Women's Pockets are Inferior (2018) | Hacker News Reader

Women's Pockets are Inferior (2018)

pudding.cool

13 pointsTomte34 comments

This is an often discussed topic online. The conclusion seems to be, women say they want big pockets but don't actually buy them if it means having a bulkier figure. The idea of more storage space is attractive in itself, except when they see how it would look.

Some claim this is all done by Big Handbag to push women to buy bags, but it seems much more plausible that clothing companies would sell big pocketed clothes if the market was big enough.

I think the conclusion might be that women are not a homogenous entity and the vocal group are small, rather than not following through.

I wonder why one brand of clothing doesn't just start making women's pants with deep pockets, and put "deep pockets!" on the tag. Seems like a huge profit opportunity.

By the way, the data visualization in the article is great.

eshakti only makes dresses with pockets, but they aren’t obviously doing 10x better than other dress companies.

Option A) the companies are misogynist and prefer to inconvenience women. Option B) they're ambivalent and don't care about market opportunities and making more money. Option C) their market analysis shows that women don't buy them, despite what some women say online about what they'd want.

Option D - it hasn’t been tried so nobody knows. Option E - so long as nobody provides great pockets, the jeans still sell.

Option F - Bigger pockets cause unsightly outlines and bulges in the tighter fitting pants that many women prefer.

That's basically option C really.

D is close to "That can't possibly be a $20 bill on the street; if it was, somebody would have picked it up", isn't it?

It's often talked and complained about, I don't think "nobody tried so nobody knows" is plausible.

E isn't convincing either. Why would "Big Jeans" conspire to keep large pockets from women? Are they trying to save a few cents by reducing the amount of raw materials? What powerful force is there to keep everyone in check so no manufacturer just gives women what they so desperately want and eats the other companies' market?

> It's often talked and complained about, I don't think "nobody tried so nobody knows" is plausible.

Can you find evidence it's been tried? By a major brand? I'm not sure anyone's making the claim that pocket size would be the number 1 determinant in jeans purchase, fit and style are still going to be important, as are perceptions of quality.

This in particular gives me pause about all the perfect-free-market responses here - women are complaining they don't get pockets. Not saying "I don't buy jeans because they have inadequate pockets". I'm not even sure they're saying "I would switch brand because of larger pockets". Just "Why no decent pockets for us?"

> What powerful force is there to keep everyone in check

Inertia?

> Can you find evidence it's been tried? By a major brand?

That's quite the goal post though. Even if a major brand tried it, it might not be the right cut, color, price, marketing campaign or season.

> Just "Why no decent pockets for us?"

Probably cecause they don't care about decent pockets enough to switch brands or buy a non-major-brand product or start a company to create jeans that have decent products. But I'm sure some have started those companies. And likely found that, despite all those comments, it's not important to the buying decision for most women, and it's much easier to make a living by writing articles about The Jeans Cartel's strategies to oppress women by not allowing larger pockets.

> That's quite the goal post though. Even if a major brand tried it, it might not be the right cut, color, price, marketing campaign or season.

Which is precisely the point I was making, you're arguing that the market will fix this, when there are a variety of confounding factors at play.

> And likely found that, despite all those comments

Which ones? I'm not seeing claims it's the single most important buying factor, just that it's a problem.

I find these posts that somehow the market will fix it, and clearly if it hasn't then it's a non-issue, to be facile.

> I find these posts that somehow the market will fix it, and clearly if it hasn't then it's a non-issue, to be facile.

You're part of the market, if you don't believe it's a non-issue, fix it. If you're right, you'll get rich in the process.

Saying "the market won't listen to the customers" is an easy out and very unlikely, because those companies want to make money and if there was "that one simple trick" to sell more and make more money, chances are extremely high that they'd use it.

> You're part of the market, if you don't believe it's a non-issue, fix it.

It's not my area of expertise, and I've already explained that there are confounding issues at work here.

> if there was "that one simple trick" to sell more

Literally nobody is claiming that apart from people like yourself who want to dismiss it.

I like having vestigial pockets. If I have real pockets, I put things in them. It ends up ruining the lines of my outfit. And then things like purses rub against them, which ends up hurting after not much time. And then I put my hands in my pockets, because I'm a nervous person.

Not everyone hates girl-clothing pockets. By a long shot.

Also they’re effective at stymying pickpockets.

Ordinarily I'd be dead-set against javascript-heavy pages where plain text would do, but this page really gets things right. The interactive elements really help illustrate the point, it loads quickly without hundreds of 3rd party requests and the page is surprisingly functional with js disabled. The warning that "you’re about to experience some scroll-driven animations" and the possibility to skip ahead was a nice touch too.

Clicking the 'O' in the title reveals a secret which made me smile!

The rest of the site is full of gems too; I really enjoyed pudding.cool/2021/03/love-and-ai/

PS. I have craved pants with decent pockets my whole life.

It’s all true, and seems to hinge on an outdated idea that women are more concerned about the line of their clothing than any practicality at all.

Pretty crappy really.

Historically, women used to have the best pockets: detachable pockets you could reach through gowns and dresses [0].

[0]: http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/a/history-of-pockets/

Meanwhile I suspect a lot of men wish they could carry handbags.

You cant get away with much more than a wallet and a cell phone in pants. A bag on the other hand ... Keys, Huge wallet than can actually take lots of coins, pocketknife/leatherman, screwdriver, usb stick. Glasses cleaner, and probably a dozen more things.

Men use backpacks or briefcases for that.

I don’t think I routinely want to take more than keys, wallet and phone with me. And I’m happy phones are taking over wallet duty!

Men's handbags exist. I have one which I am happy with.

It is roughly 22×16×10㎝ on the outside and made out of black, tightly woven polyamide fibres (like backpacks) and is water repellent. It has a single broad strap, quite similar to car's safety belt in appearance. It is worn over one shoulder with the bag on the opposite hip. When I ride a bicycle, I adjust the strap to make it shorter and wear the bag on the back or under the armpit.

The bag contains mobile phone, face mask, key-bundle, wallet, hard plastic glasses etui, earphones, pack of disposable cellulose tissues, small notepad (shopping list) and a biro, sometimes detachable bicycle lights.

> Meanwhile I suspect a lot of men wish they could carry handbags.

Men can and frequently do carry handbags or the fubctional equivalent (and not just the “murses” that get mocked for violating classic gender norms: a soft-sided briefcase/laptop bag with a shoulder strap, or a messenger bag, or...)

In fact, I'd argue that this, as with pockets, is a case where the masculine-coded offerings are often far more practical than the feminine-coded ones.

My partner complains about this constantly when it comes to womens jeans.

I can't even comprehend buying a pair of pants that didn't have usable pockets. Up there with high heels in terms of form over function.

Its a interesting study in revealed preferences. I've been hearing about this for years so I presume people have started offering larger pockets in women's fashion, the fact that they aren't more popular would seem to imply that consumers don't actually want them.

I can't find a pair of jeans with decent pockets yet. I resorted to buy hiking pants as they do have large enough pockets, but it's a bit sad to be wearing the same form everyday.

That's what I've tried arguing - but my partner is adamant that they simply do not make them, there's no option.

I believe her!

> I presume people have started offering larger pockets in women's fashion

Can you find anything to support such presumption?

I assume there isn't a few million dollars laying out in plain sight for anyone to pick up. I could be wrong, there also might be some sort of women's fashion cabal that will break my legs if I try but, I doubt it.

I get why you would make the assumption, but markets are not always perfectly rational.

Big brands might not want to take the risk, small brands might not gain the traction as it's not enough of a determinant to make people buy something completely unfamiliar or associated in their minds with quality/good fit etc.

(The women complaining about this are probably still buying jeans, so it's also not clear that money is actually being left on the table, they're just dissatisfied with what they are still buying.)

When my wife had time to sew more she would sew her own khaki pants with usable pockets, because they were impossible to buy normally.

I'd like to assert, having seen the entire process, sewing pants is not a trivial exercise, and she would much rather have gone to Kohl's.

I'm buying the same brand and model of jeans for the last 10 years. Recently I put on an old pair and found that my modern mobile phone doesn't fit in its pocket.

(2018)

Some more previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17769517

Reply on news.ycombinator.com