"fabio guillermo rojas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote: > A friend of mine noticed that men tend to carry rather large > amounts of change in their pockets compare to women. > > Any economic explanation of why this is? Men don't use purses, which have much greater change-carrying capacity than wallets (well, I don't use a purse). Also, men's clothing has more pockets than women's clothing, overall (eg., jackets, trousers, "cargo pants," etc.). My perception is that this behavior is reversing, however, as there is a long-term trend towards wearing androngynous clothing as casual wear, by both men and women. Visit your local Gap or Citisports, and you'll see women shop for subtly-feminized versions of what was traditionally men's clothing. (I'm not making a moral judgement or anything -- I shop at these places myself). I think it can be said that traditional men's clothing is more utilitarian then women's clothing, and hence men have tossed change into whatever receptacle they find convenient. Women have been forced to throw their junk into purses, since it's incovenient (and traditionally unseemly?) to put coinage, pens, random slips of paper, etc. into blouse or skirt pockets, which seem to be there for effect only. Sourav PS: Coinage is stupid; long live Coinstar! One of my physics teachers calculated that pennies lose their value after having been carried around for one week, due to caloric expenditure. ------------------------------------------------------------ Sourav K. Mandal [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ikaran.com/Sourav.Mandal/ "In enforcing a truth we need severity rather than efflorescence of language. We must be simple, precise, terse." -- Edgar Allan Poe, "The Poetic Principle"
