News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rational Dress Society by titannet on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @04:26AM (#35436684)
I think you are mixing two things: dressing "correctly" is a status symbol and always will be even if it tends to be silly (number of pockets for woman, number of buttons for mens suits). The extreme we should keep fighting is when the norm becomes prohibitive, as in no breast feeding or not being able to ride a bike.
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @04:32AM (#35436739)
I'd only suggest speaking to the women in your life about it. Every one I know closely enough expresses that they'd rather have clothes with pockets but there's simply nothing in the shop. They'd happily do without the status that having no pockets apparently gives them.
Re:Rational Dress Society by bombolo on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @04:51AM (#35436884)
They could just buy men's clothes?
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:16AM (#35437040)
They can and often do, but there are other issues then such a tailoring and colouring etc., again it's getting back to the social pressure to look a certain feminine way.

I'd also add that while workarounds are available these things add up to an increased cognitive load for women doing normal everyday activities such as shopping for shirts.

Re:Rational Dress Society by toyg on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:55AM (#35437271)
I honestly think these issues are overblown. The fashion industry is largely led by female input and consuming habits, what it sells is what large majorities of women want. If some elements win over others, it's because the disaffected are a disorganized minority that doesn't necessarily practices what it preaches.
Re:Rational Dress Society by bombolo on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @06:58AM (#35437704)
shirts don't have pockets in any case.
Re:Rational Dress Society by falcor84 on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @07:39AM (#35438043)
I'm not following. Shirts can absolutely have pockets, both for men and women.
Re:Rational Dress Society by bombolo on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @07:45PM (#35462099)
Fake pockets that aren't really designed to be used, yes.
Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @08:45AM (#35438745)
That's practical if you can either tailor or afford to look however you want. I have a decent amount of menswear in my closet but I'm also very curvy so they aren't going to look professional unless I tailor them, so they're at home clothes for now. I did dress in men's clothes back when I was WFH in a camera-off company.

I grew up poorish (and therefore can sew) and am good with math so I can tailor my own clothes, but it still takes time and a fair number of women can't sew or mend.

Re:Rational Dress Society by hackernewds on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:03AM (#35436952)
It's a free market. Why do clothing companies not produce them then. If there's enough people wanting them, surely a company would manufacture clothes with pockets and grow to be as large as Untuckit
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:14AM (#35437026)
Yeah, just like how the free market gives me the choice of having a matte screen on my laptop!
Re:Rational Dress Society by toyg on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:52AM (#35437250)
Honestly, the fashion industry is nothing like computer manufacturing. Costs are very low and most firms have ways to scattergun all sorts of combinations at various ends of the market. Which is why it's interesting that people complain about "no pockets" - that's because there is nothing of the sorts in the shops they patronize, which is likely a very small section of a huge market, selected according to some (typically class-related) criteria. If they were willing to step outside the boundaries of their self-imposed class-sanctioned bubble, I bet they'd find plenty of pockets.

Another point: traditional dressing in many cultures put large pockets on female clothes more than on male ones. The transition to pocket-scarcity on fashion clothes is recent, and probably driven by women rejecting traditional roles. Women voted with their wallets once, they can do it again.

Re:Rational Dress Society by PeterisP on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:56AM (#35437280)
Clothing companies do produce them every now and then, but they systematically don't sell well, as similar clothing without proper pockets looks tighter, slimmer, and gets preferred by the majority of shoppers.
Re:Rational Dress Society by dsfyu404ed on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @06:04AM (#35437333)
This.

Classic case of people saying they want something and then making purchasing decisions based on priorities.

Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @08:43AM (#35438711)
I would caveat: The majority of shoppers who buy clothing regularly and are into fashion. Which it makes sense for fashion companies to prioritize. Practical women who make pockets a priority also don't replace clothes just because they're out of style, take fewer chances on new things, and buy less.
Re:Rational Dress Society by PeterisP on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @10:31AM (#35440248)
True, and of course if someone buys 3x more clothing, then their opinion literally matters 3x more to the manufacturers.
Re:Rational Dress Society by bprieto on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:11AM (#35436994)
What they say is one thimg, what they buy is another. If women really wanted clothes with big pockets, women clothes would have big pockets. But big pockets, specially when they have some things in, are not esthetically pleasant, and most women value esthetics more than utility.
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:15AM (#35437030)
> most women value esthetics more than utility.

This is the kind of essentialistic thinking that creates these issues in the first place.

Re:Rational Dress Society by bprieto on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @05:23AM (#35437073)
No, yours is the kind of idealistic thinking that creates all kinds of issues when people don't act like you think they should. I just observe the world, you think the world should bend to fit your ideas.
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @10:40AM (#35440381)
You're saying you're totally at ease with how everything in your society operates? And that I'm problematic for wanting things to change that I feel are unjust?
Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @08:32AM (#35438564)
I wouldn't say most women do, but a lot of women do. And, more importantly, those are the women dropping the $$ on clothing and therefore what is catered to.

I work in a lingerie/bra boutique at the moment and there are a large amount of women who wear the wrong size bra just because the right size shows that they have back fat. Even when the back fat can't be seen under clothing and the right size is more comfortable. Or who opt for things that are less comfortable/practical solely to fit their conception of themselves. "Oh no, I won't wear this size. I'm not that big/small. It fits well, but I feel so big/small when I look at the tag. I'll just keep wearing my old ones." Those are also the people who spend a ton on things that don't fit them to try to cure the gaping hole inside stemming from their hatred of their own bodies.

I've never worked with men in a similar setting (as a class, we have some cross-dressers but if you're a dude who wears women's clothing you're already comfortable breaking the rules) so I can't say if that's solely a woman thing or a general human one.

Re:Rational Dress Society by emptystation on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @09:45AM (#35439503)
I am one of those women who would wear an ill fitting bra over a well fitting one if a well fitting one accentuated my back fat. When you're conditioned to look and present themselves a certain way, it's almost impossible to fight it with rational arguments. It's anecdotal, of course, but I've seen a certain degree of conditioning in practically all the women across different cultures, just that the details differ.

Btw, I don't want huge pockets on my pants if they make me look "ugly". I've also recently opted for a handbag over a backpack, even though a backpack is an objectively healthier option for you back (and I am used to wearing backpacks, handbags are so freaking uncomfortable). The reason I switched? Backpacks made me look/feel "childish". That's it. I traded physical comfort and health for, hopefully, psychological comfort and the ability to control my narrative through my looks.

Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @09:58AM (#35439724)
> I've seen a certain degree of conditioning in practically all the women across different cultures, just that the details differ.

I would agree with that, although my experience is mostly limited to America. I see substantial differences in how that pressure presents across different generations. (Somebody needs to check on Gen X women, Jesus. Mass media did a number on them.)

I don't understand personally (I'm 'pretty' enough to get away with ignoring the conditioning [In quotes because I mean I fit the features the societies I live in see as attractive in cis women], I'm a lesbian and the stick to a lot of the conditioning is that you won't be a desirable to men if you don't conform and what do I care, and I also was/am visually impaired and even people who are really into conformity understand that putting that conditioning onto girls who can't see is a dick move), but it's obviously real. The main reason I hate it is that so many women who think like you like to insult themselves in a way that suggests I should agree? I'm not going to insult you! I think your body is fine!

> I traded physical comfort and health for, hopefully, psychological comfort and the ability to control my narrative through my looks.

This is a great way to put it, and now that I can see and I'm more comfortable with my looks, I'm wading into that mess myself because unfortunately I'm going to need every advantage I can get for things I want to do and people being stupid around attractive women is unfortunately one of those advantages, as gross as I feel about it.

Re:Rational Dress Society by mikrl on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @11:16AM (#35441029)
>Mass media did a number on them

IMO the same can be said for every generation of women that came of age from the 1990s until today, but yea heroin chic and size zero culture really hit Gen X women.

In fact it’s so bad, that even male zoomers are falling victim to the social media powered mass culture these days; there is really no escape for anyone anymore.

Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @12:00PM (#35441737)
Gen X women in particular had to deal with all the pressure of mass media and fake pictures, etc. at a vulnerable age before there was much push back. Of course Millennials and Gen Z are pressured, but there's also substantial pushback to and discussion of that pressure in a way there really wasn't in 1993. And things are a bit more fragmented now in that the monoculture has a little less sway so it's more possible to find a niche of people who agree with your aesthetic/presentation choices. Gen X also had the misfortune of being the first generation to deal with a more sexually permissive/post pill society and so things like continually looking attractive are more 'important' than for Boomer or Silent Gen women. The older Boomers and Silent Gen women I see don't like their bodies but they also don't feel like they should look 20 at 60+ because a lot of their examples growing up were still women in their lives + the cultural ideal was to get married young and keep the same man. The Gen Xers had the double whammy of 'be sexually liberated and by the way in order to do that, we're going to tell you to look 16 forever' without the counterbalance of any body positivity at all.
Re:Rational Dress Society by emptystation on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @02:46PM (#35444222)
>I would agree with that, although my experience is mostly limited to America.

I grew up in Ukraine and have been living in the Czech Republic for the last 5 years, it's pretty much the same here, there are some slight differences about what is considered beautiful, what grooming practices are expected across different classes, what's trendy etc, but the phenomenon is basically the same.

>how that pressure presents across different generations

That's interesting, do you care to share any of your observations? I noticed that gen Z, while having broader ideas of beauty, is leaning heavily into the self-expression aspect of it, while nothing wrong with that, beauty and fashion industries picked this angle very quickly and run it into the ground through social media. (I might be biased bc I'm into makeup but these days I just cannot keep up with the makeup industry and community, mentally or financially.)

> people being stupid around attractive women is unfortunately one of those advantages, as gross as I feel about it.

There's only so many battles we can fight in our lives. Using lookism to your advantage, if you can do it in a healthy way, is just being a realist.

Coming back to the original topic - women who pick non-functional clothes are not irrational, imo, they just work with different input, so to speak.

Re:Rational Dress Society by Mezzie on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @04:13PM (#35445285)
> That's interesting, do you care to share any of your observations?

You nailed it with regard to Gen Z. I'd say off the top of my head:

- Silent Gen women either give zero fucks or have a vague desire to look "presentable". There's not much self body shaming, more grousing about how much work it is to pass 'basic' standards.

- Boomer women also usually want to look 'presentable' so most of the displeasure is what shape they have under clothes, dressing 'inappropriately' (no plunges for big breasts because it makes them look 'easy'), etc.

- Gen X are most likely to have an 'ideal' naked woman that they're comparing themselves to. They are also the harshest towards themselves verbally and most likely to make a comment about my looks passive-aggressively.

- Millennials are weird. They tend to feel the pressure of the monoculture but also know that it's not cool to care too much. They're the most likely to be very quiet or say nothing but do things like frown in the mirror or disappointingly pinch their fat. Millennials are also the most likely to view their body hatred as a personal failing: "Why can't I get over not liking how I look?" etc. They've internalized both the monoculture and the response so they think they should look a certain way but also that wanting to look a certain way is a sign of weak character.

- Gen Z don't buy into the monoculture at all but are, as you noticed, way more susceptible to empowerment/self-expression rhetoric. This is the only age group that seems to be able to dislike their body but not see it as objectively bad because the body diversity message has hit. This group is also the most laissez faire about body modification: this is the only group where the cis girls mention top surgery or reductions for aesthetics/body acceptance instead of just for medically necessary reasons. They're the inverse of Gen X in that their preferences vary a lot more, and a Zoomer is equally likely to consider themselves 'too fat' or 'too thin' or 'too curvy'. Gen Zers who don't like their bodies see it as more 'this isn't me' rather than 'I'm failing to live up to society's standards.'

These are all generalities, obviously.

> Using lookism to your advantage, if you can do it in a healthy way, is just being a realist.

True. It's also easier now because my type of attractiveness is one that's associated with personality traits I do not have. I'm small and curvy with large eyes and Shirley Temple blonde curls, so playing it up when I was younger meant being treated like a moron and I've never been able to stand that. If you're into Kibbe, I'm somewhere between a romantic and gamine which are not looks that people take seriously even if they like them. Plus since I like women I opted out because the more effort I put in, the less other women liked me. Other women respond better when I'm a bit frumpy.

> women who pick non-functional clothes are not irrational, imo, they just work with different input, so to speak.

This point reminds me of this [0] article discussing that same idea from a class + race lens.

0: https://zora.medium.com/the-poor-cant-afford-not-to-wear-nic...

Re:Rational Dress Society by emptystation on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @07:02AM (#35452116)
Thank you for sharing, very interesting points! I wonder if Silent Gen and Boomers have had a change in their perception of beauty with age. Once you're out of reproductive age as a woman, beauty works differently for you. There must be some carryover from their younger years (for example, ideas of "properness" and "class" with Boomers seem to have been present throughout their whole lives) but some things must have changed.

I am a millennial myself (29 y.o.), and I felt like my generation was the one that was “awakened” to the reality of beauty standards. Obviously, feminist scholars have observed these patterns way before my time, but during my formative years the awareness entered the mainstream. My mom and her peers don't know what bodyshaming is, even though they both experience and perform it, my peers and I do know, and not because we've read specialized literature but because ideas are out there in the mainstream discourse.

I also know that my ideas and desires for beauty have been “planted” in me by the culture. There is nothing in me as a person that just naturally yearns to be underweight and have perky boobs. These were either instilled in me by the culture, or the culture promised something important in return. Sadly, this realization does not get rid of the desires themselves. I may be acutely aware that some beauty conventions are harmful, outdated, useless, exploitative, or inappropriate (conventions and contexts change!), I just cannot stop wanting them.

Gen Z’s situation is an interesting one. On one hand, they appear to be able to break the curse of desires “planted” in them and are able to connect with themselves as persons first and foremost, at least on some level. Their inner self, not Vogue, tells them to make a breast reduction. On the other hand, this is a rich ground for corporate exploitation. Listen, kid, you don’t need this lipstick for men, you don’t need it for other people at all, you need it for yourself. I, your friendly multi-billion corporation, just help you to articulate and get what you truly want!

>This point reminds me of this [0] article discussing that same idea from a class + race lens.

Thank you for the link. The essay was very interesting. I am not very (or at all) educated in intersectionality, but it was a very accessible and insightful read. I do wish people didn’t have to deal with this crap but we live in a society yada yada.

Re:Rational Dress Society by gardenhedge on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @07:02AM (#35437722)
This is exactly correct. Maybe 30 years ago it would have been difficult to get pockets on clothes because the shops in your locality didn't sell them.. but now we have this wonderful thing called the Internet.
Re:Rational Dress Society by micromacrofoot on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @08:16AM (#35438376)
still fairly difficult to get a decent functional pocket, ask a woman
Re:Rational Dress Society by Godel_unicode on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @09:29AM (#35439258)
I have talked with not a few women about this, and it always breaks down around not liking the look of the clothes with the pockets. Largely because of what the pockets do to the silhouette of the clothes.

I invite you to do this experiment; find someone who you think is stylish, note what they’re wearing, then shop for something similar but with pockets. It’ll probably take you ten minutes online.

Re:Rational Dress Society by micromacrofoot on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @09:35AM (#35439346)
I've tried buying pants for my partner with phone sized pockets after telling her the same thing and being challenged in response. Even if you're not trying to find something stylish they're difficult to find. You may think you found pockets, but often they're only a couple inches deep. Occasionally they're entirely fake.

If you try to buy men's pants, they're designed for entirely different body shapes regardless of style. They end up too narrow around the hips and if you size up you end up much too large around the waist.

Re:Rational Dress Society by red-iron-pine on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @10:14AM (#35439966)
Shoot I'm not a woman and I get it. Gym shorts come to mind.

The ones with pockets tend to have thicker waistbands and the pockets flair out near the top. Make my hips look huge. Very womanly, big fat ass. Easily adds an inch or two, or at least the appearance thereof.

Basketball shorts sans pockets look much slimmer. Great for B-ball but not as much while lifting or other activities where I want to carry a cell phone.

Re:Rational Dress Society by gardenhedge on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @06:05PM (#35446452)
Stop being lazy. My first attempt at searching gave this: https://www.pocketauthority.com/womens-pants-with-pockets
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @04:36AM (#35451094)
So the issue is so bad that a company has sprung up called the Pocket Authority and their whole selling point is that theirs pants have pockets?

The exception that proves the rule?

Re:Rational Dress Society by gardenhedge on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @07:06PM (#35461710)
What has that got to do with anything? Are you attempting to move the goal posts. The facts are in front of you. Women (and anybody) can order clothes online that have pockets.
Re:Rational Dress Society by micromacrofoot on Wednesday April 05, 2023 @10:36AM (#35454981)
My man, look at the depths of those pockets... the models can't even fit their whole hand in them.
Re:Rational Dress Society by miriam_catira on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @11:15AM (#35441000)
It's still a problem - and then you're stuck not able to try it on to see if it fits properly and is comfortable.

I've finally decided to take up mending just to be able to add pockets to more of my clothes - esp stuff for around the house. Most of the time if you find pockets, they're too small to put anything in! I'd rather put in the effort to make clothes match my style AND be comfortable/useful than wait for shops and brands to figure it out. Because they really don't seem to care.

Re:Rational Dress Society by somethingreen on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @06:14AM (#35437386)
There absolutely is a pressure on women to look a certain way, but I don't think number of pockets is in that category. I personally can't think of a single time number of pockets on a woman was addressed critically by either a man or another woman. Unless they were wearing one of those fishing vests, I guess. Men fashion often turns on cargo pants at least - I'm not sure if even that is a major thing for women. Don't you think it's weird that there is a supposedly strictly enforced norm and most of society is largely unaware of its existence?
Re:Rational Dress Society by willvarfar on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @06:21AM (#35437416)
I regularly have to carry things for my wife and daughters because the pockets on regular european women clothes are tiny or even missing completely. It seems to be a fashion thing. Very impractical.
Re:Rational Dress Society by jq-r on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @02:49PM (#35444252)
I find this mildly funny. My wife goes with a purse or that tiny backpack everywhere and sometimes I give her my stuff to carry. Mobile phones are getting too goddamn big.
Re:Rational Dress Society by AlecSchueler on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @10:46AM (#35440481)
If you're asking me then honestly yes I find it very weird that these issues are ignired by men. I get you that you're not hearing this brought up by the women around you but are you giving them the vibes that you'd be receptive to this conversation?

You can see it all over this thread, "but there's a free market," "women are just more focused on aesthetics," even angry responses like "how dare you try to change society."

It can be extremely tiring to deal with this kind of denial of your lived experience each time you share it.

Re:Rational Dress Society by NikolaNovak on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @07:31AM (#35437980)
Not the OP, and not sure I should wade into this, but I speak to my wife and sister, not to mention to my best friend, all the time about this.

If I push, they'll agree that yeah pockets are nice. But for whatever reason that's beyond my nerdy understanding (and I've been on this for 25 years:), it's just not even remotely a priority. Societal upbringing I'm sure, but whether it's that pockets are not aesthetically pleasing, or they're not feminine, or simply (my assumption) they were brought up without pockets so they don't care about pockets, I don't know. Pockets are available to them. Not in every store, but today, in sufficient number of stores. If it were a concerted preference, a capitalistic market change would be under way. But it's one of those "spoken preference vs acted preference" things. I am tall and slim so already have to shop from the internet to get a fleece that fits, you can bet I'd turn over hell and earth to get me some pockets. This does not appear to be the same level of priority for those people of feminine persuasion in my live. My 100 Croatian Lipa, FWIW, sample size n<50, etc :)