If women's clothing had functional pockets there would be no need for handbags. Because fashion slaves alone can't support that industry. Yes, I am aware that that sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it's also the kind of capitalist nonsense that would surprise no one if it turned out to be true.
If women's clothing had functional pockets there would be no need for handbags. Because fashion slaves alone can't support that industry. Yes, I am aware that that sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it's also the kind of capitalist nonsense that would surprise no one if it turned out to be true.
If women's clothing had functional pockets there would be no need for handbags.
Pretty sure they'd still have handbags for things like toiletries at minimum. There are various additional things they tend to take with them that pockets wouldn't be ideal.
I am becoming increasingly convinced that the majority of so-called women's clothing isn't actually meant to be worn -- at least, not by humans.
Alanis, killed by a landsknecht
So fun fact, women's clothing used to have giant pockets, but since they were built into the petticoats, they ended up disappearing once we got rid of them as they'd cause skirts to bulge in un-aesthetic ways (this was around the same time as the Great Male Renunciation, or the reason why dudes only have suits as their option for fancy clothing). We still put comfortable pockets into womens clothes, but those will always be subject to the trends of fashion in the same way men's mustaches have their own cycles of popularity.
Leave a comment