The pockets, more than anything else, are the area of fashion that requires attention and innovation. It is time for brands to design more inclusive clothing, especially with the growing role of women working in the sector. Pockets are useful, and no one should be denied them on the basis that they are female.
Gen-Z influencers are often asked about the role sexism has in determining whether or not a garment is given a pocket. Men’s clothing has large pockets that are visible, but women’s clothing is usually small or lacks pockets altogether. Men are naturally content with their clothing and don’t say much about it. Women who are dissatisfied with their lack of money have complained on social media. This is not a recent design. Since the beginning, women’s clothing was devoid of pockets. The protests have been going on for more than a century. Charlotte P. Gilman, in 1905, wrote in the New York Times: “Women carry bags from time to time, sometimes sewn into them, sometimes tied onto them, and sometimes held in their hands, but a purse is not a wallet.” This couldn’t be more true. A bag is not a pocket. Pockets, and not any other part of clothing, are what create the gender divide.
A study found that pockets on women’s jeans are 48 percent shorter and 6 percent narrower than those of men’s jeans. Men’s bags have grown to accommodate the growing demand for large-screen smartphones. Womenswear pockets, however, are getting smaller or even missing altogether.
Bags were used to transport goods by men and women in the medieval period. These bags looked like fanny packs that were suspended from waist belts. These bags are often worn underneath layers of clothing to protect them from theft. To access the bags or pouches, slits were added to the dress. In the late 17th century, men’s clothing began to include pockets. The pockets were sewn into coats, waistcoats, and pants. Women’s clothing, however, did not undergo the same evolution. The women continued to hide their everyday items in huge, voluminous bags that were hidden beneath their dresses. The French Revolution brought about a dramatic change when wide and lavish skirts began to be pulled closer to the body. Restraint was the order of the day at the end of the 18th century. The natural waistline was moved upwards, and the slim and streamlined shape was adopted. The slimmer look left no room for concealed pouches, so a small decorated purse was used. Waist chains became very popular. The belongings would be hung from the belts.
Women’s rebellion reached a peak at the turn of the twentieth century. It also led to the need for pockets and instructions on how they could be sewn into skirts. A New York Times article in 1910 stated, “Plenty Pockets on Suffragette Suit.” The suits had seven or eight pockets. World War II led to the development of functional clothing with sacks. It was not because women demanded it, but rather that they took on jobs previously reserved for men in factories and offices. This inclusivity lasted only a short time. Women resigned from their positions as men returned from war. Fashion in the post-war era expected women to be feminine and abandon all masculine or practical styles. The hourglass silhouette returned, and pockets were no longer allowed.
Paul Johnson stated in The Spectator (2011) that “Men use pockets to store things, and women decorate.” Gender has a major impact on the purpose of clothing. Womenswear is more concerned with aesthetics than menswear. Women still struggle to find dresses with pockets that are large enough, even with the advent of gender-neutral clothes. Women’s clothes often have ridiculously small pocket sizes. Many clothing items do not have pockets at all. The fake bags are by far the most annoying. It’s not just pants that are affected, but also cardigans, sweaters, hoodies, and jackets.
This clearly shows the problem of inconvenience. The lack of pockets on womenswear is also indicative of the need for inclusivity. Pockets are not just a fashion statement. Pockets also have a practical purpose. Brands that design womenswear but deny this purpose assume that women or gender-nonconforming people wearing womenswear carry purses. This logic seems very obvious. The handbag industry has grown tremendously since World War II. Women’s clothing creates the demand for handbags without pockets. This conspiracy theory is based on the fact that the global bag market is $47 billion and that brands design handbags to match their stylish clothing.
However, some brands are leading the way in changing how clothing is defined by gender. Athleisure dresses must-have pockets, even with the growing demand for women’s bags. Superfit Hero and Bandier all sell leggings that have pockets with plenty of space for running and gym workouts. Bandier’s WSLY collection offers sweatsuits with pockets that are both gender-neutral and sustainable. Argent creates high-end women’s workwear with pockets at the core of their design. They have deep pockets in their trousers and iPhone pockets within blazers.
There is still a need for design innovation and attention in this area. It is time for brands to design more inclusive clothing, especially with the growing role of women working in the sector. Pockets are useful, and no one should be denied them on the basis that they are female.