Lots of pants have deep pockets. Just not the tight jeans hipsters like to wear.
Women's pants today (except jeans) don't include pockets, unless you're thinking of those stupid painter's pants with pockets below the knees!
I keep my clothes for a long time. I have some still serviceable trousers that are 15 years old, and an odd thing is happening.
The front pockets have slowly shrunk to about 3/4 size.
The snarky claim is that cargo pants are popular only with out of date old codgers.
Perhaps that's true, but those are the only trousers now available with decent pockets!
So this is a trendy news item?
The idiocracy most certainly is here.
My experience has been that the size of ones phone is inversely proportional to ones IQ.
The Idiocracy is here.
She said....”Are you happy to see me or is that just your phone in your pocket?”
Good, those pockets make for great places to put extra mags and pocket pistols in.
Thumbs up to overalls. Been an almost daily part of my wardrobe for, oh, 40 years or so. Separate from the endorsement of overalls as highly utilitarian garb, Carhartt jeans have deep front pockets.
I have no cellphone, have no urge to ever have one, but pockets cannot be too big or too numerous.
That’s why cargo pants and cargo shorts are going to stick around long after their sell-by date. Plenty of room for the growing amount of stuff guys haul around and we wouldn’t be caught dead carrying a “man-purse.”
As for the so-called “skinny jeans,” while I’m glad to see something other than sagging oversized jeans being worn, men wearing “skinny jeans” won’t have a problem carrying a “man-purse” from what I’ve seen.
I want my phone in shirt pocket
I just keep my phone in a belt holster. Easier to get at.
bfl