Truly the devil’s panties.
If there was a market for it I’m sure some fashion company would jump on selling pants with pockets to women. It’s most likely women want to complain about this but won’t actually buy clothes with proper pockets
I remember watching this TV fashion contest thing quite a long time ago. The host of this contest was this old, wrinkly French lady who was a long time veteran in women’s fashion (apparently).
So in the episode the upstart designers had to create… I think… Three fashionable pants for women. One of the contestants created all three of her pants with pockets, and I think one of them had some excessive pockets.
She was dismissed by the host immediately, before the model even wore any of the pants. Basically the episode was already decided, as that contestant got eliminated on the spot.
The reason? Well, that veteran fashion designer stated something along the lines of; “The female form is the most beautiful and powerful thing we have, and we can’t have pockets ruin that. It’s for women to accessorise with a handbag”.
This stuck with me for all these years, because I was so revulsed when I saw that. What a load of bullshit. A load of pretentious garbage.
Well now I have rage directed at some ancient French lady that I really don’t know what to do with.
She’s probably long dead. But her out-dated idealogies are probably still alive everywhere in fashion.
Not that I think she created that ideal. But she certainly did her part in propagating it.
Skill issue. Buy men’s clothes. Problem solved.
All clothes are gender neutral clothes if you’re not a little bitch about it.
I’ve never seen men’s underpants with pockets. But I’m also not researching the topic extensively, so it’s possible this is a development in undergarment tech that I’m not aware of.
My swimming trunks has pockets. Does that count as underpants?
I once came across a pair of some kind of synthetic silk man thongs. That had three pockets. One for your junk, another for your phone and the third for your dick and balls.
They were like 90 dollars a pair.
I guess it’s for when you need to be sexy and functional.
Fucktional
I wonder if it’s talking about the fold in the front to piss through
I dated a girl once who was amazed by the “pocket” in my boxer-briefs until she found it it was actually just the weird hole thing they put in the front that acts as a fly.
I have compression shorts that I run in that are the closest thing. Otherwise, if I’m just in underwear, or maybe a pair of gym shorts with no pocket, just throwing the phone in the waistband is sufficient. Just need something better for running.
Yep, just fold your waistband over your phone/wallet/whatever. Instant pocket
Picked up a pair at American eagle that did without even realizing it. Best pair of underpants
I think she found some sports underwear with a pocket to put a cup in
Just buy the pants that have pockets then, problem solved.
Sure, sure, but women get two prison pockets.
With enough cleavage, women get other places to stash stuff too.
May I request at least that money not be stored in any of these places.
Iv delt with boob sweat, ass sweat and unfortunately blood money in my time as a pizza boy years ago.
Women please don’t hide money in your bra/panties. It’s disgusting.
Men this goes for you too. Foot sweat money after you fish money out of your God forsaken sneaker is not appreciated
Wait, do people actually keep money on their shoes?
But I swear putting my bills in my gooch makes it smell nice!
Concealment Crevices
This is like the tap water of comics, yum!!!
edit: lukewarm tap water
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket
In medieval Europe, early pocket-like openings called fitchets appeared in the 13th century. These vertical slits, cut into the outer tunic, allowed access to a purse or keys suspended from the girdle beneath.[3] Historian Rebecca Unsworth notes that pockets became more visible in the late 15th century,[4] and their use spread widely in the 16th century.[4]
Later, pockets were often worn like purses on a belt, concealed under a coat or jerkin to deter pickpocketing, with access through a slit in the outer garment.
By the 17th century, pockets were sewn into men’s clothing, while women’s remained as separate tie-on pouches hidden beneath skirts.[5][6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reticule_(handbag)
A reticule, also known as a ridicule or indispensable, was a type of small handbag or purse, similar to a modern evening bag, used mainly from 1795 to 1820.[1]
The reticule became popular with the advent of Regency fashions in the late 18th century. Previously, women had carried personal belongings in pockets tied around the waist, but the columnar skirts and thin fabrics that had come into style made pockets essentially unusable.
Damn the prison of gendered fashion. Get a utility belt
Is she getting mixed up with the fly? I’ve never seen a phone pocket, or any pocket, and don’t quite see the purpose
They exist!
I see plenty of women wearing athletic shorts that have a large phone pocket.
I don’t think they’re overly common but she must be referring to men’s underpants like this:
👅
That seam right down the middle doesn’t look like it would be comfortable
Yeah, but that’s the only way to get such hammock-like cupping around the boys. And apparently I don’t notice it. I had to check and it turns out all mine have them.
Love the mens underwear ad in the background. Abs! Beard! Axe! AAAARRGGG!
If I’m in my underwear I’m not thinking of putting my phone in a pocket.
Not having underwear pockets are the only reason I’m not in underwear all the time at home.
the elastic is stretchy enough i just stick it in my waistband if I’m home in my undies and for some reason can’t just use my hand to hold it or put it on a surface of some kind.
Yeah but it keeps sliding down bit by bit with every step.
This is basically an “I can’t have my cake and eat it, too” complaint. If none of your pants have good enough pockets, it’s either because someone else is buying your clothes or because you didn’t prioritize having pockets when you bought them.
When buying women’s pants or shorts (and even dresses and skirts), you have the choice between a pair that has decent pockets and a pair that doesn’t, generally because the designer chose to prioritize aesthetics over pockets. If you buy the cuter pair, despite their lack of suitable pockets, you’re reinforcing the designer’s decision.
Even leggings / yoga pants and short running shorts / leggings have versions with pockets. Not every brand, sure, but enough.
With men’s pants and shorts, there’s much less variety. You have to go out of your way to find pants without decent pockets, but at the same time:
- Your pants and shorts are all bulkier and thicker than the equivalent women’s style
- Your shorts all come down to the knee, if not a bit further
- You don’t have the option of skirts, dresses, capris, leggings, etc…
- You don’t get the same options within a given style, i.e., far fewer embellishments, less stretch (in, e.g., jeans), often fewer colors, and most cuts are looser
Now, maybe the store you’re shopping at or the brand you love doesn’t sell women’s pants with pockets. I’m sure there are many like this. If it bothers you, find another store that does. Buy from a different brand.
Every single pair of women’s pants I have bought in the past four years, regardless of brand or store have had no pockets at all, or pockets so small you could only fit a quarter in them.
Please fuck off with this shit.
To be clear, I’m not saying most women’s pants have pockets. I’m saying that there are options, and I’m of the opinion that if you care about something enough to complain about it, you should also care about it enough to do something about it.
I own dozens of pairs of women’s pants and shorts with pockets large enough to comfortably fit my cell phone. Several pairs where I can not-so-comfortably. Probably a dozen each of dresses and skirts with decent pockets, too.
Would you like some recommendations?
Yes, please. I’m in the market for a plain pair of jeans with pockets big enough for my phone that look nice enough to wear to the office on Fridays.
If you’re a size 4-24, the Gloria Vanderbilt “Amanda” line has a variety of jeans with almost bo embellishments. They come in multiple shades of blue, black, mint, khaki, white, off white, etc… The colors other than blue are a bit stiffer and less stretchy, but they fit very similarly. They also have “Ponte pants,” basically business casual dress pants (though basically only in black), which I also recommend. I’ve worn the black jeans to the office mid-week and could probably get away with wearing the khaki ones, too.
I get them at Kohl’s, but from a quick web search I see they’re also available at Amazon, Walmart, JC Penny, Macy’s, and Costco. MSRP is around $50, but I don’t think I’ve ever paid more than $30 for a pair. I see some listed at $20 or so right now and I think I’ve gotten some (maybe on clearance?) for as cheap as $15.
Do NOT buy the “Pull-On” versions! Those either lack pockets entirely or have inadequate pockets. I could fit my phone in, sideways, but it dug into my side (my hipbone, I think, though it’s been a while since I wore those and tried to use the pockets).
Sizing is split between products (at Kohl’s at least): 4-18 and 16W-24W, with 16W being one size above 18 as opposed to overlapping. There are also Short (or Petite in the Ponte Pants) and T/L variants.
For reference, I have a standard sized iPhone - specifically the 15 Pro - in a case, with a MagSafe wallet. I often carry a similarly sized work phone in the same pocket, also in a case, so my pockets need to be able to handle both. The top of my phone is basically flush with / right below the opening of the pocket, which I prefer. A taller phone, like a Pro Max iPhone, would fit, but would need angled a bit to not have the top poking out.
Some other info on these:
- The fit, for me at least, is comfortably snug, but not tight. The cut is flattering, but not lewd.
- Durability is better than expected for fairly stretchy jeans. I ended up with a hole in the first pair I bought after a year or so, just from walking around (inner thigh friction basically) - but to be fair at that point I was wearing them twice a week, so that’s like 100 wears, 50 or so washes… I think that’s reasonable. However I don’t think they’d hold up as well if I wore them while doing yard work or something similarly stressful.
- Sizing down - I can fit into up to two sizes down, but even one size down: the fit wasn’t flattering, they were less comfortable, and they were so tight that my phone barely fit into my pocket (and wouldn’t have fit if I were sitting).
- Sizing up - one size up is great. I haven’t tried two sizes up. The fit isn’t as flattering, but it’s still fine. I generally wear a belt when wearing a sized up pair, since the waistband ends up a bit loose otherwise, but they’re still snug around my hips, so they stay up well enough without a belt.
If you’re a size 0 or a size 2 and don’t want to size up, they sadly aren’t an option (I may be wrong - their size chart goes down to 2, but I didn’t see any offered in a 2). If so I can keep an eye open for decent jeans in that size range, but I won’t be able to speak to fit, of course, as I’m nowhere near a size 2 myself.
Thank you for taking the time to write that up. I’ll check it out.
Cope and seethe women!
What is up with the influx of misogynistic rhetoric on Lemmy lately? We don’t support that here.
Its tongue in cheeck. Of all the inequalities between women and men this is super low on the list. Have you heard how actual misogynists speak?
“Haha I was just kidding” is precisely what people say when called out on insults like this.
It’s not funny, and yes, it’s exactly the type of things misogynists say.
If someone is unironically basing a sense of gender superiority on having pockets I feel bad for them.
honestly, among other things, they say things like “cope and seethe” lmao
I get that you were being satirical but it didn’t translate well to me either haha
