I'm told by Michelle Finch that the Abercrombie & Fitch catalog is obscene, even to the point of violating criminal law when sold to minors ("Mom assails 'pornographic' catalog," December 2). While I seriously doubt that there is any merit in this accusation, based on the News-Leader's description of the catalog's content, I'm willing to entertain the notion for a moment.
Let's assume that the catalog is so vile as to violate the standards that the courts have set to define "pornography." According to the News-Leader, exposing minors to pornography is a Class A misdemeanor that can get the offender a year in the calaboose and a $1,000 debit on their checking account. There are other regulations pertaining to the distribution of pornography, including sending it unsolicited to others.
So, what to do with Ms. Finch? She purchased the catalog, somehow managing not to notice that it was sealed in a plastic bag and bore a huge green warning sticker proclaiming the adult nature of its content. Then, she returned to Abercrombie & Fitch and snapped up eight more copies of the "offensive" book at $6.00 a pop, and mailed them out to unsuspecting reporters. To top it all off, she knowingly induced a minor to purchase yet another copy. This, at the very least, puts her in violation of the very statute she is complaining against the store over. She may also be culpable for contributing to the delinquency of a minor, use of the mails to deliver obscene materials to those who have not requested them, and a number of other charges.
Naturally, Ms. Finch claims that she took her arguably criminal actions "in order to make people aware of what they were buying." I doubt, however, that this defense would hold much water. If the people she mailed the catalog to had already bought it, they were already aware. If they hadn't, they quite possibly did not wish to receive pictures of nude men on horseback in the mail. Her line of reasoning reminds me of the protests of friends, who tell their significant others that they buy Playboy "for the articles."
The real point here, of course, is that Ms. Finch went out of her way to expose herself and others to something she claims to consider offensive, and now wants recourse through the criminal justice system against those who -- reluctantly, from under the counter, wrapped in plastic, with a warning sticker and a hefty price tag -- gave her something she expressly requested (and later undertook subterfuge to obtain for a minor). She wants Abercrombie & Fitch held responsible for her dereliction of duty as a consumer and as a parent, and she wants to prevent others who do want this type of content from obtaining it.
Ms. Finch: Please do all of us a favor, and mind your own business. If you don't want to be exposed to "adult content," then don't ask that clerk to dive under the counter and hand you something wrapped in plastic so that the easily upset won't be exposed to it. If you don't want your daughter exposed to it, don't send her in to buy it. Take a little bit of responsibility for your own actions and refrain from burdening the criminal justice system with your misplaced moral outrage.
