can we sustain this?
“Clear eyes, full hearts, no facts” is how I refer to any conversation about sustainability that isn’t rooted in the definition of the verb, “to sustain.” According to the Oxford Dictionary, to sustain means “to strengthen or support physically or mentally.” And sustainability in the broad sense refers to the ability to maintain or support a process continuously over time.
To put these definitions in context as it relates to any business, including the fashion industry: True sustainability seeks to prevent the depletion of natural or physical resources, so that they will remain available for the long term. It also includes aiming to achieve business practices that are built on equality, social justice, animal welfare and ecological integrity. Exploitation of people, of the earth may seem to boost profitability, but is never sustainable in the long term. In fashion, sustainability must apply to the design process, production, business operations, and consumption.
Considering these definitions, the practices of your favorite brands are simply unsustainable. A sustainable clothing brand does not exist. In a short amount of time, sustainability has become less of a practice and more of a shell game. The word has lost all meaning; instead, it has become synonymous with expensive and unattainable.
An excerpt from Brother Vellies, a supposedly sustainable brand:
“Brother Vellies is committed to honoring the people who make our products and the places where they are made. Because of this, we treat each step of our process with the utmost care for our artisans, our customers, and our planet. At our core, you will find vegetable-tanned leathers, soling from recycled tires, hand carved wood, floral dyed feathers along with a collection of other by-product materials sourced from farmers across the globe. We strive to lessen the impact of our production practices by continuing to ask questions and make changes each season. We put a lot of thought into what we make for you and we wouldn't have it any other way. The Brother Vellies collection is produced across the globe - South Africa, Kenya, Mexico Morocco, Ethiopia, Burkina Faso, Italy, Haiti and at home in New York City. We do not put our products on sale. Their value is assigned based on materials and fair labor practices, which are unaffected by the traditional commercial consumption cycle.”
This seven sentence blurb is the only information on sustainability that we have on self-proclaimed sustainable brand, Brother Vellies. Due diligence doesn’t exist because Brother Vellies has never heard of it.
We have so many options to shop, including underwear made from plastic bottles, shoes handmade by Kenyan women for a company owned by a Black American woman (I will not spend this newsletter telling you what is wrong with this business practice), and sneakers made from organic cotton, wild rubber from the Amazon, recycled plastic bottles and forced labor. Out of 3 brands referenced, only 1 has anything on their website about their supply chains; their labor practices remain unknown to consumers. 2 out 3 of these brands harvest raw materials and produce their goods internationally which immediately makes one question their ethics. True sustainability involves keeping the means of production domestic in terms of addressing environmental, economic and social needs. Doing business internationally contributes to lack of oversight which aids international businesses in exploiting the society whose raw materials they harvest for production. Google.com search results pull up pages upon pages of “sustainable fashion brands you should know right now” listicles with shiny overexposed images of clothes most likely made using child labor in a country most Americans, including myself, couldn’t even point to on a map. (For the purposes of this newsletter, I will be both American when necessary and Nigerian when convenient.)
I will not waste your time by discussing issues of labor practices, overconsumption and whatever else you’ve already heard and read about. Instead, I will be focusing on the question: Can this be sustained?
Referring back to my definitions of “to sustain,” most business practices (including those called “sustainable”) are actually unsustainable, because true sustainability in business requires transparency and diligence. Additionally, true sustainability not only requires renewable energy but also considering the economic viability of production. Can you sustain every facet of clothing production? No, because if we’re being honest, true sustainability even without capitalism cannot exist in the fashion industry. (I’ll come back to this in part 3 of this letter.) You cannot sustain creating underwear from recycled plastic when 1) Studies have shown that less than 10% of plastic can be recycled, the rest end up in landfills. Of that less than 10%, a measly 1% of recycled plastic can actually be used to create new material. 2) On top of that, recycled plastic is polyester which cannot be recycled and isn’t biodegradable. This means that tons of recycled underwear end up landfills and will emit pollutants in the degradation process over time. 3) Lastly, not all recycling is environmentally friendly, especially plastic, because it consumes additional chemical, energy and water resources. The fashion industry cannot be sustained because it is notorious for underpaying its workers. As we’ve seen with the restaurant industry in the US through this pandemic, an industry notorious for underpaying its workers will continue to lose them as inflation rises and living conditions continue to become unbearable. And the most obvious of all is, if clothing brand owners asked themselves “can this be sustained?”, most of their businesses would have ended in the idea phase, because it would have been clear that we do not need another clothing brand. We have enough. We have seen enough.
last week, Marcelo Gaia, founder of Mirror Palais and curator of the Spanish thin girl summer fantasy, spoke frustratedly after a customer stated that “normal” people couldn’t afford his clothes. (I missed what started his frustration so keep this in mind as you read further.) At first, I agreed with his criticism because if the “normal people” we’re referring to here are people who do monthly Shein hauls then they candefinitely afford his clothes. In response, Gaia claimed that his designs are ethically and sustainably made because he makes clothes with deadstock cotton fabrics and pays fair wages in defense of his clothing prices.
While these efforts are commendable, we only have his word. And I need brands to go beyond telling us they’re sustainable and rather show us how. Very few industries are as vocal about their sustainability practices as the fashion industry, and when you pull back the thin 200% silk curtain, it’s all deceit. Where I’m from, we say, “The emptiest drums make the loudest noise.” The fashion industry is the empty drum.
Mirror Palais is one of the better brands and that’s saying a lot. They only sell their clothes on preorder, which reduces a lot of waste, and they have individual size charts on every garment so you know what you’re buying and how it will fit. Their clothes go up to 2XL, which isn’t much, but compared to its independent and larger conglomerate-owned counterparts like Zara who stop at XL, it’s better. I must add that based on the measurements given on Mirror Palais’ website, Zara’s XL equates to Mirror Palais’ L. I despise having to compare 1 right for 10 wrongs but it helps my point so stay with me.
Unfortunately, Mirror Palais’ clothes are simply not made well, which makes his business unsustainable. I have seen complaints on Twitter about this. His bustier and corset designs are made strictly with vibes and the audacity of a white man who knows nothing about women’s bodies. It feels harsh to say that making ill-constructed clothes makes one's business unsustainable, but it’s true. It makes every other effort pointless. It wouldn’t matter that his clothes are made with deadstock fabrics if they end up in the same landfill as $10 Shein clothes because of poor construction. In fact, I’d be okay with his price going up if it would guarantee longevity. Additionally, his thin girl aesthetic on IG and online is impossible to ignore even though he occasionally features someone wearing his clothes in size 2XL. I point this out because, for me, fatphobia is unsustainable. I plan on elaborating further in part 2 of this letter.
As I’ve said, Mirror Palais is one of the better brands. If his “about page” wasn’t about the sustainability of his brand, I would have picked a different brand as my example because other brands doing worse things. I chose him because from his tone in these screenshots above, he thinks he’s doing more than he actually is. This is exactly my point: By using sustainability in their branding and marketing without truly understanding what it means to sustain, brands contribute to watering down and deceiving their customers about what sustainability is. I wish they’d just do what they're doing and leave sustainability out of it.
In order to produce clothes with the least amount of waste, brands have to prioritize finding ethical means of production, simply make less or close their businesses altogether. And if they must stay open, they must prioritize living wages across the board, consider waste and continuously keep up with research regarding whatever materials they use for production. I’d like to see effort and transparency as each brand builds on whatever their mission is. It is not enough to start out with some “sustainability” efforts; they must continue building on those efforts.
So what can you do?
We participate in this industry because most of us have no other choice. But we must push ourselves to dream before actualizing a world without capitalism.
So I want us to spend less hours trying to find the most sustainable brands and shaming others for buying from H&M while encouraging them to buy from H&M’s conscious collections as if that makes a difference. Capitalism has us spinning our wheels, when the problem is capitalism itself. If we have to constantly negotiate one bad for 10 goods then perhaps it might be time to get honest about what we’re really doing. I’d rather we all admitted the truth so that everyone can move on with their respective lives.
In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have to find time in the midst of our 10 hour work days, 2 hours commuting to and from work, errands, sleeping and 20 minutes of weekly quiet time to go thrifting and learn some light sewing in order to partake in what is deemed sustainable. But if we must individualize this systemic problem, the least we can all do right now is to scrutinize more, opt out of participating when we can, buy less when we must participate, purchase long-lasting garments and ignore sustainability focused brand marketing. It’s actually a lot, considering that most people will never consider any of this.
Questions you should ask yourself as a consumer:
What are markers of quality? Price? Fabric and material composition? Design?
Why do I need this garment right now? Can I wear it again?
Is this a wardrobe essential or is this a niche/trendy garment?
On many occasions, I have lamented to friends about the scarcity of brands who just make the same things every season but with different fabrics and colors to accommodate weather changes. I want a brand that focuses on improving the designs they already have. A lot of the time, I am rarely looking for something new to add to my closet; instead I am wishing that the sweater or dress I saw 4 years ago or even last season will make an appearance in the brand’s new collection. I am still wishing.