Women's World
Related: About this forum'Wouldn't it make life easier?': the growing campaign for pockets on women's clothes
Small things can mean a lot, and all revolutions start somewhere. So it is that the humble pocket, a repository for small things and once a minor consideration in clothes design, has become big news.
A growing movement decrying the lack of proper pockets in womens clothing has begun to find disciples in the world of high fashion, as well as among mainstream chains.
A new study of the feminist question of pockets, published on 14 September has already made a sizeable impact, despite the modest aims of the author, American academic Hannah Carlson. I was very careful to make each chapter fun, because I thought nobody was going to read a whole book about pockets. So Ive been surprised by the attention, she says.
When planning her book, Pockets: An Intimate History of How We Keep Things Close, Carlson says she kept in mind that similar micro-histories studies purporting to explain the world through the analysis of, say, the development of the paperclip have been the object of parody. But she was sure of her ground.
It is even possible, she suggests, that the true age of the pocket has now arrived, because everything necessary for daily life has become so small. Cash is of limited use, and address books, diaries and maps are all dead. Phones, and perhaps a lipstick, a key or a comb, are really all a woman needs, and this might mean we are not lumbered with bags any more.
Carlson, who lectures on apparel at the Rhode Island School of Design, will be heartened by some of the images emerging from London fashion week, where bulky jackets with big pockets are evident on male and female models. Vogue World, the sparkly red carpet event in the West End on 14 Septemberalso featured bits of bold pocketry, including on Kate Winslet, who wore a white trouser suit. And on the high street, the nostalgia for 00s looks has led to an outbreak of low-slung pockets on cargo pants.
https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2023/sep/17/wouldnt-it-make-life-easier-the-growing-campaign-for-pockets-on-womens-clothes
When I used to sew mine and my daughter's clothes, I put pockets in just about everything, whether the pattern called for it or not. I was clever enough to do it. Now I don't, but it's a sense of annoyance when they aren't there. I wear pants most of the time though.
Blue Owl
(54,726 posts)multigraincracker
(34,068 posts)Polly Hennessey
(7,451 posts)Pockets are perks we (I) need/require. 😊
bucolic_frolic
(46,970 posts)Designer label shirt, no pockets, simplified placket (no stiffener, no folds), $75. In other words they remove all the costs and materials, then raise the price.
Jilly_in_VA
(10,877 posts)now much it costs to get stuff tailored if you don't know how to do it yourself When I got married, the tailoring cost more than my dress did! I could have done it myself but didn't have anyone to do the measuring for me. Men were the first to get unders and t-shirts with no scratchy labels and women had to raise hell to get those.Just as a for instance.....
2naSalit
(92,663 posts)Or I probably wont wear it unless there are plenty of pockets in the other things I wear with it.
zeusdogmom
(1,047 posts)Pockets. Lovely deep pockets in multiple places to hold the stuff I need to have with me.
Keys dont fall out. Phone stays put. Skorts even have a lovely hidden zipper pocket just right for credit card, cash, etc.
Bayard
(24,145 posts)Unless I'm going out in the real world, I always have Chapstick and my pocket knife in a pocket.
chowmama
(506 posts)Pockets are not optional. I add them to everything but t-shirts, whether they're in the pattern or not. I want enough pockets to make James West jealous. (I haven't tried the one down the back of the shirt collar, but I'm thinking...)
If only Duluth Trading did a petites section. Nothing there fits me.
Jilly_in_VA
(10,877 posts)which is an option there if you're short enough. Instead of a medium, I'll buy a small and it works,
WhiteTara
(30,155 posts)get the vote. Pockets were removed so that women couldn't carry subversive materials.
Of course in the 60s they said it was about our sex appeal. Women had just learned they could enjoy sex, so they said, okay, I want to be sexy, so no pockets.