Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Put on a Hippy Face

By Holly Beck, WireTap. Posted August 3, 2005.


What's the real story behind a new trend of 'ethnic' bohemian fashion?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Holly Beck

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

If this summer's fashion trends can tell us anything, it's that the world is definitely getting smaller. Standing on Broadway in fashion-crazy lower Manhattan, the scene on the street is more Global Village than Greenwich Village: women running in and out of stores in saris and Native-American-inspired footwear, vendors selling African-style wooden beaded jewelry, and paisley-clad hipsters each trying to look more citizen-of-the-world than the next.

The sights on Broadway in Manhattan are the same as in malls and downtowns across the country. Everywhere, young women are donning batik skirts and beaded slippers as encouraged by the high-fashion architects of this summer's big trend: bohemian chic. Flip through a trendy young women's catalogue, and you'll see gauzy, embroidered, multi-colored garments accompanied by these taglines: "ethnic-inspired" (Delia's), "boho" and "vintage" (Alloy), "eastern paisley" and "seriously loose and super-flowy" (Urban Outfitters).

The only problem is that the ethnic patchwork is contrived. Young women who have never traveled out of their zip code are dressing like they just came back from a whirlwind tour of Nairobi, Prague and the Khyber Pass. While some girls really did get that embroidered blouse in the former Soviet bloc, most of them have patched together their summer wardrobes at the Gap, Urban Outfitters, or United Colors of Benneton. And most of them have done so in blissful -- or willful -- ignorance of where their clothing actually came from.

Most people are at least vaguely aware that much of our clothing is produced in conditions antithetical to the values of "one world" bohemianism. Aside from the "Made In ___" tag that identifies its country of origin, it's impossible to tell just by looking at a piece of clothing whether it was manufactured by sweatshop workers. But odds are that it was.

According to a report [pdf] by Behind the Label, an initiative of the union UNITE HERE, roughly 80 percent of garment workers making clothes for U.S. retailers are working in conditions that violate our own domestic labor laws, as set forth by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). That's over two million people worldwide, disproportionately women and young people under 18.

When people hear the word "sweatshop," they often think of child labor, long hours, and insufficient pay. They may also be aware that sweatshops are often overcrowded, poorly ventilated, and difficult to escape from in the event of a fire. In many sweatshops, managers force female workers to have pregnancy tests and fire employees who try to organize unions. In extreme cases, workers are forced to sign contracts pledging to never marry, have children, ask for a raise, or participate in religious or political activities.

Free-market economists and spokespeople for big business do their best to portray sweatshop workers as grateful for any work at all, and applaud themselves and each other for their humanitarianism. Urban Outfitters founder and President Richard Hayne, who acknowledges that the company and its affiliates -- Anthropologie and Free People -- use non-union overseas sewing shops to make their ueber-trendy clothing lines, has argued that some of the women sewing clothes for him in India had no other potential source of income aside from "selling their bodies." When asked why workers can't be paid more for their labor, the response is always that higher wages would necessarily lead to layoffs and skyrocketing consumer prices.

But the executives overseeing the abuses take home salaries amounting to thousands of times more than the wages paid to the factory workers. Sweatshop Watch reported recently that workers making Levi's jeans in Saipan (a U.S. territory in the Pacific) earned $3.05 per hour, while Levi's CEO Philip Marineau was compensated to the tune of $11,971 per hour -- almost 15 times what he was paid in 2001. Even by simply freezing Marineau's salary at its 2001 levels, Levi's could have given each of the 7,500 workers in Saipan earning minimum wage a 50 per cent raise.

This tremendous imbalance is not uncommon. A BBC special report on Gap found that 12-year-olds making Gap clothes in Cambodia worked seven days a week and earned 12 cents an hour. Meanwhile, Gap CEO Millard Drexler was paid $8 million a year, as well as $12 million in stock options. Abercrombie & Fitch garment workers in Saipan earned $3.05 in 1999, while CEO Michael Jeffries was paid a salary of $4 million. In that same year the company was slapped with a lawsuit alleging responsibility for sweatshop conditions, including locked fire exits, rat-infested barracks, contaminated water, and hundreds of other violations of OSHA's labor regulations. These findings and more are outlined in the Behind the Label report [pdf].


Digg!

Holly Beck, 23, is a freelance writer based in Brooklyn, New York.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Interesting article, but ends in mid-sentence!
Posted by: Geni on Aug 3, 2005 3:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hope we'll get to read the rest of it soon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where is the rest of the story???
Posted by: fedupamerican on Aug 3, 2005 5:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
this page is screwed up ... had to scroll right to get to the comment above.
would like to forward it to all my friends, but get the rest of the story on here PLEASE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where is the rest of the story??? Posted by: Kristina Rizga
Spelling conventions
Posted by: Nheduanna on Aug 3, 2005 5:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I may be an old crank, but the conventional spelling of the word is hippie, not hippy. "Hippy" is what's happen to my butt as I've aged.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Spelling conventions Posted by: DennisDalrymple
Understand
Posted by: jdblue7 on Aug 3, 2005 7:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Understand, that when the US was developing into the industrial powerhouse we used to be, people sufferred under poor conditions and long hours. All before we became the country we are today. Now, since all of our goods are made in these sweat shop conditions in developing nations, we can scrutinize labor laws; all while we still purchase these goods at Wal-Mart and Macy's. At the same time, we want these countries to develop economically and socially. When will we all learn that it doesn't happen at the snap of fingers. Countries must endure there own rigorous efforts while hopefully becoming a stable nation. Quit pointing fingers and live with the fact that everyone must go through some cycle in order to be recognized as a developed country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Understand Posted by: Jamaico
» RE: Understand Posted by: El Guapo Ben
» RE: Understand Posted by: berrygoldwater2004
» RE: Understand Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Understand Posted by: polyquats
A
Posted by: jdblue7 on Aug 3, 2005 7:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that labor laws should be enforced everywhere across this globe. It hurts me to know that people are working in these current conditions. But I live in reality and realize that nothing will come about anytime soon. So I look back into our own history and hope that one day these people will climb out like our ancestors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WWGD
Posted by: nakis on Aug 3, 2005 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Would Ghandi Do?

This is pathetic. Malignant justifications for making lives horrible to support unjust systems.

Makes me want to buy a bail of cotton and a spinning wheel so I can make my own clothes. Being all thumbs I'll just end up wearing the bail but that could start a new fashion trend. The bail look. The GAP could sell it for $50 a pop and cost them a $1.50. Woohoo, capitalism and free trade at its best. Of course the CEO will have to go to an orphanage to kick some kids to meet his child abuse quota but that can be arranged.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WWGD Posted by: kj_jazzgirl13
"It's Better To Look Good, Than To Feel Good"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Aug 3, 2005 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Holly hit on the basic problem: nearly everything we wear is made in a sweatshop somewhere. This is capitalism at its best: only profit counts; humanity doesn't. And of course, as long as we can still buy cheap stuff produced in these sweatshops, we in our materialistic mind-set will feel that our lives are basically OK, and we need not look at how our own government is screwing us.

But unless monkeys in Borneo can be trained to make clothes, labor can only go so low, but salaries in America still have a long way to sink. There may come a time in our free-fall to the bottom when even the cheap stuff will be unaffordable to most Americans. Maybe THEN they'll wake up to how corporations and government have sold them out. But by then, it will probably be too late.

One answer I can think of is to re-develop local economies and industry, and bypass corporations as much as possible, while reducing our materialistic cravings. This is already happening with food production in places like Portland, Oregon (article in the LA Times Sunday Magazine, 7/31/05), thanks to the poor quality of big AgriBusiness products.

And by the way – who gives a crap what Lindsey Lohan, or any of the overpaid, undereducated "stars" today, think about world affairs? You might as well ask a bowl of cornflakes. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clothing has a ridiculous cost!
Posted by: Kat144 on Aug 3, 2005 6:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't imagine how much clothing would go up in price if everything was produced in America under fair labor standards...I'm sure they'll pull out the "but now we can't afford to produce it!!" crap, when in reality if they'd take a big of a profit cut I bet they could afford it just fine.

As it is I shop at Goodwill and the like because clothing prices are ridiculous, even at stores like Meijer's. Something needs to be done about the clothing industries (and most industries, actually).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

as seen from Rajasthan India
Posted by: ilabear on Aug 6, 2005 12:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I'm currently participating in an internship overseas, I'm quite pleased to be buying and wearing such colorful, loose fitting exotic clothing. But even here there is the trouble of paying a fair price into the hands that did the work. It's nice to have the luxury here to pay the extra 100 rupees (amounting to little over US$2) to the grassroots women's economic empowerment NGOs that assure my conscience. I think the take away lesson here is to "think globally, act locally". Perhaps in an age where live strong wrist bands can advertise ones values, fair trade fashion may be able to find a place in the hearts of Americans. But then again, maybe I've forgotten the reality consumerism in the USA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: as seen from Rajasthan India Posted by: berrygoldwater2004
There are alternatives...
Posted by: Sixties Girl on Aug 8, 2005 10:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are alternatives to buying fashion items from sources that don't comply with the panoply of labor laws and ethical considerations mentioned in the article. Bono, for one, has started a clothing company that appears to pass muster on all counts. He inspired me to start a business, Native.chic.com, selling handbags made by South African locals, with profits going to HIV-AIDS awareness, jewelry handmade by local, Native American, and Brazilian artists, and jeans embellished with bohemian flare that I make right here in my apartment. A small, home-grown business. The challenge will come if I ever get big enough to make it a viable business--how to keep price points down without resorting to all the negative circumstances that entails.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you
Posted by: Olympiada on Aug 11, 2005 9:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for this post. I have liked to shop in thrift stores since I was a teen, I have been conscious of this stuff since I was a teen. My dad used to work at Levi Strauss and would discuss this stuff with me. It is a big task to take on changing consumerism like that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]