Anyone who has ever worn women's clothing knows it generally lacks one major feature: functional pockets. You know, pockets that actually hold things rather than the sewn-shut or barely-fits-a-pinky variety. Clothing marketed for women also tends to be less comfortable than its for-men counterpart, and one guy on Twitter just reminded a stranger how sexist clothing is (re: NO POCKETS) in an epic Twitter thread.
Here's some backstory: A woman named Bree Mae (@TheBreeMae) tweeted about why she prefers wearing men's clothing. In her thread, she wrote,
Wearing men's clothing is so much BETTER an experience, just physically, that I consider it self-care. I reach for it on harder days.
Then, a guy named Ryan (@imryanphllpsbro) retweeted her series of tweets with the following reply,
Incredible strand of tweets right here. Clothing is sexist now. What a time.
And yet, clothing is and always has been sexist.
Thankfully, fellow Twitter user Jared Pachacek (@vandroidhelsing) snapped back with the truth, hilariously referring to Ryan exclusively with various forms of "bro." He wrote,
My dude, clothing IS sexist and has been for centuries, my bro, broseph, guy who's never had to worry about whether his pants have pockets.
While the entire thread is worth the read, let's go through some highlights.
Like, Ryan, have you ever experienced this?
"Did you know?"
"This is called 'Privilege,' Brolossus of Rhodes."
Jared has privilege too, but he gets it.
It's really beautiful.
To conclude, Jared is BAE, and Bree Mae approves.
It looks like other people approve, too. This Twitter user gave some examples about women's clothing he might've been referring to.
Shout out to people who wear women's clothing: At least we're not alone in our quest for pockets and comfort that don't have to exude sexiness.
Thank you for supporting women, Jared. Hopefully Ryan learned a few things from your lovely feminist thread.