Sexism  is in the details... Until they fit into the waist of clothing pockets. No, but seriously ? An article on the differences in treatment compared to ready-to-wear ? Yes, because behind this question of pockets, there is a whole story that speaks of freedom, independence and even the objectification of women's bodies. We talk about it!

Pockets that are too small

August 2018. The very snobbish online cultural magazine The Pudding published an investigation entitled " Someone clever once said women were not allowed pockets ". A joke ? Not at all ! The survey reveals that for the same cut, women's jeans pockets are 48% shallower and 6.5% narrower than those of men's jeans.

And to check what are the common objects made for each other's pockets: only 10% of these objects (smartphones, pens, wallets, etc.) that fit in men's pockets fit in women's. In conclusion, all they have to do is take a handbag to carry the little necessities of ordinary life.

From the time when pockets were small bags

The funny thing is that precisely, the pocket is historically a legacy of the ladies' bag. In the Middle Ages, historian Ariane Fennetaux tells us, women tied a small purse around their waists, under petticoats, containing the essentials to take with them, while keeping their hands free.

This is a good idea, which men borrowed from them from the sixteenth century onwards by having pockets sewn into their clothing !

The advent of functional clothing and... Universal !

The more the functional dimension of the garment takes precedence over its function as an adornment, the more numerous, larger and deeper the pockets. The worker's work suit marks the apogee of this movement of practicality thinking of clothing for real life.

Pockets spread to the clothing of all classes, becoming widespread after the French Revolution, which we know how seriously it took dress as a sign of universality and equality... Finally between men.

What to put in your pockets ?

Because for women, it didn't get any better with the end of the Ancien Régime. Neither in terms of rights nor in terms of social requirements in terms of clothing. The bourgeois century, on the contrary, intends to assign them to a social role that would not allow them to move with ease, much less to ignore the duties of appearance.

And then, it's a good thing, since they are not allowed to own anything, there is no need to be equipped to take things with you, say the authors of The pocket – A hidden history of women lives.

The pocket makes bumps

Well, but still, with the modernization of outfits that makes corsets, fake asses and other crinolines disappear, women will end up having the right to pockets ? Yes, but no. It seems that it's not very pretty, pockets.

The Spectator reports a joke circulating among the first textile manufacturers: women already have four bumps (i.e. the double pair of breasts and buttocks), it is neither useful nor graceful to add them on the sides ! Atmosphere, atmosphere.

The garment is modernized, the pocket is minimized

And what about the rest of the story, then ? The rest is that women's clothing will adjust more and more, as close as possible to the shape of the body. There is no question of sabotaging the work of the designer who has thought of the perfect lines of the dress with additions that break everything.

But here they are, despite the ban on wearing trousers (and was only repealed in France in 2013), women borrowed this garment from men, which greatly facilitated movement, to the point of making it a banal alternative to the skirt from the 1960s onwards. But the pocket continues to be lacking, unless it is minimalist or even downright trompe-l'oeil. Rather fake decorative pockets than real pockets to fill at the risk of distorting the garment ! " Men have pockets for storing things, women have pockets for decoration ," Christian Dior is quoted as saying in 1954, according to the article in The Pudding.

For a different approach to women's clothing

And now, what do we do with this legacy ? Well, we think of women's and men's clothing in such a way that it is both elegant and functional, flattering and pleasant.

For the fashion world, this means not treating the person who wears the garment as a showcase for the designer's talent or as an embodiment of his or her social position, but first and foremost as an issue of his or her well-being, pleasure and freedom. But do you mean one dimension, among others, of empowerment ?