MyCIMA

The economics of why women don’t have pockets

Replies : 2
Jarred Myers's picture

Yesterday I went off to see the much acclaimed Avatar in 3D, while my eyes re-adjust to my real world which is mostly 2D (my laptop screen), I noticed a phenomenon, surprisingly for the first time. I went in a group and was asked by one of the ladies to keep her cash for her. I don’t doubt my fiduciary abilities in carrying out the task but was perplexed with a question, why don’t you keep your own money, to which she responded with a thumping “duh”, I don’t have any pockets! 

 As a fan of rogue economics I attempted to explore why it is that most women at any given event don’t have a pocket in sight.

 

 My exploration led me down an interesting path and I’ll share my unedited findings; unless you’re in combat fatigues you most likely will have pockets in one of three places, waist, rear and breast pocket.

Yes, I’m aware I make people sound like the label on a BBQ chicken pack, but my noble goal is in the pursuit of science, so onwards we march…  Pockets are a rational solution to common problem; you have “stuff” that you need to carry, so it makes sense to carry your stuff on your person so it doesn’t get lost. When your phone rings you don’t have to get down on all fours to establish which couch is ringing the loudest and when it’s time to leave the office you don’t have to trace your first half hour at work when you were trying to nurse your scolding hand from that darn leaky coffee cup in order to establish were your keys got flung. 

So let’s look at an anthropological scenario through the lens of a bean counter; your average Joe has a flattish torso with the rest of his body striving for as little curvature as possible, so your wallet in your back pocket doesn’t bother you, your phone and Mont Blanc in your shirt is pretty cool and your keys in your front trousers pocket are annoying but at least you remember where you put them. In all three scenarios we have a net gain with two scenarios baring a slight inconvenience cost. 

Now let’s examine the average Jane; according to the BBQ pack we have three pocketable regions, thigh, breast and rump. There are 2 applicable scenarios; either the pocketable region is an asset or a liability to “Jane”, if it’s an asset then Jane wants to disclose this material asset on her balance sheet , alternately if it’s a liability, Jane is going to employ some creative accounting to massage the figures, after all there are no statutory disclosure requirements for this accounting body.    

In fact it creates a lose -lose scenario for Jane. So next time you’re supposed to be productive but are gazing around the office for signs of life, try spot the rogue female pocket and you’ll be witness to the economics of life and how assets and liabilities are not always black & white.

 In the name of science you can try this yourself or convince a colleague at work to try it herself, take 1 blackberry, 1 leather wallet, 1 pen and 1 set of home and car keys and store it accessibly on your person without holding any object in your hands, now continue in this manner for 8 hours.

  I look forward to the results of your office experiment.


Alternative?

What if the answer in fact lies in the numbers of items that men and women tend to carry with them? Men may have a phone, wallet, pen and keys, but based on my observations, it seems that women will often have other supplementary items, resulting in a volume too large to comfortably fit in pockets. For this reason you tend to see the average Jane carrying a handbag around with her, whereas you don't see that with men. Now the question is... if you already have a handbag to deal with the volume of items, why would you need pockets at all?

Sagging demand in advanced pocket theory

Chris, I think the man-bag carriers alliance may be offended by your insinuations, but I hear your point.

I’m pretty sure in today’s technologically advanced world if there was consumer demand for whatever it is that woman carry in their bags to be bite-size in order to fit in pockets , the market would have generated such products. The fact that they never bothered confirms my theory that there is no real desire to ditch the old bag in favour of the sagging trouser pocket,precisely because it would sag