I have this pair of jeans I love. They are perfect in almost every respect: they are comfortable, fashionable, and make me feel and look good. Their one flaw is the same as almost every piece of clothing I own—they lack decent pockets. On the front are things that look like pockets, but they aren’t. Recently I went to a concert, and I expected a bag check, so I decided to leave my purse in the car. Everything I needed had to fit into my pants pockets: wallet, ticket, phone and lip balm. I chose to wear my favorite jeans and put my ticket/wallet in one back pocket and my phone in the other. Lip balm in the tiny front pocket. No room for my keys.
If I want full pockets, I am forced to wear clothing made for men. Men’s jeans, no matter how skinny they are, have two full pockets in the front and two in the back. Sometimes they even have extra ones on the sides. A man’s suit coat has pockets on the outside and inside. A good suit makes people take a man seriously, partly because a guy has his hands empty because there’s a pocket for everything he carries. None of my business-wear has any pockets, so I must either leave things in my office, or carry them with me. Makes it hard to shake someone’s hand when my keys are in it! Women’s clothes seem to be designed for pseudo-businesswomen: we only need to look important.
So, there’s the pocket as a social construct: men are viewed as busy, so they need pockets to manage all their things, while women are merely objects, so they don’t need pockets. Women are just as busy as men, yet women are expected to supply the tissues, hand sanitizer, lens wipe, child’s toy, credit card, snack, comb, lip balm, or business card for a multitude of situations. Since they don’t have pockets, women are forced to carry a purse. Especially at work, I don’t want to carry one, and many women feel as I do.
A little history: pockets didn’t exist in clothing until the late Seventeenth century. Before that, everyone was forced to tie a bag to their belt, which was easily stolen, hence the term “cutpurse.” When people began tying their purse under layers of clothing to avoid theft, the idea of pockets was born. However, fashion trends later drove women to wear close-fitting, narrow dresses, so pockets went out of style, and women started carrying reticules. It wasn’t until 1894 that dresses were sewn with pockets, but women were viewed as “swaggering” when they walked with their hands in them. Pockets became sexist: men were busy, so they needed pockets, while women were merely on display, so they didn’t need them.
In the 1940s, when women took on men’s jobs and Rosie the Riveter became iconic with her “We Can Do It!” slogan and trademark overalls, pockets became more acceptable in women’s fashion. But that was short lived, because in 1954 Christian Dior said, “Men have pockets to keep things in, women for decoration,” which made us take a few steps back in terms of the sexism of pocket construction. Nowadays, women carry purses—but do they do it because they don’t have decent pockets, or because they consider their purse an extension of their wardrobe? That’s when the social construct gets in the way again. Women are conditioned to think they have to accept this pocket deficit in the interest of fashion. They have been convinced that a purse is an essential accessory; some women spend thousands on just the right one, and some view designer purses as status symbols. It’s a multi-million-dollar business that keeps women’s pockets as decorations rather than as necessities.
Pockets, real ones that can hold all the things, should be sewn into ladies’ clothing the same as in men’s so women won’t feel dependent on men or accessories to carry their stuff. Instead of causing a social divide, pockets should be made the same for everyone, regardless of gender.
***
The idea of writing about social constructs was inspired by a fake article called, “The Penis as a Social Construct,” which was written to expose the hoaxes in gender studies. The article has since been removed, but you can read about the hoax in this article: “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct: A Sokal-Style Hoax on Gender Studies.” Look for other articles on social constructs as I explore their impact on gender roles.
