Why it matters
Women’s inability to carry items in their own clothing has been dismissed as a minor inconvenience, but it's a subtle form of gender inequality rooted in social norms, economic marginalization, and patriarchal fashion design.
But the pocket revolution is real—and women are demanding what should have been standard all along: functional pockets for every woman. We’re here to redefine the narrative—one pair of pockets at a time.
TODAY
Design disparities
A 2018 study revealed women’s jean pockets are nearly 50% shorter than men's.
If a woman’s garment even has pockets, only about 5% of them can fit a smartphone—versus 85% of men's.
Only 10% of women’s jeans can even fit a female hand.
60% of women’s pockets can’t fit the iPhone X.
Even girls’ clothing often features fewer functional pockets—or fake ones—while boys’ clothes routinely include usable, deep pockets. Parents report toddler girls attempting to carry rocks, toys, or snacks in their hands due to lack of storage. - Tampa Bay Times
1990s
Wyoming v. Houghton: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police with probable cause to search a vehicle may search passengers' pursesv—but not their pockets—under the “automobile exception” to the 4th Amendment. In doing so, the Court effectively treated women's personal items as less protected, simply because they could be carried—and not hiding in plain sight like men’s pockets.
Credit: Retro-Stage.com
1950s - 1970s
Post-war fashion lost its pocket pragmatism. Some designers promoted an aesthetic where “men have pockets to keep things in, women for decoration.”
By the 1970s, despite jeans and pants growing in popularity, many women's clothes still featured tiny or fake pockets.
Credit: FlashbackSummer.com
1914 - 1940s
During WWI and WWII, practicality trumped femininity—women adopted menswear-style clothes and trousers with real pockets while working.
Credit: Copyright IWM Q 109842
Late 1800s – Early 1900s
The Rational Dress Society and suffragette fashion rebelled by sewing pockets into browsable clothing—1910 “suffragette suits” famously featured six pockets.
Credit: Copyright eBay Sanden1530.
Late 1700s – Early 1800s
As dresses became tighter, functional pockets vanished, replaced by tiny reticules—handbags masquerading as pockets, often holding nothing more than a coin or handkerchief reflecting the fact that women were prohibited from owning very much in those days.
17th Century and Earlier
Early pockets sparked concern. Some of the first objects intended to be carried in pockets were small‑scale handguns. Pockets can embody both utility and secrecy—testimony to their deep-rooted significance.
Late 1600s
By the late 1600s, men gained sewn-in pockets while women still wore theirs under petticoats, reachable only by partially disrobing. An early form of pocket discrimination.