I’ve been around for a number of fashion eras and witnessed the invention of new fabrics galore (thank god for space age polymers). But I have to say, I’m a little distressed at the overwhelming popularity of a recent mass courture: the stretch pocketless jean. For a while there pockets started to shrink on womens’ pants, and then all of a sudden *poof* no storage in the trunk.
What, exactly is so disturbing about these pants I couldn’t put my finger on, but something was starting to well up inside me. Then this weekend my friend Heemin nailed it right on the head:
Pocketless jeans look cheap.
So what was it: (a) pockets were out of your price range or (b) you can afford pants, but nothing to put inside them, making the pocket an unnessecary feature.
If you own/wear these things, I don’t mean to pass judgement on you, but I’m tired of carrying your wallet and your keys. If you’re a fashion designer, please bring pockets back, I miss them.
overstated 
You could issue a citation & fine. While the original rules talk about mis-fitting jeans, I have no doubt that lack of pockets — which is sooooo 1987 — falls in the gray area.
I concur. I also think that when society deems metrosexualism passe, and Queer Eye gets nixed, Carson should have a spinoff show where he walks around New York issuing fashion fines. I’d pay good money to see a real NYC Jeans police!
hey Cam,
I still believe what’s most annoying about these pocketless jeans is what we agreed on while you were here in NYC the other weekend-simply put, there’s not enough to grab a woman’s ass by! I mean, you can easily slip up and not be able to really hook your hand in there to secure a good pinch or grope…I forget if you wanted me to keep this on the DL…
Best Friends Forever Cam!
Dre
Call me tres disappointed Cam. What I originally credited to you as a highly evolved fashion aesthetic, or even, a gallant desire to give agency to women dependent on guys with pockets, turns out to be all about ass-grabbing. Perhaps what is really bothering you is the “look but don’t touch” aspect of pocketless jeans. They showcase ass while at the same time prohibiting ass from being grabbed. A sort of lap-dance for the public eye…
Little useless ass-pockets with flaps that exist only to draw attention to the booty. Mmm.
Don’t pretend you don’t know what I’m talking about.
I must say I like ’em.
1) you carry your purse everywhere, so what do you care?
2) I absolutely love running my hands over a smooth toosh.
Regarding looking cheep: I suppose I should admit the trailor-trash look is my absolute favorite in a woman (except for cigs). So I am perhaps a little biased. But I think most guys will agree with me on #2.
love them, brings on the ass!
Given the high obesity rate in this country I’m not suprised the no pocket look is in.
Pockets draw attention to your butt and make it look bigger (depending on the kind of pocket). The pocket-less look flattens out your fat ass.
Its similar to the reason why pleated mens pants are being replaced by flat front pants. Pleats make you look bulky around your waist and hips, when really that isn’t the part of your physique you want to look bulkier. If you know what I mean.
I completely disagree. Pockets, if placed and sized correctly will make your bottom look more petite. ‘No pockets’ can make your bottom look flat/pancaked or shapeless. If it is large, a lack of pockets will simply draw attention to the size because there is nothing to distract the eye, especially if the fabric has lycra (yikes!) and then you can see EVERYTHING.
uh no, k, pocketless jeans make your butt look huge. i only wear this style & that’s why! it’s very sexy! nuthin flattens your butt like huge pockets and heavy fabric
btw, the girl in this picture is obviously anorexic with legs like baseball bats and even she looks like she has somewhat of an ass thanks to those jeans
I personally love them. I think it makes a girls butt look so sexy and smooth. Those jeans make me a horny bastard.