Well, yes, but I meant the form-fitting fashion that was the rage when pockets disappeared from womenswear between like 1910 and the late 1950s. Women still weren’t allowed to wear overtly manly clothes except in certain contexts, so everything from the waist down had to be overtly feminine, since just wearing man pants was too subversive.

In hindsight, that was a really weird analogy. In my defense, I was pretty high.

To be fair, it’s really hard to design fashion that’s stylish AND has pockets.

It’s hard enough to design something that looks good on a variably sized and kinetic shape. Now make it look good and have storage.

In that era, though, many couples slept in separate beds and pushed them together for sexy times.

Both sets of my grandparents even slept in separate rooms. When I was very small, my parents had 2 beds in 1 room. That’s how it was often done.

So that doesn’t really help much. If anything, the pushing 2 beds together was media speak for sexy times…

It wasn’t exactly subtle.

The Victorian era (and before) was chock full of ladies’ pockets. It’s just that they weren’t sewn into the garment – you’d have a slit in your skirt, and use a waist pocket like this that was separate and worn beneath your outer clothes as an undergarment. You’d line up the slit in your pocket with the slit in your outer garment.

A bonus was you could misalign the slits to easily thwart pickpocketers whilst travelling.

Women losing pockets to fashion is a fairly recent thing, actually – since the early 1900s when slim, body-conforming things like pencil dresses and trousers entered the scene, and natural, non-bustled hips being on display became cool. The secret pocket turned into a handbag, because women were still expected to carry all and sundry in order to keep their face and hair fresh all day; men weren’t required to carry more than a few paper goods, whereas if a woman couldn’t reapply her face and lips all day, a scandal might ensue. Lipstick, powder, and other accoutrements take up more space than a pencil dress allows without ruining the silhouette, so handbags were just assumed. And if you assume handbags, what use are pockets that might ruin the figure?

Nowadays, couture fashion assumes handbags for the same reason architecture assumes lifts. Why ruin your design with 12 staircases?

I want pockets, too, but anyhow, thanks for coming to my TED talk.

From now on, I’m calling the paedophile in chief the Turbulent Priest. Maybe someone will solve it.

On the plus side, this fucker has given me a reason to live. I am now determined to outlive him out of spite.

Busy masturbating with dildos made of money in every orifice. And then inventing new orifices.

No. Easy question.

Neat. Not at all too late or anything. Cool.

Typo, sorry.

As an UXD, design is also when and how it fails. This aspect is largely neglected by a lot of systems, though.

A well-designed system fails elegantly.

Hey, it’s @pentastam! I remember you.

I upvoted you before:

deleted by creator

You’re fucking welcome, for fuck’s fuck.

Yes! Jesus, if you have to ask…

Fuck you in particular. I don’t know why and I don’t care.

I still feel like he’s judging me. And I am lacking.

Soooo many fishes could fit that description, but I’m glad my dude found his bad dude. Like, dude.

We need to start calling this Trump’s Folly everywhere and for now on.

Quick reminder that Ivanka made her dad swear not to date anyone younger than her when she was 17.

Totally normal conversation for a teen girl to have with her father, and not horribly creepy at all.

Like, what the fuck prompted her to ask him to promise this?

Surely not whatever is implied by these photos: