Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

black34beard t1_j2cxhub wrote

Baby clothes pockets are so the women with babies DO have pockets to use.

57

Killer-Barbie t1_j2cvuy5 wrote

Actually baby girl stuff doesn't have pockets either. Also for some reason all the girls fit pants are tighter

30

HalfLawKiss OP t1_j2d14su wrote

Are you serious? Lol I've never had to buy baby girl clothes, I have boys so I honestly don't know.

10

queen_of_potato t1_j2d9nhq wrote

Oh and the sexualization of baby/child female clothes, super ew.. and enforced gender norms in kids clothing slogans, get wrecked!

7

MinerMinecrafter t1_j2dg3fe wrote

And the fact that it is only pink for girls and blue for boys is disgusting

1

queen_of_potato t1_j2dhzrf wrote

If I am buying for friends I always try to get non-gendered (white, grey, yellow) whether I know the gender or not, fuck stereotypes, especially for those who can't choose for themselves!

7

shaneh445 t1_j2difu4 wrote

>fuck stereotypes, especially for those who can't choose for themselves!

Amen!

1

MinerMinecrafter t1_j2dihuc wrote

Yeah, like if I want to wear blue I'll wear blue if I want pink I'll wear pink if I want both both, if I want to present myself more masculine or feminine or both at once is all up to me

1

queen_of_potato t1_j2dm9hv wrote

Absolutely! I refused to wear dresses or skirts until I was at university just out of principal, and bought most of my clothes at men's stores.. but while I still wouldn't really say I have a feminine aesthetic I do enjoy it occasionally

1

DitaVonPita t1_j2dcgug wrote

Please tell me you're joking, this is not common in my country

6

dumdumpants-head t1_j2cy8te wrote

Ok but let's not pretend that if our pants did have pockets we wouldn't be complaining about rumpled pocket lines ruining the look.

14

pigeon888 t1_j2cvqpa wrote

If they desperately needed them they would buy clothes with pockets and the ones without pockets would stop selling.

13

The_SqueakyWheel t1_j2cxayo wrote

Thats what I don’t get! Women actively choose to buy clothing without pockets and the. Complain about bot having pockets !! It’s so illogical !

9

UWAIN t1_j2czf9i wrote

Have you ever actually looked at women's clothing? Even jeans come with fake or pointlessly shallow pockets, wtf are we meant to wear, exclusively cargo trousers?

And yes, we are allowed to buy clothes and be annoyed that the designers decided yet abloodygain that we don't need pockets, because if we ignored everything that didn't have them we'd have a choice of about 4 items.

11

HalfLawKiss OP t1_j2d11kn wrote

That was my point. My girlfriend and I, some years ago were talking about how women's pants and shorts and ect often have false pockets. We concluded that it's maybe because the expectation is that women will carry a purse or pocket book. But I've forever remained perplexed by the false pockets.

2

UWAIN t1_j2d41gt wrote

I think you're probably right, but that's annoying in itself because a lot of us will only carry a bag because we don't have pockets. I actually found some flattering, good fitting jeans last year that had useable front pockets, and nice deep back ones. It was like winning the lottery 😄

6

queen_of_potato t1_j2d9iww wrote

Oh it's absolutely done to force us into buying bags which are disproportionately expensive

1

queen_of_potato t1_j2d9gda wrote

There has been multiple times my husband has accidentally worn my jeans instead of his, and not realised until he tried to put something in the pocket

2

queen_of_potato t1_j2d9dth wrote

It's actually very hard to find women's clothes with pockets, even the pockets in jeans are too small to be at all useful

Why do you think we celebrate so hard when someone comments on a nice dress "IT HAS POCKETS"

Pretty sure it's so we have to buy expensive handbags

If you can find a bunch of women's clothes with pockets please do share because I can guarantee we will all be buying them!

2

Etzlo t1_j2dj3i4 wrote

Lol, have you ever actually gone shopping with a woman or even looked at what clothes we have to pick from? Nothing has pockets, not even jeans and more lax pants, the only way to get pockets is buying mens clothes, which are cut like shit if you can even find some in your size, or cargo pants

5

pigeon888 t1_j2drgow wrote

Sounds like the first person to put pockets in women's clothes will be a billionaire.

3

Antisocialite99 t1_j2ds4p0 wrote

This is not true at all. Even women's leggings now have pockets. Outdoor brands like North face and patagucci make women's pants with pockets. They might just even have cargo pockets and not suit your sense of style.

2

Etzlo t1_j2du86t wrote

I'll definitely take a look, I haven't seen any in my local stores at least, so it's hard to know sometimes

1

Antisocialite99 t1_j2e1x0f wrote

Well this part of rhe problem... I've had this conversation before... there is the expectation of being able to find thenclothes you want in person in a brick and mortar shop so you can try them on.... that's not really our system any more. You can get whatever you want you just have to look online.

1

triple3ogies t1_j2dab9t wrote

Isn’t the fashion/design industry run by women?

How come women aren’t putting pockets on stuff made for women?

9

tempodad t1_j2dj5ee wrote

I am pretty sure the fashion industry is mostly run my men. They just have a lot of fake female representation. The fashion industry is misogynistic so I wouldn’t doubt if it was run by men

2

triple3ogies t1_j2dlg6f wrote

Yea I wouldn’t know lol

I shop at tractor supply and Walmart and wear carhartt stuff

3

phrunk87 t1_j2don0k wrote

You literally just stole someone else's shower thought from a few hours earlier and reposted it...

7

wojtekpolska t1_j2df3p5 wrote

why dont women wear jeans from the men's section? jeans are jeans, but you actually get the pockets this time.

6

tempodad t1_j2dj1jh wrote

A lot of women do! But women are built different than men. They size jeans differently. For instance, I’m not able to find my size in jeans because of the way my body is built because I have larger hips than men usually do.

7

PrettyText t1_j2dd2bh wrote

This is always so weird to me.

We're not living in the Soviet Union, where women's clothing don't have pockets because the communist party determines what kind of clothing gets made.

If women indeed desperately want clothing with pockets and if indeed it's simply not really available, then just start your own company and you'll probably be a millionaire in a decade.

This sounds to me more like women say they want pockets, but then when they're actually in the store they prioritize other things over pockets.

It's a bit like how people say that they want more leg room during their flight, but then in practice they always book the cheapest flight instead.

5

tempodad t1_j2djl5q wrote

Dude… there’s no way anyone could just start a clothing company… You have no idea how long it takes and hard it is to make a business. And it’s really expensive too. People don’t get paid enough to even afford jeans let alone make a business just so they can have pockets.

And wdym women prioritize other things than pockets?? How can we do that? NONE of our clothes have big pockets, it’s not like we saw all the ones with big pockets and decided to get the small ones instead. It’s the clothing industry and the reason why is because they market purses towards women. If women had big pockets they wouldn’t need purses. That’s it.

5

DitaVonPita t1_j2dcf8q wrote

What I'm gonna say is quite blunt, but... That's because nobody is trying to feminize/sexualize baby clothing, while womens clothing is automatically made to make us more sexually appealing, often removing pockets to accentuate curves or avoiding hiding them. We don't have back pockets because it makes our asses look malformed, don't have front pockets so that our hips don't look bulky. None of this is a concern with babies. And in all honesty, imo, it shouldn't be with women either. If she doesn't want the pocket to bulge she can just keep it empty. 🤦

4

Etzlo t1_j2dj8yo wrote

>That's because nobody is trying to feminize/sexualize baby clothing,

If only, babies clothing for girls is sexualized to hell and back

1

DitaVonPita t1_j2djplo wrote

That's upsetting to hear. I honestly am not acquainted with the practice. ☹️

2

TheMikman97 t1_j2deuwr wrote

I'm pretty sure the emergence of vestigial pockets was allowed and facilitated by women who simply didn't care enough about them because they had bags anyway.

You might think you really need them, but then you buy the clothes without them anyway, therfore commercially they weren't essential.

I doubt men would buy pants without pockets at all, which forces clothing companies to keep making them

4

tempodad t1_j2djuc7 wrote

I’m pretty sure it’s the other way around. They want women to buy purses, so they take away their pockets. I don’t think any woman would be upset to have pockets, even if they did have a purse. And not every woman uses a purse either.

1

TheMikman97 t1_j2dk4e5 wrote

If this was the case, women could simply have forced the pants without pockets out of the market by not buying them. The fact pants without pockets became the norm is because they were successful enough to keep being produced.

0

tempodad t1_j2dk8uh wrote

but how? How could you just stop wearing pants?? And clothes?? I mean jeans aside, none of women’s clothing has pockets. We can’t just not wear clothes

2

Antisocialite99 t1_j2dsc5j wrote

I've seen women's pants with pockets. They exist.

2

tempodad t1_j2dsg7q wrote

I said that wrong- even with clothes that have pockets they are usually decoration and are barely big enough to fit your fingers inside of let alone put stuff inside

0

Antisocialite99 t1_j2du5c0 wrote

North face Patagonia etc all make women's pants with functional pockets might even be cargo pockets which might ruin your sense of style

3

TheMikman97 t1_j2dl977 wrote

How do you think this happened? One day all pants producers collectively said no pockets? No. It was done progressively, just like phones with no exchangeable battery, and now no charger. One company does it, backlash is not sufficient to harm sales, the practice gets normalized and other companies copy it

There is nothing that can be done now, but people could have acted when it was time if they cared enough

1

tempodad t1_j2dljsj wrote

Yes but they’re never going to make women’s pockets with jeans because of the purse industry. It profits way too much off of women not having pockets. And right now there is no big brand that has made that decision to add pockets so there’s no options. And you can’t just make your own company from nothing.

1

TheMikman97 t1_j2dlpd1 wrote

Yeah, some practices are almost irreversible once normalized.

1

Blood-Lord t1_j2dk9ow wrote

Sounds like those women just need a man with cargo shorts :D.

3

WitchLite t1_j2dmk7t wrote

I get so ecstatic when I discover my clothes, especially dresses, have pockets.

3

TheFrontierzman t1_j2dn5z6 wrote

Coordinate an effort to eliminate the existence of purses and then the clothing industry will start taking the "we need pockets" thing more seriously.

3

Questitron_3000 t1_j2d9ixc wrote

Hear me out. We should subtract baby pockets, and add them to womens clothing pockets. Problems solved.

2

Showerthoughts_Mod t1_j2ct42v wrote

This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.

Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"

(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)

Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.

1