Missing pockets in women’s clothes are a topic that is discussed a lot among women, and if they are almost never found in trousers on sale there is one cause, and it is very simple: patriarchal machismo which has also dictated the law in terms of fashion. The absence of pockets, or their reduction to small decorative ornaments that can still be seen today on many jeans, is not a question of aesthetics, nor even sartorial: for centuries it has reflected social control over women, limiting their freedom and autonomy. Having a pocket means having a personal space, a place in which to keep what belongs to us without depending on others — a seemingly banal, but profoundly political gesture.
Today, between the return of cargo pants and feminist campaigns like #wewantpockets, the demand for roomy pockets still speaks of the same desire for independence and equality.
The Middle Ages and pockets, a symbol of power
In the Middle Ages, men and women used bags tied to their belts, ancestors of today’s fanny packs. Then, for reasons of practicality and safety, these bags were hidden inside clothes, becoming the first real pockets. And here comes the difference: at the end of the seventeenth century, pockets were sewn directly into men’s coats and trousers, while women continued to wear removable pockets under their skirts.
Why? A widespread theory is that women were not allowed to have such immediate and safe “personal space”. Pockets, explain scholars Hannah Carlson and Ariane Fennetaux, were a symbol of autonomy: being able to store objects meant exercising control and ownership, two things that patriarchal society has tried to deny women for centuries. It is no coincidence that after the French Revolution, when women’s fashion moved towards the empire style with more tight-fitting dresses and even the bags under the skirts gradually disappeared almost completely, they were replaced by small decorative handbags. Men once again had free hands and full pockets, while women were not allowed to.
Women’s pockets as a political claim
The first great act of sartorial rebellion came with the suffragettes, at the beginning of the twentieth century. The “suffragette uniform”, as the New York Times reported at the time, was “full of pockets”: six, eight, even ten. Each pocket was a political gesture, an assertion of independence.
However, fashion did not always follow this trail. In 1954 the designer Christian Dior declared bluntly: «Men have pockets to keep things in, women for decoration». A phrase that perfectly summarizes how the industry has often preferred women’s clothes that are aesthetically pleasing but not very functional. And that’s not all: there is also an economic aspect. If pockets truly became standard in women’s clothing, the billion-dollar handbag market would risk a hit.
Diana Vreeland, historic editor of Vogue, wanted to dedicate an entire issue to pockets, but she wasn’t allowed to: advertisers from fashion and accessories houses would never have accepted it.
From #wewantpockets to today’s fashion
Today the debate is more lively than ever. Journalist Caroline Criado Perez, author of Invisibili, talks about the “great gender pocket gap”, the large pocket gap between men and women, and is carrying out a social campaign with the hashtag #wewantpockets. The data proves her right: in 2018 a study by the website The Pudding showed that the pockets of women’s jeans are on average 48% shorter than those of men and often do not even contain a smartphone.
In recent years, however, something has changed. The return of cargo pants, full of large pockets, has brought pockets back into the spotlight, and more and more designers are turning them into the protagonists of collections, from Miu Miu to Isabel Marant. Some designers even experiment with “intimate” or central pockets, to transform them into a sign of sensuality and personal freedom.
Pockets, it is clear, are not a style detail, but a symbol of independence: they mean having free hands, not depending on a bag, not having to ask someone else to carry your things. It is no coincidence, in fact, that in recent years they have returned to the center of feminist discourse: they are a small space of autonomy, of choice, of freedom. After all, as the American poet Alice Duer Miller wrote already in 1915, ironically about the refusal to grant women pockets: «Pockets are not a natural right».
