Identity Bias / Group Loyalty News Letter

[Joey G]

Just read this mornings news letter. Not sure is there if a forum, if there is please direct me there.

I’m curious what people thoughts on people who prefer Patagonia because of their sustainability efforts? Like some of their gear objectively would not be the best in class, but someone might would still prefer it because wearing Patagonia is almost like having a badge these days that I care about the earth.

The next one would be Arcteryx. I talked to a backpacking guide this last summer who was replacing their rain jacket, it was an Arcteryx. He said he was no longer going to buy Arcteryx because of all the “street wear” identity it has gained over the last 3-4 years. I honestly have gained this myself and started buying less Arcteryx, even though some of their gear might be best in class.

[Chris K]

I consider buying Patagonia for that reason. But also for the lifetime warranty, which plays into those sustainability efforts. Not that it’s a badge to display–I don’t like logos in general and sometimes their’s are too prominent–but it feels good supporting a company that first led the industry in both the warranty side of things and all the profits going to support other causes. Plus I’m not sure it’s as expensive piece-for-piece as other comparable outdoor brands these days.

[Terran Terran]

Honestly, I support sustainability when it’s on sale. I’d like to say that I always support it. It’s sometimes a matter of affording to. I like the R1’s and the R1’s. The DAS light hoody is good insulation for the weight. I don’t care if there’s a name on it or not. It reminds me of when all the non conformists wore Levi’s. I wear what I like and I can afford. One the other hand, there are a few that I won’t support.

[Joey G]

Terran, I really like the das light. I try to buy Patagonia for sustainability reasons. At the same time, I think there is somewhat of a group identity bias going on there.

[Terran Terran]

I do appreciate Patagonia’s business model. One can’t buy sustainability. It’s a lifestyle on its own. By the time I replace an R1, it’s far from being fashionable and barely usable. I’m sure there is some group think in certain crowds. Some follow the fashion. I just try to stay warm while using less energy.

[jscott]

I own two Patagonia pieces, an R1 and a nano puff. Both are over 20 years old. They’re still going strong. I’m literally wearing the R1 as we speak. so I buy Patagonia for quality, plus I love their sustainability record.  quality and sustainability can go together. but I’m NOT a group loyalty person. Quite the opposite. Giving credit where it’s deserved is something else.

[Terran Terran]

My hoodies last maybe 5 years. The zipper went out on my last one. It had the longer elastic cuffs, which stretched out plus a few small holes. It’s still in the wardrobe. It still has some use. The new one is an improvement all the way around. The pufferfish gold color tends to show dirt. Nearly half price though.

If one were to buy a sustainable product for the wrong reasons though, is it still sustainable? Often we do the right thing simply by accident. It still counts. If I bought a Durston tent because everybody seems to have one, will it still keep the rain off? If I discriminate against a chosen group of people because those I know do, am I still a racist? I guess like everything context matters. You have to educate yourself.

[David Thomas]

40 years ago, I had 30+ pieces of Patagonia clothing including expedition-weight PP UW and many, many colors of Baggie Shorts.  I was working in a backpacking store so we got first crack at the discounted seconds with a further employee discount.

It worked.  It worked better than the alternatives.  PP UW, Baggie shorts and long pants, first pile and then fleece were just more functional than the wool sweaters, fishnet UW, much the less cotton t-shirts, chamois shirts and jeans that we’d been using.

I don’t see a clear functionality advantage to Patagonia anymore.  Some of it is stylish (in a “Look, I’m wearing Patagucci!” way) while their puffy jackets and puffy skirts are great options, as are other vendors.  I’ve bought one piece – a crazy warm, light, and expensive jacket – from them this century.  My wife buys 1-2 pieces a year, because for a physician in a rural Alaskan town it’s that sweet spot of warm enough for the ski trail but dressy enough for casual office wear and functional enough for walking the dog on a frozen beach.  The sustainable materials and recycling trope means more to her than to me.  I try to tread more lightly on the planet by buying used stuff, using things until they fall apart, and driving fuel-efficient cars / EVs to the trailhead.

[jscott]

I find the implication that I wear my patagonia pieces in order to virtue signal repugnant and frankly its own sort of snark-erism: discouraging folks from buying a brand out of fear of others snark and reverse snobbism.

I forgot that I also own a patagonia better sweater, again bought over twenty years ago and looking like new after a lot of use around town for many, many winters. No one has ever commented on the fact that I was “wearing Patagonia”. Are you kidding? No one cares. no one notices. It’s a great piece that cost around $60.00 at the time. sheesh,  the implication is that I’m trying to virtue signal and show how rich I am at the same time, right?

Oh, please!

Now let’s move on to folks who wear L>L Bean.  They’re really trying to brand identify!! How horrible, how obvious, how pretentious!! Pile on, folks!

[Dan]

TBH, these things never cross my mind. One company is sustainable, the other is street-wear … please.

[Matthew / BPL]

I find the implication that I wear my patagonia pieces in order to virtue signal repugnant and frankly its own sort of snark-erism: discouraging folks from buying a brand out of fear of others snark and reverse snobbism.

Strong agree with this.

[David Thomas]

And yet, as morally repugnant as one may find it to be called out for virtual signaling, it is a thing even if maybe not done by everyone.  Two economists studied the value of virtual signaling of owning a Prius 15-20 years ago which, with its unique shape, showed your neighbors and coworkers that you cared more about the planet than they did.  People paid $2,500 more for that very identifiable car model than a functionally equivalent hybrid Honda Civic with its tiny little hybrid badge but no distinctive shape.

Decent people try not to be racist and sexist, but sometimes to the point that they refuse to look at their own internal dialog.  Do you really have EXACTLY the same reaction to a black guy and white guy coming down the street towards you?  If so, you have done a remarkable job of ignoring tremendous amounts of media, religious and political messaging.  If you drop your car off for the timing belt to be replaced, and the mechanic is a woman – do you really have no thoughts or feelings (positive, negative, delight, surprise) about that at all?

I don’t give much conscious thought to the message I send if my jacket is Patagonia, LLBean, or Carhartt’s.  But I’m vaguely aware of differences in how I’ll be viewed in different circles and if I’m attending a safety meeting with the union hands, I’m going to reach for the Carhartt’s.  I don’t think about it, I just do it.  Just as I didn’t grab a navy blazer that morning but did the next day to make a presentation to the Board.  And put on the LLBean jacket for Trivia Night at the local sustainable food / bring-your-own container store.

Their marketing has worked because it mostly affects me subconsciously.

[Megan W]

I do think about environmental impact, sustainability (including durability, consurism) and ethical treatment of employees when I buy things  (sometimes ties me in knots, particularly when I really WANT something 😏). And I do want to “reward” companies for showing similar considerations (even when there is a strong element of marketing- I’d rather that, than no consideration at all).

I’m not virtue signalling, I’m doing it because it matters to me. Other people may interpret my behaviour through their own biases (snarkerism). That doesn’t change my intent

 

[Matthew / BPL]

I’ve known exactly one person IRL who was involved in sustainability in the clothing industry. She had a PHD from Harvard and taught a sustainability class at the college I used to teach at. I once asked her some questions about sustainability in clothing and she said that she noticed I had worn a Patagonia polo shirt a few days earlier and said that she felt like Patagonia was the gold standard for sustainability among larger brands in the US. This was in probably 2017. I don’t know if her assessment would change today. Maybe some of you are turned off because I mentioned Harvard and view that as signaling. 🤷‍♂️

To the OP: I’m pro-Patagonia. I believe I have three pairs of their pants and six shirts. They have all performed really well and lasted for a very long time. I believe purchased all on sale except for one recently. They have outlasted a bunch of other brands. It appears that they are thoughtful about where they source and build their products. They do repairs.

Their down products don’t math out for me. I have two Montbell jackets and no Patagonia jackets. I’m not an unquestioning stan but I have had good experiences with some of their products and suspect they are well above average on the sustainability-o-meter.

My $.02 / YMMV / HYOH

[jscott]

“And yet, as morally repugnant as one may find it to be called out for virtual signaling, it is a thing. ”

Well then one can’t perform a single act of decency in life without being called a hypocrite. David doesn’t think or mean this, of course. but the implication is that if you care are for your elderly mother, for example, and then mention that you’d visited her yesterday at her resident  home, you’re  virtue signaling. Or if you allow someone with two items to check out in front of you at the grocery store, you’re virtue signaling, since common decency is a fraud.

By the way, many here buy from cottage industries. Own a Dan Durston tent? What are you signaling? too good for REI, you snob? Trying to show your elitist bona fides? Etc. etc.

The cynicism of snark-o terrorists is remarkable.  Or rather, it’s a way for them to justify an ultimately nihilistic self centeredness, where no on else matters. For them, the only honest act is one that’s entirely focussed on immediate self interest.

[Terran Terran]

If you’ve earned it, signal away. Be the example.

[Brad W]

@David I agree whole heartedly. I know plenty of people who wear Patagonia for the label and it being seen by many as a premium brand and the sign of wealth. I also see many who could give a rats behind about the label and just wear it for the quality material and warranty-me.  Where I live many have a negative impression of people wearing Patagonia-as if you are a show off or flaunting wealth. Carhartt is the popular brand in my town.

Whether you are personally virtue signaling with a piece of clothing or not, pretending others don’t use a variety of visual cues-brand labels being one- to form an opinion of other humans is just being intellectually dishonest or incredibly naïve.

[Terran Terran]

So many fear being accused of  virtue signaling or of being “woke” when all they’re doing is supporting sustainability or they care about humanity. “Woke” has become a defamatory term downgrading the righteous for doing the right thing and feeling good about doing it. If your virtue signaling makes the world a better place, that’s the bottom line.

[jscott]

“I know plenty of people who wear Patagonia for the label and it being seen by many as a premium brand and the sign of wealth.”

Really? How could you possibly know that? Are you sure that you’re not just projecting your own assumptions onto others? that’s how it comes off to me.  Just because you assume something doesn’t make it true. “Plenty of people”…maybe that’s an indication of the quality of the garments, which in my experience is real, plus admiring the ecological stance of the company, which is also real. Why does that translate, for you, into “I know plenty of people who wear Patagonia for the label and it being seen by many as a premium brand and the sign of wealth.”

this whole ‘Patagucci” thing was, well, a thing on this forum a while back. I assume it was elsewhere as well. Hey, if you pay premium for a quality down sleeping bag…you’re merely signaling your wealth and are are a poseur! right? and if you pay a ton for a DCF tent, you’re a fraud and a pretender and signaling your off trail expertise…right?

etc. etc. Wrong.

why stop with Patagonia, in terms of so called “virtue signaling”? By that logic, everyone here who owns or has reviewed a small business produced piece of decent gear–and that’s most decent pieces of kit–is “virtue’ or anyway “snob” and “wealth’ signaling. But we’re all mostly just scraping by! None of it adds up.

 

[sbennett3705]

I buy based on the product quality and relative value. But, that said, the company becoming a non-profit trust is impressive: https://www.patagonia.com/ownership/

[Jerry Adams]

people that own Apple products are wealthy people that snub their noses at PC/android people.

I read that, don’t know if it’s true : )

I’m a PC/android cheapskate.  I know of Apple people that are quite nice.

[Terran Terran]

Age may be a factor. I’m old enough to have gathered a few things over the years. More than some. Less than others. Started out with cheap equipment. A pack from Thrifty’s. A tent from Target. Sleeping bag from Big 5. You make it work until you replace it with higher quality products. I’m at the point now where just being alive is virtue signaling.

[Dan]

people that own Apple products are wealthy people that snub their noses at PC/android people.

I read that, don’t know if it’s true : )

I’m a PC/android cheapskate.  I know of Apple people that are quite nice.

I assumed you made your own computers and cell phones, Jerry.   :-)

[Jerry Adams]

Yes, starting with building my own foundry…

[Terran Terran]

Do you have a YouTube channel?

[Author]

Posts