3 ms·

> would own a relatively small quantity of clothes (compared to today), which they'd wear for a long time. That just wouldn't be a tenable strategy given modern

> would own a relatively small quantity of clothes (compared to today), which they'd wear for a long time. That just wouldn't be a tenable strategy given modern quality. one problem though. My clothing would also last noticeably longer if I was hand-washing it. How much longer I don't actually know, but some of the dresses that was passed to me from older generations have never seen the inside of a washing machine. I also can find similar fabric in some stores, so, theoretically, some clothes today would also live for decades. We have to adjust to washing machines and our washing habits. Some people I know wash their jeans every week. Every. Week. On a high speed. Yeah no shit they would fall apart in a year, that's like 20-30 washings in a year if they had 2 pairs.

palmotea 2y ago
>> would own a relatively small quantity of clothes (compared to today), which they'd wear for a long time. That just wouldn't be a tenable strategy given modern quality. > one problem though. My clothing would also last noticeably longer if I was hand-washing it. While modern clothing might last longer if hand washed, the question is how long. Up-thread it was noted an old $18 (adjusted for inflation) work shirt has the quality features of a $200+ shirt today. I'm under the impression that no amount of babying would allow many modern clothing items to last a long as people used to wear their clothes.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
TeMPOraL 2y ago
> We have to adjust to washing machines and our washing habits. And then we have to adjust washing habits to ongoing loss of quality^W^W^W progress of clothes. This hit me once I started to see ads for laundry detergents supposedly able to clean clothes in cold water, like 20℃ or less - what's happening is, the fabrics and colors got so bad they start to degrade quickly even in 30℃ or 45℃ programs. The market, instead of giving us more durable clothes, decided to give us more high-tech detergent. Oh, and this is sold under the guise of being eco-friendly - cold water = less energy. Even if that's a valid gain, I think it's not what's driving the existence of those detergents. Rather, they're the "fix" to the problem of low-quality clothes, and its existence only lets the quality get even worse (and further enabling the "fast fashion" phenomenon).

palmotea 2y ago

>> would own a relatively small quantity of clothes (compared to today), which they'd wear for a long time. That just wouldn't be a tenable strategy given modern quality. > one problem though. My clothing would also last noticeably longer if I was hand-washing it. While modern clothing might last longer if hand washed, the question is how long. Up-thread it was noted an old $18 (adjusted for inflation) work shirt has the quality features of a $200+ shirt today. I'm under the impression that no amount of babying would allow many modern clothing items to last a long as people used to wear their clothes.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

TeMPOraL 2y ago

> We have to adjust to washing machines and our washing habits. And then we have to adjust washing habits to ongoing loss of quality^W^W^W progress of clothes. This hit me once I started to see ads for laundry detergents supposedly able to clean clothes in cold water, like 20℃ or less - what's happening is, the fabrics and colors got so bad they start to degrade quickly even in 30℃ or 45℃ programs. The market, instead of giving us more durable clothes, decided to give us more high-tech detergent. Oh, and this is sold under the guise of being eco-friendly - cold water = less energy. Even if that's a valid gain, I think it's not what's driving the existence of those detergents. Rather, they're the "fix" to the problem of low-quality clothes, and its existence only lets the quality get even worse (and further enabling the "fast fashion" phenomenon).