General Discussions > Fashion

Why are the pockets on women’s pants often so shallow?

(1/20) > >>

Why are the pockets on the back of women’s pants often so shallow?
The front ones also are often not very deep.

Perhaps the answer is stylishness.
Perhaps you want nothing like hands and wallets putting “bumps” in those clingy, tight, even form fitting pants.

But, say you have one of those big cellular telephones.  Gosh, they can stick so far out of these shallow pants!  This is not very practical, if you ask me!

Women’s pants simply often fit better for me than men’s pants.  But they do lack those deeper, useful pockets that men’s pants have.  Bummer!

Any thoughts on this?  We do not always have to wear skintight pants, we want comfort too.

I see no reason why we should not be able to have pant pockets deep enough to hold a large smartphone.  At least on some of our pants and shorts!




--- Quote from: stephaniec on November 12, 2018, 05:39:42 pm ---fashion

--- End quote ---

Yes, fashion and stylishness must play a major part of the pant’s design.

But, if you have pockets in the design, perhaps they could be deeper, at least sometimes?   :)


Hi Chrissy!  Sometimes they are just the outside pocket.  I have pairs that have no back pocket except for the stitching, but pockets in the front.  Typically any pocket on anything stylish is just for accent.....purses are a girls pockets.
Of course there are woman cut cargo pants with big pockets, but they’re bigger than your butt.
I have seen adds for tough and rough women’s jeans from a company in the US that was primarily for men’s underwear and jeans.  The men’s were supposed to make you feel ‘buck naked’, if you get my drift.

Purses are like shoes....gotta have em!
Hugs and smiles from a California girl

Arianna Valentine:
I believe it's because women are generally thought to carry everything they have in a purse so they don't need big front pockets on their pants

Sent from my LG-LS777 using Tapatalk


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version