The Political History of Pockets A Look at Why Women's Clothing Lacks Functionality

The debate over the lack of functional pockets in women's clothing is more than just a fashion inconvenience; it's a centuries-old controversy rooted in history, economics, and gender politics. The common complaint from women, "girls need to carry things too!", stems from a long pattern of design choices that prioritize aesthetics and a specific "feminine silhouette" over practicality and utility.

The Historical Divide

The disparity in pockets between men and women dates back to the 17th century. While men’s pockets were sewn directly into their garments like coats and trousers, women were forced to rely on "tie-on" pockets. These were separate pouches tied around the waist and worn underneath their skirts and petticoats. Accessing them meant reaching through a slit in the outer garment, a cumbersome and often impractical process. This fundamental difference established an early sartorial divide: men's clothing was designed for utility and freedom, while women's was built around layers and a lack of direct accessibility to their belongings.

This trend was cemented during the French Revolution when slim, "neoclassical" silhouettes came into vogue. The bulky, tie-on pockets were incompatible with the new, form fitting styles, leading to their replacement with tiny, ornamental purses called reticules. These purses could barely hold a handkerchief and a coin, a design choice some historians believe was politically motivated to limit women's ability to carry political pamphlets or other items that could fuel revolutionary activity.

A Modern Economic and Social Issue

The controversy persists today. A 2018 study by The Pudding revealed that on average, women's front jean pockets are 48% shorter and 6.5% narrower than men's. The problem is so widespread that many women can’t even fit a standard smartphone or a wallet in their pockets, while men can easily carry multiple items.

This pocket inequality is a result of several factors. The fashion industry often defends its choices by arguing that pockets disrupt the "clean lines" and sleek silhouette of women's clothing. This arugment reinforces the traditional notion that a woman's primary role is to be decorative and visually appealing, not functional or practical. Additionally, there is a powerful economic incentive: by not providing functional pockets, fashion brands indirectly drive the demand for handbags and purses, a multi billion dollar industry. A quote attributed to designer Christian Dior perfectly encapsulates this mentality: "Men have pockets to keep things in, women for decoration."

The "Afro tax" and "pocket tax" on women's clothing represent a broader conversation about fairness and equality. The demand for pockets in women's clothing has become a grassroots movement, with viral social media campaigns and brands explicitly marketing their garments based on the presence of functional, spacious pockets. It is a sign of a shifting mindset, where women are rejecting the idea that they should sacrifice comfort and convenience for a narrow definition of beauty. The battle for bigger pockets is a small but powerful part of a larger fight for gender equality and functional design in a world where women are no longer just static objects of beauty.