this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2025
223 points (94.4% liked)

Comic Strips

19068 readers
2642 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Please tell me those are not a real thing.

[–] shaggyb@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago

Truly the devil's panties.

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago

If there was a market for it I'm sure some fashion company would jump on selling pants with pockets to women. It's most likely women want to complain about this but won't actually buy clothes with proper pockets

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 21 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I remember watching this TV fashion contest thing quite a long time ago. The host of this contest was this old, wrinkly French lady who was a long time veteran in women's fashion (apparently).

So in the episode the upstart designers had to create... I think... Three fashionable pants for women. One of the contestants created all three of her pants with pockets, and I think one of them had some excessive pockets.

She was dismissed by the host immediately, before the model even wore any of the pants. Basically the episode was already decided, as that contestant got eliminated on the spot.

The reason? Well, that veteran fashion designer stated something along the lines of; "The female form is the most beautiful and powerful thing we have, and we can't have pockets ruin that. It's for women to accessorise with a handbag".

This stuck with me for all these years, because I was so revulsed when I saw that. What a load of bullshit. A load of pretentious garbage.

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Well now I have rage directed at some ancient French lady that I really don’t know what to do with.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

She's probably long dead. But her out-dated idealogies are probably still alive everywhere in fashion.

Not that I think she created that ideal. But she certainly did her part in propagating it.

[–] tamal3@lemmy.world 2 points 21 minutes ago

Fucking scabs, I feel a similar sense of disappointment that I felt talking to women who said they didn't vote for Kamala Harris or Hillary Clinton because their voices were too shrill.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Skill issue. Buy men's clothes. Problem solved.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 6 points 13 hours ago

All clothes are gender neutral clothes if you're not a little bitch about it.

[–] limelight79@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (7 children)

I've never seen men's underpants with pockets. But I'm also not researching the topic extensively, so it's possible this is a development in undergarment tech that I'm not aware of.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

My swimming trunks has pockets. Does that count as underpants?

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I once came across a pair of some kind of synthetic silk man thongs. That had three pockets. One for your junk, another for your phone and the third for your dick and balls.

They were like 90 dollars a pair.

I guess it's for when you need to be sexy and functional.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago
[–] guynamedzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 16 hours ago

I wonder if it’s talking about the fold in the front to piss through

[–] y0kai@anarchist.nexus 20 points 1 day ago

I dated a girl once who was amazed by the "pocket" in my boxer-briefs until she found it it was actually just the weird hole thing they put in the front that acts as a fly.

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have compression shorts that I run in that are the closest thing. Otherwise, if I'm just in underwear, or maybe a pair of gym shorts with no pocket, just throwing the phone in the waistband is sufficient. Just need something better for running.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Yep, just fold your waistband over your phone/wallet/whatever. Instant pocket

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I think she found some sports underwear with a pocket to put a cup in

Picked up a pair at American eagle that did without even realizing it. Best pair of underpants

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Just buy the pants that have pockets then, problem solved.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sure, sure, but women get two prison pockets.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With enough cleavage, women get other places to stash stuff too.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 4 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

May I request at least that money not be stored in any of these places.

Iv delt with boob sweat, ass sweat and unfortunately blood money in my time as a pizza boy years ago.

Women please don't hide money in your bra/panties. It's disgusting.

Men this goes for you too. Foot sweat money after you fish money out of your God forsaken sneaker is not appreciated

[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 14 hours ago

Wait, do people actually keep money on their shoes?

[–] Harvey656@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

But I swear putting my bills in my gooch makes it smell nice!

[–] valen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago

Concealment Crevices

[–] murvel@feddit.nu 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is like the tap water of comics, yum!!!

edit: lukewarm tap water

[–] tal@lemmy.today 13 points 1 day ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket

In medieval Europe, early pocket-like openings called fitchets appeared in the 13th century. These vertical slits, cut into the outer tunic, allowed access to a purse or keys suspended from the girdle beneath.[3] Historian Rebecca Unsworth notes that pockets became more visible in the late 15th century,[4] and their use spread widely in the 16th century.[4]

Later, pockets were often worn like purses on a belt, concealed under a coat or jerkin to deter pickpocketing, with access through a slit in the outer garment.

By the 17th century, pockets were sewn into men's clothing, while women's remained as separate tie-on pouches hidden beneath skirts.[5][6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reticule_%28handbag%29

reticule, also known as a ridicule or indispensable, was a type of small handbag or purse, similar to a modern evening bag, used mainly from 1795 to 1820.[1]

The reticule became popular with the advent of Regency fashions in the late 18th century. Previously, women had carried personal belongings in pockets tied around the waist, but the columnar skirts and thin fabrics that had come into style made pockets essentially unusable.

[–] DivineDev@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

Love the mens underwear ad in the background. Abs! Beard! Axe! AAAARRGGG!

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Is she getting mixed up with the fly? I’ve never seen a phone pocket, or any pocket, and don’t quite see the purpose

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 15 hours ago

I see plenty of women wearing athletic shorts that have a large phone pocket.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I don't think they're overly common but she must be referring to men's underpants like this:

load more comments
view more: next ›