Here is an article by panelist Minh Ha T. Pham that touches on some of the issues she mentioned last night.
If I did this correctly then you all can reply to this post and we can get access to your ideas and thoughts about what you learned last night while it is still fresh in your minds.
We touched on the topic of ethical consumption and greenwashing during the last class we had at the Graduate Center, and as a class we worked to problematize the idea that only fast fashion (and not luxury brands) were responsible for unsafe working conditions, poor clothing quality, and global warming. The racist and classist tone the environmental conversations are going often obfuscate the fact that it is the wealthy who lead the most unethical and wasteful lives (and that they often have the means to alleviate and fix the affects of global warming). Furthermore, as environmentally conscious instagrammers and youtubers flood the internet (many of whom I follow), selling an “ethical” lifestyle, it creates the image that it is white people who will save the planet. These influencers also sell a lifestyle that centers consumption, as they often make money by advertising “ethical” products. The white savior narrative is rampant (though not always obvious) in these videos and posts generated by these influencers. Consumption becomes the extent of many people’s activism, or, political action is often pacified through this “feel good” consumption. I do appreciate that Minh Ha T. Pham also refuses to pacify laborers in the garment industry by focusing on the activism currently going on in sweatshops. It is necessary that any environmental political activism must listen to and center the working class, indigenous folx, and other people living in the global south.
I found the point Minh Ha T. Pham made about fashion news outlets ignoring the impact of high-end clothing on garment workers very interesting. I feel there is an on-going myth with consumers that upscale, i.e. expensive, fashion goods are ethically made. While these types of goods have a better fit, last longer, and a better construction, how they are made isn’t so sound. This belief may be amplified by the often seen images of designers in their salons, piecing together a ballgown with the help of their assistants. The consumer isn’t aware of the fact that many items made by a fashion house (particularly ready-to-wear) is not created in this fabulous setting. Also, the rise of “see now, buy now” shopping has created an increasing physical demand on garment workers. Not only is quality important for garment factories, but now speed is also a factor.
I feel it would be very difficult for publications who rely on advertising and garment loans from these designers to fully “pull back the curtain.” It would take publications that source funding through a different method to provide a bias-free story, i.e. academia. Also, once this story comes out, I feel a lot of houses would shun that publication and the writer.
The discussion by the panel was very interesting, but the most shocking revelation was the fact that magazines would not publish articles that critique the sweatshops that produce clothing. The image that fashion magazines present is one of honest reporting about issues that effects their readers. When magazines try to promote an image of being feminist yet do not report on the thousands of women in sweatshops protesting for better working conditions, they send the message of promoting one type of feminism. The thousands of workers in southern California that have to deal with low wages and unfair working conditions are not being talked about in the debate for ethical fashion.
As a class we touched on fast fashion, the effects that it has on the environment, and what we can do as consumers to fix the problem. But the reality is the idea of having a capsule wardrobe or straying away from fast fashion in favor of pricey items leaves out the working class people who can’t afford to do this. In regards to the panel, thousands of workers rely on fast fashion and what becomes of them when the factories shut down. To have a productive conversation about ethical fashion we need to address all the facets of fashions- even if its uncomfortable.
In Minh Ha T. Pham’s talk, she mentions the importance of free market to democracy. Her argument seems to oversimplify the relations: we want no government regulations because we need a free market, and a free market is essential to our democracy, and we want democracy. Although it’s true that free market and democracy are mutually related, we have to consider the cases in many developing countries, where a democratic society becomes the slave of big capital. In the context of global capitalism, it’s also important to think about the unevenness of consumption and profits and the coexistence of government regulations and free market.