As women, we can collectively conclude that we hate that women’s clothing does not have pockets. When your perfect trousers or jacket or dress has pockets, yes, that’s another level of happiness! It is so frustrating to go shopping to find out that your perfect piece doesn’t have pockets! Either they are too small, or they are fake!
Lots of trends have come and gone, but the demand for pockets has always remained unheard of. Well, the fashion industry being male-dominated can be one of the reasons. The history of women’s pockets is surprisingly very political.
It has been associated with rights, freedom, and independence that women throughout history fought to achieve.
Sexist History Of No Pockets In Women’s Clothing
The history of no pockets in women’s clothing dates back to the 17th century. Back then, both men and women carried their belongings in a pouch stitched to their clothes. As criminals became clever, people started hiding their external pockets under layers of clothes.
Pockets then found their way as a permanent part of men’s clothing. Everything from trousers to coats had pockets sewn onto them. But surprisingly, women still had to carry bags tied to their waists and rely on having separate pockets that sat underneath layers of clothing.
Due to many layers of clothing, if a woman needs to access the contents of her pocket, she would have to get undressed. Women could carry their items around with them, but they could not get them out in public. And the inequality of pockets was born.
However, there was still a little hope that pockets would find their way to women’s clothing. But then the French Revolution happened.
Also Read: Women’s Fashion: Here Have A Look At The Most Impractical and Uncomfortable Ones
French Revolution changed everything. Tight-fitting skirts and slimmer silhouettes came into style. Women no longer could wear pockets under clothes because there was no room for pouchy pockets.
Some say this was all a way to keep women powerless. The fewer women could carry, the less freedom they had. By taking away pockets, they limited women’s ability to travel independently, be in public spaces, and carry writings. This way, they could not secretly carry items around.
At the peak of the 20th century, women started to reclaim their pockets. The Rational Dress Society emphasized freedom of movement, encouraged women to dress for comfort and health. They ditched uneasy clothing such as corsets.
Bags Are Not Pockets
The simple reason why women’s clothing still doesn’t have pockets is to sustain the entire bags industry. By excluding pockets from women’s clothing, they ultimately rely on bags to carry their stuff.
The fear that women might carry something secret or deadly in their pockets is funny to me. We can’t even fit a chapstick in it, forget about something deadly!
Christian Dior is alleged to have said, “Men have pockets to keep things in, women for decoration.”
This sentence means that women’s dresses are designed for beauty while men’s are designed for utility. Women are busy being looked at, so why do they need a pocket?
All this is too much to ask for, I guess?
Image Credits: Google Images
Sources: FeminismIndia, Vox, Verve, Melina Flabiano
Find The Blogger: @PrernaMagan
This Post Is Tagged Under: Feminism, Feminist, Why women’s clothing do not have pockets, pockets, no pockets in women’s clothing, Dresses, corsets, French revolution, the sexist history behind no pockets in women’s clothing, what is feminism, not all men, who are anti-feminists, France, rights, independence, freedom, bags, purses, pouches, Chanel, Dior, Louis Vuitton, YSL, Luxury clothing, why men hate feminists, Dhaka Muslin, Bengal Muslin, What is Muslin, The East India Company, Why did British destroy the Muslin industry of India, Marie Antoinette, Joséphine Bonaparte, Jane Austen
Other Recommendations:
Dhaka Muslin: The Lost Ancient Fabric That No One Knows How To Make Anymore
