For as long as there have been government-sponsored recycling programs, there has been wish-cycling—if not the word itself, then the logistical nightmare it represents. Within the context of, say, throwing a potato chip bag into the recycling and trusting it will be properly processed (it won’t be), the term, coined in 2015 by recycling executive Bill Keegan, speaks to ignorance on the part of the consumer and exasperation on the part of the industry over poor sorting habits, contamination and inadequate infrastructures.

Wish-cycling (also known as aspirational recycling) is increasingly evoked in conversations about the plight of thrift shops, which regularly find themselves inundated with poor-quality items that cannot be sold on. Much like the potato chip bag in the recycling container, these garments must be diverted and disposed of on the charity’s dime.¹

But where a hapless recycler can blame their behavior on ignorance or inattention, the closet-clearing shopper has more to answer for. In a 2009 study published in Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, researchers at the University of Missouri and the University of North Carolina found that, for the majority of participants, clothing donation “provided a means to avoid the threat of feeling guilty about their consumption behavior.”

If the recycling bin represents finality and accountability, the thrift shop represents possibility and redemption. To donate a garment you’ve tired of is to hope that where you see flaws, another may find value—a team hoodie with a flaking logo could be embraced for its authentic signs of wear; an impulse buy could find its way to someone more open to last summer’s trends. Throwing the same garment directly into the garbage is to admit that something in which you’ve invested money or emotion is ultimately, indisputably, trash.

That so many people find themselves in this quandary is unsurprising; modern consumers buy clothes than any previous generation and ditch them much more quickly. Mitigating the pressures of wish-cycling, then, would require us to think more critically about the life span of our clothes at the time of purchase, rather than at the moment of disposal. It may mean more clothing left on the rack, but certainly fewer headaches for the thrift shop volunteer sifting through a mountain of irredeemable cast-offs in search of a few saleable items.