Most people like to stay in their comfort zone, which makes sense. It’s why it’s called a comfort zone.

Sartorially speaking, it’s valuable to take risks once in a while and wear something attention-grabbing if you tend to be gun-shy, or to try something sleek and muted if your style tends to run more Betsey Johnson than Donna Karan. Having a personal style is important but fashion is fun — why not play with it?

(Reimar Gaertner)

However, when it comes to educating yourself about fashion issues, risk-taking is an absolute must. If you read only what you agree with, you may never actually learn anything to challenge your beliefs.

At first, it may feel uncomfortable — like a dyed-in-the-wool liberal getting her news from the Drudge Report, or a diehard conservative catching up on celebrity gossip from Ecorazzi. But truthfully, by understanding the other side, consumers develop a more comprehensive and fair understand of all sides of an issue.

It’s never black and white. Take organic cotton as an example. The Pesticide Action Network North America explains why pesticides are overused in the production of cotton and what the effects are on the environment. It’s a compelling argument. So why is there even an opposition?

Because, writes a blogger for Ecollo, “The production of gentically modified cotton in Australia resulted in no measurable negative environmental impact plus it allowed farmers to use 56% less herbicide and 75% less insecticide on their crops.”

In other words, the question of land use is a serious one. Growing organic cotton requires larger fields to obtain the same yield as conventional cotton, due to the possibility of infestation or slow growth without the use of chemical pesticides or fertilizers. Larger fields mean smaller forests. Genetically modified seeds are in development that would enable farmers to use fewer chemicals to nurture their crops, but that has met with opposition from organizations that fervently believe you shouldn’t mess with nature.

It’s important to recognize that neither side is wrong. They just represent two perspectives that happen to contradict each other, but they both come from positions of wanting to do the right thing. That’s a facet that’s often forgotten in the debate of ethics or morals or politics.

It doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t take a side; knowing what you value is a positive trait, and it’s worth figuring it out. Ultimately it’s up to ethical consumers to support the side of an issue they feel is the most virtuous and sustainable in the long run. But without reading articles that espouse the contrarian view, how are consumers supposed to know what they really believe?

Fashion ethics are complicated. Naturally, it’s not just organic cotton — there are major, ongoing debates about bamboo textiles, sweatshop labor, and of course the fur industry. (For more, check out this article for a sampling of user  comments left on recent news stories about fur.)

But the more that consumers are interested in all the facts behind the issues — not just the most palatable ones — the more educated and better off we all will be.