Why can’t women have pockets?

[MarmitePizza]

I know this isn’t a new idea, but why is it that men get all the pockets?

I was looking at M&S “Family” Christmas Pyjamas (where they do them in the same festive print for men, women and children). I only want them for myself though - not a cheesy matching family photo!

The men’s ones have nice pockets in the trousers, but the women’s… nope!! Why can’t we have useful clothes as well? They’re literally the same but they added in pockets just for men!

AIBU to think women could have pockets too?

(And AIBU to also be slightly glad that as I am so fat I can fit in the men’s ones and have the men’s pocket anyway?!)

Cos and uniqlo

I've noticed more men, young ones in particular using cross body bags.
They must want to keep their pockets empty so they can put their hands in their grey Nike trackie bottoms.

Is it really, though? Look at the replies to this thread - most are saying they actively don't want pockets.

Not difficult to extrapolate that into purchasing intent.

Do t be daft I'm a size 10 and pockets. Change the whole shape around my hips. Clothes just don't hang properly woth pockets and particularly of you use them.

I'm in the ban pockets group

Some pockets of mine have been ruined by keys and sharp objects so wear and tear risk sometimes.

Sometimes have too much to sensibly put in pockets, but not enough to really justify a rucksack which might not be a good look for some occasions anyway.

Wearing a rucksack on a hot day or cycling can lead to excess sweating. Sweat patches aren't yet a fashion trend.

It's been more of a thing for men in some European countries for a long while, apparently. I've only got one ATM but I can see a use for a few variations in different scenarios.

I've never had a dressing gown without pockets, even if it is just one.

Not RTFT, but check out this Yougov polling from 2020 about different items of clothing and pockets: https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zmnnuiy8uf/YouGov%20-%20Women%27s%20pockets.pdf

It doesn't compare deep/shallow pockets, which is where a lot of the issue lies, but only pockets/no pockets/don't care.

Women express a very strong preference for pockets in coats, trousers and shorts, while the preference in respect of dresses and skirts is close to an even three-way split, but still with a preference for pockets mildly winning. Women's preference for pockets in pyjama bottoms (33 percent) was only slightly lower than men's preference for pockets in pyjama bottoms (37 percent).

They also asked about whether respondents had decided not to buy items because they contained or did not contain pockets.

Do you never wear jeans then?

I personally don't care what they do with dresses or skirts as I don't wear them. I just want full size usable pockets on clothes that do already tend to have pockets.

I just buy men's stuff. Much more practical.

It doesn't compare deep/shallow pockets, which is where a lot of the issue lies, but only pockets/no pockets/don't care.

I wonder if shallow pockets mean more women don't care, as why does it really matter if you have a pocket you can't even fit your fingers into? Shallow pockets mean keys dig into your hip and keys are all that will fit so they are next to useless anyway.

The interesting part is the difference between what the respondents said they wore most, and their purchasing intent - in every case, apart from jackets, the "I'd only buy it if it didn't have pockets" and "I'd buy it whether it had pockets or not" together massively exceed "I'd only buy it if it had pockets" for women.

Of course, that purchasing intent is the only metric that matters, because that's what drives the motivation for manufacturers. Given that it's cheaper to make clothes without pockets, it's pretty easy to see why it happens from that survey.

There's also the fact that men tend to go for clothes that are a more relaxed fit (aside from the skinny-jeans guys, but...thankfully there aren't too many of them around these days, ew), whereas women tend to buy clothes that are more figure-hugging. It's pretty obvious that pockets are going to be more useful (and comfortable) in baggier clothes.

Pockets have never been a consideration when I've been buying clothes.
I have two dressing gowns one has pockets but the other doesn't. I don't favour one over the other. I can't see a need for pockets in lounge wear when I'm around my house.
I'm not bothered about pockets in my dresses and trousers because I don't want keys, phones and purses dragging my clothes down. On a day basis I use cross body bags to keep my hands free. Pockets wouldn't be big enough to hold what I carry.

I agree with you OP.
Loads of womens clothes don’t have pockets.
I hate carrying handbags, if I had a pocket I could put the little I need in them.

I often won’t buy something if it doesn’t have pockets or end up wearing a coat everywhere even in the summer. Just for the pockets.
I even had pockets sewn into my wedding dress