Why Don’t Women’s Clothes Have More Pockets? (2024)

Style|Why Don’t Women’s Clothes Have More Pockets?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/style/pockets-womens-clothing.html

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

Supported by

SKIP ADVERTIsem*nT

ASK Vanessa

A reader wonders why pockets in women’s wear remain “small and useless” — when they’re included at all. The answer is tangled up with a host of social issues, our critic writes.

Why Don’t Women’s Clothes Have More Pockets? (1)

Why don’t women’s clothes have more pockets? And when they do, why are they so small and useless? It’s like being short-sheeted. I cannot believe this is still going on in the 21st century. Please explain. — Shoba

The pocket problem is a perennial one, for good reason. The story of those — often, as you say, tiny — compartments is crammed to the brim with plot twists that involve sexism, racism, control, economic disparity and more. Who knew so many hot-button social issues could be contained in such a tiny space?

Well, maybe Darwin. After all, pockets make evolutionary sense. In theory, the more necessities you can carry on your body, the more efficiently you can move through the world. As an article in The New York Times in 1899 read: If “Adam and Eve both began life without any pockets, it seems to me that the difference in the progress of the sexes toward pockets illustrates and proves the superiority of the male. Man’s pockets have developed, improved, and increased with the advances of civilization. Woman is actually retrograding — losing ground and pockets.”

(Seriously, the paper published that. Going through the archives can be a truly delightful experience.)

Indeed, pockets have been an issue for so long that a number of books have been written about them. There was, for example, “The Pocket: A Hidden History of Women’s Lives,” by Barbara Burman and Ariane Fennetaux; “Pockets: The Problem With Society Is in Women’s Clothing,” by Audrey N. Glickman; and, most recently, “Pockets: An Intimate History of How We Keep Things Close,” by Hannah Carlson.

When I emailed Ms. Carlson to ask her to explain the deal with pockets, she pointed out that pockets “became standardized in men’s wear as the suit transitioned from a craft to an industrialized product in the 1850s.” Pockets, she wrote, are considered just “a part of doing business in men’s wear.”

When it came to women’s wear, on the other hand, individual dressmakers ruled on the need for pockets. “People blamed fashion and women’s vanity for a lack of pockets,” Ms. Carlson wrote, because pockets could mess with the line of a dress or garment, especially if they were filled with stuff. “Activist Elizabeth Cady Stanton had to plead with her dressmaker to include a pocket in her gown. Her dressmaker countered that pockets would ‘bulge you out just awful!’”

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Advertisem*nt

SKIP ADVERTIsem*nT

Why Don’t Women’s Clothes Have More Pockets? (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Zonia Mosciski DO

Last Updated:

Views: 5875

Rating: 4 / 5 (71 voted)

Reviews: 86% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Zonia Mosciski DO

Birthday: 1996-05-16

Address: Suite 228 919 Deana Ford, Lake Meridithberg, NE 60017-4257

Phone: +2613987384138

Job: Chief Retail Officer

Hobby: Tai chi, Dowsing, Poi, Letterboxing, Watching movies, Video gaming, Singing

Introduction: My name is Zonia Mosciski DO, I am a enchanting, joyous, lovely, successful, hilarious, tender, outstanding person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.