Guilt of Disposable Fashion
I love fashion. Let me rephrase that. I love expressing who I am in a given moment through what I wear. It isn’t about trends, labels, or the number of hangers in a closet. It isn’t about attention. It is about showing yourself. There is a difference.
Minimalism taught me to appreciate style more deeply. When I first committed to minimalism years ago, I spent nearly two months deciding which pieces would stay and which would go, parting with more than one hundred items. The only piece I miss to this day is a vintage Chanel hot pink crossbody purse. It would have been the perfect keeper of my iPhone, wallet, keys, and lip gloss as I hopped around the city.
![]() |
| Photo by Noah Buscher on Unsplash |
Abundance does not equate to style. Somewhere along the rise of fast fashion—Zara, H&M—and the even more disposable wave led by Shein, we began confusing volume with expression. Fueled by social media, fashion is increasingly defined by the new rather than the personal.
I had heard of Shein but had never visited the site until earlier this year, after reading WIRED’s “Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control: Inside Shein’s Sudden Rise.” Curiosity did not leave me untouched. An adorable Hello Kitty bralette and shorts caught my eye. To meet the free-shipping minimum, I added a tie-back bralette that felt perfect for summer. I wore them. I liked them. They have not yet fallen apart. Still, I couldn’t help but ask myself: am I an ethical person?
I told myself it was a one-time indulgence for my Hello Kitty weakness. Then I read The Cut’s “Shein Is Even Worse Than You Thought.” My guilt returned.
The fashion industry’s relationship with labor exploitation is not new. The word “sweatshop” did not emerge by accident. While I try to be mindful and resist chasing the lowest price, cheapness often carries hidden costs—costs paid by someone else.
But labor is only part of the story. The environment is the other.
Unless one is willfully avoiding the news, extreme weather patterns have become disturbingly ordinary. Fashion rarely enters the climate conversation, yet it should. Bloomberg reported that the fashion industry accounts for roughly 10% of global carbon dioxide output—more than international flights and shipping combined.
Modern textiles also account for a significant share of the 300 million tons of plastic produced globally each year. Polyester, after all, is plastic. When I hand-washed those Hello Kitty shorts, the fabric resisted water in a way that suddenly felt symbolic.
Studies cited by Bloomberg suggest that garments are worn an average of seven to ten times before being discarded. In the U.K., one in three respondents considered clothing “old” after just one to two years. I have pieces in my closet that are over two decades old. Marc Jacobs, Gucci, Balenciaga—yes, I will name drop—would bristle at being called “old.” I still receive compliments when I wear them.
Luxury labels aside, some of my most cherished pieces are not luxe at all. They have simply endured. #OOTD does not require every element to be new. When something in your closet begins to feel tired, reach for fabric shears, a needle, thread, and imagination before reaching for a checkout cart.
Let’s be honest. Fashion should not cost the earth. Yet our appetite for more, newer, and different fuels environmental destruction at a scale that is no longer abstract. Historic droughts. Intensifying hurricanes. Fires and floods that no longer feel rare.
Is the destruction of the planet the price tag of your #OOTD?
_____
Reflect with these essays:

Comments
Post a Comment