Cotton can have an image problem - both here at home and across other parts of the world.
In the vast majority of cases, cotton's negative image is accepted to be unwarranted.
But there remain regions of the world where practices to grow, spin and manufacture cotton products are often still questionable by western standards.
Unwitting retail brands - even at the very highest end of retail - have found themselves caught up in controversy surrounding their fibre textile sourcing.
We have been seeing fresh headlines on this topic recently - this time focusing on China's Xinjiang region.
Stories about cotton grown in this region emerged after the USA introduced trade restrictions for a handful of agricultural and manufacturing companies - all based in this north western area around Xinjiang.
Four of these companies are involved in Chinese cotton production and textile manufacture.
The US cited the suspected use of forced labour as the reason for the restrictions, with concerns over Muslim ethnic groups - such as the Uighurs - in particular.
US law, like that in many other parts of the west, prohibits imports of products produced from prison or slave labour.
While dramatic, the US move failed to excite markets, traders or speculators.
The world cotton market simply shrugged-off the headlines - and for good reason.
While China produced 22 per cent of global cotton in 2019-20 - about 23 million bales - and the majority of this came from the Xinjiang region, the nation uses this home-grown cotton almost entirely for domestic spinning and manufacturing. It also imports eight to nine million bales.
As a result, the direct, short-term market impact is limited.
But when this cotton is processed - and perhaps blended - and manufactured into clothing, it is then exported around the globe.
The first, most obvious impact of these restrictions is the rising geopolitical tension between the US and China.
We have seen no retaliation from China on these measures yet.
And, while the US cites a potential breach of human rights as the justification, the measures will undoubtedly hurt and/or complicate any exports of clothing from these Chinese companies to the USA.
Furthermore, this appears to be a 'first step' for US officials in terms of restrictions.
There is rhetoric that further, more widespread, restrictions could be imposed on companies in China's Xinjiang region.
Meanwhile, China now makes up 40 per cent of 2020-21 US cotton export sales - having started the season with 2.4 million bales of commitments.
In short, any cotton fallout between these two parties could bring fireworks.
But if we cast our minds back to the 2019 US-China trade war, remember how Australia - along with Brazil -was able to benefit?
The second, and less kinetic, impact of these restrictions relates to the growing importance of fibre provenance and traceability for governments, brands and consumers.
While the US has implemented formal restrictions, European Union companies are also reportedly re-evaluating their sourcing of fibre and textiles to avoid breaching consumer expectations.
More consumer awareness of issues in the cotton supply chain, such as those cited by the US, will undoubtedly influence western shopping habits.
And, while this is not a trend that will change the textile industry overnight - and perhaps not even in the next year - it does highlight the need for supply chains to be fair, open and transparent.
Australian cotton has sat firmly in this category for some time.
We can't help but feel the pay-off is finally approaching.