I have only boys so I can’t speak to girls clothes. But I feel like my sons’ clothes are made better than my clothes! I ordered some short sleeve shirts/t-shirts from Kohl’s and Target for myself and none of them have any natural fibers in them. They’re all some kind of poly-rayon-spandex blend. My kids’ clothes are more than half cotton, apart from athletic clothes which are usually artificial, but that’s the case for kids and adults athletic clothing.

PP here. Examples of "trendy" girl brands would be Splendid Kids and Habitual Kids and Zella Girl, all of which use a lot more polyester, despite being more expensive than Gap and Walmart.

Anonymous wrote:I am by no means picky about my kids' clothes (I buy from places like Target, Old Navy, Children's Place), but even those places have cotton or mostly cotton clothes. My kids received a lot of clothes as gifts, and I don't think they were from cheap places, but most of it is thin polyester. My husband picked up a pair of leggings and was like "these are pajama pants, right? there's no way she can wear these out in public" - they were like the kid equivalent of those see through leggings women wear. What is going on with kids clothes?

I think it happens when people try to buy kids "trendy" or "fun" items (at any price point) like "ooh, let's buy her something cool or fun her parent's wouldn't buy" instead of "what kind of boring workhorse clothing does this kid need for school/daycare?" I notice that lines that are less "hip" and more "boring," regardless of price, tend to actually be 100% cotton.

For example, OldNavy/Gap and Carter's Oshkosh styles aren't going to be seen as "trendy" or "fun" by an adult but they tend to offer classic play clothing in 100% cotton. The same is true of Walmart's Garanimals line for babies and toddlers--there's nothing edgy or hip about it (mostly solid tees and pants), and it's a low price point, but it's actually mostly 100 percent cotton items that hold up okay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the goal there is to make the clothes disposable, to boost sales. At least from my daughter's closet, few of these items last as long as we need them, and we won't pass it on to other children. In turn, we buy more new. Multiply that effect by billions of items from many millions of children/families and these things keep the consumer economy moving... but at what cost?

And on a similar note: Why does EVERYTHING have to be gendered, including safety gear? I went to Target today and they didn't have one gender-neutral helmet. Wanted a plain one so son and daughter would use the same one, but the stock was either frozen, unicorns, dinosaurs, hot pink, etc.

None of those things are gendered. None of them are plain (well, hot pink, if there was no design), but none of them are gendered.

Not many boys are going to pick Frozen, unicorn, or hot pink. And boys tend to pick dinosaurs more than girls. So obviously any kid can wear any of those helmets if you look at sales figures it does break down by gender.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't Nordstrom's the worst? Like a polyester parade when it comes to boys clothes. The racks are full of Under Armour and Nike polyester crap.
Same goes for Ross, Marshalls and TJ Maxx: can't find socks that are not mostly polyester.

If you are talking about some of the higher priced items from Nike and UA, that is a little different. Those items tend to be "technical fabrics" designed for athletic activity, particularly in very hot or very cold weather, or for specific sports.

Anonymous wrote:I think the goal there is to make the clothes disposable, to boost sales. At least from my daughter's closet, few of these items last as long as we need them, and we won't pass it on to other children. In turn, we buy more new. Multiply that effect by billions of items from many millions of children/families and these things keep the consumer economy moving... but at what cost?

And on a similar note: Why does EVERYTHING have to be gendered, including safety gear? I went to Target today and they didn't have one gender-neutral helmet. Wanted a plain one so son and daughter would use the same one, but the stock was either frozen, unicorns, dinosaurs, hot pink, etc.

None of those things are gendered. None of them are plain (well, hot pink, if there was no design), but none of them are gendered.

Anonymous wrote:
And on a similar note: Why does EVERYTHING have to be gendered, including safety gear? I went to Target today and they didn't have one gender-neutral helmet. Wanted a plain one so son and daughter would use the same one, but the stock was either frozen, unicorns, dinosaurs, hot pink, etc.

People are richer and have fewer children.

Anonymous wrote:I think the goal there is to make the clothes disposable, to boost sales. At least from my daughter's closet, few of these items last as long as we need them, and we won't pass it on to other children. In turn, we buy more new. Multiply that effect by billions of items from many millions of children/families and these things keep the consumer economy moving... but at what cost?

[]

Synthetic polyester is made using a chemical reaction involving coal, petroleum, air and water. This material is made up of purified terephthalic acid (PTS) or its dimethyl ester dimethyl terephthalate (DMT) and monotheluene glycol (MEG).

So I'd say the cost is pretty high.

Anonymous wrote:I think the goal there is to make the clothes disposable, to boost sales. At least from my daughter's closet, few of these items last as long as we need them, and we won't pass it on to other children. In turn, we buy more new. Multiply that effect by billions of items from many millions of children/families and these things keep the consumer economy moving... but at what cost?

And on a similar note: Why does EVERYTHING have to be gendered, including safety gear? I went to Target today and they didn't have one gender-neutral helmet. Wanted a plain one so son and daughter would use the same one, but the stock was either frozen, unicorns, dinosaurs, hot pink, etc.

Go to a bike shop and get a helmet. They will fit the kids and the quality is likely to be a lot better. And there are a good number of choices that are neutral.

I think the goal there is to make the clothes disposable, to boost sales. At least from my daughter's closet, few of these items last as long as we need them, and we won't pass it on to other children. In turn, we buy more new. Multiply that effect by billions of items from many millions of children/families and these things keep the consumer economy moving... but at what cost?

And on a similar note: Why does EVERYTHING have to be gendered, including safety gear? I went to Target today and they didn't have one gender-neutral helmet. Wanted a plain one so son and daughter would use the same one, but the stock was either frozen, unicorns, dinosaurs, hot pink, etc.

Isn't Nordstrom's the worst? Like a polyester parade when it comes to boys clothes. The racks are full of Under Armour and Nike polyester crap.
Same goes for Ross, Marshalls and TJ Maxx: can't find socks that are not mostly polyester.

They are just not the same quality like they used to be 10+ years ago. Actually, they are quite horrible these days.

No clue. Relatives are told 75%+ cotton, nobody else buys clothes. I buy 100% cotton.

I am by no means picky about my kids' clothes (I buy from places like Target, Old Navy, Children's Place), but even those places have cotton or mostly cotton clothes. My kids received a lot of clothes as gifts, and I don't think they were from cheap places, but most of it is thin polyester. My husband picked up a pair of leggings and was like "these are pajama pants, right? there's no way she can wear these out in public" - they were like the kid equivalent of those see through leggings women wear. What is going on with kids clothes?