this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
536 points (97.9% liked)
Funny
13041 readers
713 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The discrepancy between the size of pockets in men's and women's pants is nuts. I can comfortably fit an entire iPad Mini in my pants pockets, while my gf is lucky to fit her phone in her's.
Why doesn't she buy men's pants with the correct measurements for her needs? Unlike the arbitrary garbage system for women, us guys just have inch measurements of the important stuff.
The inch measurements for men don't account for wider hips/bum so it takes a bit of trial and error to figure out what size to buy. Whenever I buy men's trousers I have to buy them 4 or 6 inches bigger than my own waist and then wear a belt to cinch the excess in. It's kind of a hassle and it's definitely not considered a put-together look by most women so the appeal is limited to the less fashion conscious of us.
This would be a $10-$20 adjustment at your local tailor.
But adds significant additional cost and complexity.
Wait, you have a local tailor?
Several, actually.
Tell me you live in a major city without telling me you live in a major city.
Probably European, but not necessarily.
European, 20000 inhabitants.
And that’s why you have a local tailor.
Women usually have smaller waists compared to the width of their hips than men, so the ratio would be off, and she would likely end up with pants that might fit the width of her hips/butt, but are way too loose in the waist area.
Most modern pants aren't waist-high, and the ones that are are almost always aimed at women (called "high-rise" pants). Most pants rest on top of the hips. I (woman with wide hips) usually wear men's pants and the waist thing is a non-issue. The only issue is that the longer crotch area bunches up when you sit down.
Depends on the shape of your hips. I wore men's pants almost exclusively until my hips changed a lot during pregnancy and I haven't been able to find a comfy pair of men's pants since (and I'm far from the only woman I know with this problem). Glad it works for you, though! The huge pockets are so nice and the fabric is usually sturdier, too.
Oh, I'm sure it does, plus whatever pants you happen to try. I wear men's athletic pants most of the time these days. Women's versions are mostly all tight in the crotch and I've never been a big fan of fabric crushing my vulva.
Ha, I do miss the extra crotch room. Here's actually an interesting article about why women's pants have been getting even tighter in the crotch (spoiler alert - it's money):
https://fashion-incubator.com/anatomy_of_a_camel_toe_pt1/
https://fashion-incubator.com/anatomy_of_a_camel_toe_pt2/
I mean, belts exist.
You either get big pockets or tight fitting, sexy clothes. Pick one.
Everyone in this thread is acting like guys' clothes don't also have a huge range of fits even within the same measurements...
Let me tell you as a guy with big thighs, the 'difficult fit' problem is not unique to women's clothing. It's just exacerbated by the norm of tight clothes for women. If you want to wear guy's clothes for the pockets, you'll have to deal with the norm of not-tight looks, and that often means belts.
Getting something that has both good form (stylish, fitting) and good function (large pockets) is not easy. For any gender. Especially if you're not willing to throw on a belt and/or wear something baggy.
I just want to say, this is not true. I have a couple pairs of jeans, some skirts, and a few super cute dresses that all have functional sized pockets and yes some are tight fitting and “sexy”. Even my workout leggings have functional pockets. We can have both, they are just difficult to find because so many companies add pockets that can barely hold a chapstick.
Then do what the other commenter said and compete and drive them out if it's so undesireable.
My main point still stands that you're not going to magically get good fits with guy's clothes either. Especially when a belt is a befuddling option.
That was unnecessarily rude.
Have a nice day 🖖
On me, men's trousers come up to my armpits and have a big flappy area around the crotch, neither of which are appealing.
Probably harder to find pants she likes. Mens clothing tends to be baggy and boxy whereas women's tend to be more form fitting. Even mens skinny jeans could end up looking baggy depending on her size
My friend once snuck an entire subway footlong into a movie theater by just putting it in his pocket
Who the hell brings subway into a movie theater? And the staff defintely knew there is no hiding the smell of that bread.
There's a great fashion history podcast called Articles of Interest that covered this early on. Explains why it happened and covers things like the commenter's suggestion that women buy men's pants.
https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/pockets-articles-of-interest-3/
Shh. Women's pants pockets are the only hope those of us that want smaller phones still have.
You gotta go all the way back to a flip phone then. Even 10 years ago a lot of phones poked out of girl's pockets
I'd be fine with that. I was pretty damn fast at T9 typing back in the day... I might've been even faster than touch keyboards. Only could go faster on the old physical keyboards. Harder to typo with real tactical feedback...
There's a size difference?
the ipad mini is 195.4mm x 134.8mm
the iphone 17 pro max is 163.4mm x 78mm
those sizes do indeed differ, even if the listed diagonal display sizes only differ by 1.4" (8.3" vs. 6.9")
the reason the widths are so different is because the ipad mini has much thicker bezels but more importantly because it has a much squarer aspect ratio. the squarer aspect ratio means with a "similarly sized" display when only counting the diagonal you get much more width. while almost 7 inches is a lot, when you compare it to phones from 8 years ago it's not actually that much bigger, even though back then 16:9 phones were usually under 6 inches.
Well thanks. Though it was more of a joke on modern phones' phablet size. I'm happy with Xperia these days. Can even reach the whole screen with one hand.
oops i took the joke literally again
Eh, is fine. Thanks for your effort!
Yeah, the iPad Mini is roughly twice as wide as your average phone.