|
Sugar & Spice...
I just want to commend you for explaining your viewpoints so clearly and eloquently--I don't think you could have explained your thoughts any more clearly.
At any rate: African American vs. Black. Each person has their personal preference. I used to be okay with AA, because I understood why it was created (provide black folks living in America a history and heritage to reseach and explore culturally). However, saying AA excludes the "black" Latinos, Africans, Carribeans, Haitians and other folks throughout the diaspora living in the US who are not American. As such, I use the term black. I also use the term "white." I respect whatever folks chose to call themselves, because it simply isn't that hard to remember people's preferences unless you're just being obstinate.
On A&F: it is within A&F's rights to hire whomever they want. It is however illegal in the US, generally, to deny a person a position for which they are qualified exclusively because of race or gender. If it can be proven that black, Latino and Asian folks were routinely not hired or relegated to certain positions ONLY because of their race, then the lawsuit has merit. If A&F can argue or prove that they employ fair hiring practices overall and can discredit the plantiffs and/or the allegations, then A&F, and their current hiring practices, will prevail. From the very comments on this thread, it would seem on the surface that A&F employs, at the very least, questionable hiring procedures in some of their stores.
|
Threaded Mode