What is that little pocket for? You know. You have a pair of jeans. At the very top of the right front pocket, there’s a little itty-bitty pocket. What’s that for? Me, I hide a 500-baht note in there whenever I’m out in the bars, so I’ll be sure I can make it home just on the off chance I lose my wallet. But I’m sure that’s not what it was originally intended for.
I always thought that it was for coins. If so, it’s a very bad design: too small and hard to get one’s fingers in.
This site says it’s a holdover from the days of pocket watches.
It was designed in the 1800’s to hold a watch and the design stayed ever since.
eta: ah beaten to it by Duckster
I’ve heard that as well, but weren’t pocket watches almost exclusively used by men when they were in fashion? Women’s jeans have that pocket too.
And a right handy device it is, too. I won’t buy a pair of jeans without one.
Condoms.
Women’s jeans are derived from men’s jeans, so it was probably inherited and just never got removed.
I thought of pocket watches, but I don’t believe pocket watches were really that small. And I would find it odd for the manufacturers to say: “Gee, no one carries pocket watches anymore, so instead of eliminating the pocket for it altogether, we’ll just miniaturize it just for fun.”
It is, as others have pointed out, a watchpocket.
A watchpocket is a receptacle designed to hold a pocketwatch. It’s not like you would stick your wristwatch down there, right? It’s for pocketwatches.
Lest there be any confusion on that score, I think it advisable to use more specific terminology, and acknowledge that the item in queston is, more specifically, a pocketwatchpocket.
And of course, lest there be an uncertainty as to whether one’s pocketwatch belongs in that pocket or perhaps the large one at the left or the hip pocket or the shirt pocket, let us not that the mechanical device is, emphatically, a watchpocketwatch, OK?
Having done so, I suppose our initial designations are now in need of just a bit more specificity, now that such specificity is not only available but, as a consequence of our enveavors, part of the venacular, shall we say? The riveted denim square is, to be exquisitely correct about it, not merely a pocketwatchpocket, but a watchpocketwatchpocket, is it not? And into it one would dangle from fob and chain of course, one’s very own pocketwatchpocketwatch, would one not?
…Oh dear…
I have never seen a pocket watch that would fit in there.
but why? Women’s jeans button on the opposite side than men’s, so it’s not as though they made no modifications when they first designed jeans for women. Why change that but keep a watch pocket for a gender who didn’t use pocket watches?
That’s where my grandfather kept his when he wasn’t working. When he was working, it went into the breastpocket of his coat. He was an engineer for the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway and carried an ATSF issue pocketwatch.
Okay, so I looked at your link, and now I’ve seen a pocket watch that small. But this is the first time I’ve seen one that small, I think. Was that size they really all that common? It seems that particular watch was designed to fit the little pocket, not the little pocket designed to fit watches. It’s almost a chicken and egg thing.
It was really that small? In movies, it looks so big when the engineer or conductor whips it out to look at it.
Why? I imagine it’s the same reason why my suit has buttons on the cuffs that don’t button anything. It originally served a purpose but is now vestigial.
At least the buttons are decorative. The little pocket is not that noticeable.
It may be that the watchpocket on your jeans is smaller than the norm, but the jeans I am wearing could easily hold a 2" diameter pocketwatch.
Back in the 80’s I carried a pocket watch. And I wore 501 jeans. The watch fit in the pocket just fine.
My parents have an old pocket watch that my great-grandfather carried in the 19th century. I tried it out once. It fit fine too.
I’m really surprised that pocket watches are so small. I guess I just haven’t paid that much attention to them.