Somehow, buying second-hand has become controversial. Thrifting is now being framed as overconsumption. That buying second-hand is just as bad as buying fast fashion.
It sounds absurd—because it is.
But this opinion keeps popping up in low-buy circles and no-spend challenges, gaining traction like it’s some great ethical insight.
As someone who’s been writing about sustainable fashion for over a decade, I’m not just irritated, I’m concerned. Because this argument isn’t just wrong; it’s rooted in misinformation. And like most bad takes online, it’s being repeated without anyone stopping to check the facts.
The Definition of Overconsumption
The term 'overconsumption' is often misused, especially in conversations about thrifting and low-buy challenges. While language evolves, in sustainability terms, it doesn’t mean ‘buying more than three shirts from a charity shop.’
Here’s what we need to get straight:
The general definition of overconsumption:
The action or fact of consuming something to excess.
In sustainability terms, it means:
Excessive consumption or use of goods and services (like energy, land, water, or materials) that causes harm to people or the environment—usually by exceeding the planet’s capacity to support it.
That’s why applying this term to thrifting is so misleading. Buying pre-owned clothes doesn’t use up new resources. It doesn’t damage ecosystems. It doesn’t deplete the planet. It’s not the kind of consumption sustainability experts are warning us about.
And while thrifting too much might impact your budget, clutter up your wardrobe, or confuse your sense of personal style—that’s a you problem, not an environmental one.
The “Overconsumption” Myth
The idea that buying pre-owned clothes is “just as bad” as buying fast fashion is wildly off the mark. The environmental impact of clothing happens during production. The clothes you find in thrift shops have already been made, discarded, and, if they're not bought, will likely end up in landfill.
So what, exactly, is being overconsumed here?
The emissions have already been emitted. The resources have already been used. You buying second-hand clothes—even in abundance—isn’t contributing to any more waste, it’s preventing it. And there’s no shortage of pre-owned clothes in the world. None.
What About Thrifted Clothes You Don’t Wear?
Even if you buy a second-hand coat and never wear it, it’s still better than it being incinerated or dumped. That coat already exists. The damage (in terms of emissions, pollution, and energy) has already been done.
100 billion garments are made every year, many of which never even make it to the shop floor. Some are destroyed before they’re ever sold—burned, shredded, or sent straight to landfill. That’s a grotesque level of overproduction!
So if you're hoarding a few too many thrifted jumpers, you're not the one wrecking the planet.
The Challenge of Buying Less
Back in 2019, I set myself a challenge: buy everything second-hand. Clothes, homewares, electronics… If I needed it, I had to thrift it. I called it my year of second-hand, and it completely changed …
But Isn’t Thrifting Still Overconsumption?
There are a few common arguments that try to frame thrifting as overconsumption, and none of them hold up. Here’s why these ideas just don’t make sense:
1. “It’s the same behaviour as fast fashion.”
Thrift hauls on TikTok are starting to look like fast fashion hauls. But the impact is completely different. Buying a mountain of brand-new polyester is not the same thing as buying a mountain second-hand clothes already destined for landfill. Again, the only thing is might affect is your bank balance and storage space.
2. “It creates waste if people re-donate or throw things away.”
That waste already exists. The environmental damage happens during production, not resale. Buying something second-hand, even if you later re-donate or declutter it, doesn’t generate more waste. It actually gives that item another chance to be worn and used, which is literally the whole point.
3. “It fuels a cycle of endless consumption.”
Thrifting doesn’t increase the demand for new items. And for many people, it slows down their shopping habits. Recent research supports this. Thrifting actually displaces new purchases, reducing demand for new clothes. It doesn’t encourage overconsumption, it’s a way to resist it.
On “Limiting Thrifting During a Low Buy”
There’s a growing opinion in low-buy circles that thrifting “encourages the shopping habit” and should be avoided. Honestly, this annoys me much more than it probably should.
The problem isn’t thrifting, it’s buying without intention.
Low-buy goals are usually about spending less, avoiding clutter, and changing bad habits. Thrifting can support all of that. It’s not inherently harmful. It doesn’t fuel fast fashion. It’s a way to shop sustainably without supporting overproduction.
Unless you're dealing with compulsive shopping or serious budgeting issues, thrifting isn’t a threat to your low-buy goals. It's a practical alternative that keeps clothes in circulation and out of landfill.
I’ve seen people claim that thrifting leads to more buying. In my experience, it does the opposite. Once you realise you can find better-quality clothes, with more personality and for a fraction of the price, it makes buying new feel pointless.
Thrifting helps break the fast fashion cycle and makes it easier to stop supporting the system that fuels overproduction in the first place.
And it’s not just anecdotal. Research shows second-hand shopping helps change shopping habits. It doesn’t drive overconsumption, it helps stop it.
Forget the Spending Ban—Here’s What Really Works
Spending bans sound great in theory: stop buying things, save money, and hopefully put an end bad shopping habits. Except that in practice, that doesn't happen. Sure, you'll save money and there won’…
The Real Issue
If we’re going to talk about overconsumption, we need to talk about the real problem: overproduction.
Let’s talk about the 100 billion garments produced every year. Let’s talk about the brands making clothes that fall apart after one wear. Let’s talk about why we keep dumping tonnes of textiles on countries that didn’t ask for them.
So no, buying a few too many vintage jumpers isn’t overconsumption.
The clothes already exist. The damage is already done. Buying them second-hand doesn’t create demand, it prevents waste. It doesn’t support overproduction, it disrupts it.
Buy what you need. Wear what you love. Pass things on.
And if that means buying ten second-hand shirts because you love them all? Go for it. If it means buying a vintage coat even though you already have one? That’s fine too.
Because thrifting isn’t the problem.
It’s part of the solution.
Yes, yes, yes. The people saying that thrifting contributes to overconsumption...what do they suggest we do with the clothing that is already out there? We currently have enough clothes on the planet to clothe the next six generations. Do we just let all of that go to waste? That would be insane. And yes, I buy fast-fashion garments from secondhand sources. Because what else do we do with these garments?
Thank you for this Sophie! I've seen a spate of articles that equate buying secondhand with overconsumption, but agree it's not the same between the displacement rate, the fact that the item's already been produced, and that it's keeping textiles in circulation. I understand the argument that if you're getting something shipped it contributes to carbon emissions, but it seems like this is still a lower footprint than clogging a landfill or waterway.