[a sign reads FEMINIST CONFERENCE next to a closed door, a blue character shrugs and says…]
I don’t care

[next to the same door, the sign now says RESTRICTED FEMINIST CONFERENCE WOMEN ONLY, there are now four blue characters desperately banging on the door, one is reduced to tears on the floor, they are shouting]
DISCRIMINATION
SO UNFAIR!!!
LET US IINN!!
MISANDRY

https://thebad.website/comic/until_it_affects_me

  • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The best solution is to give women more options.

    The customer will always want their preferred option to exist, but if creating those additional options isn’t profitable for the clothing manufacturer because it doesn’t sell well enough, you shouldn’t be surprised if they don’t do it. After all, from their perspective, it’s not a “solution”, it’s throwing money out the window for no reason. And businesses dislike doing that as much as we do.

    I’m not a woman, but I am someone whose preferences are often significantly deviated from what’s commonly available, so I can definitely empathize about this sort of dilemma. But at the same time, I understand why it is the way it is.

    • dkppunk@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      I disagree. Women’s pants with pockets will sell just as well as, if not better than, women’s pants with fake pockets because at the end of the day, there is no difference in pants with vs without except in very limited cases like specific styles of business attire. The pants will sell because women want to wear pants and we buy pants available to us.

      There is no good reason at all for fake pockets to even exist. These companies do this so they can force women to buy purses, an extra item that causes women to spend more money. It’s sexism. That’s all there is to it.

      I highly recommend a book called Pockets: An Intimate History of How We Keep Things Close by Hannah Carlson. Women have been denied pockets for centuries and business today are just continuing that.

      https://bookshop.org/p/books/pockets-an-intimate-history-of-how-we-keep-things-close-hannah-carlson/be9f2cf36a821fb6?ean=9781643751542&next=t

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I disagree. Women’s pants with pockets will sell just as well as, if not better than, women’s pants with fake pockets because at the end of the day, there is no difference in pants with vs without except in very limited cases like specific styles of business attire. The pants will sell because women want to wear pants and we buy pants available to us.

        If the demand is there, then it’d be a golden opportunity for a clothing manufacturer to corner that market then, wouldn’t it? With how massive the fashion industry is, there must be a reason it’s apparently not been attempted in earnest yet, by any of the over 400,000 apparel companies out there.

        What do you think that reason is? Not a rhetorical question.