“Patagonia confirmed Tuesday that it would no longer sell to the resort, its largest single customer in the Jackson Hole area.”
I’ve bought Patagonia gear for decades. I will buy more if the stuff I have ever wears out.
I will, too, but politics will never come between me and 4000’ of amazing terrain if I’m in Jackson.
No friends on a powder day and no politics either.
Everyone says that. Until they’re the ones being refused service.
27 Likes
Ah, the virtue of selfishness. What’s the worst thing you would be willing to tolerate so you can slide down a hill?
Careful. It’s a slippery slope. 
20 Likes
Uncalled for.
Everyone needs a sanctuary from politics, polarization, and the general stresses of daily life–a place where people don’t judge, apply labels, or put their prejudices front and center when communicating. For me and many in this very blue state of Colorado, the mountains provide that.
People on trails, summits, and ski lifts do not insult or reflexively put labels on each other due to politics.
They’re friendly and respectful 99% of the time, but you get back what you put out there.
I disagree with all ski companies available to me on at least one of their practices.
It seems silly to quit snowboarding because someone thinks it selfish to use these resorts or stop hiking because I might not agree with the BLM or USFS on policies that harm the environment. I won’t impugn anyone else for their choices, though.
If Patagonia wishes to make this stand, great.
If Jackson’s owner wishes to defy his board of directors and have an event with reprehensible people, whatever. My lift ticket isn’t going to the GOP outliers. That’s what the fundraiser accomplished.
Neither matters more to me than the quality of their products. That may not be the case for others. I’m ok with that.
Regardless, it looks like a smoke screen by Patagonia. It appears that Republican fundraisers may not have been more than a sales tactic.
From the article:
Patagonia has undertaken other boycotts, but is willing to reconsider its withdrawal from the mountain resort, Kenna said. If owners recommit to priorities “especially protecting the planet,” Patagonia would “consider sitting down and talking through that,” she said.
1 Like
Indeed, we all do. Access, however, is not evenly distributed.
The question of which groups have such sanctuaries available to them is left as an exercise for the reader.
13 Likes
This reader recognizes that access to any ski resort is proportional to two things:
- Income
- Proximity to ski resorts.
Neither of those has any measurable connection to Patagonia’s marketing strategy or the Jackson Hole owner’s fundraiser.
Reverse their political leanings and we’d see no change in access to ski resorts or expensive outdoor clothing.
Wealthy folks will always have access to things the rest of us do not, and low-income folks of all stripes won’t move closer to the mountains, even if every person on BB boycotts Jackson Hole.
1 Like
I too like to get away from politics by giving $160 to businesses owned by fascists, neo-nazis and the like. /s
7 Likes
That fundraising guy sounds like a grade A Jackson hole!
3 Likes
I see it as a way of withdrawing my consent.
There are still World War II veterans (U.S.ians all; fathers of friends of mine) who continue to refuse to ever buy a Japanese-brand car, on principle. One even forbade his family buying Bic pens when he heard they were made in Japan (at the time, that is where the pens were made, before China took over making everything).
10 Likes
This BBS needs a “dont like” button.
Do you think that a marginalized person would feel as comfortable at a ski resort that hosted far right extremist groups as a straight white male would?
“Putting politics aside” is a luxury reserved for those of us who never had to fight for any of the same fundamental human rights enjoyed by our fellow citizens.
17 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
