Yes, a lot of women’s clothes have things which look like pockets, but aren’t. Since, she feels, it’s obvious that women wouldn’t design things like that, it must be men. Men who don’t want women to be able to carry things. Men who want to handicap women and keep them from their full potential. I.e. a patriarchy.
If they were fake pockets, they wouldn’t be able to bunch up, nor would they be sewn shut.
This comic would have beem a lot funnier (and just as politically critical) if the artist had used Bill’s title word in the fourth panel.
P.S. @ Andréa: In this case the fake “pockets” are simply sewn-on squares of pre-“distressed” (and creased) denim.
Women’s clothing, especially suits and pants, frequently have the pockets hand-sewn closed (at least the clothes I buy do) to keep them smooth and flat during shipping and display. You’re supposed to snip and pull out the threads after purchase.
Yes, the pockets were sewn ‘closed’, not ‘on’, as a fake pocket would be.
The strip’s a year old. Anyone know if the next strip(s) tell us whether they’re faux pockets or real pockets sewn shut?
If anyone has any doubts about this being a real problem: my daughter had more than one pair of jeans with such idiotic fake pockets – and that was back when she was in kindergarten! None of them were of the “cut-the-thread-to-open” type; at least one pair had fake pocket cover flaps that could be buttoned down, but no actual pockets underneath them (not even fake ones).
I think I’ve had this on trousers of my own. Ones for work, you know, “dress pants”. They had a slit and button, but it did’t open, nor would it turn into a pocket if you removed the threading. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this on formal jackets too. Whatever patriarchy she’s referring to isn’t only targeting women.
As long as “patriarchy” is behind the bad design: The men designing them didn’t want women to carry things in their hip pockets as that might detract from ogling their backsides.
Things in pockets ruin the line of the clothes, that’s why clothing that emphasizes form over function has fake or at least sewn-closed pockets. Women’s clothing has gone to extremes in pushing form over function even on mundane outfits, meaning no pockets or the insulting fake pockets. Because patriarchy.
And don’t get me on pockets that are ‘real’ but are only an inch deep.
@ Arthur – This strip originally appeared on 9-Nov-2017 (the website offers a search function, and “patriarchy” turned it up right away). Unfortunately, there is no context either before or after this strip, it was simply a “one-off” gag.
The solution to this problem would be for women to stop buying clothes with fake pockets, and only buy clothes with real ones. Once they stop selling, they will stop being manufactured.
And both clothes designers and ad writers are frequently women.
ignatzz:
A few problems. There are a number of variables that go into whether to purchase an article of clothing, of which “functional pockets” is only one. Finding clothes that look good and fit your desired price range is a rare enough occasion for some women that they may not feel their refusal to purchase due to lack of pockets is a significant enough blip on companies’ radars to be worth giving up whatever other advantages the garment may have.
Also, given that there are women who don’t care about pockets, there may never be enough market pressure to eliminate pocketless garments entirely.
Thirdly, a lot of women don’t even notice that the pockets are fake until they get the garment home.
Andrea: I’ve only recently started seeing YouTube ads (AdBlocker used to keep them out, but doesn’t anymore, and I haven’t had a chance to check if if needs an update). But I have actually run into some ads that were clever enough that I didn’t want to skip them. For a few I was even slightly aggravated that I couldn’t rewind them to listen to a part that I had tuned out.
I really posted that ’cause of Hillburn’s ‘tight pants’ panel, BUT I, too, have noticed that AdBlocker is not doing as much blocking as it used to . . .
I admit that I had to see the entire Purple Mattress egg test.
The above link is an article showing the actual stats comparing men’s and women’s pockets. I’ve ranted about this for years, and know many women who feel the same.
Note: eshakti.com has a large selection of quality women’s clothing WITH FUNCTIONAL POCKETS. It keeps throwing my wife — she keeps going, “But… my credit card and phone are SO EASY TO GET TO!” She’s not used to being able to get to things conveniently.
A joke:
Q: how do you tell a trans man who was assigned female at birth and transitioned as an adult?
A: Compliment his suit. He will reply, “Thanks! It has pockets!”
Even if I HAD pockets, I wouldn’t put anything in them . . . I’m already big-hipped; don’t need to add to that!
A long time ago, my wife bought some clothes and after she got home realized that the pockets appeared to be sewn shut. How does one determine whether one should cut the thread, opening the pocket, or leave it alone because cutting it will cause problems in the garment which doesn’t have actual pockets?
@Arthur: unless it’s lined, look on the inside. If it’s lined, you might be able to feel the pockets, if they exist, if they are made of thick enough material.
Here is the ultimate in faux pockets –
Also, faux bleach spots, faux button-fly front and faux rips and tears.
The men’s sizes have REAL pockets in front; the women’s sizes have FAUX pockets in front.
They are so realistic that I’ve been complimented on how I ripped and bleached my jeans (who wears real jeans in Florida??), and the compliment-giver is always surprised when I show how they’re lounge pants made to look like jeans.
Quite coincidentally, my male dog has a belly band with the same faux pockets; logically, since he doesn’t really need to carry anything. That’s what *I’m* for.
@ Andréa – Unfortunately, the link to that .jog produces an “access denied” error.
P.S. Adblock has been selling exceptions to advertisers for some time now. If the advertiser pays for it, Adblock leaks their material through the filter.
@ Andréa – Even that “normal” URL produces the same error message, at least over here. It would appear that this company has decided to fulfill its GDPR obligations by blocking everyone in Europe from looking at their website.
“Adblock has been selling exceptions to advertisers for some time now. If the advertiser pays for it, Adblock leaks their material through the filter.”
Is this a service they offer anybody, or more long the lines of paying a fee for them to check you out and determine whether you’re kosher (which, however, would change the “bribe” aspect to “extortion”)
Bill: Why would an ad not be kosher?
I got Adblock for free, I don’t feel like I can complain much if they decide to let stuff through. (It does make me inclined not to donate to them, but I wasn’t doing that anyway.)
If they can be bribed to allow an ad go through — the sort of ad it’s their job to block, whether or not you’re paying for it — then they’re not doing their job.
@Kilby: I can see both picture & website from here, in Belgium.
Bill: I can see your point, but if I’m not paying them, I don’t think of them as having a job.
Incidentally, AdBlock does come with a list of sites that it allows ads through by default, but when you install AdBlock, they explicitly tell you that, and let you choose whether or not to keep that default. Not sure if Kilby is referring to that, or something more nefarious.
@ Olivier – Then maybe they just don’t like Germans. It’s not just me, I already tried it from an alternative (domestic) location.
@ Andréa – Do you want the honest answer, or the polite one? ;-)
Neither . . . we’ve spent too much time on faux jeans as it is. Anyway, that question was sarcastic and/or rhetorical.
@ Andréa – Well, so was my answer. ;-)
Silk – you buy much more expensive clothes than I do.
Powers – in my case pockets in a pair of pants is a major factor. I gave up carrying a purse a couple of decades (after I again left mine somewhere – a colonial tavern in Colonial Williamsburg, we drove back from the hotel to it for the purse, the tavern was closed and I found the purse on the floor of the car). It now goes in the pocket of the jeans or it doesn’t come with me. When going to work I have my briefcase. When dressing up I made myself a modern version of the woman’s colonial pocket – a large tearshaped bag with a slot in the front which tied around one’s waist under one’s petticoat (skirt) – my modern one is black instead of beige, and has velcro to close it – except the velcro no longer works,so same is joined by a small safety pin for closure.
It is amazing what I can fit in just the front pockets – cell phone (which is why I want a small one), wallet, keys, space pen, small bottle of hand sanitizer, small spray bottle of alcohol, pill box, and emergency lower carb candies. This leaves the rear pockets if the pants have them for things like, well today, Robert’s wallet while we spent 8.5 hours finding out he did not have a heart attack, but no one bothered to figure out why else his left shoulder and arm are in excruciating pain. When not out of the house, all, but the cell phone,is stored in a small shelf on the fridge and I can use the pockets otherwise – hammer, screwdrivers, nails, screws, other small tools, flashlights and so on.
The worst site I find for ads is Comics Kingdom. They are so bad that the site can take up to 30 minutes to load. While I understand Win XP is no longer supported, I have no problem with any other site. I wrote to CK about this and when they blamed it on XP, I pointed out (as in the original post) that my desktop is Win 7 (and this was a few years ago) and was told that Win 7 is also no longer supported by anyone (?). So we tried it on Robert’s new Windows 10 computer and it did not work with that it. They did not reply to that comment.
Comics I Don't Understand 
Yes, a lot of women’s clothes have things which look like pockets, but aren’t. Since, she feels, it’s obvious that women wouldn’t design things like that, it must be men. Men who don’t want women to be able to carry things. Men who want to handicap women and keep them from their full potential. I.e. a patriarchy.
If they were fake pockets, they wouldn’t be able to bunch up, nor would they be sewn shut.
This comic would have beem a lot funnier (and just as politically critical) if the artist had used Bill’s title word in the fourth panel.
P.S. @ Andréa: In this case the fake “pockets” are simply sewn-on squares of pre-“distressed” (and creased) denim.
Women’s clothing, especially suits and pants, frequently have the pockets hand-sewn closed (at least the clothes I buy do) to keep them smooth and flat during shipping and display. You’re supposed to snip and pull out the threads after purchase.
Yes, the pockets were sewn ‘closed’, not ‘on’, as a fake pocket would be.
The strip’s a year old. Anyone know if the next strip(s) tell us whether they’re faux pockets or real pockets sewn shut?
If anyone has any doubts about this being a real problem: my daughter had more than one pair of jeans with such idiotic fake pockets – and that was back when she was in kindergarten! None of them were of the “cut-the-thread-to-open” type; at least one pair had fake pocket cover flaps that could be buttoned down, but no actual pockets underneath them (not even fake ones).
I think I’ve had this on trousers of my own. Ones for work, you know, “dress pants”. They had a slit and button, but it did’t open, nor would it turn into a pocket if you removed the threading. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this on formal jackets too. Whatever patriarchy she’s referring to isn’t only targeting women.
As long as “patriarchy” is behind the bad design: The men designing them didn’t want women to carry things in their hip pockets as that might detract from ogling their backsides.
Things in pockets ruin the line of the clothes, that’s why clothing that emphasizes form over function has fake or at least sewn-closed pockets. Women’s clothing has gone to extremes in pushing form over function even on mundane outfits, meaning no pockets or the insulting fake pockets. Because patriarchy.
And don’t get me on pockets that are ‘real’ but are only an inch deep.
@ Arthur – This strip originally appeared on 9-Nov-2017 (the website offers a search function, and “patriarchy” turned it up right away). Unfortunately, there is no context either before or after this strip, it was simply a “one-off” gag.
The solution to this problem would be for women to stop buying clothes with fake pockets, and only buy clothes with real ones. Once they stop selling, they will stop being manufactured.
And both clothes designers and ad writers are frequently women.
ignatzz:
A few problems. There are a number of variables that go into whether to purchase an article of clothing, of which “functional pockets” is only one. Finding clothes that look good and fit your desired price range is a rare enough occasion for some women that they may not feel their refusal to purchase due to lack of pockets is a significant enough blip on companies’ radars to be worth giving up whatever other advantages the garment may have.
Also, given that there are women who don’t care about pockets, there may never be enough market pressure to eliminate pocketless garments entirely.
Thirdly, a lot of women don’t even notice that the pockets are fake until they get the garment home.
Speaking of tight pants . . .
https://www.gocomics.com/theargylesweater/2018/09/27
Andrea: I’ve only recently started seeing YouTube ads (AdBlocker used to keep them out, but doesn’t anymore, and I haven’t had a chance to check if if needs an update). But I have actually run into some ads that were clever enough that I didn’t want to skip them. For a few I was even slightly aggravated that I couldn’t rewind them to listen to a part that I had tuned out.
I really posted that ’cause of Hillburn’s ‘tight pants’ panel, BUT I, too, have noticed that AdBlocker is not doing as much blocking as it used to . . .
I admit that I had to see the entire Purple Mattress egg test.
https://pudding.cool/2018/08/pockets/ The struggle is real.
The above link is an article showing the actual stats comparing men’s and women’s pockets. I’ve ranted about this for years, and know many women who feel the same.
Note: eshakti.com has a large selection of quality women’s clothing WITH FUNCTIONAL POCKETS. It keeps throwing my wife — she keeps going, “But… my credit card and phone are SO EASY TO GET TO!” She’s not used to being able to get to things conveniently.
A joke:
Q: how do you tell a trans man who was assigned female at birth and transitioned as an adult?
A: Compliment his suit. He will reply, “Thanks! It has pockets!”
Even if I HAD pockets, I wouldn’t put anything in them . . . I’m already big-hipped; don’t need to add to that!
Re Silk @ 4 ( https://godaddyandthesquirrelmustbothdie.wordpress.com/2018/09/27/pantriarchy/#comment-12161 ):
A long time ago, my wife bought some clothes and after she got home realized that the pockets appeared to be sewn shut. How does one determine whether one should cut the thread, opening the pocket, or leave it alone because cutting it will cause problems in the garment which doesn’t have actual pockets?
@Arthur: unless it’s lined, look on the inside. If it’s lined, you might be able to feel the pockets, if they exist, if they are made of thick enough material.
Here is the ultimate in faux pockets –
Also, faux bleach spots, faux button-fly front and faux rips and tears.
The men’s sizes have REAL pockets in front; the women’s sizes have FAUX pockets in front.
They are so realistic that I’ve been complimented on how I ripped and bleached my jeans (who wears real jeans in Florida??), and the compliment-giver is always surprised when I show how they’re lounge pants made to look like jeans.
Quite coincidentally, my male dog has a belly band with the same faux pockets; logically, since he doesn’t really need to carry anything. That’s what *I’m* for.
@ Andréa – Unfortunately, the link to that .jog produces an “access denied” error.
P.S. Adblock has been selling exceptions to advertisers for some time now. If the advertiser pays for it, Adblock leaks their material through the filter.
P.P.S. Ooops. JPG, not “jog”. ;-)
The picture shows, doesn’t it? Or just to me? OR were you trying to buy them? http://www.ltdcommodities.com
@ Andréa – Even that “normal” URL produces the same error message, at least over here. It would appear that this company has decided to fulfill its GDPR obligations by blocking everyone in Europe from looking at their website.
“Adblock has been selling exceptions to advertisers for some time now. If the advertiser pays for it, Adblock leaks their material through the filter.”
Is this a service they offer anybody, or more long the lines of paying a fee for them to check you out and determine whether you’re kosher (which, however, would change the “bribe” aspect to “extortion”)
Bill: Why would an ad not be kosher?
I got Adblock for free, I don’t feel like I can complain much if they decide to let stuff through. (It does make me inclined not to donate to them, but I wasn’t doing that anyway.)
If they can be bribed to allow an ad go through — the sort of ad it’s their job to block, whether or not you’re paying for it — then they’re not doing their job.
@Kilby: I can see both picture & website from here, in Belgium.
Bill: I can see your point, but if I’m not paying them, I don’t think of them as having a job.
Incidentally, AdBlock does come with a list of sites that it allows ads through by default, but when you install AdBlock, they explicitly tell you that, and let you choose whether or not to keep that default. Not sure if Kilby is referring to that, or something more nefarious.
@ Olivier – Then maybe they just don’t like Germans. It’s not just me, I already tried it from an alternative (domestic) location.
Here you go – http://alldogssite.com/faux_jeans.jpg
. . . and . . . http://alldogssite.com/faux_jeans2.jpg
If your entire family is into faux jeans . . . http://alldogssite.com/faux_jeans3.jpg
Now, aren’t you GLAD you asked??
@ Andréa – Do you want the honest answer, or the polite one? ;-)
Neither . . . we’ve spent too much time on faux jeans as it is. Anyway, that question was sarcastic and/or rhetorical.
@ Andréa – Well, so was my answer. ;-)
Silk – you buy much more expensive clothes than I do.
Powers – in my case pockets in a pair of pants is a major factor. I gave up carrying a purse a couple of decades (after I again left mine somewhere – a colonial tavern in Colonial Williamsburg, we drove back from the hotel to it for the purse, the tavern was closed and I found the purse on the floor of the car). It now goes in the pocket of the jeans or it doesn’t come with me. When going to work I have my briefcase. When dressing up I made myself a modern version of the woman’s colonial pocket – a large tearshaped bag with a slot in the front which tied around one’s waist under one’s petticoat (skirt) – my modern one is black instead of beige, and has velcro to close it – except the velcro no longer works,so same is joined by a small safety pin for closure.
It is amazing what I can fit in just the front pockets – cell phone (which is why I want a small one), wallet, keys, space pen, small bottle of hand sanitizer, small spray bottle of alcohol, pill box, and emergency lower carb candies. This leaves the rear pockets if the pants have them for things like, well today, Robert’s wallet while we spent 8.5 hours finding out he did not have a heart attack, but no one bothered to figure out why else his left shoulder and arm are in excruciating pain. When not out of the house, all, but the cell phone,is stored in a small shelf on the fridge and I can use the pockets otherwise – hammer, screwdrivers, nails, screws, other small tools, flashlights and so on.
The worst site I find for ads is Comics Kingdom. They are so bad that the site can take up to 30 minutes to load. While I understand Win XP is no longer supported, I have no problem with any other site. I wrote to CK about this and when they blamed it on XP, I pointed out (as in the original post) that my desktop is Win 7 (and this was a few years ago) and was told that Win 7 is also no longer supported by anyone (?). So we tried it on Robert’s new Windows 10 computer and it did not work with that it. They did not reply to that comment.