Men are finding some women’s clothes are better designed and cut, made of better fabric – and cheaper. From cotton vests on influencers to designer blazers on Prince Harry, men borrowing womenswear is on the rise
Women’s pants don’t have pockets because putting stuff in your pockets causes weird bagging on your upper thighs and ruins the silhouette of the pants. However, I do agree the utility of having pockets is hard to live without.
Women’s pants don’t have pockets because it’s a way to force them to buy purses.
Every person ever who has said that this is purely due to women’s choice needs to go shop for pants once. It’s a miracle to be able to find a single pair of pants that either isn’t 6 inches too long or 3 inches too wide at the waist. Women don’t have luxury of choosing pockets when most pants are either so long they drag through every puddle or too wide to the point of showing the whole ass crack when sitting down.
I have the exact same problems finding men’s pants. The leg length never makes sense with waist size. Not to mention being a skinny guy having one pair of pants in my size in the entire store, if I’m lucky. I almost always have to settle for at least one size to big.
You say that as if altering clothing isn’t something that takes time to learn, time to do, risks of ruining your clothes, affect it’s durability, and difficult to do well. If it were so easy no one would pay for it to be done. Go to your local tailor and ask how much it is to hem a pair of pants or take the waist in.
Imagine everytine you buy a pair of pants you have to mentally prepare yourself to put the time and effort into sewing your own pants, something that most guys don’t have to do.
I like having pockets
Removed by mod
I had a men’s hoodie from Bench that had those thumb holes. Loved it.
They’re out there.
Removed by mod
If you don’t mind being a billboard, the Noctua hoodie is amazing and has thumb holes.
Women’s pants don’t have pockets because putting stuff in your pockets causes weird bagging on your upper thighs and ruins the silhouette of the pants. However, I do agree the utility of having pockets is hard to live without.
I’m more convinced the lack of pockets is to force women to buy handbags and purses. That weird bagging can definitely be designed out.
Women’s pants don’t have pockets because it’s a way to force them to buy purses.
Every person ever who has said that this is purely due to women’s choice needs to go shop for pants once. It’s a miracle to be able to find a single pair of pants that either isn’t 6 inches too long or 3 inches too wide at the waist. Women don’t have luxury of choosing pockets when most pants are either so long they drag through every puddle or too wide to the point of showing the whole ass crack when sitting down.
I have the exact same problems finding men’s pants. The leg length never makes sense with waist size. Not to mention being a skinny guy having one pair of pants in my size in the entire store, if I’m lucky. I almost always have to settle for at least one size to big.
They do have pockets though.
Is altering not an option?
You say that as if altering clothing isn’t something that takes time to learn, time to do, risks of ruining your clothes, affect it’s durability, and difficult to do well. If it were so easy no one would pay for it to be done. Go to your local tailor and ask how much it is to hem a pair of pants or take the waist in.
Imagine everytine you buy a pair of pants you have to mentally prepare yourself to put the time and effort into sewing your own pants, something that most guys don’t have to do.
The store I buy jeans from adjusts the length for free.
Usually it’s quite cheap, around ten or so bucks here.
Jeez, you can take this a little less personally. It was a suggestion.
Having to spend an extra 33% the cost of each pair of pants is hardly cheap.