Jeans

As a Blog dedicated to creativity and design you may wonder… why jeans?

I’ll tell you. 

Jeans are one of the most poorly designed products to this day, for women, in my opinion. Now I know the huge problem of “female “marketing, which is basically make it pink and charge more for the same product. It’s a lazy and degrading philosophy that most women see through. It’s also a vast missed market of opportunity to make things women actually want. Like jeans, more specifically, jeans with pockets.

Woman come in all shapes and a one size fits all when it comes to jeans is almost impossible. If you have hips, but no waist, you have to cinch-up like a crown royal bag. If you have nothing going on back there, just wide and flat like an aircraft carrier, you get the “gap” whenever you sit, where friends can throw spare change for fun.  To further complicate we have short-wasted ladies and long wasted, and jeans that can be hip-huggers or mom jeans. Worst of all, jeans made for women have no pockets. Why? On average you can fit may be a quarter and a tube of Chapstick. One piece of gum, well one piece of Trident gum.  Even cargos for women, if you can find them, are capri and the pockets are only big enough to hold one credit card, maybe.

Here we are paying minimum fifty dollars, up into the hundreds for jeans, and Men’s Levies start at twenty bucks!

Now I have worn the hundreds of dollars jeans, and they look good. I can’t carry my phone, keys or Id, unless I have purse or a coat with adequate pockets. I think this is the origin of my hate against lady jeans, I am not a purse person. I can’t be trusted with them. I have tried and have left them in restrooms and friends’ houses all across America. I need pockets, jeans with pockets. Ones that don’t slide my phone out of its back pocket when I stand up in the restroom stall and send it into the bowl. I have to hold my phone in my mouth because putting it on any surface is gross, and I may forget to take it with me. I need working pockets, but women jeans don’t have them. They are there so the jeans look normal, not to serve any function.

I got fed up and bought some men’s Levies, they are their new line for guys called Flex, because men like words like Flex, rather than stretch, because ladies’ jeans stretch and men jeans flex like bulging muscles instead of stretching under muffin tops. They are also slim fit, because that’s a lady’s jeans standard and the pockets go almost to my knees.  They look good, feel good and cost twenty bucks.  So, my question is, why can’t we have them? What is the issue in the design that stops all manufacturers from making them? Do women not look good with real pockets? Do women not want to wear men’s jeans outright that they must buy “boyfriend” style jeans at two to three times the cost? I have never worn “boyfriend” jeans and I can’t vouch for the pockets. Why not just buy the same jeans your boyfriend wears?

And this is the problem. Fashion is a beast unto itself and I am not questioning or tackling it, I am asking about a fundamental difference in a staple of everyday clothing and work wear. Is it not feminine to have pockets? Is the line ruined? Why are we concerned about a line in jeans that we throw on to hit the grocery store? Because in woman jeans, designer or every day, it doesn’t matter.

No pockets for you!

That again, is design flaw. If you’re out and want jeans that look painted on, I can understand, but if you’re out to buy you aren’t wearing those jeans, you wear the ones that need functioning pockets. But we don’t because some imaginary rule forbids it. This we can change. To do that we have to look at things beyond who we always do them and begin questioning why we do it and change it if it is no longer working.