Fast Fashion Redefined
The harmful effects of fast fashion are no secret. In a world of social media and accessible news, you have to be living under a rock not to know about the environmental and societal impacts. Not only does the clothing go to landfills where non-biodegradable fabrics sit for up to 200 years, but one cotton shirt can take 2,700 liters of water to make. About 85% of textile waste in the US goes to landfills, with one garbage truck of clothes burned or thrown into landfills every second. And if that isn’t enough for you to start questioning the morality of the fashion industry, maybe the struggles of workers in Bangladesh making $96 a month will. These primarily female workers actually need 3.5 times that amount to provide the basic necessities of life. The fast fashion brands are destroying the Earth while also supporting child labor and cheap labor.
Fast fashion isn’t a new phenomenon; it’s been happening for decades. Taking a look at the history of the clothing industry, it wasn’t until the Industrial Revolution and the invention of the sewing machine that the industry took off. Clothing became easier, cheaper, and overall more efficient to make in factories. Throughout the late 1900s, seasonal fashion trends caused a shift in society. People were buying more clothes because of the desire to keep up with the trends. In other words, “keeping up with the Joneses.” More clothes were produced in bulk. When online shopping took off in the 2000s, fast fashion grew exponentially. In fact, within the past 15 years, clothing production has doubled. It raises the question: What is so appealing about fast fashion if it is so detrimental to our environment and global workforce?
It’s cheap. Plain and simple as that. If you have ever visited the Shein website, you would notice that the prices are significantly lower than other stores. Who doesn’t love that? $12 bathing suits and $10 T-Shirts beat sales prices anywhere everyday. It seems too good to be true, and it is. Cheaper prices can result in bad quality clothing. After a season, the clothes will be ripped and worn out, so, next season, you have to buy more. In the end, are you really spending less money? Maybe you are or maybe you aren’t, but the long-term isn’t always the first thought when buying cheap clothing.
In a New York Times article focusing on the constant need for new outfits, Gen Z shoppers from America, Britain, and New Zealand were interviewed about their shopping habits. Andrea Vargas, an 18-year-old American freshman at Hofstra University, discloses, “If I have a shirt in one of my previous pictures I try not to take a picture again in it. I don’t like to repeat.” In the same article, Nicole Lambert, a 20-year-old Australian student at the University of New South Wales, addresses a similar message, “It sounds shallow, but I think in the back of your head you’re like: I probably should avoid wearing the same outfit twice.” When considering purchases, all three women are looking for the cheapest, trendiest clothes possible. The low costs make it worth spending the money, time, and effort to always have a new outfit for Instagram. There is not a second thought about the environmental impacts. Just trying to keep up with the latest craze.
Our society is reliant on trends. Companies depend on the consumers’ desire to keep up with the trends and purchase new items, whether it’s children’s toys, kitchen supplies, or clothing. The focus on short-lived fads is directly correlated to the increase in clothing production and consumption. More clothing is being produced because people are buying more clothing. As the WRI reports, “the average consumer bought 60 percent more clothes in 2014 than in 2000, but kept each garment for half as long,” proving that people care more about keeping with the trends and buying new clothes than where the clothes go after they no longer want them.
To some extent, we can’t help the desire to keep up with the trends. Everyone loves a good sale. A study from 2007 showed that when humans were shown a desirable item on sale, the nucleus ambens, or pleasure center of the brain lit up in an fMRI. When shown the price, the medial prefrontal cortex now debated the price with the desire to have the item. As Tom Meyvis, a professor at NYU and expert in consumer psychology explains, “Part of the joy you get from shopping is not just that you bought something that you really like and you’re going to use, but also that you got a good deal.” Fast fashion exploits these neurological effects because it consists of cheap, trendy clothing; people are buying what they want for low prices.
While all of these reasons can explain the appeal of fast fashion, perhaps there is another. Fashion has been a symbol of wealth for centuries. Starting with the royal families and continuing today, “fashion trends have generally been driven by the elite for the elite.” Specific styles and outfits are associated with wealth and status. The goal of high fashion is to be exclusive. Only the elite can partake, allowing the wealthier members of society to differentiate themselves from the rest of society. In modern society, technology has eliminated the association of wealth with fashion. With accessible clothing for everyone, status no longer dictates what you can or can’t wear. While there are luxury brands who maintain high prices to stay a symbol of wealth and status, there are cheap knock offs available everywhere which are basically carbon copies available to all consumers at a fraction of the cost. Various styles of clothing are now seen as acceptable and artistic, such as the rise of street wear.
However, technology did not eliminate the culture of trends. How could it? In fact, it only promotes it by making trends more apparent as they are plastered on every social media app. Technology could also never remove the desire people have to fit in and keep up with the current styles.
In a society where people are dressing as they please with access to a variety of clothing, wealthier individuals have a harder time differentiating themselves. Hence, the speedy fashion trends. They are in a race without a finish line. In one season, thousands of different fashion trends will be released. Fashion Nova’s CEO admits to launching 600 to 900 new styles every week. The only people who can afford to keep up? The wealthy, leaving those less fortunate to scramble to stay in the race.
It would be wrong to draw conclusions about all wealthy people supporting the fast fashion industry, as it is a far more complicated matter. Wealth inequality is more complex than to assume wealthy people support fast fashion. However, the median annual income of a sustainable fashion consumer is $18,753. Within the US, the primary consumers of fast fashion are in the middle-income bracket, making about $68,703 a year in 2019.
The logic of this makes sense. People with more disposable income can waste it on clothing that will only be worn for a season. Meanwhile, people with lower incomes need to be more thoughtful about how they are spending their money and the quality of the clothing because they will need it to last for more than one season.
In recent years, there have been growing campaigns against fast fashion and towards more sustainable shopping. But, once again, “through ethical boycotts of fast fashion, people from lower-income backgrounds are at risk of being left excluded from fashion as a whole.” These boycotts are shaming consumers for purchasing fast fashion brands instead of encouraging more sustainable options. Lower-income families have long relied on thrift stores and charity stores for affordable clothing, which is now becoming the new trend amongst the upper classes. These people, who can afford to spend money on more expensive clothing, are buying clothes meant for lower income individuals, sparking a whole new debate. Are they saving the environment or sabotaging the poor? It depends who you ask.
At face value, fast fashion is harmful to the environment and workers. Countless statistics prove this, yet 88% of Americans still embrace this cheap clothing. Why? Because the fashion industry is about more than clothes. Fashion has different meanings to different people. It can be an art, a form of self-expression, or in some cases, a way to differentiate yourself from lower-income individuals. Therefore, it can be easy for people to turn a blind eye toward the damaging impacts. The Earth is facing the consequences of the race to keep up with our culture of trends. Fast fashion is merely a product of the inequalities in our society. Therefore, we must look toward the trends in our society and address the inequalities fueling them.
