politics in clothing, WHY?

[Desk Jockey]

Interesting. gets to the heart of a conundrum that faces the outdoor activities community at large. the right-leaning hunting crowd is often at political odds with the left leaning hippy / granola / bird watching / backpacking crowd.

Patagonia does a lot for land initiatives and conservation. I like their gear.

If I stopped associating with every person and every business that didn’t share my politics, I would be a lonely man. While it is true, I preference certain firms over others based on their support for certain ideas, I don’t require total alignment with my world view in order to transact.

Consumptive use can and does coexist with conservation. We all care about wild places. Better to go to battle with imperfect allies than to fight alone.

 

[rodney482]

I wouldnt use their stuff if it were free.

 

[HankNM]

I have Patagonia fleece I have been wearing for 25 + years. One pull over I wore almost everyday in morning for 20 at work. I still have it in my hunt gear bag.
I have thrown away several other brands since...none for political reasons.

 

[Rich M]

Politics are becoming increasingly polar. It's too bad, but how the social engineers are working it.

Anyone who gets all excited over global warming needs to take a few historical geology classes. All those various funky time names, global freezing and flooding. Most happened when there were no cars or people. That's the real science.vs the political science they use to scare folks.

 

[bat-cave]

I absolutely hate the division politics create. If their were no politics in this world we would get along better. It's like the brand you wear today in someone's eye is gonna be virtue signaling, and that's came directly from politicking. It really is mind boggling to me why people want to get their brands mixed up in political BS. I try so hard to ignore it all, and just do my own thing, enjoy what I like, but it's so difficult these days.

Sent from my SM-S506DL using Tapatalk

Why wouldn't you take this into consideration? It's the companies choice to make it public and an issue, therefore it's my choice to decide if I do business with them. Why would I knowingly give $'s to a company that openly supports views that are radically opposed to my own? In my eyes companies would be smarter to keep their political views to themselves, but if they choose to make it a big deal ... they can deal with the consequences.

 

[Trial153]

Outrage of day tread..

 

[Jauwater]

In my eyes companies would be smarter to keep their political views to themselves, but if they choose to make it a big deal ... they can deal with the consequences.

I don't disagree with that, and is basically what I was saying. I've been trying along time to ignore the politicizing of every and anything we do these days. Whenni said "people's brands" I'm talking about the people who run them. I just don't want to become a product of politics. But, as I ended, it's becoming more, and more difficult to do what I just described.

Sent from my SM-S506DL using Tapatalk

 

[conley417]

Working on a list of brands we hate.

Patagonia
Sitka
First Lite?
Meateater
Benchmade
Levi's
Under Armour
Eddie Bauer
Dick's
Yeti
Everything?

 

[Deplorable77]

Make this a sticky please

Working on a list of brands we hate.

Patagonia
Sitka
First Lite?
Meateater
Benchmade
Levi's
Under Armour
Eddie Bauer
Dick's
Yeti
Everything?

 

[Deplorable77]

I think Gerber got thrown under the bus as well, please add them just to be safe.

Working on a list of brands we hate.

Patagonia
Sitka
First Lite?
Meateater
Benchmade
Levi's
Under Armour
Eddie Bauer
Dick's
Yeti
Everything?

 

[ewade07]

I own lots of Sitka and lots of Patagonia. Turns out their political stance doesnt have any effect on keeping me warm and dry

 

[browning2480]

Why do we hate Under Armour?

 

[spike camp]

I couldn’t care less.
If it’s something I want, i’ll buy it.

 

[Unclemoe]

They shit canned a pro staff member because their husband killed a bear with a spear

 

[5MilesBack]

"politicians who deny or disregard the climate crisis and ignore science."

They all ignore the science.......when that science goes against their narrative or agenda. That's what irritates me the most......."demanding" that we only operate based on "the science", but when the science doesn't meet the agenda or narrative they are pushing.......then they ignore the science. That's not logical.......that's political. Stick with logic 100% of the time, and they'd be good to go.

 

[spike camp]

They shit canned a pro staff member because their husband killed a bear with a spear

Righty so, too.

 

[5MilesBack]

Righty so, too.

So, if your wife did something that your company doesn't like, you're OK with getting fired for that? That way beyond a slippery slope.

 

[spike camp]

So, if your wife did something that your company doesn't like, you're OK with getting fired for that? That way beyond a slippery slope.

Yeah, I’d expect her to get fired if she acted as big of an ass clown Bowmar did.
She’d deserve to get fired, if she embarrassed everything and everyone like Bowmar did.
Additionally, if she got hunting with a spear in a different country banned because she acted like a totally F’ing jackass D-bag...yeah, getting fired sounds appropriate.

 

[wind gypsy]

They shit canned a pro staff member because their husband killed a bear with a spear

Seems like they were ahead of the game on Bowmar.. They could have weathered the storm only to be caught up in Bowmar's current conspiracy poaching cases.

 

[ramsdude47]

They dropped a sponsorship, how is that the same as firing somebody? Unless I’m missing something.

Also human accelerated climate change is unequivocally real. I have a hard time grasping why there isn’t more consensus on that.