It turns out that you aren’t crazy: women’s pockets really are smaller than men’s. And women are not happy about it.
Forbes estimates that, while the average woman owned only nine outfits in 1930, today she owns one for each day of the month. However, you’d be hard-pressed to find a 30-outfit collection that features pockets as roomy as the ones in men’s pants — or sometimes, any pockets at all. Instead of being able to slip their wallet and their phone in each pocket, women are forced to carry heavy purses to compensate. They may even incur pain or long-term injury from lugging around those bags filled with every necessity.
Until now, some people probably thought women didn’t have anything to complain about. But a new study found that women’s pockets, particularly the ones found in blue jeans, are substantially smaller than the ones found in men’s pants. The published analysis found that women’s front jean pockets are actually 48% shorter and 6.5% narrower than men’s. While brands like American Eagle and H and M boast larger women’s front pockets than most, they still pale in comparison to those found in the men’s jeans these companies carry. And while the back pocket comparisons were less disparate — women’s back pockets were around 5% shorter and 2% narrower than men’s — the divide is still there. And before you argue that men are bigger and therefore need bigger pockets, you should know that all of the jeans tested were intended for a person with a 32 inch waist. Therefore, there shouldn’t be that big of a difference in pocket size.
But there is, and it was even more pronounced when researchers attempted to assess what women are even able to fit into those sorry excuses for pockets. Most men’s jeans pockets could fit the three most popular smartphone models — the iPhone X, the Samsung Galaxy, and the Google Pixel. But only 40% of women’s pockets could fit the iPhone, while only 20% could hold a Samsung Galaxy. A pitiful 5% of women’s pockets could fit the Google Pixel. Although the percentage of drivers who use electronic devices while driving decreased to 3.3% in 2016, people of all genders should theoretically be able to keep their smartphone on their person when it’s not in use. Even worse, 100% of men’s pockets could fit the average male hand inside, but only 10% of women’s pockets would allow the wearer to put her hand in.
Women tend to own more clothing than men do, and research shows they understandably spend a lot of time shopping, too. Women, on average, spend more than 100 hours (and take 30 trips) a year shopping for clothes. And yet, many retailers still won’t give female consumers the pockets they want and deserve. While we’ve come a long way since women’s clothing bore no pockets at all due to women’s lack of access to personal funds, many are still saying that pocket inequality illustrates just how far the feminist movement still has to go.
Fortunately, some brands are taking a stand.
Camilla Olson, the creative director at Savitude (a company that uses machine learning to make clothing choices more personal) told The Atlantic back in 2014: “I honestly believe the fashion industry is not helping women advance. [Women] know clearly we need pockets to carry technology and I think it’s expected we are going to carry a purse.”
That may be changing, though. A new clothing brand called Poche Posh just released an entire collection wherein each piece has functional pockets. Other brands have followed suit, pledging to make their pockets roomy enough to make up for a heavy handbag. And while it’s not yet the norm, women are hopeful that after receiving a compliment on a given garment, they’ll be able to confidently say: “Thanks — it has pockets!”