submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) by ReconciliationTime22128@sh.itjust.works to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world

95 comments fedilink hide all child comments

[deleted]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world -2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

If you want a real hoot, next time the issue comes up point out that women's clothing is the way it is (form-fitting, small pockets, etc.) because that's what the majority of women buy and that there are a lot of looser options with big pockets out there.

Edit: I'm talking about men's opinions on women's clothing. Women are well aware of their clothing choices.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 19 hours ago

That’s interesting that you chose women’s jeans as a response to a real complaint of the amount of misogyny that’s openly pushed on Lemmy.

Second, the majority of women buy jeans with small pockets because that’s what is on the majority of shelves. Women’s clothing is purposefully made of less quality than men’s clothing because women purchase clothing at higher rates and capitalism will do what capitalism does.

There are looser options with bigger pockets out there, but they’re not as available. You have to go hunting for them. And don’t even suggest women just buy men’s jeans as I’ve seen here - women’s bodies tend to be shaped much more differently than men’s bodies especially around our hips. Men’s jeans don’t fit the same.

Again, very interesting that your response to misogyny is “women complain about pants!”

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world -3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

My point is that "men complain about women's clothing" not "women complain about women's clothing." They white knight so hard they don't realize that the choice exists, then they go to "well they feel pressured to wear those things because of societal expectations." They are just trying so hard to take the agency away from women one way or another.

Loose fitting women's clothing is not hard to find. It's in brick and mortar stores. It's online. My wife wears it. Kids wear it, loose clothing is very fashionable right now.

When you say "not as available" what does that mean? That less of it is sold? That's because it's what sells. Most women want form-fitting clothing with smaller pockets.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 5 points 19 hours ago

There are more pants with small/no pockets available than there are pants with deep pockets. How is that hard to understand?

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 0 points 18 hours ago

Bars have more taps with IPAs than stouts or porters. It's not a grand conspiracy against non-IPA beer, it's because IPAs sell better. Retail business doesn't waste significant space on products that don't sell quickly.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago

IPAs are easier to brew.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world -2 points 19 hours ago

Yes, and that's because it's what most women want to buy. How is that hard to understand?

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago

Source for your claims?

According to a 2018 study by The Pudding, the front pockets on women’s jeans are on average 48 per cent shorter and 6.5 per cent narrower than they are on men’s jeans.

You see, since the ’50s, there has been a role reversal of sorts in the fashion industry. Handbags, which started as a convenient accessory and a fun extension of an apparel brand, are major money-makers for many luxury brands. According to Fortune Business Insights, in 2022, the North American handbag market was valued at $16.3 billion. By 2030, that number is projected to grow to $26.47 billion.

A former designer assistant at McQueen, who wishes to remain anonymous, muses that with so much money at stake, clothing could now almost be considered an accessory to the handbags. “When Tom Ford debuted his first collection for Gucci in the ’90s, almost every single look had a handbag to go with it,” they point out. “Since then, ready-to-wear and purses have gone hand in hand.”

Fellow Canadian designers Eliza Faulkner (formerly of Erdem, Roland Mouret and Zandra Rhodes and now creative director of her own brand) and Caffery Vanhorne (who worked at an undisclosed luxury house) echo our anonymous source, with Faulkner reiterating that “brands make money off accessories, not clothes.” Vanhorne also admits that he has witnessed seasons where “more than half the clothes shown on the runway never went to production — they were just to showcase bags.”

What does this mean for our original question: Do brands purposely exclude pockets in women’s clothing so women will be more likely to support the purse industry? Well, it doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines above. To quote the great philosophers known as ABBA, it all comes down to “money, money, money.”

Like J.Lo gaslighting us into believing that her and Ben Affleck’s relationship history was “the greatest love story never told,” the handbag industry essentially barged in and seduced women into believing that the purse was the answer to all their portable needs. The only obstacle in their way? The pocket.

By that logic, as long as women are denied pockets, they would be forced to spend more money on bags and thus an entire industry could be sustained by reducing the size of pouches or excluding them from women’s clothing.

Capitalism forced small pockets in women's clothing.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world -2 points 19 hours ago

When your headline is a question, the answer is "no."

You said yourself "capitalism will do what capitalism does" or words to that effect. So if more women wanted looser clothing, why would companies not start selling it?

The answer is that they have. Do just one Google search for "baggy women's jeans with pockets" and you'll see that they're readily available.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Yeah, yeah, it's all women's fault for how we're treated, the products we're offered, probably even the "pink tax". It's our fault, we should shut up. You're totally right!

Thanks for derailing the topic of misogyny to complain about some women's pet peeves about pants.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world -1 points 19 hours ago

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=baggy+womens+jeans+with+deep+pockets&iar=shopping&t=fpas

Anybody can buy baggy pants with pockets. From shein to Levi's to designer.

My issue is with men. Specifically chronically online white knights and their ironically misogynistic stances. My issue is not with women.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago

Saying that pants with deep pockets are less available than pants with small pockets does not mean pants with deep pockets don't exist.

You are pushing the false narrative that women want small pockets and then want to complain about small pockets.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago

They are quite available.

You could buy, in the next five minutes, three different styles of baggy pants in three sizes each. They'd be at your front door in a couple of days. You could try them on, test out the fit and pockets, and return the ones you don't like.

If you live in a big city or near a shopping mall, you could walk into a store and buy some big ol' pants within the hour.

If by "less available" you mean there are more SKUs offered or shelving space dedicated to "traditional" women's pants, then yeah I'll agree with you there. But it's 2026, you don't even need brick and mortar, and you can just order whatever you want.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 18 hours ago

Ok.

[-] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 19 hours ago

Edit: I’m talking about men’s opinions on women’s clothing.

It's clear that you share that opinion. Not sure why you think putting that edit in was going to clear up anything here.

this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2026

35 points (92.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

41430 readers

1303 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

6) No US Politics.

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !uspolitics@lemmy.world

7) No Hit-and-Run questions.

Please don't delete your post for no apparent reason. If you plan on deleting a question later, say so in the post, or if you feel that you have a good reason to remove it, message a mod beforehand. It's not fair to the ones who took their time to answer, and it's not in the spirit of the community.

8) No Bots.

Posts or comments from bots, LLM's, AIs, Neural Networks, Transformers, or Marvin the Paranoid Android are not welcome in AskLemmy. Real humans only please.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.