it's a fabulous place to work if you're good looking! lol

Is it really about being good-looking, or rather about fitting into a fetish ideal look? Because if it were all about "symmetrical" doll looks, ANF would rather go for the Eastern Asian look, and even black people's faces are generally finer proportioned and chiseled that Neanderthalish European looks.
I remember having watched recently (I was so intrigued or, rather, fascinated about how promisingly crappy it seemed from the title: "Oprah", "coming clean"...) and having thought: oh my, poor people. She didn't even have a good skin in the first place but she could live half her life on the conviction that she was truly, "objectively" special enough to be above the rest... with face.

[jkom1f]

Well, good-looking comes in many forms, but at that store it is very specific, you are right.

[belamo]

Well, good-looking comes in many forms, but at that store it is very specific, you are right.

My point is that, apparently, even today, it doesn't: there is quite a specific form that is considered as the standard against which looks are measured to be considered "good" or not, and it is not so much the shape of a nose or a jaw as certain colors in which a potato nose and any sort of jaw can be made to pass for "good-looking". Now someone tell me what exactly is so symmetrical or particularly good-looking above-average about this guy:

Mike Jeffreaks may have the sexual fetishes he wants, but having them pass for the standard of good looks is sickening from the merely frivolous aesthetical point of view to the outright social discriminatory one.

[cgymike]

Yeah but doesn't Spain have their own A&F type stores?

[pat grimshaw]

I say The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.
The flesh will fall from the bone in fifteen years time but WA MOzart and LV Berthoven last forever.
The flesh will fall from my bone earlier than I'd wish. But …

[eastofeden]

I didn't even know it was a clothing line or store until a few months ago...I was quite embarrassed...

The thing is...a neighboring town here in California is Hollister and I have seen these Hollister T Shirts for years now and kept wondering why the hell so many people wear Tshirts from Hollister. It is a sweet little town...the earthquake capital of California...and I go there maybe once a week...but I couldnt' imagine why anyone would wear a Hollister t shirt????????

Now I know.

Oh yeah...on the subject of "beauty"...I think it is a hoot that people allow other people and corporations define beauty for them. It is subjective...period.

[xbuzzerx]

My point is that, apparently, even today, it doesn't: there is quite a specific form that is considered as the standard against which looks are measured to be considered "good" or not, and it is not so much the shape of a nose or a jaw as certain colors in which a potato nose and any sort of jaw can be made to pass for "good-looking". Now someone tell me what exactly is so symmetrical or particularly good-looking above-average about this guy:

Mike Jeffreaks may have the sexual fetishes he wants, but having them pass for the standard of good looks is sickening from the merely frivolous aesthetical point of view to the outright social discriminatory one.

Here we are talking about the negative social impact of A&F but to Belamo the most important thing was that they perpetuate a beauty standard he doesn't agree with lol.

I agree they go for boring bland white guys you could see on any cheap pack of underwear but, it sells. So chastising them for bad aesthetics is really just the same thing as saying everyone has bad taste. In which case it doesn't matter since more people agree it's good taste than bad.

[belamo]

Here we are talking about the negative social impact of A&F but to belamo the most important thing was that they perpetuate a beauty standard he doesn't agree with lol.

I agree they go for boring bland white guys you could see on any cheap pack of underwear but, it sells. So chastising them for bad aesthetics is really just the same thing as saying everyone has bad taste. In which case it doesn't matter since more people agree it's good taste than bad.

You are ignoring again the fundamental point: this is not a question of just taste, we are talking about a whole standard with deep social implications being more or less surreptitiously imposed. It's like with morals, or ethics, which is a more in vogue appelation for what is EXACTLY the same, no matter how they try to color it by pretending they are promoting the same "fundamentals" under a different name or a different set of credo: when you talk about standards you are appealing to an absolute, to a truth, and then you use it to displace or crash whatever does not agree with it.

As I often say on this site, the fact that I have a thing for redheads and blonds does not blind me to the fact that they are quite often truly fugly, and that my eel down here and my brains up here do not mix to cook up a chimaera. Likewise, when I seem to be so wrought up in this sort of "discussions", it is not just about the trifling specific particular, like in this case ANF looks, as the underlying and more far-reaching rationale that can, and in fact IS stretched to more momentous issues.

About the selling, oh c'mon, IT is not IT itself, it is not that there is any inherent characteristic that appeals to people: people would, will, in fact have laughed and laugh at one thing one day and literally the next day they follow the trend they are fed with to consider that same thing totally normal and even desirable. In fact it is not even about presenting anything new: they just take the old same clothes and decide to "present them differently" by just dropping them on a young, supposedly cool or "alternative" youngster. That is how a totally classic, rancid if you want, coat that I gladly buy and proudly wear, from Mango, is presented in the catalogues as just "a layer" hanging from the model.

[belamo]

Yeah but doesn't Spain have their own A&F type stores?

If you mean trashy clothing, of course we have all the Inditex group (Zara & co.) and Mango, and Shana, and Blanco, and what not. But if we had a real ANF-like style over here, Jeffreaks would not be very happy.

[Harke the Boeotarch]

[belamo]

Oh, so you remembered it from when they posted it a few years ago? I was expecting that post from any other forumer, but not from you

[JP.]

Abrecombie, Hollister, GAP, JC penny...nothing change since 2002

I have one pink Hollister shirt back in 2004..with poppin collar

I use that now as a kitchen rag

[xbuzzerx]

You are ignoring again the fundamental point: this is not a question of just taste, we are talking about a whole standard with deep social implications being more or less surreptitiously imposed. It's like with morals, or ethics, which is a more in vogue appelation for what is EXACTLY the same, no matter how they try to color it by pretending they are promoting the same "fundamentals" under a different name or a different set of credo: when you talk about standards you are appealing to an absolute, to a truth, and then you use it to displace or crash whatever does not agree with it.

As I often say on this site, the fact that I have a thing for redheads and blonds does not blind me to the fact that they are quite often truly fugly, and that my eel down here and my brains up here do not mix to cook up a chimaera. Likewise, when I seem to be so wrought up in this sort of "discussions", it is not just about the trifling specific particular, like in this case ANF looks, as the underlying and more far-reaching rationale that can, and in fact IS stretched to more momentous issues.

About the selling, oh c'mon, IT is not IT itself, it is not that there is any inherent characteristic that appeals to people: people would, will, in fact have laughed and laugh at one thing one day and literally the next day they follow the trend they are fed with to consider that same thing totally normal and even desirable. In fact it is not even about presenting anything new: they just take the old same clothes and decide to "present them differently" by just dropping them on a young, supposedly cool or "alternative" youngster. That is how a totally classic, rancid if you want, coat that I gladly buy and proudly wear, from Mango, is presented in the catalogues as just "a layer" hanging from the model.

I don't understand how you did anything other than spend 3 paragraphs saying what I already said, which is that the beauty standard is created to sell and it displaces more varied tastes or aesthetics.

None of which is new with A&F.

[belamo]

I don't understand how you did anything other than spend 3 paragraphs saying what I already said, which is that the beauty standard is created to sell and it displaces more varied tastes or aesthetics.

I did it because I did not want you to be left with the impression that what I was trying to say was what you already said, even if it is what you INTENDED to say. You did not write just "a beauty standard" but "a beauty standard" I "do not agree with". If you think the difference is only "stylistics" or "semantics" (which is not) no wonder in America need people with career in law to clarify what is just the logic of linguistic expression.
My paragraphs were stressing the fundamental point that it is not about subjectivity, about a choice among many, but about only one possibility being presented as THE and only possible choice.

That is also why I need six lines to answer to your two lines, plus this coda

[xbuzzerx]

I did it because I did not want you to be left with the impression that what I was trying to say was what you already said, even if it is what you INTENDED to say. You did not write just "a beauty standard" but "a beauty standard" I "do not agree with". If you think the difference is only "stylistics" or "semantics" (which is not) no wonder in America need people with career in law to clarify what is just the logic of linguistic expression.
My paragraphs were stressing the fundamental point that it is not about subjectivity, about a choice among many, but about only one possibility being presented as THE and only possible choice.

That is also why I need six lines to answer to your two lines, plus this coda

It is being presented as "THE and only possible choice"?

Does A&F somehow control and restrict what anyone else may publish or what models they may use?

They're using a beauty standard that sells fantastically well. That's the reason they're doing it.

[belamo]

It is being presented as "THE and only possible choice"?

Does A&F somehow control and restrict what anyone else may publish or what models they may use?

They're using a beauty standard that sells fantastically well. That's the reason they're doing it.

Are you sure, even according to your own assessment of AFN's practices, that it all did not start with a standard that has the pontential, by its own magic, to "sell fantastically well", but that first there was a standard being socially and culturally positioned everywhere, and then, with that well-tilled ground they started selling "fantastically well" their cheap, goofily daubed rags for goofy teens and hen-pecked husbands?
As for the male looks being the only choice, well, just look at their looks section: the girl is the 1980s Cosby-world, Eddie Murphy-sidedoll standard for black women, and the boy still represents the stale Tom-Sawyer-goes-to-Jeffreaks-College all-AmericanISH look.

Does A&F somehow control and restrict what anyone else may publish or what models they may use?

Are you serious or even aware of your are writing there? Are you considering that A&F, like any other bigger firm, does not any interest in having control on what image and "values" they present and represent to the general public?