4 ms·

According to this comment section: The lack of workable pockets comes down to women's morality. After all, doesn't the free market offer exactly what is demand

According to this comment section: The lack of workable pockets comes down to women's morality. After all, doesn't the free market offer exactly what is demanded? The option must be there, women just don't choose it because they think it's ugly. Women are never socially punished for looking frumpy, obviously. Women are also responsible for the actions of the fashion industry.

empyrrhicist 3y ago
It's wild. This is a common theme though, the quality of HN discussion on average can be absolutely terrible when it comes to gender.
- Jensson 3y ago
  Yes, in a normal thread people wouldn't argue that a highly competitive market fails to sell products the consumer would like even though those products are easy to make. But when you start to talk about women all rationality goes out the window and now people suddenly believe the people who sell products are total idiots.
  - empyrrhicist 3y ago
    That's such a ridiculously oversimplified take on how the modern economy/clothing industry works it's almost childish. Markets aren't magic, and there are lots of reasons customers wouldn't get what they want. Not to mention, my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want - you should try it sometime. With that in mind, even if you want to hold on to your weird market utopia fantasy, it certainly seems like there must be a sizeable minority of people who want (and, anecdotally, who DO go out of their way to find when possible) pants with functional pockets. "That's what the market sells so it's what you must want" is such a wild take.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      > my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want That is even more childish though, we know for sure that people don't really know what they want. What is available is a much better predictor for what people want than what they say they want. Peoples opinions are a valuable input, but it isn't the most important. Expert decisions that considered peoples opinions among many other things are a much better signal.
      - empyrrhicist 3y ago
        Oh, bullshit. Yes, people are irrational in lots of ways, but on such a simple thing, where I personally know people who search for pants with more reasonable pockets (or even modify the pockets on the jeans they find, since they're sometimes just sewed shut), it is transparent to me that your impulse to trust "the magic jeans experts" is indefensible. There are a limited number of retailers in a space where many like to try on the product. There are only a handful of major brands. It is cheaper to make and sell fewer SKUs. Style and fashion are driven by relatively few individual people. Sure, it's obvious that some (perhaps many?) either like or don't care about the bad pockets. It's also transparently the case that if there are not readily available alternatives, still more will buy the products anyway. It is also transparently obvious that this can and does result in sizeable numbers of unhappy consumers who want what they claim - better pockets. You trying to simplify that with "women actually DO want shitty pockets" is absolutely wild.
        Jensson 3y ago
        I did a google search and this is the first I found: https://www2.hm.com/en_us/productpage.0751471063.html https://www2.hm.com/en_us/productpage.0751471063.html Those pants looks like they have good pockets, and they aren't cargo pants. Pockets for women are trivial to find, I found them instantly! So the problem isn't "women's clothing doesn't have pockets", the problem is "the clothes I like doesn't have pockets". If women wanted pockets they could go buy pants with pockets, but they choose not to.
        empyrrhicist 3y ago
    - nerdponx 3y ago
      It's childish and unrealistic but it's actually consistent with the prevailing HN attitude in just about any thread where economics shows up. We need a variant of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect where individuals are eager to forget that they are themselves not experts in the topic at hand, and are therefore unqualified to evaluate a large variety of statement and scenarios.
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  The quality of HN discussion is dismal in most subjects outside of very narrow subjects (such as software development). On most other things - i.e.: economics, politics, social issues, history, et cetera and so forth - it's a parade of bad takes from people that obviously think very highly of themselves, but are actually pretty dumb.
  - growingkittens 3y ago
    Economics in particular is seen as a reputable subject based on numbers, math, resources, and Big Important Decisions. One problem: human economics are based on human psychology, a subject which is in its infancy. In fact, some who look up to economics look down on psychology. Actual economic experts are doing the equivalent to "making shit up" since we know so little about psychology. It's all very backward.
lotsofpulp 3y ago
> The lack of workable pockets comes down to women's morality. Which comment? Most are discussing supply and demand. > The option must be there, women just don't choose it because they think it's ugly. The option is there, albeit expensive. Travel to a developing country with a reputation for making clothes and for a few thousand dollars, I am guessing you can get custom clothes with bigger pockets made for you.
- growingkittens 3y ago
  "women don't value putting things in pockets" "women want form over function" "women [are lying] about wanting pockets" "women refuse to wear clothes they find ugly" These are all morality based statements. They hold a moral value. Other comments build on these assumptions to discuss supply and demand. > Travel to a developing country with a reputation for making clothes and for a few thousand dollars, I am guessing you can get custom clothes with bigger pockets made for you. Your solution is "have money and take advantage of developing labor." That's not helpful.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    > These are all morality based statements. They hold a moral value. Other comments build on these assumptions to discuss supply and demand. I would describe those as statements as more about economics, and which tradeoffs people are willing to make in their clothes buying decisions. > Your solution is "have money and take advantage of developing labor." That's not helpful. The clothes in Costco and pretty much every other store in America take advantage of developing labor.
    - growingkittens 3y ago
      Any human economic system is intrinsically tied to human values (and human nature). What we value depends on our moral systems. Discussing economics involves making assumptions about what other people value and why they value it. > The clothes in Costco and pretty much every other store in America take advantage of developing labor. Yes, so why suggest "more of the same"?
snehk 3y ago
> After all, doesn't the free market offer exactly what is demanded? You should be able to get pants with bigger pockets at H&M. My girlfriend buys her jeans there.

empyrrhicist 3y ago

It's wild. This is a common theme though, the quality of HN discussion on average can be absolutely terrible when it comes to gender.

Jensson 3y ago
Yes, in a normal thread people wouldn't argue that a highly competitive market fails to sell products the consumer would like even though those products are easy to make. But when you start to talk about women all rationality goes out the window and now people suddenly believe the people who sell products are total idiots.
- empyrrhicist 3y ago
  That's such a ridiculously oversimplified take on how the modern economy/clothing industry works it's almost childish. Markets aren't magic, and there are lots of reasons customers wouldn't get what they want. Not to mention, my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want - you should try it sometime. With that in mind, even if you want to hold on to your weird market utopia fantasy, it certainly seems like there must be a sizeable minority of people who want (and, anecdotally, who DO go out of their way to find when possible) pants with functional pockets. "That's what the market sells so it's what you must want" is such a wild take.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > my default stance is to simply believe people when they tell me what they want That is even more childish though, we know for sure that people don't really know what they want. What is available is a much better predictor for what people want than what they say they want. Peoples opinions are a valuable input, but it isn't the most important. Expert decisions that considered peoples opinions among many other things are a much better signal.
    - empyrrhicist 3y ago
      Oh, bullshit. Yes, people are irrational in lots of ways, but on such a simple thing, where I personally know people who search for pants with more reasonable pockets (or even modify the pockets on the jeans they find, since they're sometimes just sewed shut), it is transparent to me that your impulse to trust "the magic jeans experts" is indefensible. There are a limited number of retailers in a space where many like to try on the product. There are only a handful of major brands. It is cheaper to make and sell fewer SKUs. Style and fashion are driven by relatively few individual people. Sure, it's obvious that some (perhaps many?) either like or don't care about the bad pockets. It's also transparently the case that if there are not readily available alternatives, still more will buy the products anyway. It is also transparently obvious that this can and does result in sizeable numbers of unhappy consumers who want what they claim - better pockets. You trying to simplify that with "women actually DO want shitty pockets" is absolutely wild.
      - Jensson 3y ago
        I did a google search and this is the first I found: https://www2.hm.com/en_us/productpage.0751471063.html https://www2.hm.com/en_us/productpage.0751471063.html Those pants looks like they have good pockets, and they aren't cargo pants. Pockets for women are trivial to find, I found them instantly! So the problem isn't "women's clothing doesn't have pockets", the problem is "the clothes I like doesn't have pockets". If women wanted pockets they could go buy pants with pockets, but they choose not to.
        empyrrhicist 3y ago
  - nerdponx 3y ago
    It's childish and unrealistic but it's actually consistent with the prevailing HN attitude in just about any thread where economics shows up. We need a variant of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect where individuals are eager to forget that they are themselves not experts in the topic at hand, and are therefore unqualified to evaluate a large variety of statement and scenarios.
surgical_fire 3y ago
The quality of HN discussion is dismal in most subjects outside of very narrow subjects (such as software development). On most other things - i.e.: economics, politics, social issues, history, et cetera and so forth - it's a parade of bad takes from people that obviously think very highly of themselves, but are actually pretty dumb.
- growingkittens 3y ago
  Economics in particular is seen as a reputable subject based on numbers, math, resources, and Big Important Decisions. One problem: human economics are based on human psychology, a subject which is in its infancy. In fact, some who look up to economics look down on psychology. Actual economic experts are doing the equivalent to "making shit up" since we know so little about psychology. It's all very backward.

lotsofpulp 3y ago

> The lack of workable pockets comes down to women's morality. Which comment? Most are discussing supply and demand. > The option must be there, women just don't choose it because they think it's ugly. The option is there, albeit expensive. Travel to a developing country with a reputation for making clothes and for a few thousand dollars, I am guessing you can get custom clothes with bigger pockets made for you.

growingkittens 3y ago
"women don't value putting things in pockets" "women want form over function" "women [are lying] about wanting pockets" "women refuse to wear clothes they find ugly" These are all morality based statements. They hold a moral value. Other comments build on these assumptions to discuss supply and demand. > Travel to a developing country with a reputation for making clothes and for a few thousand dollars, I am guessing you can get custom clothes with bigger pockets made for you. Your solution is "have money and take advantage of developing labor." That's not helpful.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  > These are all morality based statements. They hold a moral value. Other comments build on these assumptions to discuss supply and demand. I would describe those as statements as more about economics, and which tradeoffs people are willing to make in their clothes buying decisions. > Your solution is "have money and take advantage of developing labor." That's not helpful. The clothes in Costco and pretty much every other store in America take advantage of developing labor.
  - growingkittens 3y ago
    Any human economic system is intrinsically tied to human values (and human nature). What we value depends on our moral systems. Discussing economics involves making assumptions about what other people value and why they value it. > The clothes in Costco and pretty much every other store in America take advantage of developing labor. Yes, so why suggest "more of the same"?

snehk 3y ago

> After all, doesn't the free market offer exactly what is demanded? You should be able to get pants with bigger pockets at H&M. My girlfriend buys her jeans there.