What Gear Companies Get Wrong About Women

As we layered up for the New Hampshire winter, my friend and I were indulging in a popular pastime – comparing our gear. We both enjoy the outdoors and have spent our fair share of time working in forestry or on farms, so we share any tips we can get.  Such as, TitleNine makes great sports bras.  Oiselle has soft waistbands on their running gear.  And a go-girl is a must have for peeing during a long multi-pitch. But even though we’ve spent our whole lives looking for the alternative deal, we’re still surprised by how hard it is to find women’s athletic clothing that fits right and doesn’t make you look like an idiot.

The outdoor industry has exploded in the past few decades, focusing on creating lightweight, highly efficient gear from base layers to backpacks. As far as women’s gear is concerned, we’ve come a long way. But despite a newfound focus on the female demographic, I can’t help but feel like a lot of companies are still falling short of delivering the same quality to women that has been available in men’s gear for years.

So, here is an open letter to marketing companies around the world about what you can you do better, along with a reader tip about which companies are ahead of their time and already getting it right.

1.  Make the arms larger


My arms are muscular. This is because I climb and I like to do active things. Hence why I’m trying to buy wicking shirts and flannel work shirts. I’ve come to understand that, despite my personal opinions, ‘muscular’ is not necessarily the ideal female form in society. In fact, when I injured myself and had to stop climbing for two months last year, I got endless compliments on how skinny I looked. And a miracle also happened – my arms fit into all of my shirts!


Having grown up in my brother’s hand-me-down flannels, I was pretty excited when outdoor companies started making ‘women’s flannels’. Imagine my disappointment when I realized that that meant much less arm space. And when it comes to why, the ads say it all.


Men’s flannels are shown in ads being worn by modern day, romanticized lumber jacks, but women’s shirts are modeled by waifish women who look as though they couldn’t even lift an axe, much less use it. Why would a woman want a shirt that was stereotypically worn by people cutting wood if it wouldn’t fit her while she actually chops wood?

What is the message here? That women should dress the way men do, but remain weaker?

Women’s arms are getting a bigger workout today than serving turkey dinner; let’s try to keep up.


…So, who does it right?

Well, for one, Duluth makes a pretty solid line of women’s work shirts.

2.  Change the colors


It’s hard enough to stand your ground as a woman in outdoor sports. Now try doing it dressed like a female Power Ranger. The colors available for women’s clothing are a horrible mix of pastels and neons; Line up women on a hiking or biking trip and it looks like Abba visiting a nursery.


OK, so it does play right into marketing stereotypes that I care about the color of my clothes, but I do think that color affects how we’re perceived. Women want to be taken seriously – as mountaineers, climbers, hikers, skiers, snowboarders, runners, and cyclists. You name the sport and I guarantee you there is a humiliating teal outfit for it.


Even hunting clothing, which is designed for one primary purpose – camouflage – is tainted by female stereotypes:


There’s nothing like bright, glaring pink to simulate a natural environment for wary deer.

And you know what? Some women want to wear neon pink and yellow, and that’s OK. But in a market that is gradually incorporating more and more fitness boutiques like LuluLemon and Fabletics, it would be nice if the more serious gear companies – especially the ones who try to convince us that they support women’s equality and athleticism – offered the same color choices for both genders.


Well, two out of three is pretty good.

It is 2015. We’ve had the right to vote for almost a century – can we please have adult colors now?

Who does it right?

Patagonia and the North Face are expensive, but slightly more likely to use palettes which don’t assault your eyes.  Unfortunately, I still haven’t found a company that reliably sells their women’s gear in the more subtle burnt oranges, olive greens, and slate grey colors that men’s wear comes in – but please tell me if you know of one.


Yeah, this is really for sale (on multiple backpacking sites).

3.  Make work clothes for women. Seriously.

I don’t want to hear about how there are totally work pants for women out there. I know there are. But frankly, they suck.

To illustrate the divide, here is the picture you get when visit the website for Dickies, a well known supplier of work pants, and click on ‘Men’:


And here are the categories for work pants underneath that picture:

Cargo Pants, Coveralls, Bib Overalls, Painter’s Wear, High Visibility, Flame Resistant, Built to Work.

What about the women’s department, which primarily caters to women who stare meaningfully into the distant scenery on their farm?


If you want to guess how many of those categories repeat in the women’s pants department, the answer would be none (I don’t know what I expected from a company named Dickies…).

In all fairness, a more comprehensive search of their site turns up women’s work pants that look like they might be durable enough, but the selection is limited and includes no female flame-resistant wear. There is a huge flame-resistant wear section for men, complete with a page-long explanation for why their gear is essential to occupations dealing with fire.

The long list of reasons I should protect myself from fire damage as a firewoman, female smoke jumper, female hot shot, or wildland firefighter would be a lot more helpful if it was put out by a company which also actually made fire-resistant clothing for women. The presence of women in fire-fighting jobs is growing every year; maybe the gear could grow – or shrink – with it.


Picture courtesy of National Parks Service. It can be found here next to a mention of the first female forest fire fighters in 1915 (I’m not sure how long it takes to design and produce fire pants, but that was a century ago for those keeping track…)

Of course, there is always reliable old Carthartt – your friendly, post-misogynism blue collar company. Except that, despite a recent effort to make double-knee work pants which fit women (I own four pairs and can’t complain), there is still a noticeable divide. Sure, I can get pants for chainsawing, but what about rain gear? Does Carhartt create its famous heavy-duty rain pants for the thousands of female foresters and trail maintainers out there?


That would be a ‘no’.

In my mind, feminism can be summed up in one word: pants.

We finally have pants that we can go to the office in. Now how about pants that can resist fire, water, motor oil, paint thinner, and all the other elements that women are encountering on a daily basis in this brave new world of non-gender-specific jobs?

Who does it right?

Basically, Carhartt has a pretty decent women’s line, although for rain pants you’re on your own.


Et Tu, Carhartt?

Speaking of pants….


4. Help us cover our asses

Side by side, here are men’s and women’s long compression shorts from UnderArmour, which illustrates how much variety can exist in the word ‘long’:


The above shorts aren’t bad, but the vast majority of base layer shorts you find for women still seem to look like this:


Booty shorts have a time and place. For some women, they are the most comfortable thing to wear while being active. But for many women, no amount of hiking, biking, or exercise will ever lead to their thighs not touching. So please consider this, trendy sport companies. Not only do the standard short sizes that you offer make me feel like a sausage who has outgrown its casing, but they cause chafing that can create a serious, long-term problem. I am happy to buy men’s shorts for now, but I’m growing tired of explaining the opening in the front, so let’s transcend women’s shorts and begin making women’s longs.

Who does it right?

Shredly and LaSportiva both make some pretty great shorts for women.


I’ve got to give marketers some credit. As perspectives on women’s athleticism are changing, they have improved a lot. I’m by no means advocating for all gear to be exactly equal – the differences in many female-specific products are necessary. In fact, that’s the whole point of this article. Outdoor gear is not like a bic pen – you can’t just re-market men’s clothing by changing the name to women’s clothing. Women need smaller gear that accommodates our bodies. We get colder because of our fat distribution which means that the ‘female temperature rating’ on sleeping bags is one of the first specs I look at. And making backpacks that curve to fit women’s shoulders is only one example of how companies like ULA and Osprey really listen to feedback from women.

But still, when I’m standing in the women’s shoe department of REI looking at ‘fit flops’, I can’t shake the feeling that marketing teams must view women as an alien species.

So, how do they make contact with us? What does the complex, enigmatic female brain desire?


Men’s gear – made to fit women.


Did I get something wrong?  Did I forget something?  Let me know in the comments – improving gear choices is a community effort, and one I know I’m not working on alone!

Affiliate Disclosure

This website contains affiliate links, which means The Trek may receive a percentage of any product or service you purchase using the links in the articles or advertisements. The buyer pays the same price as they would otherwise, and your purchase helps to support The Trek's ongoing goal to serve you quality backpacking advice and information. Thanks for your support!

To learn more, please visit the About This Site page.

Comments 49

  • Meg @ Adventures in Verdance : Feb 4th

    I associate soooo hard with everything you just said. Thanks for the recommendations and commiserations — hopefully more companies will catch up with us. 🙂

    • Diane : May 17th

      Thank you for pointing these things out! It’s nice to know there are other women that feel the same way. I thought it was just me when I would see women wearing hideous, ill-fitted gear and they don’t seem to mind at all. I find it frustrating to go to REI to shop for pants and resign because they’re ill-fitted, the colors are blah, and they just look hideous. Meanwhile, my husband got some pants and when we were traveling, just for humor, I wore his pants and they fit better then mine. What the heck?! LOL!

      By the way, I’m a textile designer interested in designing for athletic wear and outdoor wear so it’s good to hear these issues and work towards a better solution.

  • Gillian : Feb 4th

    Thanks for the post. I definitely relate to this; I probably own more men’s outdoor clothing than women’s, but would absolutely appreciate women’s clothing that fit well and performed like men’s clothing.

  • Timber2014 : Feb 4th

    I realize that women like me are few and far between, but there has to be SOME market for large women who are active. I am a full size 22/24 woman who hikes constantly and can find NOTHING in active wear – even JUNO clothes are not shaped correctly, they are too short in the hem and sleeve. Mens hiking pants in 2X fit, if you don’t count the waist or hips (you kind of have to fit waist and hips). If anyone knows of another resource, please share!

    • Cricket : Feb 4th

      I’m with you there Timber. I’m a size 12/14 and usually have to purchase an XL or XXL in outerwear to have room for layering. And sometimes I end up returning the XL and XXL because they still don’t allow enough room for movement. I can imagine the problems larger women have. Do these guys (and most I’m sure are male) never go out on a trail to look at the real women out there? The women I hike and kayak with are everything from size 10 to size 26. How about sizing that makes sense for REAL people, not NY fashion models.

  • Shawn Hudson : Feb 4th

    Go get’ em, Maggie. My wife is on board with all of this as am I. I think the gender stereotyping that takes place with women’s gear is inexcusable, especially coming from all of these supposedly forward-thinking outdoor companies.

    • Shawn Hudson : Feb 4th

      I would like to point out, too, that when we visit an outdoor retailer, it’s very common for us to compare the same make/model of gear (Men/Women) and find that the women’s one is lacking something … an external butt pocket, something. I can’t recall exactly what, but it’s happened many times. Like women need to have less functionality in their hiking pants? Fo’ Real?

      • Cricket : Feb 4th

        Women’s pant pockets, if they have pockets at all, are generally smaller then the pockets on men’s pants. C’mon! Are our compasses, cell phones, granola bars, etc. smaller than men’s?

  • Trillium AT2014 : Feb 4th

    How is it possible that you wrote a blog containing every sentiment I’ve expressed over and over about women’s outdoor gear?? I’m so happy I’m not the only one with big arms, touching-thighs, a decent hip-waist ratio and lament all the silly school-girl colors out there! I hiked the AT (2014) with a bright purple pack and was actually embarrassed about it for the first few weeks. One item to add: a non-uniboob, jiggle-control bra that doesn’t require yoga to don, and can double as your no-peekaboo swim-top on trail would be nice!

  • Linda : Feb 4th

    Yes! I used to buy a lot of L.L. Bean stuff in tan, camel, ‘rust,’ dark green, navy, etc. but now they have mostly pastels and brights and I buy very little. And it’s difficult to find zip-off quick-dry pants that fit me (37″ waist, 46″ hips, 32″ rise, and a length that can be altered to 28.5″ without messing up the bottom-of-leg opening). And why can’t they have inseam-length choices like they do in men’s pants?? Most women’s pants offer only one choice–about 32″. Petites are shorter, but then the other measurements don’t work.

  • Jessica : Feb 4th

    Fantastic job on this! I loved the shirt remark about the arms. Also the chest, for obvious reasons for us busty gals. You hit all the major points.

  • Cricket : Feb 4th

    Thanks for the post, Maggie. I would add a couple of things. 1) Sizing – when size 12 is an XXL there is something wrong. 2) Materials – I am really sick of ordering women’s outdoor gear and finding it is made of lighter or inferior material than the same thing for men. But I really don’t expect it to change much. Most “outdoor” clothing is NOT purchased by women (or men) who live, work, and play in the outdoors, but by women (and men) who want to LOOK LIKE they live, work and play in the outdoors. So long as these folks purchase the vast majority of outdoor clothing, marketing will continue to be directed for them. Not us.

    • Shawn Hudson : Feb 4th

      I don’t want to take away from the women’s side of this, but this also a problem for men’s sizing in outdoor gear, as well. In particular, if I try to wear anything that’s a large (my normal size for cotton shirts), it will be uncomfortably tight and pretty scary to look at.

  • Trailbug : Feb 4th

    HA! I loved this!!!! I’m glad I’m not the only woman with arm sleeve issues, we got guns too! Totally nailed it with the shorts too and work pants. We have butts and hips that don’t look particularly well in mens clothes. Also if they could make womens pants (work pants, running gear, hiking shorts etc) made for women with THIGHS. I do a large amount of biking and it shows. Wonder Woman never had these problems…

    • SPOOOOOOOOON : Feb 4th

      >Wonder Woman never had these problems…

      That’s why she wore a leotard 😉

  • D : Feb 4th

    Deer are color blind. The pink wouldn’t matter. The only things that matters is movement and pattern.

    That’s why hunting gear meant for deer hunting are oftentimes patterned with orange. Deer can’t see you, but other hunters with their guns/rifles/or bows can.

    • BEA : Feb 5th

      While your comment is true, it misses the point. We don’t need our camo to be High-Femme.

  • Cory : Feb 4th

    As a man who works and plays with women in the outdoors, this all rings true. Great article!

  • Joanne Donn aka GearChic : Feb 4th

    Ahhhhhh this post rings true in the motorcycle world as well! It’s really difficult for women to find gear that actually works Really well, and offers the same technical features as their male counterparts without the floral/pink/glittery/gold accents that I’m supposed to be wearing! I am lucky enough to know what’s available for women in the moto world because I built a blog entirely around it. But most women have no idea because stores only carry what they want or can afford.

  • Blu J : Feb 4th

    I agree wholeheartedly. I will begin the AT as a thru hiker in 43 days with my husband. We have spent the past year researching our gear and clothing for me has been a struggle. Pants especially have been a challenge, but we have both settled on Kuhl. I have had to go two sizes larger to accommodate a shapely booty! Shorts will be menswear and sports bras from Victoria’s Secret can’t be beat for support and style.

  • Jack W : Feb 4th

    There are so many niche markets in this world! The women’s fitness world is definitely big enough to have its own specialty stores online and in person. This is a good article, the only bothersome thing is attributing it to the evil of feminism, which only serves as the smoke and mirrors that lets said evil continue. Let’s go with improving quality for women instead aye?

    • Lillie Stack : Jul 24th

      I think the quality of women that hike, work and play hard in the back country need no improvement, thank you very much!
      We do however need less of this type of attitude when outdoor clothing designers look at the adaptability and comfort of women’s outdoor work and hike clothes.
      Bigger arms in tops, less pink and purple, and more comfort in the booty.

  • Melanie : Feb 5th

    You’re wrong about the camo gear – the bright colours (pink in this case) is a safety feature so you don’t get shot. Deer are colourblind and can’t see the pink

  • HunterD : Feb 5th

    Regarding the outdoor gear, deer are colorblind. Or close enough to it that the colors really don’t matter. What matters is that the pattern breaks up the straight lines of your shape so that you don’t look like a person to them.

  • BEA : Feb 5th

    Great blog! I appreciate all the points you hit and the comments as well. Just as a perfect exclamation point, I ordered a pair of merino wool long underwear from Campmor and the shirt was scoop necked. What? Like the girls don’t need to be warm too? Ridiculous! Thanks for hitting the nail right on the head.

  • Victoria Anderson : Feb 5th

    This list is one I have been talking about for a long time. As a tall gal I’d add length to the list. So many of my sleeves are too short. I was trying on Carhartt work jackets the other day- I could never work in them because once I raise my arms they bare my midriff! I’d also love more made in America things.

    • Purple Lady : Jul 24th

      So true! I don’t understand why clothing companies need to pretend tall women don’t exist.

  • Frogmonkey : Feb 5th

    I agree with everything you said! You know what else irritates me though? Pants pockets. My men’s Dickies have pockets big enough to put stuff in. Any pair of women’s pants I own have a pocket big enough for lip balm. Some women’s pants don’t even have back pockets! Men aren’t the only ones that have stuff to put in their pockets!

    • Angie LOL Holbrook : Feb 28th

      i hate this! i have a pair of really awesome prana pants that i wear pretty much every day. they’re nice and stretchy and i can hike and climb in them. downfall? the pocket is barely deep enough for my POCKET knife! whereas the men’s version of the same pant has a pocket i can fit my entire hand (past my wrist) into.

  • Carol Horen : Feb 5th

    I buy so many guy’s clothes that the internet thinks I am a guy. My spam consists of woodworking tools and cigar stuff…. You really hit the nail on the head here. Have you tried sending it and all the comments to outdoor clothing companies? Although I like purple, I like practical pockets more. Thank you for writing about this.

  • Samantha Thompson : Feb 8th

    This is sooo true!!! I have had this problem since I was a kid playing soccer and softball. I don’t mind some of the brighter colors for soccer, especially since a lot of the guys are wearing them now too. But on the trail, I usually want more natural colors (although I will sometimes wear just one item that is brighter in order to stand out more in pictures). I typically wear khaki or grey pants with a green, blue, black, or grey top. I think LL Bean and Lands End do a good job with quality and the color palette, but their smaller sizes are too big for me. I think it also depends on what season of the year you are buying stuff. Most clothing companies put out lighter/brighter colors for women during the spring and summer and then tone it down more for fall and winter.

    Also, as a side-note, the pink camouflage thing doesn’t affect the majority of hunters because deer are color blind and it, like the neon orange, is actually considered a safety feature. In fact, in some places you are actually required to wear camo with some sort of contrasting bright color with it.

    • Xanthippe : Aug 2nd

      Good point about the need for contrasting colors in the woods during hunting season — but the contrasting color for women doesn’t need to be “Barbie’s Dream House Pink.” It can be orange, just like the men’s gear.

  • russkie : Mar 21st

    Moving Comfort is awesome at sports bras and spandex shorts- though the shorts I have are bright pink, I got them on closeout. Really well made, comfy stuff.

  • Judi Harris : Apr 10th

    i love the post, but was actually hoping you would uncover some secret website for high quality outdoor gear/wear for gals with curves. I cross country ski, snowshoe, hike and paddle in the Adirondack park through every season and have yet to find something that fits my 5’1″ curvy frame. I buy men’s when i can find them in short, but most of the pants i wear need to have a zip up the side and they are difficult to shorten.

  • Olivia : Feb 14th

    red ants pants! They’re work pants made in Montana by women, for women! Check ’em!
    and on the bright side of women’s clothing being bright colored… easier to spot ticks.

  • Joan : Jul 24th

    Great article! You put my thoughts into words! Since I was little and tagging along with my dad who was a farrier (and wearing men’s long underwear because that was all there was), then working in an unheated warehouse as a forklift operator (when Duofold came out with women’s long underwear…in pink, of course), hunting in the bitter cold (with men’s gloves and boots), up until now when I’m out backpacking and hiking (have to admit the choices have improved greatly, but no I don’t want pastel or flowery patterns. Patagonia what are you thinking?). And we’re not all 5’2″, petite little things.

    Next maybe you can write something about women’s shoe sizes? Or lack there of. I wear an 11.5 or 12 narrow. Try finding that. I went to REI where you’d think they would have a variety of sizes and choices. I was told to try men’s hiking boots. Have you looked at a man’s foot compared to a woman’s?? Or should I wear three pairs of socks and wrap my ankles in ace bandages so they fit? Ahnu are you listening??!! I would love a pair of your boots!! Please!

  • Jennie Ritter : Jul 24th

    Yes, I sure wish they would make clothing for active women who are short and slightly muscular who like comfort and PRACTICAL styling !!! I don’t want to look like a teeny bopper OR a dude. Just sayin ……

    I end up buying men’s clothing alot because women’s clothing is usually too tight in the arms and too short around the torso. To fit my arms/chest I try on a L / XL and then the rest of it looks like a maternity item ! But when I wander into the men’s department I notice that the similar item is 1) made a little better and 2) COSTS less !! Why do they charge more for women’s clothing when they are smaller and more “delicately” assembled ? I just don’t get that. I have also seen that the same item, whether men’s or women’s, will cost more if it is a certain color. Why would, say a shirt, cost more if it is pink instead of brown? Are people willing to pay more for something just because they want that color? That is crazy to me.
    I just bought a Smart Wool 250 base layer shirt on sale at REI and they wanted $15 more for the black one than the out-dated black/white printed one. That totally does not make sense to me. You would think that basic black would cost less.
    The other problem is the reality of being a short person. When I do find women’s pants that fit I have about 3 extra inches of excess material at the bottom – way too long. They have this thing called “petite” sizes but they are for women who are petite all over like they were Mini Me-fied or something. If you buy Small Short or Small Petite then the distance between the crotch and waist is shorter as well as the inseam. Does not work!!

    Yes, I sure wish they would make clothing for active women who are short and slightly muscular who like comfort and PRACTICAL styling !!! I don’t want to look like a teeny bopper OR a dude. Just sayin ……

  • Purple Lady : Jul 24th

    I couldn’t agree more! I may be a girl and maybe I own too much purple gear, but if that’s the only women’s color that doesn’t burn out my retinas I gues that’s what I’m stuck with.
    I just feel you forgot to mention something else: Not all women are short. I have the hardest time finding pants that don’t look like I stole them from a 7th grader. I’m 5’11, which is tall but not freakishly so, yet it took me years to find decent hiking pants.
    Here is hoping for even more improvement in the future!

  • Gelfling : Jul 24th

    YES! YES! SO MUCH YES!!! I agree with every word! Now, we need to get this article, or at least this sentiment, in the hands of people who can make the necessary changes. I didn’t read all the comments, so sorry if this was said previously, but perhaps if we ALL write reviews of the products that fall short of our needs, we can garner some attention. Another issue I have is with local stores not carrying the same options for women as they carry for men. I love REI for their selection, but I discovered on a shakedown hike that my shoes were too small. The local REI store carried NO WIDE shoes for women. I ended up buying the only size 7.5 men’s shoe they had. FYI, Their pants (REI Classic Sahara Convertible) are great hiking pants with handy pockets.

  • kestrelchick : Jul 24th

    YES!!! THIS! I am 5’10” and I am SO over the itty, bitty, teeny weenie sports clothing for people who are a size 0 (no offense to size 0 people). I have gone through multiple stores to attempt to find shorts and bike shorts to wear under them for an upcoming thru-hike. I left banging my head on the wall….with being so tall, all the shorts looked absolutely ridiculous on me – nothing like the look of spandex daisy-dukes – it was so incredibly frustrating. The colors are mind blowing – it looked like a crayon factory threw up on half the workout tanktops and pants. I just want good old fashioned, comfortable, moisture wicking shorts, tanks and shirts

  • Andrea Carsrud (krazysalt) : Jul 25th

    Thank you! I’m not a girlie girl. I like black brown grey green blue etc. Even pack colors are stupid to me. I don’t need pastels, hot pink, fire engine red, neon orange, or a stupid flower sewn onto my pack!!!

  • Tanias Reign : Jul 13th

    Thank you for writing this. Generally what happens when I go shopping for pants: I check every single women’s pants pocket and I can only get half of my hand to fit in all of them. (if the pants have pockets at all). That’s when I storm over the men’s section and resign myself to wearing a belt so my pants don’t fall off. And the neon colors! Oh my god. I like earth tones but often the men’s shirts don’t come in my size and it’s not even an option in many women’s shirts. Also durability. It seems men’s clothing in general lasts a lot longer. I had a pair of hiking/mountain pants that gave up the ghost after just a year. $80 dollars is way too expensive if the pants will only last a year. Sheesh. Is 4 or 5 years too much to ask?

  • Lori : Aug 14th

    I have basically given up on shopping in the women’s department for shorts and pants for hiking. I buy men’s clothing, and then cinch up the belt, or take in the waste. I have hips, a butt, and a waist (I am a woman), and thighs (I am a hiker). I do not want hipsters (every step up a mountain would mean my butt hanging out), and yes, I need pockets too! I have some fat (again, I am a woman), so stretchy but ultra-thin hiking pants without pockets means I might as well be wearing leggings! NOT going to happen. Why do men get “relaxed fit” in their thighs, but women have to squeeze into the equivalent of skinny jeans? When I am hiking I make a point of looking at other women on the trail, and most of them are shaped like women, and are wearing MEN’s shorts and pants. The teenagers ARE actually wearing leggings, so you can stop making hiking pants that fit 12 year old models; they aren’t buying them.

  • Brendan : May 15th

    As a man I have to say that every time I go into an adventure store I long for the women’s colors. Be thankful.
    Also, good cargo pants on men’s wear are also surprisingly hard to find. I bought a pair of pants yesterday, got them home found they didn’t have any back pockets. Wth?

  • Dawn : Mar 12th


    Sorry to discover what you say is so true?.
    I’m shopping for a safari & gorilla trek.

    Safari rides are hours-long & rugged. Gorilla treks can involve the same as well as lunging & climbing while jungle trekking etc.

    I’M medium weight & desire the comfort of men’s 1970’s authentic relaxed-fit cargo pants for LADIES!

    Plenty of sitting & thigh room with crotch inset for long airplane & 4×4 rides & lunging during gorilla treks but without thick seems to prevent chafing & blisters on tender thigh skin.

    An in-between high rise & mid rise waist band with wide belt loops & a replaceable elastic military style belt for a CUSTOM FIT THAT CAN STAY closed while using a quiet button fly front THAT OPENS LOW ENOUGH FOR A WOMAN TO USE A PEE FUNNEL – easily allowing her NOT TO HAVE TO UNBUTTON THE WAIST & PARTIALLY PULL DOWN HER PANTS TO USE THE FUNNEL!

    At least 6 “man-size” cargo pockets – front & side pockets being on seam & large enough for an IPhone 8+ ENCASED IN A HEAVY-DUTY MILITARY METAL PHONE CASE, gloved hands for cold early morning/late evening safari rides & the back pockets QUIETLY expandable (no snaps or Velcro – maybe hidden elastic) & large enough for a thick travel/guide book.

    Each pocket actually being 3 hidden zipper pockets WITHIN each-other for security, with impenetrable zippers (as on newer luggage) & QUIET zippers (so as not to frighten safari game) & the outer pockets lined with slash-resistant mesh & WASHABLE RFID (flat, armour-style mesh like the decorative ladies purses with colored mesh outer shells?) for airport & subway travel. (No flaps to catch & rip.)

    A choice of 2 styles

    #1. Zip on/off convert-to-shorts wide enough to easily slide over boots & long enough to stay tucked in while sitting & lunging while trekking

    #2. Roll-up button-tab style, with wide button-tabs (so they don’t snag/rip easily while trekking & traveling) & wide enough to easily slide over boots & long enough to stay tucked in boots while sitting & lunging while trekking.

    A choice of medium-weight & light-weight fabric for the cold early morning/late night safari rides as well as the warmer season safari’s respectively.

    TRUE rip-stop, TRUE quick-dry fabric in 4 color choices of olive, khaki, brown & grey.

    Now you know what we want!

    In the meanwhile, time for me to get designing!

    all pockets triple zippered for security

  • Amy : Oct 17th

    I can understand the frustration you mentioned. One of my older daughters has the same challenge. However, I Have the opposite frustration. I was in my best physical shape around the age of 42. I am now 51. I was in the Air Force, and meeting the highest scores on PT tests of the younger age group. I was muscular and strong, but still small-boned with narrow shoulders. If stores didn’t have XS, I knew it would be hanging off of my shoulders. I always had enough arm space even with being fit. I was lifting weights, but still had thin bit muscular arms. So, many clothes out there look like a sack on me. I like some Earth tones, but bright colors perk me up. I think all of us are different builds, and the clothing manufacturers are probably taking “averages.” My husband is very muscular, and needs a ton of space in the shoulders, but then that means a shirt that is big in the torso. Really? I do think they are falling short more on women’s clothing. I almost think they need different “fits”.

  • Old fart : Dec 17th

    I may have missed it, but I didn’t see anything about the poor fit of women’s outdoor clothing. It is generally sized to fit sub-zero sized fashion models – way way too long and narrow. I’m 5’3 and under 130 but often need to buy a large or xl because the tops are six inches too long and therefore need to fit over my gigantic 38″ hips, so I need an xl. I usually need at least a size large in pants in order to fit over my hips, but then they are a foot too long. And I’m very small for an American. If you’re a standard sized american female (5’5 and 165 #) you probably cant buy outdoor clothing that fits at all!

    • Terry : Jan 14th

      You mentioned “reliable old Carhaart”, but their women’s work pants are part of the problem as they’re cut for stick- thighs and tiny waists with no give for bending, sitting or heaven forbid, weight gain. I had two pairs that I squeezed into for years before I finally gave them away and tried switching to Patagonia, but found the same problem. If work pants are supposed to be comfortable and not restrictive so as to facilitate all the crouching, lifting and bending, why make the waistband so small and unforgiving? Playing to old expectations and stereotypes is no more helpful than making men’s clothes smaller or giving us pink and neons.

  • Terry : Jan 14th

    I didn’t intend to reply to Old Fart, but I agree with her comments!


What Do You Think?