Young Writers Society

I know this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but this thread confused me at first. To me, this is what the definition of pants is:

Spoiler! :

Due to that fact, I started worrying about girls wearing these. Then when you mentioned pockets and such, I became slightly disturbed. Then I remembered that pants in Americaland are trousers/jeans.




As for the debate itself, meh, I don't see what the big deal is. I'm not sure what kind of pants/trousers/jeans they sell in America, but around my neck of the woods, the pocket sizes are very varied. Depending on the shop and style of the item, some pockest are big, some are small, some have five pockets, some have two, and some don't even have any.

I definitely don't think that small pockets sugest sexual behaviour of any kind either. The condom thing weirded me out a little... When I see a small pocket, I don't tend to think condom.

Besides, in the end, we can always just carry our things around on a donkey.

What's the issue with women's pockets? If you want pants with pockets you can keep things in, buy cargo pants or women's work jeans. Woo. I'm more annoyed with the industry's mistaken assumption that all tall women are automatically curvy and all non-curvy women are Hobbit sized.

I haven't really noticed this... Except in skinny jeans, where the problem is the pockets are too tight. And guys were skinnies too.

Also, since your argument against purses is 'it's crammed with useless objects'-take out the 'useless' objects.

The argument is a stupid argument. The reason no women have big pockets is a ploy by religious fundamentalism to get women to dress in skirts. Hence, increasing the pockets would really not be particularly effective, would it?

AuroraOrodel wrote:What's the issue with women's pockets? If you want pants with pockets you can keep things in, buy cargo pants or women's work jeans. Woo. I'm more annoyed with the industry's mistaken assumption that all tall women are automatically curvy and all non-curvy women are Hobbit sized.

Agreed with on the cargo pants bit.

I've never really associated different types of pants with different genders.
Granted, being a guy I'm not going to go shopping for for those, like, really cute sparkly jeans that are on sale! but I usually wear cargo pants or sweats, and when I DO wear jeans, I find that the pockets are too small. I've never really had a problem with formal pants having too small of pockets, although that may be because I usually wear Zoot-Suits that are a size or two bigger than me

Honestly, I don't think there's genuine evil behind pocket sizes, just stupidity.

And Griff, I really hope your kidding about the sawed off shotgun and 9/11...

Unless you assume that it's an AA shotgun

So where are the pics of the afflicted females posteriors in the the savage constricting denim garments?

We must seem them to analyze the problem, and the aforementioned condom pocket. Which could be any pocket.
Get on it ladies.

Again, that's my take of this issue, which is just awesome with pics involved....uh for research.

MeanMrMustard wrote:So where are the pics of the afflicted females posteriors in the the savage constricting denim garments?

We must seem them to analyze the problem, and the aforementioned condom pocket. Which could be any pocket.
Get on it ladies.

Again, that's my take of this issue, which is just awesome with pics involved....uh for research.

Yes ahem, For science!

Like I said, there's no real discrimination or evil behind this topic. just stupidity!

"Oh my! you look really good in those pants! let's make nothing BUTT (tee hee) those pants so that every girl can look that good!"
Or something like that, So it's nothing to worry about..

I just naturally wear over-sized clothing.( cargo pants, flared jeans etc.)
Hasn't hurt me one bit.


There are waaay too many issues in life for us to pick on a pair of pants.
It's not like people don't want to look sexy in a pair of skinny jeans.
I guess if it bothered a majority of us women by now, we would have said something.

The argument is a stupid argument. The reason no women have big pockets is a ploy by religious fundamentalism to get women to dress in skirts. Hence, increasing the pockets would really not be particularly effective, would it?

Did you mean legalism?
A fundamentalist is a person who wants to go back to the fundamentals/basic of a religion, sees the fundamentals as being no-negotiable, and judges others for being fundamental, while ignoring their own fundamentalism.
(confusing, i know)
But they could mean the same thing, in a way, i guess.
I can think of only one religion in which a woman can only wear a skirt...but there could be more.
But i agree, this argument is too nit-picky.

Skins wrote:I know this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but this thread confused me at first. To me, this is what the definition of pants is:

Spoiler! :

Due to that fact, I started worrying about girls wearing these. Then when you mentioned pockets and such, I became slightly disturbed. Then I remembered that pants in Americaland are trousers/jeans.




As for the debate itself, meh, I don't see what the big deal is. I'm not sure what kind of pants/trousers/jeans they sell in America, but around my neck of the woods, the pocket sizes are very varied. Depending on the shop and style of the item, some pockest are big, some are small, some have five pockets, some have two, and some don't even have any.

I definitely don't think that small pockets sugest sexual behaviour of any kind either. The condom thing weirded me out a little... When I see a small pocket, I don't tend to think condom.

Besides, in the end, we can always just carry our things around on a donkey.

Boxer briefs were made in response to all those skimpy, thread-like, overpriced under-panties that women are expected to wear these days.
They just aren't comfortable.

But boxer briefs are.
I don't think they were intended to be sexual, just a fight-back against thongs or something.
but they look like this...





or this




** but the ones with the pockets in the front are just out-of-line and disturbing in my opinion.
That goes too far.lol

----------------------
-jojo.

Well, atleast you can carry a pen and spare change in tiny pockets.
What if you have to wear clothes that don't have pockets. Or are designed in such a way that you can't put in decent looking pockets? You can't keep stuffing cash inside your blouse or something.
So in that case you have to rely on men completely, right?

You can't keep stuffing cash inside your blouse or something.
So in that case you have to rely on men completely, right?

Bra-stuffing is rather common from what my female coworkers say. They'll stuff most anything in, like wallets or cell phones... often to keep them away from the Significant Other.

Or maybe I just work with strange women.