Forever obsessed with that genre of character that’s like an evil henchman who’s a little too devoted to their overlord. Like they’re starting to sound gay about it
you know what? fuck you. i think its cool to have no labels, or cool to have more labels then you have fingers, and cool to just say queer, or cool to say “queer but theres more i can explain if youd like”, and cool to say sapphic because you cant figure out if you id as a lesbian or bisexual, and cool to say youre asexual even if youd “fit into demisexual” more, and cool to introduce yourself as a trans guy even if youre also complicatedly nonbinary. its amazing no matter. youre all cool. im cool. yeah.
going through Google Books looking for pocket-related sources and I found something interesting in an 1875 issue of the magazine “The Spirit of ‘seventy-six”
it’s a letter to the editor, written by someone who signs herself “A Revolutionary Young Person” but later makes it clear that she’s a woman. and she is incensed about These Disgraceful Pockets Nowadays
she went through a man’s everyday outfit, based on general observations, and counted up a total of 25 pockets between all the different articles of clothing. this, to her, seems a gross unfairness compared to “these little shallow things, with the opening level with [one’s] bottom or a little lower, of which they sometimes allow us one in a dress…” she’s also transported with delight at the earlier, separate pockets she’s seen on display at American centennial fairs
based on my own study of extant garments, the “modern” pockets she’s talking about are often around 9 inches by 11 inches
so there might be a bit of an answer to the question of “why was there an association between women’s rights and women’s pockets in a time period when, by our standards, they were quite lavishly pocketed indeed?”
some of them were comparing their pockets to a truly excessive number in men’s outfits, and to the size of 18th-century examples. getting just as frustrated as we are today at our pocketless pants, fake pockets, and tiny pockets barely big enough for half a hand
“As to living another hundred years in this way, it isn’t to be thought of.” oh honey. I have some good news and some bad news…
1875 men’s fashion apparently
I have to quote this because the young lady was so Unhinged about pockets that I wish to go back in time and propose Boston Marriage
Look at a man. He’s just a mass of pockets. See his Ulster overcoat. Two pockets in the breast, to put his dear hands in when they are cold. Two pockets in the skirt [long hanging portion of the coat] to put his hands when he doesn’t know what to do with them, and what man ever does? One pocket just under the belt. Small change for [street]car-fare, is what he says that is for. One side pocket higher up on the breast, for his pocket handkerchief. Well, we don’t object to that. One pocket in the cuff. Heaven knows what that is for. All this on the outside.
Now just unbutton his coat and there, as I’m a living woman, three more pockets inside. Probably under his Ulster he has another light overcoat, many of these tender creatures do, but in that you will not find more than five pockets, so let that go. Then there is his [suit jacket]. Skirts, two pockets; breast, two pockets; another small pocket for change. Oh! if they only had money in any proportion to the pockets they have to keep it in, wouldn’t they be better worth having than most of them are now? Which? No matter which, the men or the pockets, which ever you please, or both together, for we have to take them that way if at all.
Then at least four more pockets in the vest. Then as to [trousers], I found a pair the other day without a man in them, and just counted the pockets myself. Let me see; there were two, where they always put their hands when they have no overcoats on. There was one, said to be a watch pocket, but this is on historical or traditional evidence entirely. No man has carried a watch there since- well, I’m sure I don’t know when- certainly not since the war with Mexico [1846-48]. Then, last of all, a pocket on the hip slanting backward. A girl who has brothers says they call this a pistol pocket…
Now, let me see. There is the Ulster, seven. The overcoat, five. The [suit jacket], five. The vest, four. The trousers, four- total, twenty-five pockets, to say nothing of others which I don’t know about and don’t care to.
Why do women carry things in their hands? humph! Why do women lose their purses? Why do women stuff things in their muffs? These are the questions which men with their twenty-five pockets are forever asking. Why don’t you keep a cash account [written log of money spent]? Why don’t you have a diary [planner]? What do you always want to borrow a knife for? Where’s that pencil I lent you?…What do you want a bag for? Think of their impudence, with all their twenty-five pockets, to ask such questions as these.
is her count correct, or typical of the period? I have no idea. is her energy IMMACULATE? Y E S
Modern AU where Padme Amidala is a 14 year old who ran for city council as part of her Girl Scouts Silver Award (her project was about civic involvement) but she actually gets elected and proceeds to impeach the mayor for corruption. She’s regularly running out of class to go make impassioned speeches about decreasing police funding in the city budget.
ALT
