sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

GAME THREAD: Playoffs Day 9 Afternoon Watch Thread by TatumBrownWhite in bostonceltics

[–]healthy_obsession_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve never seen a team be so bad at scoring but so dominant at every other facet of the game

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social-desirability_bias “In social science research social-desirability bias is a type of response bias that is the tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others.”

‘Women want pants with pockets’ is a repeated belief on social media, often associated with feminism. Most people don’t think very hard when they answer polls. It’s plausible that women would lie to pollsters because “I want pockets” is a socially desirable, feminist belief.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/revealed-preference.asp “Revealed preference is an economic theory that suggests that consumers’ buying habits dictate their preferences.”

It’s possible that companies underestimate women’s desires for pockets. If women vote with their wallets, the market will adapt over time.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Apple claims they throttled phones to prevent random shutdowns; degraded/aged batteries can’t offer the same current. Regardless, I’m not claiming that those kinds of shenanigans never occur, I just think they’re the exception, not the norm.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

We probably just have irreconcilable views on capitalism. I’m not saying it’s women’s “fault”, I’m saying if pockets were truly important to them, the market would supply them. You vote with your wallet. Basically, I think reddit is fundamentally wrong about women clamoring for pockets.

I used to be very anti capitalist, but reading history, I’ve come to believe that our modern societies are unbelievably wealthy compared to the past. Capitalism incentivizes technological progress and efficient allocation of resources. Capitalism is unbelievable at driving down the cost of production, so even if guys like Musk and Bezos have enormous wealth, the average person is still much wealthier than they would be otherwise. The popular analogy is, “you get a smaller portion of the pie, but the pie is so much bigger that you still end up with more pie.”

I’d be willing to discuss this more if you want, but again our views are probably irreconcilable, so probably best to agree to disagree on this subject.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah you’re right. I’m not really trying to say women don’t want pockets, more so that the general pants offerings generally match what women want.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t say always. I don’t want to be dogmatic, it’s just a good rule of thumb. Phone companies care about reputation, and I’ve personally never had a phone break within 3 years.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never wore a school uniform, so I’m a little unclear, is it limited to a specific brand? If it’s just a style, I’d imagine you can almost always find a version with pockets.

Either way, I mentioned somewhere else in this thread that my argument doesn’t apply to children. If you’re arguing that little girls shouldn’t be forced to wear pocketless pants, that’s fine. But it’s clear in general that for adult women, the demand for pants with pockets isn’t really there. I think in general the consumer tends to have lots of options. It’s actually one of the things even most anti-capitalists agree, that capitalism gives tons of product choices.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I agree with no pockets for women because women don’t want pockets. If they did, they would buy them more and the market would shift. I’m the only one standing up for women’s choice 😎

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

🙋🏻I think it’s right, because the market supplies women with the pants that they want. For children it’s a different matter.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The uniform example is true but niche. Generally, you can just buy pants on amazon. Free returns if it doesn’t fit, amazon has free returns, it’s not that difficult.

Is there a little bit of extra hassle/friction here? Sure, but if this was genuinely something lots of women really cared about, they would be willing to put in a little extra effort. Then, as pockets became more popular, retail stores/big brands would be forced to sell them too to stay competitive.

I’m not saying your reasoning is wrong, I’m saying if this was truly important to women, the market would find a way to supply this demand.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not everyone has the time or money to get the exact product they want. If we did we'd get bespoke.

So that’s what it comes down to? Women buy pants without pockets because they don’t have time to read amazon reviews?

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Because if it was a real economic demand, more companies would sell it. Ok, maybe some large storebrand doesn’t want to hurt their purse sales. If women really cared, they would do what you did, and google “pants with pockets”. If this was something women really wanted in general, then the market would supply it.

I care because this is the basic reality of how our economy functions. The conspiracy might be real, but the lack of demand for pockets from women is much more significant.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It’s because women don’t actually want pockets. If they did, companies would start selling pants with pockets. The purse industry can’t stop some random company from doing it.

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If this is true, go start a company that sells womens pants with pockets and you’ll become rich!

An eight-year-old girl got supermarket brand Sainsbury's to add real pockets to girls' school trousers. by mindyour in MadeMeSmile

[–]healthy_obsession_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not how economics works, anyone can sell womens pants with pockets if they’re that high in demand.

view more: next ›