nevexhausting day of shopping done. mostly turned out to be trying things on in store to order online afterwards. but, i have summer hiking shoes! and quick-dry pants on the way.
also, i just want to say, these shorts have one (1) very small pocket. "everyday adventurer" my ass. how are you supposed to go on an adventure with ONE TINY POCKET. women's clothing is a trash fire
Side note: I've actually put some thought into how to legislate pocket parity, if, say, one were to use it as an election campaign promise or something. I think it would have to be an incentive via tax cuts or tariffs. Like, companies that sell women's clothing with as many pockets, and just as big pockets, as men's would get a tax break (per fashion season, presumably). Or there's a tariff on imported women's clothing and it gets waived if it has adequate pockets. It would probably have to be at the federal level to be worth it.
Some considerations:
- what about companies that only sell women's clothing; are they exempt?
- for tariffs, what about clothing manufactured in Canada?
- how to prove clothing is for women (e.g. if it's a fairly unisex style, like sweatpants or something, and sizing is S, M, L; or if it uses waist size)
- how to prove styles correspond? what if there are no corresponding men's and women's styles?
- what's the most efficient way to have companies demonstrate compliance? How do you enforce it? Send out pocket-inspecting secret shoppers or something?
I think it would have to be limited (at least at first) to companies that sell men's and women's versions of a particular style—e.g. Uniqlo's flannel shirts, Patagonia's "Baggies" shorts, etc. And to companies over a certain size, based on market share or average revenue or company valuation or something.
(A non-legislative way might be a social media campaign, whether official and glossy or sneaky and DIY. Carrot: promoting companies that put adequate pockets in clothes. Stick: shaming the ones that don't. TikTok, video/podcast sponsorship, stickering/flyering, stealthily adding your own tags to clothes in stores, etc.)
filipa mv@nev as someone who still remembers the active decision to begin wearing women’s clothing… i thought in modern times it had mostly to do with it looking unsightly to have all this junk hanging around
like pockets in dresses are great but mostly as somewhere to put your hands or only very temporarily a key or a single napkin or a child’s special stone
@phillmv well sure but then why do men get pockets you can put a phone in???
At the end of the day I don't really care why, I just want pockets.
@nev fwiw back when i was a guy i also got the feedback that it looked bad to have my phone in my front pocket. for some reason its more socially acceptable to be frumpy and unkempt if you’re a guy?
i also wonder why. me personally i discovered that i hated shopping and clothes and everything felt wrong because i didn’t like being a guy? but that’s not the average answer.
as to you: you can always buy a men’s adventure shorts ;)
@nev looking it up the answer seems to be https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/womens-apparel-doesn-t-have-enough-pockets-1.7071091
slimmer silhouettes for women became the fashion & female gender roles kept you in the house so not seen as necessary & wearing a purse became common
but why hasn’t capitalism answered the call? it’s very unsatisfying as an answer
Women's apparel doesn't have enough pockets. This expert says that has to change | CBC Radio
Women's clothes have never had an equal chance at pockets, says Hannah Carlson, a design expert who teaches at Rhode Island School of Design. She wrote about it in her new book Pockets: An Intimate History of How We Keep Things Close.
@phillmv (actually, it occurs to me that some companies have answered the call. There's an online dress store whose name escapes me where you can customize the dress, and one of the options is to add pockets.)
Anke