Sustainable fashion is trending and it’s gaining attention left, right and center. Everybody wants a piece of the buzz and now, more than ever, the consumer has to be aware of the lies they’re being fed.
As I discussed on Instagram, influencers promoting fast fashion brands as ‘sustainable’ is largely problematic. Not just environmentally but also in terms of operating within the limits of law. Influencers must understand that with influence comes responsibility.
But what happens when the people selling us pure bullshit are actual journalists and reporters? People who should, according to their job description, bring us facts and be trustworthy. Well, that’s where consumers’ intelligence and awareness gets tested.
A fellow sustainability blogger Lidia from Pretty Green Lily brought this article to my attention and I was astonished at the colourful lies and pure shit that met my eyes. But it also got me thinking. I could see from the first 2 paragraphs that the article was a paid advertorial by the fast fashion brand, Boohoo. But could anyone else tell that?
It was also very interesting to get such a good look into “the enemy’s” point of view. I now understand better how many fashion haul lovers think. And that’s why I decided to take the article and debunk pretty much every single sentence on it. Welcome to the ultimate truth bomb!
I will now present you with claims from the aforementioned, questionable article and explain why the claims are false in terms of sustainable fashion. To say the least!
Beware of Fake News! Debunking Lies Around Sustainable Fashion
‘Consumer behaviour has shifted towards cheaper clothes online’
I’m sure we all know that yes, consumers moved to shop online in great amounts when the pandemic hit and many retail stores closed their doors. Does this mean that online shopping is what we all want from now on? Of course not!
Here’s what the article states: “‘Fast fashion’ brands like Boohoo, Missguided, PrettyLittleThing, Asos and H&M get a bad rep for selling cheap clothes to cash-poor, trend-conscious, social media obsessed teens.”
Now, according to this (clearly) upper class writer fast fashion is for ‘cash-poor’ and ‘social media obsessed’ teens. Recognize yourself from any of this? I thought not. In fact, the rational behind shopping fast fashion for most consumers is something quite different. Like necessity and ease.
The article continues: “The APPG for Ethics and Sustainability in Fashion said, “Consumer habits have shifted and so have attitudes – the public wants to see change”. This is absolutely correct; consumer habits have shifted dramatically – in favour of buying cheaper clothes online.”
The author is ignoring actual facts here and replacing them with her own opinion of consumer behaviour. When actually “consumers everywhere are prioritizing value and accelerating the shift to thrift.” – source, ThredUp. If Trump has taught us anything, it’s that opinions ARE NOT FACTS!
And the author continues on her chosen path of pure lies: “While clothing sales at high street shops have been particularly badly hit by lockdown, falling 30% since March, digital sales have grown by around 50%.” I do love the fact that she’s linked a study here and then invented her own numbers. Because obviously she bet on the “fact” that we’re too lazy and stupid to actually check.
CONCLUSION. Consumer behaviour has in fact changed towards more transparency and sustainability. Transparency and authenticity is required from clothing brands in increasing amounts. Yes, online shopping increased, which is obvious: there was no other choice. Can we predict consumer behaviours from their behaviour during a pandemic. Hell to the NO.
‘Sustainable fashion’s aim is to get us buying fewer and more expensive clothes’
Well… yeah, you twat! Of course it is. And the fact that the author didn’t even manage to understand why just shows how little of attention should be paid to her incredible opinions. Yes, just opinions, there’s no foundation for anything she writes.
But let’s take a look at this: “Boohoo adds as many as 115 new garments to its website every day. This means customers can constantly refresh their look and always be on-trend.” Indeed, but HOW is it possible to add 115 new garments every day with one garment costing on average £7?
In case you don’t know, it’s possible by over-producing bad quality garments made out of toxic materials (because they are the cheapest!) and not paying anyone for the work. In the end, most of these garments go straight to landfills. Also, why should we refresh our look every week? What’s wrong with the current look? But oh, it doesn’t end here:
“…the cheapest dress I could find on Vivienne Westwood’s website was £300. That’s completely out of reach for ordinary shoppers, especially the 16-30 demographic that favours fast fashion.” Poor, wee lamb! She’s been paid to think that sustainable fashion equals luxury fashion. I say paid because I don’t want to believe that she’d be that fukken stupid!
If the author had dug a little deeper, she would have noticed that many sustainable fashion brands are actually, particularly addressing the price, as well as the size issue.
‘Those who prefer sustainable fashion sneer at consumers who like cheap things’
Erm, who exactly? Please show me who exactly sneers at people who prefer to shop at high street brand stores (which are all fast fashion)! Honestly, this part made me laugh. She writes:
“Take Stella Claxton from the Clothing Sustainability Research Group at Nottingham Trent University, who was quoted by the Environmental Audit Committee: “These garments are mainly aimed at young women who are … [gaining] pleasure from what they wear and expressing their identity through their clothing, but the actual value of the item is very low in real terms, in quality terms and in emotional terms to them.”
But how does she know? Who is she, or anyone else, to judge what ‘emotional value’ a young woman may get out of wearing a dress she loves and feels great in?” How does she know and who is she to say?! Well, she’s the opposite of you, darling author, because she KNOWS WHAT SHE’S TALKING ABOUT :’D
Stella Claxton’s findings are completely in line with actual facts. Fast fashion clothes are of abysmal quality! And there have been, and will be cases where their clothes contain harmful chemicals (here and here).
Also, fashion is a brilliant form of self expression. And by selling us cheap, bad quality shit the brands are telling us very clearly what our value is in their eyes. Minimal in terms of emotional and economical value. As I asked in this post, are you really only worth shit? Bags of shit (hey, fashion haulers!) instead of long-lasting emotional value?
‘The industry is responding to criticism’
Again I found myself face-palming and sniggering into my cup of tea like “Oh, you need to go back to school, love”. And it’s because she finishes the article:
“…an independent review into Boohoo’s supply chain has now been published. H&M has committed to using exclusively recycled and sustainable materials by 2030. Both H&M and Asos have signed an agreement with IndustriAll, a global trade union that represents 50 million workers, to strengthen international labour standards.”
1) Okay, what does the independent review into Boohoo say exactly? 2) H&M has committed to all sorts of greenwashing many times in the past 20 years and done fuck all (no, one collection, which ISN’T even sustainable fashion, is not enough). 3) AHHAHAHAHAHAHA! This is just ridiculous because where the fast fashion workers are, there are no unions to represent them!! This isn’t even greenwashing, it’s throwing actual poo in our faces.
As an adequate finish we get to enjoy one more opinion from the author. “But framing the problem as one of ‘overconsumption’ is wrongheaded. Instead of patronising young women for wanting to look nice or punishing them with taxes, surely we should be celebrating the fact that they still want to buy stuff.”
Yes, there are people who are ‘patroniZing’ young women for wanting to look nice. But they have nothing to do with fashion, fast or slow, at all! Within the actual fashion-sphere I’m not aware of anyone like that and I do follow loads of sustainable fashion influencers and advocates. It sounds to me like the author has her own cow in a ditch here…
In terms of ‘framing the problem as one of overconsumption’ being wrongheaded I’ve got this to say:
I don’t know how this woman has been educated but I can clearly see massive holes in her general knowledge in just this one sentence.
Regardless of education even, she has somehow managed to miss/ignore/skate over news and actual reality for the past 10 years. That takes skill! It’s not a beneficial skill, though, because it leaves you in a place where many people don’t want to join you: it’s called absolute stupidity.
I’m exhausted. One of the most tiresome things I know are ignorant and poorly educated people who base their “facts” on their opinions. You can’t discuss with people like that and you can’t reason with them because they can’t even see the difference between a feeling and a fact.
But the facts remain, nonetheless! They are concrete and they are available if you wish to find them. The question is, do the facts matter to you? We’re living interesting times in terms of facts and I confess being worried for our interest for actual facts these days. Is there any interest?
Or does how you feel count for more, is that more important than the truth? Let me know in the comments below, are you into facts or feelings? ♥
For more sustainability chat, follow me on Instagram and join the convo!
