This week in class we did some interesting meditations that I would have never even considered. The first mediation was with a piece of nature, the goal of this mediation was to really focus on the piece and see things that you normally would not have at first glance. At first I enjoyed this mediation, but it was definitely not one that I could pay attention for very long time. I feel when doing these types of mediations, it was and would be hard for me to pull myself back into the moment. The second mediation done was walking outside, I use to do this all the time back home, but never considered it to be a type of mediation. The difference is that I like to walk without a pattern, so I did not enjoy walking in a figure eight, because I was more concentrated on the pattern and not running into a tree. I enjoy going for walks, because for me it is a way to destress and really gather my thoughts, so I will definitely keep doing this type of mediation in the future.
Secondly, this week we talked about how the fashion industry relates to sustainability. I found this article to be interesting, due to the sole fact that I normally do not put fashion and sustainability together. In this article fashion was descried as an every changing thing, which I believe to be true. I know for myself this is to be true, because my personal style is constantly changing, not necessarily to confine to the trends, but because I enjoy trying new things out. I feel that one problem that could arise would be the fact the people enjoy shopping and having the ability to change with fashion, so I do not know if changing fashion to something that has longevity will be the best idea. Not only for the consumers, but also for the workers. If fashion were to change to sticky making products with longevity, I believe there would be a large amount of people unemployed, which could lead them into poverty. Just as the article stated about needing a change in the industry, but also finding a balance. What that balance is, I am not sure. I believe one company who is trying to find the balance in what they do is Patagonia, they are taking something reactive and turning it into something proactive. Patagonia takes plastic bottle waste and turns it into clothing, which I think is absolutely incredible.
Lastly, this week we talked about poverty and heard about two different ends of the spectrum. For the past couple of weeks, I have been on the yes side of the argument and this week the article discussed the relationships between environmental quality and poverty within environmental-development. Poverty is more than people living under the normal living standards, it can be caused be economic, ecological, cultural, and social systems. In this article the author describes poverty as vulnerability and deprivation, and I believe this is described very well, because some people are at the lowest they have ever been, while others do not know anything different. Earlier I mentioned how longevity in fashion could in turn cause people to become unemployed, these people who are pushed out of their jobs may have already been living on the poverty line, which means they would most likely become poverty stricken. Another point brought up in discussion was whether or not people in poverty add on to environmental degradation. People who live in poverty and live in rural areas typically relay on agriculture to survive. The article states how poverty stricken people use natural resources in an unsustainable way, because it is their only source of income. I believe that people living in poverty who use natural resource have no other choice, even if they are adding on to the problem or not, it is their only means to survive. Just like many other wicked problems there is no direct solution to this problem at the time being. However, steps will have to be eventually taken to try and stop the continuing number of people in poverty and the outcomes that are occurring due to this problem.