continued
There it is, in a nutshell, the reason why the A&F
Quarterly and its inherent contents are so bothersome to parents in
America. It is one more piece of evidence that demonstrates their fear
that, as parents, they are having less and less influence on the actions
of their children. Of course, that is not necessarily true. But being
a parent nowadays means that you are competing with so many other aspects
of daily life, you are never too sure if you are winning or losing the
battle.
Mr Della Femina’s first thoughts as a parent are to
question the “lost” innocence of pre-teen and teenagers today: ‘Wait a
minute. Stop. You’re too young to see and know [these things].’ However,
he soon realizes that ‘short of locking kids in their rooms 24 hours a
day, there is no way you can stop them from living in these, their years.’
Just when it think it is safe to go back into the water
(cue in the theme music from Jaws), another hysterical and ultimately
groundless “controversy” flared up over the Back-to-School 2001 issue
of the Quarterly. Illinois Lt Gov Corinne Woods (Republican) held
a news conference in early June, where she and a motley crew of supporters
announced a boycott campaign against the company, charging that its racy
images ‘are luring teenagers into a lives of sex and sin, homosexuality
and Aids, rape and disgrace.’ What planet is she living on?
The most astonishing aspect of this latest attempt to
censure the public’s right to indiscriminately spend its disposable income
rashly is the spectre of naturally born enemies uneasily co-existing under
this boycott banner. There, surrounding the visibly indignant Lieutenant-Governor
were representatives from the Islamic Cultural Center, Citizens for Community
Values, the Chicago Rabbinical Council, the Illinois Coalition Against
Domestic Violence, the Hospital Crisis Intervention project of Chicago
Abused Women Coalition, and the Chicago, and Illinois, chapters of the
National Organization for Women. In saner times, the NOW
members would be protesting the actions of the über-conservative
religious groups. They have now declared their allies against A&F
‘for promoting unrealistic body types and photos that suggested group
sex.’
continued
|
Above:
The National Organization for Women says that A&F has promoted unrealistic
body types and photos that suggested group sexor is this,
as the author says, hysterical and ultimately groundless?
From the summer 2000 issue. Below left: Christmas 2000, a tamer
image that might exemplify the furore. Below right: Summer 1999but
why must photographs of half-naked (or totally naked) men lure teens into
homosexuality as has been chargedand the same images of women do
not?
|