
iStock.com/Carlos Barquero Perez
June 27, 2024
Are Pockets Finally an Opportunity for Women’s Fashion?
Women have been rallying for centuries for functional pockets in more of their apparel and finally seem to be getting their wish.
Women’s workwear brands and high-fashion houses are increasingly featuring deeper pockets in their designs after women for decades have become accustomed to smaller pockets compared to men or no pockets.
“Pockets inequality is a centuries-old form of gender bias,” Aditi Sinha, the co-founder of Seattle-based women’s workwear label Point of View, told Seattle Refined. “Only 5% of women’s pockets can fit a smartphone, compared to 85% of men’s pockets. On average, women’s pockets are 48% shorter and 6.5% narrower than men’s pockets.”
“Pockets have become the hidden superpower in our collection,” Sali Christeson, who founded Argent, a women’s workwear label focused on functional office attire, in 2015, told The Wall Street Journal.
European fashion houses have been highlighting “corpcore” pieces with deeper pockets and cargo pants on recent runways.
Hannah Carlson, a Rhode Island School of Design professor and the author of “Pockets: An Intimate History of How We Keep Things Close,” told the New York Times that pockets became an expectation for men’s garments with the arrival of the suit in the 1850s. Men’s clothing, according to Carlson, was seen as “meant for utility and women’s for beauty.” For some time, a lack of adequate pockets continued due to “old ideas about women’s place,” with women seen requiring less storage in their clothing as homemakers.
At the same time, the lack of pockets led to handbags becoming go-tos for women’s storage.
“It’s become such a tradition for women to carry an external bag of some sort,” Hayley Gibson, founder of the Toronto-based contemporary women’s clothing line Birds of North America, told CBC. “I can’t help but think that it’s partly the predominance of males in fashion design — maybe just not thinking of these practical needs women have.”
In recent decades, Carlson said fast fashion has led to pockets being “the first to go in any cost- or time-cutting and profit-boosting endeavor.”
The shift to featuring more pockets on women’s apparel arrives as the disadvantages of lacking the ease and convenience of pockets become more evident in an on-the-go society. The Wall Street Journal pointed out that women office workers need to head back to their desks to grab their purses before work lunches, and this represented a “detour that often removed them from the casual banter and strategy chats that male colleagues enjoyed.”
Carlson told The Guardian that pockets have become more applicable as storage now that everything women need for daily life is so compact. For instance, address books, diaries, and maps are no longer carried around, and that, along with the limited use of cash, has made handbags less necessary.
Other factors supporting the addition of pockets include the rise of unisex clothing, back problems caused by big tote bags, and the social comfort of being able to put hands in pockets. Gibson told CBC, “Socially, it’s so comforting to have pockets to pop your hands into. You feel sort of helpless when you don’t have pockets.”
The shift toward pockets may be hindered by fashion, however, as some designers and fashion followers feel pockets ruin the line of a dress. Some women worry about how rear pockets make their backsides look. The New York Times recently explored a reader’s question wondering why cargo pants were trending when they “seem neither functional nor flattering.”
Many women are also attached to their handbags, although a survey last year from Circana found that while more than 60% of women ages 35 and older always carry a handbag for activities other than work or school, only 39% of women ages 18 to 34 do the same.
Discussion Questions
Why has it taken so long for proper pockets to be featured on women’s apparel?
Do pockets work enough for women from a style standpoint to make them even more pervasive across women’s garments, including dresses and gowns?
Do handbags have to lose appeal for pockets on women’s clothes to make gains?
Poll
BrainTrust
Cathy Hotka
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
Liza Amlani
Principal and Founder, Retail Strategy Group
Nikki Baird
VP of Strategy, Aptos
Recent Discussions








So many female friends, colleagues and relations have told me that the dearth of pockets on some women’s garments is a real pain. Yes, there are historic reasons for it: pockets were traditionally seen as interfering with the elegant line of garments like dresses; women had handbags to store stuff, and so forth. However, practicality is extremely important for modern consumers, so it is sensible to integrate more pockets. Some of the historic reasons are also a bit sexist and silly: for men, stuffing suit pockets with things also spoils clean-cut lines and can cause fabric to sag, but men were still given the possibility of using pockets! As for handbags, while some women do like to carry these around everywhere they go (dear Mrs Thatcher was one such example, HM the late Queen was another), it sometimes just isn’t practical to so do!
My wife: “Don’t put that in your pocket. It ruins the suit’s line.” Me: “Pockets are for stuff. Why else would they be there?”
Sorry but I am with Mrs Detroyer on this! Haha!
The problem isn’t the pocket, itself, but rather that people put things in them, which looks bulky. Men, apparently, are less bothered about looking frumpy. I would point out, however, that much the same can be said about men’s suits: yes they have pockets, but when I used to wear one, it never looked right to put much in them…the inside pocket of the coat became the default depository.
Craig, see my comment above.
One, I will no longer buy an article of clothing that does not have appropriate pockets. Leggings, skirts/dresses, work pants, you name it. I haven’t entirely ditched my past collection of useless pocket-wear, but I have put a stake in the ground going forward. And every time I do that I wonder, will anyone notice this shift in my behavior? This is actually a great potential use of AI, to spot a pattern like that which might otherwise get totally missed unless someone outright asked me. That said, we must also speak of the ‘portable pocket’, aka the phone purse, usually worn crossbody and really only big enough to hold what might otherwise go into 1-2 pockets max. I have one (for those pocketless pants) and I see them everywhere. And for that matter, I see more and more men carrying sling bags as well. So who knows? Maybe the investment in pockets now is “too little too late”? (I still won’t buy something that has useless pockets, for the record!)
Women in the 17th century wore tie-on pockets. Maybe that’s an option for us!
Amen to pockets! Apparel brands: listen to your customers. We want products that are both attractive and functional.
I see this more and more on QVC. Designers are designing dresses, jeans, and pants with less clunky and clean pockets . They are obviously listening to their customers.
The good news is that women are finally in leadership roles in fashion so I think that the gender bias that resulted in pocket inequality will finally be eliminated! (sarcasm)
I love tech but I miss the ultra-thin phones that fit wonderfully into pockets, especially inside suit pockets (as Craig mentioned). Maybe the answer isn’t bigger pockets but on reducing the need for pockets. Let’s call it a climate saving initiative – smaller pockets, smaller things, happier planet. Who’s with me?
Finally, I suspect and hope that like many things, this is a matter of personal choice. I’m sure there are women that don’t want pockets because the styles they prefer do not lend themselves well to pockets, much less, large functional pockets. Personally, I would prefer we devote some energy to making things infinitely smaller NOT to increasing the size and quantity of pockets. But since I don’t expect that trend to catch fire, I think that Cathy has properly and succinctly summarized the challenge for women who want pockets: attractive and functional. #PocketedWeddingDressesAreRealAndCoolForSome
I love a good cargo pant or utility skirt – anything with pockets works. I have had pockets added to dresses that don’t have them, even to ballgowns, because carrying a handbag is a pain.
Pockets have always been an opportunity for women’s fashions, just not a priority.
Pockets to ball gowns? Very creative. And smart.
Those big skirts can hide a lot of things!
The issue from anecdotal evidence (wife, sister, etc.) is that stuffing pockets with wallets and phones creates unsightly bulges and buckling of the garment. Many women prefer the clean sight lines and flow of garments while some will adopt a more utilitarian approach in the post-covid, comfy, athleisure-friendly environment. So yes, pockets will appeal to some, especially in the right categories, but less so in the mainstream by far than men.
Anyone who carries a mobile device everywhere needs a secure pocket to put it in.
I’m not a qualified arbiter on this really, but from what I can see, women have been shortchanged in this regard. It’s high time the fashion houses stepped up.
Coincidentally enough, I put on a dress today that had pockets and thought to myself, all my dresses now have pockets and I’m not sure I want that. As much as I appreciate that designers have heard our rally cry, it’s like they just slapped them on. They don’t lay well, often making my hips look weird. It looks horrible if you actually put anything in them. I’m not a purse person, but I also not going to load my pockets with stuff either. My 15yr old daughter likes guys pants bc she can put her phone, etc in them without it showing. Designers need to actually build the product such that it still looks good and is comfortable when are phones, etc are in them or not.
We’re all looking to wear garments that fit, are well-made, attractive. Pockets are necessary and appropriate
Pockets may be what the customer has always wanted but brands are more inclined to do without them to save a buck.
Adding pockets to a garment increases the design, development and production costs and so brands would rather go without them. Even if it’s the right thing for the customer.
This is an opportunity for brands to use technology like AI to determine what garments in their assortment would perform better with pockets and increase full price sales. The ROI may be worth it. There is also a business case to use digital product creation and eliminate physical sampling to offset the cost of adding a pocket.
Why has it taken so long to feature proper pockets on women’s apparel? For the same reason, it took centuries for women to find pants acceptable.
I’ve been hearing about this challenge for years from my wife and two daughters. Especially with the advent of phones, and especially when the phone either holds license and payment cards, or is the payment form itself, many times they simply don’t need to carry anything else. One of my daughters even insisted on one of the criteria for her wedding gown was it needed pockets. A purse or handbag still has appeal for the right occasion, but its no longer an required accessory all the time.
Yes, to pockets for all! In this election year, this is something that we can all agree on. It was apparent that style was winning over functional need over these last decades, but the tides have turned. Pockets don’t have to be bulky as small pockets can also be used in some of the more form fitting clothing. Regardless, this movement should have happened decades ago.
My future leaning question is: will the pocket popularity be short lived? In five years, will we still be holding onto the ubiquitous cell phone, or will we be migrating to only watches, rings, and other wearables? Will we be making payments through a fingerprint, eye scan and other methods? It seems to me that the need for pockets will decline over time. Would welcome other perspectives on this.