The “clean girl aesthetic” — gold hoops, Skims T-shirts, North Face puffers, Lululemon flare leggings and Airpod Maxes — may as well be deemed the “rich girl aesthetic,” as none of these items can be replicated without a heavy hand of cash.
The existence of clothing trends has always been painful for the bank accounts of those who buy into them. It’s always out with the old and in with the new. Each season, social media cultivates a whole new look for consumers to indulge in. Just as soon as wallets have been emptied, bags for Goodwill donations are piling up in closets.
“Sometimes when I see something I like, I have to question, ‘Do I actually like this article of clothing? Or do I just like the social connotations that it carries?’” Rosa Schaffner, a junior at UO, said. “If it wasn’t trendy, would I see it in public and think it’s cool? Or would I not even give it a second glance?”
The habit of trend following is generally wasteful for both monetary and environmental purposes, but the cost is becoming steeper. In the past, fashion trends have demanded far fewer savings. Many complained about Urban Outfitters’ $80 jeans and Brandy Melville’s $20 T-shirts of the late 2010s, but now a $320 North Face jacket is the price to pay for trendiness.
“Most of the time you are just paying for a logo,” Maeve Huntington, a junior at UO, said. “People will often comment on what you’re wearing and be like, ‘Oh you’re super cool because you can afford these things.’”
The popularity spike in more expensive fashion items can create a noticeable wealth gap within the UO community, where certain brands become a sort of social currency for status. The existence of trends expresses the human desire to fit in. And when assimilation is only possible by employing wealth, a linear relationship between social and economic status is created.
“As much as I wish there wasn’t, there’s a lot of social praise and validation that comes with following things that are trendy,” Schaffner said.
More often than not, trends are started by influencers and celebrities. Certainly, the Hailey Biebers and Kendall Jenners of the world have more generous savings to spend on clothing than an average college student. On minimum wage incomes at part-time jobs, most college students can hardly muster the funds to DoorDash Taco Bell after a night out, much less buy a $550 pair of Apple headphones.
“There’s some weeks where I’m like, ‘Do I get groceries? Or do I get these really cool shoes?’” Huntington said.
While there are less expensive replicas for most pricey trends, the dupes are often produced by fast fashion brands like Shein or Amazon products. In an article for Forbes Magazine, reporter Hadari Oshri summarizes the fast fashion industry as being unethical in the wages it pays workers, as well as the conditions they work under and the environmental waste and pollution it causes. Products of fast fashion are also often low quality, dictating a higher rate of waste during closet cleanouts.
“Overconsumption as a whole is a big issue, but the whole dupe thing is a little bit more of an issue because it makes it easier to consume so much more,” Schaffner said. “You don’t have to think as much before you buy something.”
There is no ultimate solution to overconsumption and overspending in accordance with fashion trends. But it can be somewhat supplemented by identifying personal style and resisting the urge to consume something based on its current social relevance.
“I’m aware that I’m buying into a trend that’s going to be done in a couple of months, so it’s important for me to buy the things that make me feel good or make me happy,” Huntington said.
