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.
Or perhaps just get a pair of pants that doesn’t suck? Designing a phone around womens complete lack of self awareness seems not so good, it’s way to volatile.
That’s the result of women choosing it over and over again…If women got to their senses and actually started NOT buying that junk, what do you think all the big mega corps producing tons and tons of clothes will do? Continue producing same shit clothes or adapting the factories to new, more reasonable clothes?
I like the idea of a foldable phone but what I really want is a phone that folds enough to fit in my women’s pants pockets.
The other solution is to make women’s pants with pockets that can actually hold things.
They do, they’re just not skin tight. You can’t really fit much into a pocket in super tight jeans.
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.
Even jeans that aren’t skin tight don’t have full pockets.
inconceivable!
Or perhaps just get a pair of pants that doesn’t suck? Designing a phone around womens complete lack of self awareness seems not so good, it’s way to volatile.
I can see you don’t spent much time with women.
Women aren’t choosing pants with shitty pockets intentionally.
That’s the result of women choosing it over and over again…If women got to their senses and actually started NOT buying that junk, what do you think all the big mega corps producing tons and tons of clothes will do? Continue producing same shit clothes or adapting the factories to new, more reasonable clothes?
Wait your pants have pockets and they’re not vestigial
Most of them are. I can really only carry things in back pockets, but then it makes sitting awkward.