Everyone wants to save the environment. That’s why we drive Teslas and drink out of soggy straws and shop with reusable bags from Trader Joe’s, right? Nowadays, eco-conscious consumers are taking it to the next level: abandoning fast fashion in favor of small-batch, artisan-crafted garments stitched from hemp plants in the Himalayas.
But we can’t all afford to save the planet. If we had the choice, I’m sure almost all of us would ditch H&M, Zara, and other fast fashion giants in exchange for sustainable clothing.
There’s just one problem: A pair of $30 carbon-neutral underwear made from organic cotton costs just as much as a child’s school lunches for the week. What should you do? Should you invest in the low-impact underwear and let your kid go hungry?
According to Fast Company, sustainable clothing costs double or more of what fast fashion enthusiasts are used to paying. High-end lines like Maria McManus charge $590 for a work polo that’s still made in China, and even more “affordable” brands like Able still charge $48 for a plain white t-shirt.
We all know that for the working class, nothing is more accessible than $48 viscose t-shirts and $19 Erewhon smoothies.
Of course, there’s a reason sustainable fashion costs so much. These brands aren’t just using organic silk woven by the rural monasteries in China or wrapping your clothes in biodegradable natural parchment paper, they’re actually attempting to pay their workers a liveable wage.
On the other hand, brands like SHEIN and Zara continue to rake in billions from the enthusiastic child labor force cranking out rhinestone-studded crop tops in their foreign factories. According to The Guardian, Zara compensated their sweatshop workers in Brazil between $156 and $290 a month — less than minimum wage — cutting the wages of workers down to as low as 50 cents per hour.
So, here we are. Choosing between ethically sourced brands while sacrificing an arm and a leg, versus falling victim to fast fashion but having enough to afford necessities at the end of the month is a dilemma that only working-class consumers get to face.
Meanwhile, we watch billionaires and multi-millionaires like Jeff Bezos and Katy Perry soar to space in the name of “female empowerment” as the burden of saving the environment falls on the middle class one linen shirt at a time.
And thanks to Trump’s 145% tariff on Chinese imported goods, according to BBC, where a significant amount of American clothing is manufactured and sourced from, the cost of sustainable fashion is set to rise.
Sure, some might argue that there is a compromise: that the real solution to ethical and sustainable fashion is to shop secondhand. But let’s be honest: In a culture that thrives off of overconsumption and materialism, where being an “outfit repeater” is practically a crime, can you really expect Americans to slow down, shop less, and wear someone else’s old clothes?
I don’t think so, considering that half of all American adults recoil at the thought of wearing “unhygienic” and “used” secondhand clothes, according to The Independent. Gosh, the horror!
So for now, the struggle remains: wondering if it’s worth the splurge to look ethical, live clean, and invest into sustainable fashion, even if your bank account is gasping for air.
