• mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Yes and no… Women do complain about a lack of pockets, while simultaneously buying pants that physically don’t have room for pockets.

    But on the other side of the same coin, women’s heavy duty cargo pants have smaller interior pockets too. Like the exterior pouch pockets may be the same/equivalent size, but the main front and back pockets are often still tiny. There’s no real way to rationalize that or blame women for it, because that’s the entire point of the pants, and there is 100% enough room for larger pockets in those baggier pants.

    And no, they often can’t just buy men’s pants, because the cut is very different. Guys tend to have narrower hips and wider waists. Women wearing men’s pants will tend to have the waistband fit (but can’t get their hips into them) or be able to get their hips into the pants (but then need to cinch down the waist by a ridiculous and uncomfortable amount). Women’s pants tend to have more hip room and narrow waistbands, to account for that.

    • The Velour Fog @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      I am AFAB - been wearing mens pants for years and I don’t have a problem fitting into them. Probably largely depends on individual body shape and even then, taking measurements and matching it to the correct waistband/inseam size usually works out.

      My crackpot conspiracy theory is that women’s pants pockets are smaller in order to force women to buy and use purses.