So....
Abercrombie and Fitch has already proved their superficiality. So we should be surprised to hear that it discriminates against its salespeople based on their attractiveness, according to a report on Sunday's CBS news magazine "60 Minutes.”

Chronic lack of fundage spares me the moral decision making of whether or not to set foot in A&F. (Of course, it makes it easy to proclaim that, “I refuse to shop at Abercrombie and Fitch.) My dilemma comes when I find a fine piece of previously owned clothing at the Presbyterian Rummage and am forced to make the decision to keep it (good and cheap) or toss it back in the pile (good, cheap and marked with the A&F name.) It’s not worth it to me to give them free advertising even if I have been able to obtain th eir merchandis for less than the original owner paid in sales tax.

Have I ruminated on my surprise at all the children I see at our parish school lugging stuff to school in Abercrombie shopping bags? It just looks plain wrong for little kids to be walking past a statue of our Blessed Mother toting a bag with pictures of scantily clad models. (My absolute apoplectic moment came during Lent when I saw a group of 8th graders walkiing from the school to the church to practice their living Stations of the Cross tableaux....carrying their costumes in multiple A&F demi-nudie shopping bags. What’s wrong with that picture?)