4 ms·
I am so happy to see this. I have supported Patagonia as a consumer due to their commitment to corporate responsibility, specifically their (more) ethical cloth
by mikekij 8y ago
I am so happy to see this. I have supported Patagonia as a consumer due to their commitment to corporate responsibility, specifically their (more) ethical clothing manufacturing practices.
When I’m in the Bay Area and see every private equity bro wearing a Patagonia fleece, it makes me wonder if they are supporting the brand for the same reason.
Ultimately it shouldn’t matter. But I’d rather be associated with the responsibly sourced clothing brand than the financial engineering brand.
- cabaalis 8y agoI find it odd that excluding religious groups is now considered good ethics.
- thundergolfer 8y agoCan you explain what you're referring to with "excluding religious groups"?
- javagram 8y agoThe tweet in the article states that Patagonia is now excluding religious groups https://twitter.com/binnaskim/status/1112731360244961283 https://twitter.com/binnaskim/status/1112731360244961283
- thundergolfer 8y agoOh thanks for the heads up. Seems entirely reasonable to exclude religious groups who promote anti-environmentalism. They're not blanket excluding religious groups.
- adamparsons 8y agoReligion and conservatism do tend to be pretty aligned, and this seems to be about being a more progressive brand or something
- craftyguy 8y agoI don't.
- sonnyblarney 8y agoI don't think it's 'ethics' - rather than they are just trying to avoid any kind of controversy. Let's get real folks: it's just a totally synthetic fleece in a totally commodity package. There's nothing really special about Patagonia. It's just a brand. I'd buy it because I like the design, possibly, not because of their corporate positioning / PR spin.
- spammersharass 8y agoAfter they publically came out as supporting infanticide, I have made it a point to never buy one of their products.