I always feel a little uncomfortable complaining about the differences between men's and women's clothes. On the one hand, "fashion" or design esthetics not withstanding, the quality, cleanability, and practicalities tend to be much lower than comparable articles for men, and stich for stitch and seam for seam they prices tend to be higher. On the other hand it doesn't seem to be true that women lack agency in their purchasing decisions, nor probable that women's actual buying habits have no correlation with the products designers, manufacturers, and retailers make available.
But when I go shopping with my 11-year-old daughter, compared to what was available for my son three years ago when he was 11 (he's now 14), I... gotta chafe about it. A lot.
Case in point, both my kids have ipod-sized hand-me-down smart phones. These fit effortlessly into the front pockets of my son's jeans. The same size phone sticks out of my daughter's jeans pockets because for some incredibly baroque reason girl-jeans pockets are only about three inches deep.
Anyway, since I don't feel comfortable about carping about it stand-alone I'm really, really happy to endorse the following post by Suzanne Reisman , who says
Dear Women’s Athletic Apparel Manufacturers:
I appreciate that you understand that women should be active and earn your livings by producing clothing to enable us ladies to engage in physical fitness. However, what is wrong with you? Most of you seem to produce clothing for men and women, and of course, the men’s gear is a jillion times better.
First off, almost all shorts made for men have pockets. You seem to understand that men carry shit with them – like keys and ID and money and music machines and maybe even inhalers or tissues – when they run. Guess what? Women need those items too! Especially asthmatic ones! Those little “key pockets” are nice for a key, but otherwise they are fucking bullshit. I need to carry my inhaler with me, just in case. Where shall I put it in your pocketless shorts?
This brings us to the length of shorts. Men’s shorts come in a variety of lengths, from the short running kind to straight legs that extend to their knees. Women’s shorts, on the other hand, come in two sizes: short and even shorter.
Source: Cuss and Other Rants
I know, I know, the theory is that it's just a waste of time putting pockets in women's slacks because everyone knows All Ladies Carry Purses Anyway. Except, you know, when they run or do sports. So WTF is the deal with women's athletic shorts then?
Tags:
The theory is, I believe,
Submitted by FD (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-01 05:52.The theory is, I believe, that pockets spoil 'the line'. Inset eyeroll here about the underlying assumption that women's bodies are made for display at all times.
And speaking as a woman who actively prefers pockets, I have to say that ratailers get away with the no pockets thing because if there isn't what you want, (and there really truly largely isn't what I want available and do not get me started on women's trouser suits without pockets in either jackets or trousers omfg) you buy what there is, unless like me you are wiling to say eff you to the whole gendered clothes thing and buy 'menswear'. Mind even that presents problems. Setting aside the internal hurdles and the fact that taking menswear into women's changing rooms gets you funny looks and comments ranging from inoffensive but intrusive to downright nasty, male clothes are generally cut straighter on the hip and so I have resigned myself to buying a size up and accepting that they will drop to my hipbones rather than my waist.
Yeah, it sucks. I've noticed
Submitted by Lynn (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-01 06:44.Yeah, it sucks. I've noticed it all my life, especially since I've been active and done a lot of walking, mountain biking, scuba diving, and a marathon. I wound up wearing either a fanny pack, which will hold several small bulky items, or a neck pouch, which will hold several flat items like ID and money.
So many times I wished there were a pocket, especially a secure pocket, in my shorts that I could tuck my keys, ID and a few bucks.
It's as if, even when designing "serious" active wear, manufacturers think we're just going to stand around in it and look pretty.
The funny thing is, I carry a
Submitted by chingona on Sun, 2011-05-01 07:24.The funny thing is, I carry a purse mostly because women's pants don't have very good pockets.
I hate purses, so my choice
Submitted by ozymandias (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-01 07:56.I hate purses, so my choice is binary: try to find pants that fit my long legs and tiny waist AND have pockets, or wear a messenger bag. There have been times I've had a wallet and a key, and worn a messenger bag, because I had no pockets.
You know what I hate? The girl's pants with the pockets SEWN UP. Aaaaargh!
The fake pocket? Yeah, I hate
Submitted by chingona on Sun, 2011-05-01 10:37.The fake pocket? Yeah, I hate that. A lot of my work pants have those. Seriously, what's the point of looking like you have a pocket but not actually having one?
I used to just carry my wallet and keys a lot of times, but now that I usually have a cell phone as well, it's just too many things. Also, I would end up leaving my wallet places a lot more frequently because I would set it down on a table or something.
You're supposed to cut the
Submitted by tlt (not verified) on Mon, 2011-05-02 22:37.You're supposed to cut the threads that the pocket is sewn shut with once you buy the item (this is the real pockets, not the ones that are a flap covering nothing). They're sewn shut to make them look better on the hanger and when you try them on. Of course that sometimes means that when you get them home and cut the threads you realize that the pockets gape out like a pair of ears on the sides of your hips.
I've completely given up the quest for workout shorts or pants with pockets. It's so hard to find something that fits, is the right fabric combination and doesn't cost $80, that expecting pockets just seems like too much to ask for. I just stick my key and ID in my sports bra if I'm working out outside. I figure if I'm hurt badly enough to be unconscious, they'll cut the bra off, the ID will fall out and they'll at least know my name.
I think the assumption is
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-01 09:02.I think the assumption is "Non-gay men wouldn't be caught dead with a fanny pack (or anything similar). Women will just buy a fanny pack."
And then if you're carrying a
Submitted by Sheila (not verified) on Sun, 2011-05-01 12:50.And then if you're carrying a purse, or your pocket isn't deep enough to secure your stuff, you're that much more vulnerable on the street to pickpockets and pursesnatchers. It's no surprise to me how popular cargo pants are among women.
Then there are boys' clothes, which are sturdier and roomier than girls, so boys can wear them for more years as they grow.
I think the main reason that
Submitted by Redleader (not verified) on Wed, 2011-05-04 21:53.I think the main reason that a lot of women accept the status quo is that they end up buying what is in the store, because all too often the alternative is to go around naked.
Also a lot of people seem to think that standardized sizes of clothes for women or even pockets in women's clothes would require some less than certain scientific breakthrough, even if they were possible for men starting in the Civil War.
And a lot of women simply buy the dictums of "Well you really have to work with your shape."