Boycotting Fast Fashion: A Conundrum for Conscious Consumption

By: Farishta Anjirbag

Boycotting Fast Fashion: A Conundrum for Conscious Consumption

The discourse on the unethicality of fast fashion has been rampant across media in the past few months. This has made me feel a lot of things. It all began with a dire sense of alarm when a friend pointed out that the clothing website I was using to pine over cute crop tops was responsible for the exploitation and mistreatment of labourers. Shortly after, I was both, shocked, and not, upon learning of the environmental impact of the fashion industry. Let’s begin by talking a little bit about that. 

According to statistics published in the Nature journal, the fashion industry currently produces 4-5 billion tonnes (8-10%) of global carbon emissions annually, and uses 79 trillion litres of water. It goes without saying that the industry contributes greatly to industrial water pollution and microplastic pollution.

“The rising environmental impact (and awareness thereof) can be attributed to the substantial increase in clothing consumption and, therefore, textile production,” states the journal. But, of course, manufacture is not the only environmentally unsound aspect of the product. Fast fashion has made affordable clothing frequently and abundantly available to us. The ability to consume more means that we assign less value to the clothes we purchase, and thus feel more comfortable throwing them out once they start to look old or get slightly damaged. This, in turn, has contributed significantly to the production of waste.

In a nutshell, fashion is one of the largest polluting industries in the world, with no concrete plans to turn to more sustainable methods.

Learning about this infused in me a certain sense of urgency, a need to act quickly to prevent further harm to the planet. Equipped also with some knowledge of the industry’s exploitative tendencies, I was sold on the one solution being widely promoted in discussions about fast fashion: boycott. Ready to give up these Evil Companies once and for all, I was never going to look back, and that would be the end of it for me.

But it wasn’t. Somehow, things didn’t stop there. As my readings got a little more extensive, I got a little more confused. Something in my mind started to stir, and I could no longer treat boycott as the ultimate solution. Now, let’s talk about why. 

The fast fashion industry is globally notorious for its unethical treatment of the workers who produce its garments. Sweatshops and factories not only in South Asian nations, but also in developed countries such as the USA and the UK, constantly fail to uphold their workers’ rights. Big brands source from these factories, where workers are overworked in insecure environments, gravely underpayed, suppressed, and subjected to emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. 

A report by the Clean Clothes Campaign states that 80% of global garment factory workers are women, who, because of the eons of gender-based discrimination and oppression in these countries, are easier to mistreat and exploit, as compared to men. 

Women are frequently subjected to verbal and physical abuse and sexual harassment. They also work under the fear of perhaps being assaulted or raped on their way home from work late at night...Women are also discriminated against once they decide to start, or already have, families...Some employers will only hire unmarried women with no children and some make each woman sign a document that they agree not to have children during their term of employment...Women who become pregnant during their employment may try to hide it, often resulting in birth defects and other childcare issues.

To make matters worse, all the articles I read seemed to point towards the fact that compliance with occupational safety norms was not a popular notion in garment factories. The Rana Plaza disaster – the collapse of a manufacturing and retail building in Dhaka, Bangladesh that killed over 1100 workers and injured 2500 – is a prime example of this. One day before the accident, an engineer was called in to inspect a wide crack in one of the walls, and advised that the building be evacuated. The employees were sent home, but called back into work the next morning. Several returned for fear that their absence would affect their paycheck. Many of the survivors of the accident were not offered any compensation from the government or their employers. 

Five months prior to the Rana Plaza collapse, another accident in Dhaka – the fire at the Tazreen Fashions factory that killed around 117 people – gained international attention.

According to an article in the New York Times, “Between 2006 and 2012, more than 500 Bangladeshi garment workers died in factory fires. The usual cause: faulty electrical wiring.” The Rana Plaza Disaster did compel fashion brands to enter into various agreements to ensure proper safeguards for their workers. While these were successful in making workplaces safer, the change is not expected to last long. The agreements have expired, and sweatshops still exist in Bangladesh. The condition of the workers also points towards their governments’ failure to uphold the systems of law and justice when it comes to their protection.  

An enlightening report by Siddharth Kara entitled “Tainted Garments” offers a detailed account of the home-based garment sector employees in India. A large proportion of them are women who live in small houses unfit for the work they are charged with. They are unable to upgrade their standard of living due to their meagre wages. Kara lists the health ailments these women suffer from, as a result of working in these conditions: 

• Ocular degeneration or near complete loss of vision 
• Chronic back pain 
• Muscle pain and atrophy
• Headaches 
• Pulmonary issues 
• Cuts and infections 
​
The health and development impact on child laborers is naturally more pronounced.

Kara also cites a 2012 study conducted by the India Committee of the Netherlands and the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations. This describes working conditions in the spinning units of five Indian textile companies that source to the USA and Europe: 
Researchers found cases of forced and bonded labor, as recruiters convinced parents in rural villages to send their daughters to spinning mills with promises of a decent salary, accommodations, meals, and opportunities for schooling. However, when the girls arrived at the mill they were forced to live in cramped hostels...were prohibited from leaving the factory grounds, and were not allowed to contact their families...the girls worked 60 or more hours each week, with mandatory but unpaid overtime and night shifts. 


It was all this information – and more – that really had me distressed. Then, when Kara wrote, “..ensuring decent wages for home-based garment workers would have at most a minor impact on the profit margins of most apparel retailers, so there is little excuse not to do so,” I could not help but be vexed. To know that someone, somewhere was being exploited was one thing, but to actually find out who these people are, the lives they lead, and the institutions that profit from mistreating them, is another ball game, altogether. With scarcely a glimpse into the reality of the industry, I was angry and overwhelmed, and certainly unprepared to read what Kara had written next: “...foreign brands provide vital employment to women and girls from historically oppressed ethnic communities who may otherwise have no option to earn a livelihood…” 

Kara’s research concerns women and girls in India’s home-based garment sector, specifically. However, it doesn’t take much to realize that the employment in the garment industry worldwide, though wholly inadequate in ensuring security, is important. Without it, millions would be left with no source of income. With the ongoing pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, this is already manifest in different parts of the world. Owing to the Coronavirus, sales in fashion have taken a hit, and so have the factory workers who produce the clothes. As stated by Fashion Revolution, that several of them have lost their jobs, and are finding it difficult to pay for basic necessities. Meanwhile, others are being forced to work in unhygienic conditions, put at the risk of being infected with an illness they don’t have the means to treat. 

So, what do we do, then? Where on the one hand, an immediate boycott would promote healthier consumption habits for the planet and its people; on the other, it would mean that a lot of workers would be let go. Undoubtedly, then, economies – especially those that are particularly reliant on the garment industry – would also suffer. Bangladesh, which receives 83% of its foreign currency from exporting garments, and India, which earns 13% of its total export earnings from the textile and apparel industry, are good examples. At this point, I had a lot of information, but no idea how to act. Only one thing was clear: that boycotting fast fashion without looking back is a privilege that is going to harm the people who don’t have it.

Dana Thomas pointed out in an interview with Vox that before companies moved their production offshore, 
​
...we always knew somebody who was in the garment industry, whether it was your cousin, a neighbor down the street, or someone at your church or at your school, so you had a person related to what you were wearing, and you thought about them. But once we removed that emotional investment from the equation, we cared less about our clothes.
Evidently, this is one big reason we can so easily consume and throw away our clothes. But, at the same time, our detachment from the people who produce them, and our comfortable ignorance about their situation is what is allowing us to boycott without thinking twice about it.

As more time passed, my predicament only worsened. There were so many questions – was boycotting really the right move? Could we not slow down, think this through, and finally take action that would minimize harm to the labourers? On the other hand, could our environment bear the weight of us slowing down? In the end, what outcome do we expect? Do we want to kick existing fashion giants out of the picture, or do we want them to change their ways? If we kick them out of the picture, what will happen to their factory employees? If we don’t, how do we instigate change? How can I figure this out without any expertise in these issues? 

Different people – all of them far more qualified than I – had different things to say. Where some would support absolute boycotts as the only efficient way to move forward, others would suggest raising consumer awareness, putting more pressure on brands and lawmakers, unionizing the workers, etc. Alas, neither of these perspectives was very appealing to me, because where one would neglect the humanitarian crisis, the other would neglect the environmental one. Are you starting to see what I meant when I said this made me feel a lot of things?

To me, it doesn’t seem fair for a few privileged sections of society to wake up and decide they want to boycott fast fashion to help factory workers; even though it means that the same workers would be hurt in the process. I cannot understand the lived experiences of these workers, and so, is it right for me to determine how they should be supported? At the same time, it also doesn’t seem fair for us to move too slowly and wait for change, because our planet can’t take it. 

What struck me most about the boycott was the traction it has been gaining on social media, getting more and more people on board with the movement. It is, without a doubt, amazing that so much consumer awareness is being generated across the world, and that so many people are making more ethical, sustainable choices. However, I also think it is important to ask ourselves that in boycotting fast fashion, do we really understand what its significance and repercussions could be? I ask this only because I didn’t. 

I had been treating boycotting as an end in itself. I had Done My Part by leaving fast fashion behind. But, as has become apparent in the course of this article (and so, in the course of time that led to me writing it), boycotting isn’t an end. It is a means to pressurize the fashion industry into adopting more just and sustainable systems of functioning, to direct our money to brands that already have, to facilitate structural changes in the industry, and create healthier consumption habits.

All of this cannot be achieved through boycott alone, even though it is an important tool. If we choose to boycott, we must know that it comes with responsibilities – environmental and social – of its own; simply because boycotting is privilege, privilege is power, and power is responsibility. We need to learn to buy less. This is imperative in living more sustainably. Shifting our heavy impulse-buying tendencies to more ethical companies isn’t the solution, only an improvement. Excessive consumption, no matter where it is, will always be a drain on our resources. 

We need to support the people who have been making our clothes this whole time, even when we choose to withdraw support from their industry. Giving up fast fashion and convincing others to do the same has an impact, however small, on the people we have supported for years by paying money to the industry. Even though their exploitation is one of the reasons we choose to boycott, our withdrawing doesn’t automatically make everything okay for them. We still need to extend our support, which can be done by raising awareness and donating time or money to organizations that work with garment factory workers. 

We need to demand transparency from brands and question their accountability. The lack of transparency in supply chains is a major enabler of social and environmental injustices. The Fashion Transparency Index 2020 claimed that when Rana Plaza collapsed, people did not know which brands sourced from there. They had to dig through the rubble for clothes with brand labels on them. Transparency is a necessity not only in fast fashion companies, but even in thrift stores and ethical clothing brands. We must know where our clothes are coming from, and question gaps in information. By and large, the aim is not to mindlessly boycott, but to raise our consciousness as consumers and provoke systemic change. 

I will reinstate here that our media is playing a very important role in making us aware; but we need to learn to think for ourselves, and reflect on our actions and decisions. When social media told me that boycotting fast fashion is good because the industry is exploitative, I didn’t really think. My mind only registered a few things: the people who were telling me this and how I identified with them, the fact that my current actions were worsening an already awful situation, and that there was one visible solution. And though I still stand by the fact that refusing to purchase fast-fashion apparel will help make a change, I would not have realized my complete responsibility in making this decision, if something had not compelled me to think about it. 

I was pushed to realize that to be a conscious consumer, I had to question and evaluate everything, whether that was my consumption, or other people’s opinions about it. It also meant that I got to figure out what method of conscious consumption worked for me. For many, a complete boycott of fast fashion is just not feasible, owing to a variety of reasons. That doesn’t automatically put them in the wrong, or make them unconscious consumers. In the same vein, completely boycotting fast fashion only because you heard it was bad, does not make you a conscious consumer. Unless we understand what terms like boycotting, sustainability, and transparency really imply, and figure out how we can contribute with the resources available to us, we won’t relate to them at the level that is required to bring about permanent change. 

Today, the free availability of information has disillusioned us with a lot of people and institutions we look up to. Sometimes, it all feels like too much to deal with. Everything we have grown to like seems to feed off the exploitation of someone or something. Occasionally, it gets tiring to have to keep up with being plastic free, or fast-fashion free, or free of that one chocolate company’s products you loved but later found out uses slave labour in its production. But it’s less tiring when you’re really conscious, when you think, evaluate, and you decide for yourself what your contribution will be to the causes you care about. We have cultivated a culture of posting and reposting information for various (very noble) causes. But I often find that it isn’t until someone really thinks about something, learns, and asks questions, that they feel prepared to carry their digital advocacy forward to their real lives. I believe that we need, in the long run, is not people who can read infographics, align with trends, and tweet about causes while they’re in vogue, but conscious consumers who understand their responsibility enough to not forget it. 

I am not here to tell you to do all these things because I am talking about them. I am not an economist, a fashion expert, a social worker, or anyone who has had to deal with the fashion industry’s disregard for other existences. I am just a consumer who has had a bit of a revelation. That is, even though gaining all this knowledge about fast fashion has made me feel a lot of things, it was important.

​Because above all, it has made me feel conscious.

​