Do you remember rolling up the right leg of your jeans to keep that pant’s leg from catching in the chain when you rode a bike? A few years back I saw some stretch jeans with tight fitting legs. Thinking they would be perfect for bike riding, I ordered a pair from L.L.Bean. Although they were great pants, not entangling in the bike chain, they had a major defect! The front pockets were only three inches deep! The first time I wore them while bike riding with a friend, some money I had in my front left pocket worked its way up and out. Losing the money was bad enough but it was the money clip holding the bills which devastated me. It was a memorable gift. I had thought that the shallow pockets were just a manufacturer's method of cutting costs to make more money. Perhaps that is true but nonetheless, pockets piqued my curiosity. Did you know that back in the middle ages even men’s breeches did not have pockets? Both men and women carried a pouch attached to a rope. Then, according to some sources, crime (pouch snatchers) brought about the invention of pockets for men’s clothing in the 1600’s. Women, having few freedoms such as land ownership, voting, equal education or numerous other rights, relied upon men to carry whatever was needed when socializing at grand balls or attending the theatre. With the full skirts and numerous petticoats of the 1700’s, women were able to hide pockets. These pockets were tied around the waist under the voluminous dresses of the times. Dresses were even made with slits in them so that the pockets could be reached. If no slits were in the dress, the pockets were tied between the petticoats. These pockets were not easily attained unless in privacy. I had never considered pockets to be a political issue, but apparently it was and may be still! Also, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this but there are some reports that say it was outlawed for women to have pockets in their clothing during the French Revolution of 1789 due to the fear of women carrying concealed revolutionary material. If true, that is definitely gender pocket inequality! Women began to seek independence in the late 1700’s, especially against the tight corsets and stays, high heels and unwieldy heavy, long skirts. Women were fighting the idea that to look feminine and desirable they had to pinch themselves into clothing which made it difficult to breathe and maneuver. Finally, more figure hugging dresses came into vogue in the 1800’s. Loose, clingy dresses with high waistlines aimed at a neo-classical appearance. The manufacturing of cotton helped this style along. But the tied-on-pockets that were worn under the full skirts were too visible and a small nacreous bag or “reticule” was carried. An American activist, Libby Miller, designed a pair of pants to be worn under a knee length skirt in 1851 but the fashion was ridiculed so badly that it did not hold. In 1890 the Rational Dress Society was formed in London with its main ambition to make women’s clothing more functional. “Instruction manuals on how to sew pockets into your skirts became more and more popular as women increasingly sought after independence.” When crinolines and hoop skirts became fashionable, it was possible to sew pockets into the side seams of the skirts. But ruining one’s profile if the pockets were stuffed was a fashionista no-no according to a British fashion magazine, Queen. At the turn of the 20th century women wanted more freedom in all of life, including the right to be educated, hold meaningful employment, be able to vote and wear functional clothing with POCKETS. Wouldn’t you know that it took two World Wars to achieve this! Women were called into the employment of jobs that normally men held during these frightful times. It was the second World War, when my mother worked in a factory in Evansville which manufactured airplane parts. Some of the work entailed wearing appropriate attire for the job which meant trousers with pockets and loose shirts. By the 1940’s women were wearing trouser suits which held lots of pockets. One would think that was the end of pocket disparity. Not so! Was it patriarchy demands? Were women expected (again) to exude femininity?Maybe so, after the horrifying aspects of war. Women’s clothing became slimmer and more alluring. Once again, the pocket disappeared. As a result, the handbag industry blossomed and pockets for women were again seen as unnecessary. I do have some skirts and dresses which have no pockets, seldomly worn. Maybe that is why so many of us wear jeans. Jeans have multiple pockets. I even use the tiny watch pocket in the front right pocket of my jeans. In some jeans, I have seen that eliminated! And, I surmise that the tight legged jeans that I have seen men wear do not have shallow pockets. Men can probably fit wallets, keys, a phone, a pocket knife and a steak sandwich into their skinny jeans pockets. I need to let someone know how inconvenient and inadequate shallow pockets are. Believe me, I scrutinize clothing for pockets! Will there ever be pocket equality? [email protected] ©Ann Rains August, 2021
8 Comments
|
Subscriptions are free! Just fill out the box below.
Archives
August 2021
Featured Posts
|