WHY DO WE HAVE SO MANY CLOTHES? The Ugly Naked Truth

This is an important question, and one that explains the nature of why we shop the way we do. In the 80s and 90s, there was two ‘classes’ if you will, of clothing stores. There was expensive, and there was mid range. You didn’t have the amount of cheap clothing stores that exist today. In most of these stores, clothing was released on a seasonal basis – usually about 4-6 releases a year. So there wasn’t the enormous selection of clothes to buy, it was one release for summer, winter etc. This meant there wasn’t the drive that exists today to buy things. And that is important in two ways.

Ugly Naked Truth 1 – You’re being manipulated.

Today’s clothing retailers have constant stock rotation. Most stores you ask will tell you they get new arrivals between once, to several times a week, depending on the store. This is great for the consumer, because it means if something isn’t stocked in your size, chances are you can visit the store the following day, or even a few days later and it will be. The flip side of this is that stores aren’t making huge numbers of stock anymore. Once upon a time, you could pick something up, try it on, and leave the store thinking about whether you want to buy it or not, or needing to save up to buy it. These days, if you don’t buy it at the time, chances are by the time you get back to the store, the item is finished and no longer available. This drives us to buy at the time so we don’t miss out, and has created a whole new “impulse buying” culture. Zara is one such store, who have clothing delivered twice a week to their stores. In my experience, some Australian stores have several deliveries, such as Witchery, Cotton On and some stores in the Just Group.

For those that are interested, this began with the American superstore, JC Penney, whose founder once famously stated “If you only deliver four times a year, customers only need to visit the store four times a year”. It makes logical sense then, that stores would release clothing lines gradually over the course of the season, rather than in one big hit, as it keeps consumers visiting the store.

As much as I can understand this being a successful business model, I also see it as consumer manipulation. We don’t have the luxury anymore of thinking about a purchase, we need to buy it now or risk missing out. This is one reason we end up with so much clothing in our wardrobes, some of which we don’t end up wearing. Yes, it’s fair to note most stores have excellent return policies. This is where individual psychology comes in, and the things that make us hold onto things, rather than return them and let them go (or better yet, not buy them in the first place). Thoughts such as “It’s only a little bit tight, it will stretch out and fit me properly” or “It will fit when I lose a few kilos” keep us holding onto things in the (usually) vain hope that it will fit one day. Or taking it one step further, that it will motivate us to lose weight. As if that pair of jeans is going to miraculously grow legs, walk behind us and secretly whisper in our ear not to eat that cupcake because we already can’t fit our ass into them, and what chance will we have if we keep eating cupcakes? Don’t feel bad, I’ve made this mistake too. I think most women have. You see something in a store, you love it, you have to have it, but it’s a tiny bit tight. ‘It’s okay,’ you tell yourself. ‘I’ll just lose 2 or 4 kilos and it will fit perfectly’. But the problem is, you don’t lose the weight, and it sits in your cupboard lonely and unworn (okay, I know clothes don’t have feelings, but you get my point) and you just can’t bear to get rid of it because you love it so much.

The second reason we accumulate so many clothes is that price has gone down. Clothing companies are increasingly outsourcing to countries such as Bangladesh that have extremely low production costs. The ethics of this is a whole separate issue (and one I’m quite passionate about) and I’ll address that later in the blog for those who are interested. For now, I don’t want to appear condescending, so I’ll just reference the fact that clothing is costing less and less to produce. Therefore, companies can afford to sell them cheaper and still make good profit margins. In Australia, these stores are such brands as TEMT, Valleygirl, Chica Booti and so on. There are also bigger American stores hitting our shores like GAP and H&M that do the same thing. Forever New is also a big retail store in Australia that outsources production to countries such as Bangladesh. To be fair, many stores in Australia do this, so I don’t intend to single stores out for any other reason than to make my point in a recognisable way.

In the UK, stores such as Primark are notorious for selling clothing for a just few pounds. In a documentary I watched (which I will locate and attach the link to in the resources section of this blog), the presenter spoke of seeing a girl walk down the street in London with her arms full of the signature brown paper Primark bags. It was raining heavily, and one of the bags split, sending clothes all over the footpath. The girl carrying it didn’t even bother to stop, and instead kept on running to get out of the rain. I remember my thoughts echoing the presenter when she asked the question ‘have clothes become so expendable we don’t even care anymore?’. It’s a fair question. Ten years ago, nobody had ever heard the term ‘disposable clothing’. These days, we look at cheap clothing stores as being useful to buy clothes to wear for a single season, and then throw out. I don’t want to judge anyone here, and I am certainly guilty of it too, so please don’t feel offended if this is you – but what an incredible waste!!

One of the consequences of this is that we never quite build up a wardrobe. There is a constant cycle of buying and disposing. Or if you’re anything like several of my friends, it’s a cycle of buying, and stashing in a drawer somewhere because it has faded, ripped, stretched or gone out of style.

These stores are known as ‘fast fashion’ because of their ability to source, produce and deliver to the store in amazingly fast timeframes. Stock numbers are kept limited for the most part unless they are selling particularly well, and then orders are replenished. Some stores are able to fast track the whole process in 6 or 7 weeks, from design to delivery, which is pretty mind-blowing if you think about it. One of the main reasons fast fashion stores succeed is because their stock is both on high rotation and we can afford to buy more.

Ugly Naked Truth 2: You’re being treated like a fool

Fast fashion stores take advantage of our perspective that we can buy more for our money there. They bank on the principle that we are going to leave the store feeling like we’ve got an incredible bargain. I’m guilty of it. Why go to Myer and spend $130 on a coat, when I could go to Valleygirl and spend the same amount, and leave with three dresses, two tops, a coat and a scarf?

I wanted to call this Ugly Naked Truth – You’re being lied to, but that’s not entirely accurate. You’re not being lied to; you’re just being taken advantage of. Fast fashion stores don’t tell you their clothes are going to last more than one season (which they rarely do) or that they are good quality (they’re not). And yes, they fill a niche in the market for those who want to keep up with trends and can’t afford to spend huge amounts of cash doing so. But for most of us, it’s just an absolute waste of money. It simply doesn’t make any sense to buy clothing simply to throw it out three months later (an average season). But we do it anyway. Why?

There is a feeling of excitement that occurs when we find a bargain. When we get a good deal. The whole culture of buying things has changed underneath us in the past 10-15 years. When I was younger, it was embarrassing and not the done thing to admit you had bought cheap clothes. Further, there wasn’t really the big deal about clothes that there is now, because everyone shopped at the same chain stores. Nowadays, the internet has brought with it easy access for consumers to shop internationally. The choices we have at our disposal are enormous. And with it, this has brought competition. Stores have to fight for our patronage, which drives prices down. As a consumer, this is great as it means we get access to global brands at good prices. On an ethical level (which I’ll address later) this has serious implications for third world countries doing the production. The result is that it is now a cool thing to brag about where you got something, or how little it cost you. I’m guilty as sin, and so are many others I know, of exclaiming “Five bucks!” when someone tells me they love my top. Getting a steal of a bargain is something to be proud about these days. But how much of a bargain is it really? This brings me to my next point.

Ugly Naked Truth 3: The Cost per Wear Principle.

This principle will help guide you into making responsible fashion choices for your wallet. The idea is to divide the cost of an item into the amount of times you wear it. Let me demonstrate.

You want to buy a white collared shirt as it’s a bit of a wardrobe staple. You find two that you like. One is from Witchery, and worth $79.95. The other is from Big W and is $19.95. Which is the better buy? Firstly, lets look at quality. Now, not to take away from Big W, as it’s quality really has come a long way, but it still doesn’t compare to a store like Witchery. So chances are, the shirt might last you two seasons, or maybe three if you’re careful about how you wash. At the end of this period, it might have discoloured, stretched, shrunk, pilled, or just be looking ratty. Chances are the Witchery shirt will still be looking almost as good as new, and will last you maybe seven or eight seasons. On the basis of quality, the Witchery shirt is the better investment, as it lasts longer and logically following, you get more wear out of it as it remains looking good.

Following from this, if the shirt remains looking good, and you wear it more often, the shirt becomes better value. If you wear the shirt 20 times per season, and it lasts 2.5 seasons on average, the Big W shirt has cost you about 40 cents per wear. On the other hand, if you wear the shirt 20 times per season, and it lasts eight seasons (4 years, or more likely if you wear it year round, 2 years), the Witchery shirt has cost you about 50 cents per wear. Now, expanding this further, you actually have to replace the Big W shirt as well, which means if you need to buy 2 in the same period, it’s actually costing you 80 cents per wear. Which do you think is the better “bargain”?

Note – this is not a plug for Witchery (nor am I bashing Big W) and I am not sponsored in any way. It is simply intended to be an illustration to make you think about the principle of a ‘bargain’. If you only plan on wearing something a few times, this obviously doesn’t apply. But sometimes it is a better use of your money to invest in something of higher quality that will last longer in your wardrobe and not need replacing quite so quickly. Of course, this relies on your ability to resist the temptation, ignore the clever marketing which makes you think the cheaper shirt is the better bargain, and walk away. Clearly this is an area we all struggle in, myself included.

Upvote if you're interested in hearing more about how we all need to jump the hell off this wagon that is killing our wallets, our self-esteem, and our planet.