Embedded Files
In this section, Willow Ransom will discuss the environmental impacts of overconsumption that affects personal morals.
The Objectified Personality: Overconsumption
The Objectified Personality: Overconsumption
By Willow Ransom
By Willow Ransom
Starting from the day we are born, it is normalized to be showered in gifts. Gifts that are fundamental to our growth due to their comfort, yet gifts that, within a little time, we outgrow. This habit stays the same as we grow older. However, whether it is for our own personal pleasure, a gift for our birthday, or any other holiday we celebrate, most of the time, while it just sits, the collection is bound to increase. As a temporary pleasure for something that is so interchangeable in worth, it becomes meaningless.
“A house is just a place to keep your stuff while you go out and get more stuff.”
“A house is just a place to keep your stuff while you go out and get more stuff.”
From the beginning of our primate life, humans have learned to compete for survival. Such a competitive trait has become a beneficial adaptation that most humans use to feel proud, satisfactory, and joyful. However, when comparing our lives to the thousands (out of billions) who own or support one thing while placing it in a positive, superior light, it is a bound instinct to not want to miss out. This trendy bandwagon, however, is detrimental to humanity’s health, due to the result that it supports.
Photo Credit: Celi Sally
Popular yet unethical product sources such as Shein, Temu, and AliExpress can at first seem valid: clothes are needed to stay warm, and other materials are seen as a sort of necessity to make living easier. Nonetheless, large hauls are spread all over the internet, showcasing cheap polyester (a synthetic fabric made of plastic) clothing which, within a couple of months, heads to the trash can. Unfortunately, if the clothing does not lead automatically to dump sites, there is a 70-80% chance that it will end up in the landfill, with most of the clothes not even being worn above 15 times. Furthermore, instead of contributing to such a system that profits off of producing and destroying, it can also be seen that the more expensive something is, the higher quality it is, and the longer it will last. Instead of purchasing something thin, cheap, and easily breakable, the consumer can just as easily purchase quality products by saving up a few dollars. The contrast to higher quality clothing would be the infamous polyester, which causes the skin (the body’s largest organ) to soak up multiple chemicals and microplastics from the material, similar to a sponge. In addition, according to White Lodge Fabric, polyester also retains body odor, making the wearer more susceptible to long-lasting BO, and making the garment smell "putrid" even after multiple washes. This can be easily avoided, however, when thoughts trail to places such as thrift stores, clothing swaps, garage sales, or upcycling that carry cheaper items that don’t include the materials of said plastic and chemicals.
Photo Credit: Elaina Simonsen
It should indeed be clearly stated, however, that the concern does not lie in the lower class population who are buying what they view as cheaper, or in children, who have very little money to express themselves. These populations make up a tiny minority of the results. The problem lies in financially stable 26 to 44-year-olds who overbuy as a hobby and influence younger generations to do the same. This population is most likely to value the purchase of clothes that not only harm themselves but the rest of mankind, as well.
Over the years, overconsumption and prioritizing want over need have led to 152 million child laborers (from 5 to 17 years old) slaving away under harmful conditions globally in developing countries. With fast fashion trends constantly following the sweatshop workers, a childhood is stolen and gives the underpaid worker no future. It is always best, for the sake of human rights, for consumers to consider which brands contribute to the large amount of waste made unethically. Martina Igini, a journalist for earth.org, states that “Of the 100 billion garments produced each year, 92 million tonnes end up in landfills. To put things in perspective, this means that the equivalent of a rubbish truck full of clothes ends up on landfill sites every second. If the trend continues, the number of fast fashion waste is expected to soar up to 134 million tonnes a year by the end of the decade.”
Photo Credit: Shreshtha Mittal
It may be asked at some point of ignorance how a garbage truck full of clothes per second negatively impacts the lives of ordinary citizens who are contributing to such a matter. Ordinary citizens are overconsumption victims of Capitalism, a system that was born to live based on profit, consumption, destruction, and never-ending creation. In fact, within the past decade, there has been a 35% increase in textile waste, which is only bound to increase as time goes on-- as environments slowly become eradicated, including the one we live in now.
However, despite most people realizing the impact of their own actions, and how they support unethical processes, purchases are still made out of convenience-- even when it clashes with morals. So why is it that people continue to purchase said items even when it is against their own beliefs and ethics? Even when there is a 50% chance of the item being thrown away after a year and only a 1% chance of it being recycled? Even when the planet already has enough clothes to cover the next six generations? Simply because of an idea of convenience and lack of self-control, mixed with the marketing strategy that companies spend millions on. Not to mention, wearing a certain style the consumer is interested in increases confidence, making the consumer all the more likely to ignore any other unethical programs and ideas as a form of self-interest. After all, negligence and ignorance cover up empathy like a hole in the wall.
According to the first and foremost law of science, it is been stated and confirmed that “nothing can be created nor destroyed.” Atoms and particles can only transform through a physical or chemical reaction. This applies to the amount of waste that is poisoning the environment, and how raw materials are being transformed into synthetic ingredients, which includes a cheaper price tag that feeds consumer addiction, like any narcotic. It should not be the planet that humanity is worried about, as Earth has survived many catastrophic experiences, according to scientific research, and held many different species and creatures, according to its habitat. What is concerning is our current place on the planet that is asked to preserve our being and the lives of other species who live among us. Simple weaknesses should not manipulate humans into desiring something that ruins mankind. It is for this reason, with compassion or not, that the consumer should deny the idea of being taken advantage of by a synthetic point of weakness that brings uncontrollable hypocrisy and apathy towards something as important, yet meaningless as clothes.
Page updated
Report abuse