Shein beat Amazon and reinvented fast fashion(restofworld.org)
restofworld.org
Shein beat Amazon and reinvented fast fashion
https://restofworld.org/2021/how-shein-beat-amazon-and-reinvented-fast-fashion/
133 comments
I've noticed that fast fashion is also a gendered problem.
I'm often assured that "toxic masculinity" doesn't mean an inherent criticism of masculinity, and is a phrase that many institutions seem to think is a productive way to talk about problems they perceive as being male gendered.
I find it interesting to consider whether it would also be productive to refer to fast fashion as "toxic femininity", as it's often literally so, given pesticides, plastics, fertilisers.
I will not perhaps be the first to do this, however.
I'm often assured that "toxic masculinity" doesn't mean an inherent criticism of masculinity, and is a phrase that many institutions seem to think is a productive way to talk about problems they perceive as being male gendered.
I find it interesting to consider whether it would also be productive to refer to fast fashion as "toxic femininity", as it's often literally so, given pesticides, plastics, fertilisers.
I will not perhaps be the first to do this, however.
Is that term giving us better description than concentrating on the fashion part though? Toxic masculinity works because it's about bad traits we as a society teach and normalise for men. I don't think that idea matches this case. The fashion industry is responsible for lots of toxic behaviours both in literally toxic production and in harmful trends for all genders. (Even if women are disproportionately affected)
In that we encourage women to wear clothes in ways that we don't encourage men, yes, I think it is "toxic femininity". Toxic to both women and the planet.
We teach them that they can't wear white after a certain time the year, and then black after a certain time. Why? Just because. We teach them never to wear the same outfit as their friend at the same party. We teach that they always have to wear perfect clothes.
There are examples of people fighting these things (such as ripped jeans) but they're the rebels, not the norm.
So yeah, I think that in regards to most clothing issues, "toxic femininity" definitely applies.
For fast fashion... I don't know. I have never paid attention to that scene, so I don't know how much it affects men.
Also, I should note that "toxic masculinity" generally only refers to behaviors that straight men show, and not gay men. And is often badly applied.
We teach them that they can't wear white after a certain time the year, and then black after a certain time. Why? Just because. We teach them never to wear the same outfit as their friend at the same party. We teach that they always have to wear perfect clothes.
There are examples of people fighting these things (such as ripped jeans) but they're the rebels, not the norm.
So yeah, I think that in regards to most clothing issues, "toxic femininity" definitely applies.
For fast fashion... I don't know. I have never paid attention to that scene, so I don't know how much it affects men.
Also, I should note that "toxic masculinity" generally only refers to behaviors that straight men show, and not gay men. And is often badly applied.
I think you’re absolutely right here. I’ve noticed that there’s already an analogous concept to “toxic masculinity” for women, which is “internalized misogyny”. An example of internalized misogyny is when women believe they have to be rail-thin to be properly feminine or attractive.
I’ve never understood why this isn’t called toxic femininity. If society’s standards of femininity cause women to become anorexic, that standard of femininity is clearly toxic. Just like how a standard of masculinity that causes men to take steroids and damage their bodies would rightly be considered toxic by everyone.
I think the reason is that there’s a kind of cat-coupling. When you say “I visited the famous golden gate bridge”, you don’t mean “among all the golden gate bridges, I visited the one that was famous”. You mean “I visited the golden gate bridge, and by the way the golden gate bridge is famous”.
When you say “toxic masculinity” even if you mean “the subset of masculinity which is toxic”, it’s possible to interpret that as “masculinity, and by the way masculinity is toxic”.
Feminist academics, being mostly female, have no emotional response to the idea that saying all masculinity is toxic, so the possible misinterpretation doesn’t bother them. But they might have a response to someone saying all femininity is toxic, so they wisely chose a term that was less likely to be misinterpreted (“internalized misogyny”). More diversity in their field would have prevented them from making the same mistake w.r.t. toxic masculinity.
I’ve never understood why this isn’t called toxic femininity. If society’s standards of femininity cause women to become anorexic, that standard of femininity is clearly toxic. Just like how a standard of masculinity that causes men to take steroids and damage their bodies would rightly be considered toxic by everyone.
I think the reason is that there’s a kind of cat-coupling. When you say “I visited the famous golden gate bridge”, you don’t mean “among all the golden gate bridges, I visited the one that was famous”. You mean “I visited the golden gate bridge, and by the way the golden gate bridge is famous”.
When you say “toxic masculinity” even if you mean “the subset of masculinity which is toxic”, it’s possible to interpret that as “masculinity, and by the way masculinity is toxic”.
Feminist academics, being mostly female, have no emotional response to the idea that saying all masculinity is toxic, so the possible misinterpretation doesn’t bother them. But they might have a response to someone saying all femininity is toxic, so they wisely chose a term that was less likely to be misinterpreted (“internalized misogyny”). More diversity in their field would have prevented them from making the same mistake w.r.t. toxic masculinity.
>I’ve never understood why this isn’t called toxic femininity.
Because language itself is also subject to societal bias - it's turtles all the way down.
Men are by default the transgressor - they are actively aggressive and when good things happen to men it's because they went out and fought for it and got it done and when bad things happen to or because of a man it's because of a flaw in the man, a failure to actively improve ones self. These are both not true pictures of reality, of course, but the man is always the one depicted with the active tense, for better and worse.
Women are by default the passive transgressee - when something bad happens to a woman it's often because they are the victim of a system or person that was stronger than them - they could hardly be expected to do otherwise. Similarly when something good happens it's often lucky, thanks to the support system of the people around them, or even worse painted as an 'inspirational' exception that is novel only for it's improbability.
The truth is somewhere in there, but with all the layers of human abstraction on top of it it's hard to prise it apart, but one thing is for sure - our language informs how we think in a very concrete way.
Because language itself is also subject to societal bias - it's turtles all the way down.
Men are by default the transgressor - they are actively aggressive and when good things happen to men it's because they went out and fought for it and got it done and when bad things happen to or because of a man it's because of a flaw in the man, a failure to actively improve ones self. These are both not true pictures of reality, of course, but the man is always the one depicted with the active tense, for better and worse.
Women are by default the passive transgressee - when something bad happens to a woman it's often because they are the victim of a system or person that was stronger than them - they could hardly be expected to do otherwise. Similarly when something good happens it's often lucky, thanks to the support system of the people around them, or even worse painted as an 'inspirational' exception that is novel only for it's improbability.
The truth is somewhere in there, but with all the layers of human abstraction on top of it it's hard to prise it apart, but one thing is for sure - our language informs how we think in a very concrete way.
> there’s already an analogous concept to “toxic masculinity” for women, which is “internalized misogyny”
Perhaps it would then also be helpful to use toxic misandry instead of toxic masculinity because as you mention people can take it to mean that men by nature are toxic.
Perhaps it would then also be helpful to use toxic misandry instead of toxic masculinity because as you mention people can take it to mean that men by nature are toxic.
> Perhaps it would then also be helpful to use toxic misandry instead of toxic masculinity
Toxic masculinity isn't misandry, so, no, it wouldn't be helpful. Both toxic masculinity and internalized misogyny are aspects of partriarchal socialization; they aren't symmetrical with regard to sex or gender.
Toxic masculinity isn't misandry, so, no, it wouldn't be helpful. Both toxic masculinity and internalized misogyny are aspects of partriarchal socialization; they aren't symmetrical with regard to sex or gender.
Toxic masculinity seems straightforwardly like misandry to me. Someone saying "you're not a real woman unless you're skinny" would obviously be considered misogynistic, so someone saying "you're not a real man unless you're muscular" seems straightforwardly misandristic.
I agree, toxic misandry or internalized misandry would be much clearer.
I don't agree that it's specific to women. How many times did you hear about reversible belts being "cheap"? How many people have strong opinions about the width of the tie, even though the target changes every decade? What about shoes / trousers / belt colour matching? Why are socks and sandals a bad match? Why is a vest a wife-beater? There's nothing intrinsically better/worse about those situations - they're weird norms created between the industry, society and Beau Brummell.
Men's fashion or even just basic clothing choices are very restricted as well and have their own rules. In that case it's not fast fashion, but the toxic fashion industry goes well beyond feminity.
Men's fashion or even just basic clothing choices are very restricted as well and have their own rules. In that case it's not fast fashion, but the toxic fashion industry goes well beyond feminity.
I'm not sure where you're getting this information from, toxic masculinity applies to men regardless of their sexuality and originated as an academic term.
The difference I'd highlight to you is that women are taught these things to get a husband and fulfill their traditional roles in a patriarchal society. They are baby incubators as far as that system is concerned.
Men are taught to be aggressive or not show emotions not because it will get them a wife and family, but because in Western society the chain of command goes: God -> Father -> Mother -> Children
In fact many of our cultural cornerstones rest on this baked in assumption, like The Iliad. The entire plot is set into motion by a tantrum wherein Achilles does not want to hand over a captive woman he views as his property. Thousands die in that pissing contest with a human being as the prize.
Now imagine we say Helen of Troy is displaying toxic femininity by investing so much in her appearance. Well, the reason she does is because it's the only source of her worth (besides making children of course) to a patriarchal society such as that of Ancient Greece
The difference I'd highlight to you is that women are taught these things to get a husband and fulfill their traditional roles in a patriarchal society. They are baby incubators as far as that system is concerned.
Men are taught to be aggressive or not show emotions not because it will get them a wife and family, but because in Western society the chain of command goes: God -> Father -> Mother -> Children
In fact many of our cultural cornerstones rest on this baked in assumption, like The Iliad. The entire plot is set into motion by a tantrum wherein Achilles does not want to hand over a captive woman he views as his property. Thousands die in that pissing contest with a human being as the prize.
Now imagine we say Helen of Troy is displaying toxic femininity by investing so much in her appearance. Well, the reason she does is because it's the only source of her worth (besides making children of course) to a patriarchal society such as that of Ancient Greece
> Men are taught to be aggressive or not show emotions not because it will get them a wife and family, but because in Western society the chain of command goes: God -> Father -> Mother -> Children
I challenge this. Men are taught to be strong, aggressive, and not show emotion precisely because it's seen as how strong men behave, and being a strong man is seen as a way to get a wife and family.
I challenge this. Men are taught to be strong, aggressive, and not show emotion precisely because it's seen as how strong men behave, and being a strong man is seen as a way to get a wife and family.
> Men are taught to be aggressive or not show emotions ...
> In fact many of our cultural cornerstones rest on this baked in assumption, like The Iliad.
"So speaking glorious Hektor reached out to take his son. But the child shrank back crying against the breast of his girdled nurse, terrified at the sight of his own father...Hektor took the helmet straight from his head and laid it gleaming on the ground. Then he kissed his dear son and dandled him in his arms..."
> In fact many of our cultural cornerstones rest on this baked in assumption, like The Iliad.
"So speaking glorious Hektor reached out to take his son. But the child shrank back crying against the breast of his girdled nurse, terrified at the sight of his own father...Hektor took the helmet straight from his head and laid it gleaming on the ground. Then he kissed his dear son and dandled him in his arms..."
one could argue that women’s fashion originated primarily to please men in a patriarchal society
I would like that argument put forwards to the fashion editor at Vogue.
One could also make the argument that it is a patriarchal attitude to suggest women are so lacking in agency, that a popular interest amongst woman could be reducible solely to the interest of pleasing men.
One could also make the argument that it is a patriarchal attitude to suggest women are so lacking in agency, that a popular interest amongst woman could be reducible solely to the interest of pleasing men.
Well once women have agency equitable to men maybe we can start figuring these things out in earnest.
Seems like very rich women enjoy fashion a lot.
we live in a society
Women with agency still like fashion. What’s your point about society?
Sorry, It's a bit of a joke (https://happymag.tv/we-live-in-a-society-meme-explained/)
But jokes aside I think it generally applies here, we don't live in an equal society so women don't experience the level of agency men do, even in the presence of wealth.
There are immense pressures for women to like certain things, dress certain ways, etc. Men have their own pressures, but they have more agency when choosing how to dress specifically. Can you think of a single woman CEO that can get away with dressing like Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey, for example?
But jokes aside I think it generally applies here, we don't live in an equal society so women don't experience the level of agency men do, even in the presence of wealth.
There are immense pressures for women to like certain things, dress certain ways, etc. Men have their own pressures, but they have more agency when choosing how to dress specifically. Can you think of a single woman CEO that can get away with dressing like Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey, for example?
An equal critique though would be - can you think of a man who can get away with dressing in women’s clothing? You might find some gay men but you won’t find straight men getting away with it - generally speaking.
Yet - women wearing mens clothing choices is very normal.
I’m not saying men have it worse or anything btw - just giving vision to the other side which is ignored often. Men have simplistic wardrobes out of habit but also because they literally are so limited in what they can wear. Choose your bottom - pants, pants, jeans, or pants. Choose your top - polo, button down, or t-shirt. Those are your options. You can try to add layers like a scarf, sweater, suit jacket, etc. but mens fashion is inherently way more limited due to gender norms. It’s not a surprise that you see CEOs wearing the same thing everyday because they’re like, “well, what else can I fucking wear? I can’t wear different dresses everyday with different cuts and patterns and designs. It’s not masculine. I’ll be ridiculed.” So they go with what is exceptionally boring and repeatable because very few people will even notice to begin with…
Even when men just accessorize - it becomes a costume and a joke. Prime example - Bezos wore a cowboy hat. Now it’s a costume you can buy off Amazon because of the cowboy hat. It should really show you how men cannot wear almost anything outside the norms without heavy critique. So they go with what is safest and normalized and just wear that every single day.
Yet - women wearing mens clothing choices is very normal.
I’m not saying men have it worse or anything btw - just giving vision to the other side which is ignored often. Men have simplistic wardrobes out of habit but also because they literally are so limited in what they can wear. Choose your bottom - pants, pants, jeans, or pants. Choose your top - polo, button down, or t-shirt. Those are your options. You can try to add layers like a scarf, sweater, suit jacket, etc. but mens fashion is inherently way more limited due to gender norms. It’s not a surprise that you see CEOs wearing the same thing everyday because they’re like, “well, what else can I fucking wear? I can’t wear different dresses everyday with different cuts and patterns and designs. It’s not masculine. I’ll be ridiculed.” So they go with what is exceptionally boring and repeatable because very few people will even notice to begin with…
Even when men just accessorize - it becomes a costume and a joke. Prime example - Bezos wore a cowboy hat. Now it’s a costume you can buy off Amazon because of the cowboy hat. It should really show you how men cannot wear almost anything outside the norms without heavy critique. So they go with what is safest and normalized and just wear that every single day.
What do you mean get away with? If Zuckerberg was a woman and dressed way down. She would still be one of the richest motherfuckers in existence!
In America, men (straight men) are clueless towards what women wear.
I have never met a man who cared about what color of anything they wear.
I have never heard a man even notice makeup, other than being too much.
And the big one--shoes. Men don't notice shoes. We just gasp at the price. I have a sister who because a multimillionaire making/selling shoes to women. She knew how they felt about shoes, and exploited it. Oh yea, throw in hand bags. I have never heard a male utter this sentance, "But did you see her handbag?"
Female fashion is not due to men. Men got a break on this one war. You can argue the mini-skirt was man's doing, but that's pretty much it.
(This is just for America. I have no clue to the rest of the world.)
I have never met a man who cared about what color of anything they wear.
I have never heard a man even notice makeup, other than being too much.
And the big one--shoes. Men don't notice shoes. We just gasp at the price. I have a sister who because a multimillionaire making/selling shoes to women. She knew how they felt about shoes, and exploited it. Oh yea, throw in hand bags. I have never heard a male utter this sentance, "But did you see her handbag?"
Female fashion is not due to men. Men got a break on this one war. You can argue the mini-skirt was man's doing, but that's pretty much it.
(This is just for America. I have no clue to the rest of the world.)
Fast fashion is definitely a problem no matter the gender. The rate of replacement per item and the amount of fabric per item are negatively correlated so cancel out a bit. There’s a lot of junk clothing made for both men and women out there.
I currently have a bag full of mens clothes to take to the tailor to repair: holes in pockets, elbow holes, loose buttons.
I currently have a bag full of mens clothes to take to the tailor to repair: holes in pockets, elbow holes, loose buttons.
Absolutely, I've been on a quest to find fair trade and responsible clothing since I watched this show (sorry in Dutch): [0]. It's pretty clearly aimed at fashionable youth which I'm not but I still found it utterly confronting. The conditions that the workers live in (I say live but it's often just sleep and the rest is work) are crazy. They are sleeping above formalin baths. swimming in chemicals that slowly cause burn wounds, they live near rivers that are bright blue from dyes. Cotton fields take all water in an area away from humans who need it more.
Luckily there are alternatives, in the Netherlands I found [1] (apologies, also in Dutch), and there are many more of such companies. The crazy thing is that it's really not that expensive and they even make the clothing high quality so I have to shop less (I hate shopping). (Ok, so I never really was the target for fast fashion.) I'm open to other suggestions for responsible (quality) clothing.
[0]: https://www.npo3.nl/genaaid/VPWON_1295027
[1]: https://skotfashion.com/nl/our-story/
Luckily there are alternatives, in the Netherlands I found [1] (apologies, also in Dutch), and there are many more of such companies. The crazy thing is that it's really not that expensive and they even make the clothing high quality so I have to shop less (I hate shopping). (Ok, so I never really was the target for fast fashion.) I'm open to other suggestions for responsible (quality) clothing.
[0]: https://www.npo3.nl/genaaid/VPWON_1295027
[1]: https://skotfashion.com/nl/our-story/
There are plenty of second hand stores (kringloop) in NL and I have been buying everything except underwear (socks,underpants,undershirts) there. I have to admit, it takes time : you will have to frequent the shops at least weekly/bi-weekly because the supply is not 'on-demand', you'll have to help your luck a bit.
I now own previously unworn Armini jeans, previously unworn Drykorn's, Scotch & Soda etc. About € 5 each. Actually I am dressed better than ever before.
Pro-tip : don't buy used shoes.
I now own previously unworn Armini jeans, previously unworn Drykorn's, Scotch & Soda etc. About € 5 each. Actually I am dressed better than ever before.
Pro-tip : don't buy used shoes.
I have a very nice pair of Prada dress shoes that I bought second hand. They had been used but are in perfect condition. What is wrong with buying used shoes that are in good condition?
It depends, but if worn too much, the shoes 'mold' to the (previous) owner.
And you will feel this primarily in your knees very soon.
And you will feel this primarily in your knees very soon.
My Pradas are very much for being seen in on formal occasions! Walking any distance is not much fun, they weren't designed for that. And they are made of such stiff leather that I don't think they will ever be moulded to my feet. :-)
Also, vinted.com
That's awesome! I'm working for https://fairbee.com , a Dutch startup that's trying to get more attention to these kinds of brands, there's a bunch of (Dutch and international) companies trying to do better :)
Thanks for the NPO tip: definitely going to watch it :)
Thanks for the NPO tip: definitely going to watch it :)
Great, I'll definitely have a look next time I need something. Is there also some kind of label for these ethical clothes? I'm ok with trusting small shops and I understand it might cost them money (perhaps better spend otherwise) to get a label and labels aren't everything, but still...
Edit: Are there also brands specifically aiming at quality? So that denim pants just last a lot longer for example? Paying more feels even better if I'm really buying quality. The Skot polo I bought seems to be really good fabric and well made, they also touted that, that really adds a lot to the whole value proposition, for me.
Another edit: This is also a nice initiative which could perhaps be leveraged more, specifically by ethical companies: [0]
[0]: https://returns.homerr.com/
Edit: Are there also brands specifically aiming at quality? So that denim pants just last a lot longer for example? Paying more feels even better if I'm really buying quality. The Skot polo I bought seems to be really good fabric and well made, they also touted that, that really adds a lot to the whole value proposition, for me.
Another edit: This is also a nice initiative which could perhaps be leveraged more, specifically by ethical companies: [0]
[0]: https://returns.homerr.com/
We use Good On You for the bigger brands, they do audits based on a couple criteria. There are a bunch of different certificates some of which are a bit of a farce, seeing through the green washing can be pretty hard.
If you'd like to have a longer conversation about this, feel free to contact me at arjan [at] fairbee.com
If you'd like to have a longer conversation about this, feel free to contact me at arjan [at] fairbee.com
I have 3 skot polos too, their under shirts are great as well. Build quality is def something we try to look at, the kuyichi pants i have for instance feel way more robustly built than g-star pants for instance.
We're also looking at different ways to ship, especially the last mile, trying to use electric cargo bikes instead of vans, and bundling packages across other shops as well via izipack for instance.
edit: one thing about the quality we're running into is it's hard to get across online how different the hoodies we have (from Athrty for example) look from the hoodies you'd buy at H&M for instance. As soon as you have them in your hands you can tell the difference, but on pictures that's way less apparent.
We're also looking at different ways to ship, especially the last mile, trying to use electric cargo bikes instead of vans, and bundling packages across other shops as well via izipack for instance.
edit: one thing about the quality we're running into is it's hard to get across online how different the hoodies we have (from Athrty for example) look from the hoodies you'd buy at H&M for instance. As soon as you have them in your hands you can tell the difference, but on pictures that's way less apparent.
I have a large number of under shirts as well, I actually give them as gifts sometimes, I like them so much (nice feel + deep v-neck is super nice), never came across something like that in normal stores (but again, I hate spending too much time in fashion stores :p).
yeah they're super nice, the only downside is they look super weird if you end up taking off your sweater :D
Haha, kind of, but tighter fitting
You can use https://www.projectcece.nl/ to search for sustainable items and https://goodonyou.eco/ to check if your favorite brand is actually sustainable.
Additionally of course you should buy second hand through thriftshops or something like https://www.vinted.com/.
I just checked the skotfashion.com shirts.. I wouldn't call a € 99 per shirt price "not that expensive"
I would pay €25-40 if a shirt is really good...
I would pay €25-40 if a shirt is really good...
I have a polo for 49 eur and the under shirts were 6 for 60 eur last weeks (now back to 30 for 2). For things that last years it's ok for me. Ok, it's certainly not cheap.
Let's just tax carbon extraction and not worry about who's doing what with it.
Although I suppose there's a separate externality to creating friable material. The issue of discarding too much should be addressed with higher prices at the dump.
Although I suppose there's a separate externality to creating friable material. The issue of discarding too much should be addressed with higher prices at the dump.
Bottle and can recycling worked with incentives. But both are valuable to the receiver outside of the cash incentive on energy grounds. I don't think fabric recycling has that energy benefit so I am unsure incentives would work full life cycle.
But you could be right: carbon pricing down to the edge on all things might actually be good economics if we can work out how to make it run. Please don't say blockchain
But you could be right: carbon pricing down to the edge on all things might actually be good economics if we can work out how to make it run. Please don't say blockchain
I have one better than blockchain. When can we all get those futuristic ones piece outfits with the lightning bolt across the torso? I was led to believe that’s what everyone would be wearing sooner or later.
"Things to come" (1935) and "metropolis" (1927) said loincloths and Greek togas for elites but boilersuits for plebs. I would wear a spandex "onesie" with a lightning bolt.. for about 30 seconds.
> I would wear a spandex "onesie" with a lightning bolt.. for about 30 seconds.
sure - long enough for you to run around Central City robbing every bank.
sure - long enough for you to run around Central City robbing every bank.
> I would wear a spandex "onesie" with a lightning bolt.. for about 30 seconds.
Which brings us right back to (very) fast fashion.
Which brings us right back to (very) fast fashion.
OK. Let's make one onesie, call it an NFT and you have to post a picture wearing it, before you pass it on to somebody else.
Don't forget the underwear on the outside!
The problem, not unique to fast fashion, is we've structured things such that recycling is rarely economical. That shouldn't be the case, our damage to ecosystems means prices are not properly accounting for the cost of negative externalities.
Whether in inputs (unethical labor practices, questionable material composition, hazardous inputs handling, manipulative marketing tactics and artificial scarcity) or in outputs (planned obsolescence, unsustainable consumption, disposal, discounting full product life-cycle), socio+ecological costs are ignored to maximize profits while keeping prices fairly low.
It's good to democratize access to more and fancier options but if this comes by cheating and a dishonest accounting of costs, it's not worth it (full cost accounting will be better in the long run, having to account for product full life cycle might spur investment and innovations in say, mechanical disposal automation or plasma arc gasification).
Whether in inputs (unethical labor practices, questionable material composition, hazardous inputs handling, manipulative marketing tactics and artificial scarcity) or in outputs (planned obsolescence, unsustainable consumption, disposal, discounting full product life-cycle), socio+ecological costs are ignored to maximize profits while keeping prices fairly low.
It's good to democratize access to more and fancier options but if this comes by cheating and a dishonest accounting of costs, it's not worth it (full cost accounting will be better in the long run, having to account for product full life cycle might spur investment and innovations in say, mechanical disposal automation or plasma arc gasification).
> Although I suppose there's a separate externality to creating friable material. The issue of discarding too much should be addressed with higher prices at the dump.
If the dump costs more, people create unlicensed dumps. Thus the cost remains external.
If the dump costs more, people create unlicensed dumps. Thus the cost remains external.
These goods are produced internationally. How do you intend to force foreign governments to have a carbon tax?
Import tax
How do you know how much carbon the goods used?
A valid question. By keeping to raise that import tax until they accept doing a trustable carbon tax instead. Next up: how could you identify a trustable carbon tax? How could you do the tariff thing without all hell breaking loose both on the level of inter-government relations and in terms of plain old grassroots contraband snuggling?
The assumption that social goals are achievable by price and tax adjustments is faulty. So is the assumption that the state = "us".
L'etat c'est moi.
Taxes (and thereby price adjustments) can achieve some social goals. Empirically so, not assumed.
Both the "state" and "us" are social constructs, and are simultaneously both essentially the same concept and entirely separate concepts. The nice thing is that we don't need theory here, we can just try it and find out if it helps, then try something else if it fails.
Taxes (and thereby price adjustments) can achieve some social goals. Empirically so, not assumed.
Both the "state" and "us" are social constructs, and are simultaneously both essentially the same concept and entirely separate concepts. The nice thing is that we don't need theory here, we can just try it and find out if it helps, then try something else if it fails.
> Fast fashion is a root cause of a huge amount of fabric waste, plastic waste, and cost shifting of waste streams to developing nations.
And water waste. [0]
Most people have no idea how water intensive the textile dyeing of their clothes really is.
Buy high quality clothes and wear them as long as possible.
[0] https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/putting-brakes-f...
And water waste. [0]
Most people have no idea how water intensive the textile dyeing of their clothes really is.
Buy high quality clothes and wear them as long as possible.
[0] https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/putting-brakes-f...
I love my adidas hoodie that already is 10y+
The sad truth is that quality clothig is not available in many countries. All my best stuff was bought in France. In Poland they sell crap(too small after washing 3 times, super thin) and even more expensive. There are some local companies with quality stuff but they are niche.
Sounds like it is true because of the word "fast" in fast fashion, but is it true? Is Shein really causing more fabric waste, plastic waste, and cost shifting of waste streams to developing nations than Old Navy or TJ Maxx or Pacific Sun or whichever cheap clothing stores was displaced by fast fashion outlets?
To the extent that they reduce the cost per item to the floor and encourage people to swap tops to "todays" stripe, yes. The counter argument would be that they do more demand response and so produce less surplus where Tj Maxx and the like have to pre order to estimated demand.
So one (Shein) might be less bad per unit style but encourages more rapid churn. The other traditional model claims fast, but is slower, but has higher upfront build and ship consequences.
So one (Shein) might be less bad per unit style but encourages more rapid churn. The other traditional model claims fast, but is slower, but has higher upfront build and ship consequences.
If I remember correctly, TJ Maxx usually buys excess product from other brands (and possibly removes or covers up branding if requested). So they contribute less to this problem -- if anything they give less successful runs a second chance should mitigate damage slightly I guess.
I don't think this detracts from your broader point, though -- your specific example just happened to be the unusual exception to an otherwise good rule.
I don't think this detracts from your broader point, though -- your specific example just happened to be the unusual exception to an otherwise good rule.
Even if everything else was exactly the same, they'd still make it considerably worse by removing trying out the fit from the equation. There's no way of running a try/return/send to next buyer cycle on that price level, it's all about best guess and eating the cost. Reminds me if how the IP family of protocols, unlike protocols from the old telephony tradition, does not promise anything about the connection before the packet is sent out. Only that this time there's actual stuff ending up in bins. At retail fast fashion, fitting booths have not yet entirely disappeared.
Old Navy is also fast fashion.
TJ Maxx is interesting in that it is fast fashion but it provides a useful outlet for clothes that would otherwise have been trashed.
So immediately it is a positive since it ensures more clothes are worn than they would have been otherwise.
In the long run, however, by providing those clothes value beyond their original life TJ Maxx helps prop up the finances of fast fashion, so maybe it’s a net negative? It’s not clear to me.
TJ Maxx is interesting in that it is fast fashion but it provides a useful outlet for clothes that would otherwise have been trashed.
So immediately it is a positive since it ensures more clothes are worn than they would have been otherwise.
In the long run, however, by providing those clothes value beyond their original life TJ Maxx helps prop up the finances of fast fashion, so maybe it’s a net negative? It’s not clear to me.
If you want to avoid fast fashion altogether, you can always roll your own. (Make your own clothes that is).
Sure, it's perhaps a bit niche. But there's a thriving open source community at https://FreeSewing.org/
Full disclosure: I am the FreeSewing maintainer
Sure, it's perhaps a bit niche. But there's a thriving open source community at https://FreeSewing.org/
Full disclosure: I am the FreeSewing maintainer
[deleted]
I think fast fashion is a behaviour of the individual consumer rather than an attribute of a particular brand though.
I suspect wherever you buy the clothes from they likely come from the same sweatshops and factories in Asia just with different markup.
Many people say Zara is fast fashion, yet I sit in the Zara clothes that have lasted me 2-3 years. We are fortunate to be able to produce high quality clothing incredibly cheaply due to the wonders of modern manufacturing and the brutal exploitation of foreign labour - yet that won't stop people throwing it in the bin to get the next shiny thing an 'influencer' has shilled.
I suspect wherever you buy the clothes from they likely come from the same sweatshops and factories in Asia just with different markup.
Many people say Zara is fast fashion, yet I sit in the Zara clothes that have lasted me 2-3 years. We are fortunate to be able to produce high quality clothing incredibly cheaply due to the wonders of modern manufacturing and the brutal exploitation of foreign labour - yet that won't stop people throwing it in the bin to get the next shiny thing an 'influencer' has shilled.
Whats the alternative ?
On the charitable and ecological end of the spectrum, there is of course thrift/flea/second-hand shops, church or garage sales. Availability varies quite a bit especially seasonally or following economic trends. It definitely takes a lot more effort.
A bit farther along you can find arbitrage type businesses reselling lots or whole sale and warehouse overstock, army/navy/surplus, vintage boutiques upselling estates or whatever wont sell in retail stores for whatever reason. This is an easy option, but the price is higher since someone is curating a selection or otherwise squeezing a profit from what might've been refuse.
A lot of the old-school sources (flea, thrift) have been experiencing additional inventory pressure caused by another great option which is depop, etsy, ebay, or other online shops (even goodwill has an online auction site[0]). Tons of practical, uncommon, and cool thrift finds are available online at the general cost of people farming thrift and flea markets for popular sizes, driving up prices and reducing popular sized stocks. But this also keeps tons of old weird stuff in peoples closets out of the garbage by granting a more obvious value proposition. GenZ people seem to be embracing this quite a bit. It sounds like a fun side-hustle for a college student.
Frankly, if you are buying regular wardrobe, I'd make the fairly obvious recommendation of just simply buying practical, usable, and good quality. If what you buy works well and lasts a reasonable period, thats a great definition of value to follow towards the best manufacturers. Maybe buy it from a store you like and don't worry about it if we've stopped the urge to buy a little bit of trash because we feel weird at 2am. We is me.
Most of the fast fashion cheap stuff is uselessly flimsy, but maybe it would work alright for a costume or some kind of bedroom scenario. I guess in one respect fast fashion is useful insofar as its hard to find some of that weird one-off junk-stuff in a thrift store or even the mall, because nobody will buy it. Its ugly and the fabric is itchy.
[0] https://shopgoodwill.com/
A bit farther along you can find arbitrage type businesses reselling lots or whole sale and warehouse overstock, army/navy/surplus, vintage boutiques upselling estates or whatever wont sell in retail stores for whatever reason. This is an easy option, but the price is higher since someone is curating a selection or otherwise squeezing a profit from what might've been refuse.
A lot of the old-school sources (flea, thrift) have been experiencing additional inventory pressure caused by another great option which is depop, etsy, ebay, or other online shops (even goodwill has an online auction site[0]). Tons of practical, uncommon, and cool thrift finds are available online at the general cost of people farming thrift and flea markets for popular sizes, driving up prices and reducing popular sized stocks. But this also keeps tons of old weird stuff in peoples closets out of the garbage by granting a more obvious value proposition. GenZ people seem to be embracing this quite a bit. It sounds like a fun side-hustle for a college student.
Frankly, if you are buying regular wardrobe, I'd make the fairly obvious recommendation of just simply buying practical, usable, and good quality. If what you buy works well and lasts a reasonable period, thats a great definition of value to follow towards the best manufacturers. Maybe buy it from a store you like and don't worry about it if we've stopped the urge to buy a little bit of trash because we feel weird at 2am. We is me.
Most of the fast fashion cheap stuff is uselessly flimsy, but maybe it would work alright for a costume or some kind of bedroom scenario. I guess in one respect fast fashion is useful insofar as its hard to find some of that weird one-off junk-stuff in a thrift store or even the mall, because nobody will buy it. Its ugly and the fabric is itchy.
[0] https://shopgoodwill.com/
Sounds like there is a market for anti fast fashion
There is!
That said, it's generally limited to the segment of people who are aware of fast-fashion, have their own reasons to disdain it, can afford the substantial premium of sticking to slow fashion, and are willing to follow through. This is perhaps a smaller market than might be wished for.
That said, it's generally limited to the segment of people who are aware of fast-fashion, have their own reasons to disdain it, can afford the substantial premium of sticking to slow fashion, and are willing to follow through. This is perhaps a smaller market than might be wished for.
[deleted]
Somewhat more durable and multi-seasonal goods. Using clothing until they can't be reasonably used anymore.
A higher degree of oversight by government than we want these days and less individual variability without personal effort: more handmade sewed goods.
Frankly there isn't much alternative.
Frankly there isn't much alternative.
everything have external cost just like it has external benefits. The question is whether they ad up or whether its outsized in one direction.
> Fast fashion is a root cause of a huge amount of fabric waste, plastic waste, and cost shifting of waste streams to developing nations.
How does all of that waste compare to all of the waste involved in making your comment? Not just the infra required to host it and distribute it, but the devices required for you to make it. Kind of turning a blind eye to the amount of "cost shifting of waste streams to developing nations" that electronic devices create.
How does all of that waste compare to all of the waste involved in making your comment? Not just the infra required to host it and distribute it, but the devices required for you to make it. Kind of turning a blind eye to the amount of "cost shifting of waste streams to developing nations" that electronic devices create.
This is whataboutism.
Fast fashion clothing often falls apart after a single wash and at the latest after two. They are meant to worn once and then to be disposed. I agree that some electronics like smartphones should be made to last for more than 2 years but fast fashion creates much, much more plastic waste on its own. We already know how to make longer lasting, more environment friendly clothing, so it's not like we couldn't do any better.
Fast fashion clothing often falls apart after a single wash and at the latest after two. They are meant to worn once and then to be disposed. I agree that some electronics like smartphones should be made to last for more than 2 years but fast fashion creates much, much more plastic waste on its own. We already know how to make longer lasting, more environment friendly clothing, so it's not like we couldn't do any better.
The pure cotton clothes I bought on shein have the same quality I'd expect from H&M or C&A. They're well sewn and came with replacement buttons for resewing as well.
So your comment seems to be quite the hyperbole.
So your comment seems to be quite the hyperbole.
H&M clothes are meant to be worn once and then tossed.
> Fast fashion clothing often falls apart after a single wash and at the latest after two
Is that hyperbole? Or is it really that bad? I always thought fast fashion meant stuff like those cheap Amazon brands (!Solid etc.) that only last around a year…
Is that hyperbole? Or is it really that bad? I always thought fast fashion meant stuff like those cheap Amazon brands (!Solid etc.) that only last around a year…
Your mileage may vary.
Anecdotally, it seems like women’s fast fashion falls apart a lot faster than men’s apparel from the same brands. And some brands are a lot worse than others (e.g. Forever 21 is a lot worse than H&M)
Anecdotally, it seems like women’s fast fashion falls apart a lot faster than men’s apparel from the same brands. And some brands are a lot worse than others (e.g. Forever 21 is a lot worse than H&M)
Worse than H&M? Wow.
At least in the States, I can wear an H&M shirt fairly reasonably for a year or two without significant damage.
I bought a F21 shirt exactly once and on the third wash there were numerous holes in it.
I bought a F21 shirt exactly once and on the third wash there were numerous holes in it.
Women's fashion also uses a small fraction of the fabric in men's fashion.
A single item of clothing lasting a year is not a good outcome.
Yes, which is why I assumed that is what fast fashion meant.
It depends on how many wearings and how much material is in it.
> How does all of that waste compare to all of the waste involved in making your comment? Not just the infra required to host it and distribute it, but the devices required for you to make it.
Extremely poorly? Computers, especially servers and the kind of clients that HN users tend to favour, are built to be robust and last years if not decades; many HN folk are proud of how long theirs last. The kind of computer that gets thrown away quickly is the fashion-driven kind, and that's not a coincidence.
Extremely poorly? Computers, especially servers and the kind of clients that HN users tend to favour, are built to be robust and last years if not decades; many HN folk are proud of how long theirs last. The kind of computer that gets thrown away quickly is the fashion-driven kind, and that's not a coincidence.
If he was using a phone/laptop that costs 100$ and gets thrown away every 3 months I could see your point otherwise I don't get it.
His waste comment is compared to a baseline of something more durable.
His waste comment is compared to a baseline of something more durable.
What I have noticed in Shein's app is that their pictures are meticulously done. Average stuff looks great with professionally done pictures with professional models. Not saying all their stuff is ordinary (they generally have good variety/design) but there is no hodgepodge mix and match of images of varying quality ranging from potato to great (e.g. compared to Alibaba/Shopee/Lazada/Aliexpress etc) - they all look awesome.
Quality of the product media is a huge influence on customer trust. AirBnb is a great case on that, as their effort to take professional photos of the listed properties had a huge positive impact on trust and conversion.
Very informative article.
It's rather disturbing to read about so much undercutting and unethical practices to satisfy consumer demands. Makes me wish more people might become mindful of the impact of their purchases, so they make a conscious decision of whether or not to feed an industry that does business like this.
It's rather disturbing to read about so much undercutting and unethical practices to satisfy consumer demands. Makes me wish more people might become mindful of the impact of their purchases, so they make a conscious decision of whether or not to feed an industry that does business like this.
People (in general) mind their wallet, expecting anything more is futile. This is the same reason we are still having a debate about wearing masks or doing other things that benefit more then one self.
I would also argue that this is just another side effect of a society that has conditioned us to overwork ourselves to such a level of exhaustion that to spend less of our resources(money and/or time) will always feel logically justified.
The headline is very different from the article.
At the heart of these issues is Shein’s aggressive business model. Comparisons to fast-fashion giants like H&M miss the point: it’s more like Amazon, operating a sprawling online marketplace that brings together around 6,000 Chinese clothing factories. It unites them with proprietary internal management software that collects near-instant feedback about which items are hits or misses
At the heart of these issues is Shein’s aggressive business model. Comparisons to fast-fashion giants like H&M miss the point: it’s more like Amazon, operating a sprawling online marketplace that brings together around 6,000 Chinese clothing factories. It unites them with proprietary internal management software that collects near-instant feedback about which items are hits or misses
If im not mistaken this model has been called customer2factory
Never even heard of SHEIN before yesterday, when I happend to come a cross a well-researched video that uncovered how SHEIN exploits workers in chinese sewing sweat shops, and how most of their designs are stolen from small western fashion creatives.
So just like their "Amazon's Choice" counterparts... this kind of practice should be illegal on an international basis given the ecological and human impact but corporate exploitation is still going strong.
We need much more transparency about these practices, be it SHEIN, Amazon or Apple... I do doubt however that people would make more conscious consumer choices even if they know about it. The pandemic has made me very pessimisic.
We need much more transparency about these practices, be it SHEIN, Amazon or Apple... I do doubt however that people would make more conscious consumer choices even if they know about it. The pandemic has made me very pessimisic.
It is illegal.
But for a small, independent fashion designer it's not quite feasible to take on a large Chinese corporation in court.
But for a small, independent fashion designer it's not quite feasible to take on a large Chinese corporation in court.
Fashion is not protected the same way as other creative works, so some amount of copying (the designs, not logos) might be legal.
(IANAL and I remembered it vaguely, here they explain a bit better) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion_design_copyright
(IANAL and I remembered it vaguely, here they explain a bit better) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion_design_copyright
I'm pretty convinced that SHEIN cannot legally take instagram pictures of the original designers wearing their own creations, and then use those pictures as product images on the SHEIN shop without permission.
> most of their designs are stolen from small western fashion creatives.
I agree. I was referring to this claim. This is a bit special in fashion. We can see often how inditex and others copy designs. Just remarking that some things that would clearly be copyright infringements in other contexts might not be in fashion.
I agree. I was referring to this claim. This is a bit special in fashion. We can see often how inditex and others copy designs. Just remarking that some things that would clearly be copyright infringements in other contexts might not be in fashion.
The clothes my kids have from Shein seem much higher quality than H&M. They are definitely softer/plusher, and they also seem to be more durable.
But did you check how much chemical did they put in the clothes that make the cloths your kids are wearing? Highly likely is the amount they put in exceed the safe limit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQdonJ8yE1k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQdonJ8yE1k
Really appreciate you sharing this link. Seems like only plasticized items (bibs, rain jackets, purses) were affected, not any regular cloth-based clothes (sweatshirts, t-shirts, pajamas). I'll be sure we are careful sourcing plasticized items, and if there is evidence that their cloth-based items are affected please share with the rest of us.
We always wash clothes before wearing because of the chemicals used during manufacture, and to make clothes feel soft in the store.
We always wash clothes before wearing because of the chemicals used during manufacture, and to make clothes feel soft in the store.
They are copies of brands that pay designers and the materials are often synthetic trash that look good.
Why is fast fashion bad but slow or regular fashion not?
Fashion is valuing things based on some definition or perception of popularity. It's chasing the dragon.
Fashion is valuing things based on some definition or perception of popularity. It's chasing the dragon.
Fast fashion drives more waste, environmental harm and illegal (or just shady) labour practices. If the cost of externalities were captured in the price, then fast fashion probably wouldn't exist. You can't sell a $5 dress without lax environmental and labour standards.
Slow fashion on the other hand is about creating items that last for years, even decades. Each item might have greater environmental cost to produce, but the cost per wear is far lower.
Slow fashion on the other hand is about creating items that last for years, even decades. Each item might have greater environmental cost to produce, but the cost per wear is far lower.
It's all on a continuum, but what fast fashion changed was the structure of fashion seasons. When new models are developed and released on an industry agreed schedule (2 or 4 times a year), then there are clear benefits for planning, forecasting and managing the supply chain.
Having a cycle that cannot be planned and offers a short window to profit, creates strong incentives to compromise on these relatively stable systems. This is compounded by the vast majority of fashion brands outsourcing production, and often design, sourcing, etc. So if a new item appears to be about to become extremely popular:
- Don't have time (or want to maximise margins) to design an item? Copy someone else's. - Don't have time to find a new factory? Offer the contract to one you know that doesn't have capacity to produce it safely. Or quickly pick a new one without doing any supply chain checks. - Don't have time to source materials? Let the factory pick what they want without oversight. - Factory owner doesn't have time to source additional labour? Secretly outsource to a cheaper factory with worse conditions to keep the margin. They might never get another contract anyway. - Factory owner has an unrealistic price per unit to achieve? Just reduce the quality.
The lack of stability means that there are just no incentives for anyone to anything "right".
Having a cycle that cannot be planned and offers a short window to profit, creates strong incentives to compromise on these relatively stable systems. This is compounded by the vast majority of fashion brands outsourcing production, and often design, sourcing, etc. So if a new item appears to be about to become extremely popular:
- Don't have time (or want to maximise margins) to design an item? Copy someone else's. - Don't have time to find a new factory? Offer the contract to one you know that doesn't have capacity to produce it safely. Or quickly pick a new one without doing any supply chain checks. - Don't have time to source materials? Let the factory pick what they want without oversight. - Factory owner doesn't have time to source additional labour? Secretly outsource to a cheaper factory with worse conditions to keep the margin. They might never get another contract anyway. - Factory owner has an unrealistic price per unit to achieve? Just reduce the quality.
The lack of stability means that there are just no incentives for anyone to anything "right".
Fashion is art. Just happens to be art you can wear. Art is generally considered to be good culturally and economically for a society.
But anything can be corrupted. Fast fashion is an especially deleterious evolution of wearable art, imho.
But anything can be corrupted. Fast fashion is an especially deleterious evolution of wearable art, imho.
If fashion were art you wouldn't have the word fashionable, in the same way that you don't have the word artful.
You’re entitled to your opinion and there’s no definitive answer, I suppose, but I just googled: “Is fashion art?” and virtually every result on the first page said yes.
Well it's not really the type of question to be answer via a referendum. Maybe it's fashionable to consider fashion art? Haha.
i posted this 8 days ago, always makes me curious how the hn algo works, maybe cause you edited the title or timing?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29559044
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29559044
At least it isn't really subject to arbitrary moderation like on reddit. I have a pretty good idea what posts are sensible on hn.
However, I keep posting stuff on r/de (German subreddit) and mods remove it or let it pass at a whim even though very clear rules have been established over the years. Sometimes thread types which I have clearly seen before with hundreds of upvotes are removed because of violating content rules. The next day someone posts a picture of a frog and it's sitting at 2.6k upvotes (I think the Wednesday frog meme is super embarrassing but anyway...)
However, I keep posting stuff on r/de (German subreddit) and mods remove it or let it pass at a whim even though very clear rules have been established over the years. Sometimes thread types which I have clearly seen before with hundreds of upvotes are removed because of violating content rules. The next day someone posts a picture of a frog and it's sitting at 2.6k upvotes (I think the Wednesday frog meme is super embarrassing but anyway...)
For your curiosity: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hacker+news+algorithm
It's considered acceptable to repost an article for a second try, so long as you don't delete the original. It's mostly just timing, though I have bookmarked a few users' profiles for a shortcut to curation :)
It's considered acceptable to repost an article for a second try, so long as you don't delete the original. It's mostly just timing, though I have bookmarked a few users' profiles for a shortcut to curation :)
Do you mind sharing some of those bookmarked users? I haven't even thought about using HN that way
Shein is actually a thing? I heard of it and seen it occasionally, but I always stamped if off as the wish.com for clothing.
EDIT: Reading the article and others about Shein my assumptions were apparently correct. Sigh.
EDIT: Reading the article and others about Shein my assumptions were apparently correct. Sigh.
I wonder if there is any tie between wearing extremely cheap microplastic shedding polyester and getting cancer
+1. I've also wondered about this for a long time, especially as someone who wears a lot of fleece products. This blog post (https://alexdanco.com/2019/12/17/ten-predictions-for-the-202...) describes it well. Quoting:
> At some point in the 2020s ... we're going to learn that some sort of chemical or microscopic thing that’s inside everything, all around us, actually has some horrible health effect we never knew about before. My pick for what it’ll be? Microplastics – particularly the microplastics inside clothing, like athleisure.
> I have no idea what kind of health hazard it’ll pose, but it’ll be one that takes a long time to develop, and where childhood exposure gets linked in a study to some awful condition that happens to you later. It could be that all these cheap, fast-fashion clothes are secretly off-gassing some volatile organic compound that we breathe in and gives us cancer later, or maybe it could be something like physical micro plastic particles getting on our hands, and then into our stomach when we eat, and then it gets linked to some digestive disorder or intolerance, or maybe it kills our gut bacteria, or I dunno.
Couldn't agree more. (The rest of his 10 Predictions for 2020 missed the most important one...)
> At some point in the 2020s ... we're going to learn that some sort of chemical or microscopic thing that’s inside everything, all around us, actually has some horrible health effect we never knew about before. My pick for what it’ll be? Microplastics – particularly the microplastics inside clothing, like athleisure.
> I have no idea what kind of health hazard it’ll pose, but it’ll be one that takes a long time to develop, and where childhood exposure gets linked in a study to some awful condition that happens to you later. It could be that all these cheap, fast-fashion clothes are secretly off-gassing some volatile organic compound that we breathe in and gives us cancer later, or maybe it could be something like physical micro plastic particles getting on our hands, and then into our stomach when we eat, and then it gets linked to some digestive disorder or intolerance, or maybe it kills our gut bacteria, or I dunno.
Couldn't agree more. (The rest of his 10 Predictions for 2020 missed the most important one...)
Add another company to the pile of “companies profiting off of cheap Chinese goods at the expense of the American worker/economy and the environment”.
Shein is a Chinese company itself, so they wouldn't really be hypocritical here. Is it better or worse than an American company profiting off of Chinese goods at the expensive of American worker/economy and environment? I guess we could just keep the goods all out, but the distributors aren't going to survive if it is allowed and they don't do it.
I don't see how they do it "the expense of the American worker". It's a Chinese company founded in China by a Chinese man and selling worldwide online, it's perfectly normal for them to make their product in China.
American worker?
Shein sells worldwide. H&M (mentioned elsewhere in this thread) and other US brands don't ship to most countries in the world, if they ship overseas at all.
Shein sells worldwide. H&M (mentioned elsewhere in this thread) and other US brands don't ship to most countries in the world, if they ship overseas at all.
H&M is the second largest clothing retailer in the world and based in Sweden- they trade in 75 countries. The only one bigger is Inditex from Spain.
They may trade in 75 countries, but I'll say again, the vast majority of people in the world can't go online and buy from H&M. They won't ship internationally.
A guy in Samoa, Pakistan, or most other countries can't go to hm.com and buy anything.
Shein ships to 220 countries.
A guy in Samoa, Pakistan, or most other countries can't go to hm.com and buy anything.
Shein ships to 220 countries.
Pretty sure H&M is not a US brand given all the H&M shops I saw in Europe long before I saw any in the USA. According to Wiki, they are Swedish. They also have stores in China.
A good German language video about Shein https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Go4Npf1hYU
tldr: huge amount of waste, bad working conditions, copyright infringement
You should prefer the video on the same topic from Brust Raus, another funk channel, over this video series from Simplicissimus.
Simplicissimus got unusually emotional and preachy in this video, which I'm going to count against them because they have their own fashion brand with 80€+ sweaters "produced in Europe" (which means they couldn't even write produced in EU, which in turn means it's going to be produced in Turkey, under similarly bad conditions as Shein produces).
They didn't make such a series about any other fast fashion brand, and I'm pretty sure the reason they got this preachy is not because of the bad work conditions or environmental issues, but because they fear that SHEIN will copy their own designs.
I'm very disappointed that they made such a video, considering the entire industry of fast fashion as well as the parts of the fashion industry based on exclusivity are at fault, and it's not just limited to one company like Shein but a systemic problem. If you avoid SHEIN and buy from another fast fashion brand, or even CultureCulture, the label of the Simplicissimus authors, you've done nothing to avoid the problem.
Buy second hand products instead. Learn sewing. Fix old clothes instead of throwing them away.
Also see the Strg F documentary on Sneakerjagd how Nike just grinds up new unsold sneakers to ensure exclusivity and grinds up returns to avoid having to process them.
Simplicissimus got unusually emotional and preachy in this video, which I'm going to count against them because they have their own fashion brand with 80€+ sweaters "produced in Europe" (which means they couldn't even write produced in EU, which in turn means it's going to be produced in Turkey, under similarly bad conditions as Shein produces).
They didn't make such a series about any other fast fashion brand, and I'm pretty sure the reason they got this preachy is not because of the bad work conditions or environmental issues, but because they fear that SHEIN will copy their own designs.
I'm very disappointed that they made such a video, considering the entire industry of fast fashion as well as the parts of the fashion industry based on exclusivity are at fault, and it's not just limited to one company like Shein but a systemic problem. If you avoid SHEIN and buy from another fast fashion brand, or even CultureCulture, the label of the Simplicissimus authors, you've done nothing to avoid the problem.
Buy second hand products instead. Learn sewing. Fix old clothes instead of throwing them away.
Also see the Strg F documentary on Sneakerjagd how Nike just grinds up new unsold sneakers to ensure exclusivity and grinds up returns to avoid having to process them.
Not to say Shein isn't responding well to an economic niche. Just, that it has an externalised cost: disposal of clothes on a fashion whim is not a good thing.