this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2025
721 points (97.5% liked)

memes

17641 readers
1640 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 31 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I just want to see more women's clothes with pockets.

[–] Trex202@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Big pockets! Bigger than a chapstick

[–] Lightfire228@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Sew your own

There's a ton of tutorials on YT, and a basic sewing machine is like $80

(Not to say that women's pants shouldn't have decent pockets, just that you're not forced to deal with them)

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

While true, it's hardly fair that I, as a man, don't need to learn to sew, buy a sewing machine , spend time getting materials or actually doing the sewing in order to have good pockets. My pants just come with good pockets.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yes, but men's clothes come with the other issues, too. I just started sewing my own pants because I couldn't find a pair that was in the right spot between good fit and style, affordability, quality and not being made under exploitive labour conditions.

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

and not being made under exploitive labour conditions.

It’s that last one that’ll get you.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

While that's certainly true, I don't think that doesn't apply to women's clothing as well nor does it change that women's clothing not having pockets is kinda bullshit, even though you can technically add your own after the fact.
It would be more of a "yes, but..." Situation if women's clothing that didn't have pockets always fit perfectly and hit all the criteria you mentioned. They have that problem and they don't get pockets.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

That's what I wrote though, sorry if that's not clear enough.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

That takes time, the rare spare time not everyone has and not everyone wants to spend on making a bought product useful.

[–] insaneinthemembrane@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I'm time, space, and cash poor. I just want clothes I can wear.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't understand why women say this, then buy clothes without pockets (or without useful pockets).

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 4 points 1 month ago

Because often the options are non existant

[–] onion_trial@europe.pub 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's funny, I'm over here wishing for men's clothes with less pockets

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

How dare you make such a dangerous wish.

There are plenty of men’s pants with just the front and rear pockets!