April 24th, 2015, will mark the two-year anniversary of the devastating Rana Plaza collapse that killed 1133 people and injured many more. It is also Fashion Revolution Day.
Fashion Revolution is a global movement aiming to "help to raise awareness of the true cost of
fashion, show the world that change is possible, and celebrate all
those involved in creating a more sustainable future."
On Fashion Revolution Day we are asked to wear our clothes inside-out, reveal the label, tag the brand on social media and ask, #whomademyclothes?
I've previously written about fast fashion and its social and environmental costs, and my commitment to ethical fashion has not changed. However, I feel I should be contacting more clothing retailers to question their practices. Following last year's Fashion Revolution Day, I wrote to Australian fashion label Gorman about their supply chain transparency. They replied directing me to their "Ethical Statement". I'm still not buying Gorman and haven't done so for a few years, although they are probably better than most Australian fashion retailers. They fared...okay...in the 2009 "Travelling Textiles" report but have since been sold to Factory X, owner of brands like of Dangerfield and Alannah Hill. I can't find anything online about their supply chain. I will continue to make do with my already over-populated wardrobe, replacing items only if they wear out or no longer fit, and doing so with fair trade, second-hand or Australian (ethically) made garments.
If you would like to read more on this topic, I've created a page with links to ethical fashion resources.
I will be asking #whomademyclothes on April 24, and encourage you to join me. You'll find me on Instagram and Twitter (and maybe at work!) with my clothes inside out.
One of my first posts on this blog was about the Peter Singer book, The
Life You Can Save. In his recent TED talk on Effective Altruism, he
argues the ethics behind that book. I think it's worth 20 minutes of your time.
Bigger Than Yourself is starting a letter-writing campaign to Australian fashion labels, asking about the ethics behind their clothing production.
She's starting out with popular brands Sportsgirl, Review, Portmans,
Alannah Hill and Witchery and she's had a few typically vague responses.
I'm going to write to a few of the brands I no longer purchase because
I'm not confident they're sweat-shop free.
One of my food heroes, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, is heading to Australia for a River Cottage Australia. Unfortunately, it's on Foxtel. I may need to find a friend with Foxtel...or wait until it comes out on DVD. I'm hoping there will be a River Cottage Australia cookbook.
Another of my food heroes, Michael Pollan, was on ABC Radio National this week along with celebrity chef Peter Kuruvita and "Salt Sugar Fat" author Michael Moss. They talk about taking back control of cooking (from food corporations) as a source of pleasure and self-reliance. (Thanks to @timsenior for the link.)
Fat City: What can stop obesity? is a long, but eloquent and thorough, read by Australian physician Karen Hitchcock. (Illustrated by a faceless fatty, I see.) She discusses the individual and societal factors leading to obesity, and the costs to the individual and to the public. She concludes, "If you come to me, your doctor, and you ask me to make you thin, for now
I will have to cut you or drug you, as these are the only weapons I
have to ward off the sirens." We (not just doctors but everyone) need to tackle obesity at a societal level because as Dr Hitchcock says, our options are limited at an individual level.
Please comment if you find these links of interest and would like to discuss their content.
Underwear is a popular Christmas stocking filler in Australia so I thought I'd take this opportunity to post about ethical underwear choices (socks, jocks, bras and tights). Underwear is one item I don't want to buy "vintage" and am not willing to forgo completely.
This cheeky (sorry, pun) "More Than Pretty Knickers" video briefly (oops, another pun) points out some of the environmental and human costs of the production of underwear.
There is further explanation here of the facts quoted in the video. I'm not alone in the struggle to find ethically made
underwear - I discovered great posts on the topic by Adventures Undressed and Life of a Vegetarian Girl (each with a list of links).
With my
non-existent sewing skills, I'm unlikely to make any underwear that's
wearable and does its job without bulging (and not in a good way). I discovered a website for a bespoke bra-maker in Brisbane (Linda's Lingerie) - I wonder if I could find the same in Perth? I have heard that making bras, particularly those with under-wires, is a specialised and difficult skill. If you are more sartorially savvy than me, here are instructions for making underpants from old t-shirts.
I am trying to extend the lifespan of my delicates by handwashing and mending where possible - and I reuse my holey (cleaned!) undies as rags for cleaning the bathroom. But what to do when my current batch of smalls has had its day? Finding ethically made underwear is far more difficult than finding ethically made clothes. Bras (especially with under-wires) are more difficult than undies and socks.
There are a number of producers making socks and jocks (and singlets and sleepwear) from fabrics with a lighter (but not invisible) ecological footprint than traditional cotton and nylon, such as organic cotton and bamboo. Some are fair trade. You can find them easily by searching for "ethical underwear Australia". Wool socks keep feet warm wet or dry, require less frequent washing and will biodegrade if you bury them in the garden once you're done with them. My friend works for NZ merino brand Icebreaker and vouches for their ethical standards (and his wife loves Icebreaker undies!), although I've not tried them myself.
Pants to Poverty (their name is a pun - my kind of brand) is a British pants company that, according to their website, source their organic cotton directly from farmers in India and produce in a carbon neutral factory that pays living wages to its Indian garment workers. There are a few online stockists in Australia including Etiko and The New Internationalist. Who Made Your Pants? is an English worker cooperative (mainly of refugee women) making underpants from fabric that would otherwise end up in waste. I was really captured by their business model (after discovering them through Twitter).
I've struggled to find Australian-made underwear since Bonds sent their production offshore. Brisbane-based Nico Underwear produces (ethically, in Australia) pretty women's underwear that's available in a few stores in Brisbane and online. I won some of their underwear once and while it's gorgeous, it far too big for me because I chose the sizes based on my (obviously poorly self-measured) measurements. Still they're worth another try, especially if you're in Brisbane and can try them in person. With a bit of online searching, I just found Tuffys & Tuffetts, another Australian-made underwear producer (including bras with under-wires!). However, they don't seem to have any bricks and mortar stockists so I'm left with the same concern about ill-fitting bras and VPLs.
For seriously sexy, Melbourne-made lingerie, Hopeless looks like the way to go. They have a gorgeous blog and are the most only appealing of the Aussie underwear producers I found via an etsy search.
As I sit here sweating on the couch on a 39 Celcius Christmas day, it's hard to think about wearing tights. However, I thought I'd end by mentioning Tightology. Their lovely hosiery is Australian-made, from "organic cotton, bamboo and wool blend using 100% recycled paper packaging and environmental inks for printing." They have many stockists, including several in Perth!
I would love to hear others' suggestions for ethical underwear choices. Does anyone know of a store in Perth selling Australian-made underwear? Does anyone know of a bespoke bra-maker in Perth? If you do, please be generous and share the details - it's Christmas after all.
We have an insatiable appetite for cheap fashion. I've heard friends say, "This store is great for throwaway clothes." I've seen fashion magazine covers scream, "Guilt-free buys under $20." I've seen a lifestyle journalist comment (repeatedly) that fashion purchases are so cheap, they're "practically free."
These comments assume that the only cost of cheap fashion is the cost to our wallets and that the only reason we may feel guilty about purchasing cheap fashion is that we're spending our potential savings or racking up more credit. The Australian mainstream media today ran a "cheap fashion" story, with the long (and poorly punctuated) title "The twin test: One twin is wearing a $199 Cue dress the other is in a $50 Target dress. Can you tell the difference?" The focus of the article was the aesthetic differences between the two dresses - the fit, the cut and the feel of the fabric. While mention was made of the country of manufacture (the $199 dress is made in Australia by an accredited Ethical Clothing Australia brand, whereas the cheaper dress is a cotton/elastane mix and was made in China), no comment was made about the possible implications for labour conditions.
One reason the "Twin Test" article resonated so much with me today is that it was juxtaposed against the horrific news of more than one hundred deaths in a factory fire in Bangladesh. Twelve of those people died after jumping from windows to escape the fire (due to a lack of emergency exits). I'm not trying to suggest that the cheap Target dress in the article above is linked to factory worker deaths, or even that Target uses factories with unsafe labour practices and conditions. Target Australia, like many big brands, has an Ethical Sourcing Code, which is very easy to find and download from their website. This is self-monitored, as per the guidebook to their code:
"Target will monitor compliance with this Code, and we, or our representatives, may visit factories to ensure compliance with this policy. Any violations of our Code will be reported to the vendor for follow up and corrective action. Vendors are required to cooperate with the entire process. Where there are egregious violations and/or the vendor/factory does not demonstrate a willingness to comply, Target reserves the right to discontinue business with the vendor/factory."
This monitoring seems pretty wishy-washy to me. They "may" visit factories to ensure compliance, they "reserve the right to discontinue business" in the case of "egregious violations." I'm not trying to pick on (or target) Target in particular. I only mention them because they are featured in the "Twin Test" article and I thought they would be fairly representative of other big Australian retailers. (Out of interest, I spent a few minutes searching the Myer and David Jones website but was unable to find any ethical sourcing policy, just mentions of their philanthropic works. K Mart has an Ethical Sourcing Code, similarly worded to Target's, which is unsurprising as they are both subsidiaries of the same company. I could not find a similar policy on Big W's website.)
What I am sayingis that our appetite for cheap fashion, and retailers' desire to feed that appetite, means that manufacturers have to produce garments more and more cheaply. This inevitably means that somewhere along the line, corners are cut, and the least empowered workers are the ones who ultimately suffer. Most (nearly all) big labels and chain stores out-source the production of their garments to third parties. This way, when disasters such as today's factory fire occur, the label can protect their brand name and wash their hands by severing their ties with that factory and condemning its unsafe practices.
How do you ensure that the people who made your fashion did so in a safe working environment, under fair conditions? Unfortunately, this sort of information does not appear on a clothing label along with the washing instructions. There is nothing to distinguish whether it was made in a "good" or "bad" factory. When I'm in a store and spot clothing I like, the first thing I look for is the place of manufacture (yes, even before the price). Unless it's made locally or fair trade, I will avoid it. Individual items of clothing may be more expensive but I am buying far fewer clothes than previously. The only way to ensure that workers are treated fairly is for consumers to demand it and to be willing to pay more for fashion that is produced under better conditions.
Even the "Twin Test" article concedes, "...cheap clothing can often cost more in the end because enthusiastic bargain-hunters buy more items than they really need." It's a pity the more important, human, cost is not mentioned.
As usual, this post is longer than I intended, with half the content. Another post on this topic, and a page with reading suggestions, coming soon!
