So, I got this for Christmas

So, I got this for Christmas

How many people do you think would know it's historical significance?

Only academics and autistic retards like you

Nobody but hardcore Nazi memorabilia types.

Normies only recognize the SS and Wehrmacht officer trench coats.

one or two

but i can guarantee everyone will recognize how poorly it fits you and how awful you look

>cool ninth doctor coat
>are you into polyamory?

People are more likely to think you're a leather fetishist than a Nazi.

Ryan, Fuck off

i think we need to see a fit pic op

Go to a re-enactment event. Don't wear it in public.

Don't wear shitty repros, man.

This looks so fucking horrendous

Some Nazi uniforms are objectively aesthetic but this is just atrocious and disgusting

>WWI
>Muh Nazis
Fucksake guys.

Also, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with a leather peacoat.

you cant wear this with yeans and a t shirt but have to go full military or terrerost core or it will look like shit

peacoat
thats what is worng

>Also, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with a leather peacoat.
kys, seriously.

The fit is everything. If it fits like shit, it'll look like an expensive piece of shit.

Furthermore, peacoats are in my view a serious style problem, one that never looks good. It makes the body look shorter than it is by cutting off the legs. If you're under 6 foot and not slim as a post, you'll look stocky and fat (especially because of the double-breastedness).

As much as I love the look of the coat (without being worn), I don't think it looks good on anyone. If you wear it unbuttoned, there's too much material flapping everywhere...and if you wear it buttoned, your legs are cut off at the mid thigh, which is too high to look distinguished but too low to look fitted.

Sorry bro...

You can always wear a peacoat that is not the traditional length though.

Post a fit pic so we can see if it actually works or not.

what are you talking about? pea coats come just over your ass, they are only slightly longer most jackets excluding blousons. nevertheless leather pea coats are not okay

>Why are you wearing a fucking leather pea coat, user you fucking neckbeard?
>actually, Stacey it's authentic WW2 Nazi regalia

peepee coat

peacoat more like poo coat

Agreed; non-traditional length peacoats look fine. The OP's pic is military style and cut, which means that you're stuck with something that traditionally will be mid-thigh (just over your ass). I still think it will look bad if you're not rail thin and tall.

Yes, they are longer than blousons; the benefit of a blouson is that it cuts at the waist, just under your natural hip. It slightly lengthens the torso to the eye, which gives a flattering look to someone who is short and stocky but also looks 'hard-cut' on someone who's in shape.

3/4 long coats that cut at the knee are the other alternative in terms of length that make the body look good, regardless of your fitness. If you're fat, it hides the fat in vertical lines, and if you're fit, your shoulders look broad with a long v down to the knees.

With a peacoat, you have something that is in-between. It wasn't designed primarily for fashion, it was designed for practical use. There's a reason that you can cut the body at the waist, slightly below, or above the waist, but you can't do it mid-thigh; the whole proportion of the body looks off.

That's not to say that peacoats are useless; they are useful for the purpose (keeping sailors warm). Also be aware that peacoats look good if there's something above them to balance the mass. That's why men wearing hats and peacoats look good (the sailors in your pic) but men with short hair and no hat AND a peacoat look like an acorn or a thimble.

>waist
>just under your natural hip
Eh? Also pretty much all modern blousons (bombers usually) come to your hip.

Sorry, I was obviously unclear.
The thinnest part of your body above your hip bones would be your waist (i.e. hopefully under your bellybutton, where the elastic band of underwear would sit). Your natural hip would be the hip bones (which is a slightly wider), and the fat and muscle that become the fattest part of your hips would be your built hip (which is lower, at about the top to middle of the groin).

What I'm trying to say is this: modern blousons are cut so that when zipped they should sit at the waist, and if unzipped they hang just under the natural hip. In either case, it breaks the waist and flattens it out, which gives the illusion of your torso being longer. The jacket however is short enough not to go too far over the joints of the hips, so when you walk or sit everything still looks in proportion.

The peacoat covers this joint by a large enough margin to make it disappear entirely, but it the drawback is twofold. First, the only joint you see afterwards is the knee, which makes the proportion of the body look wrong. Second, when you look at the body in a front-view, it looks like Clinton's pantsuits. The reason for this is that the jacket has to account for hips, but it's too short to correct for them. Thus, the thimble effect.

English peacoats also suffer because the shoulders are cut very thin; this is an issue with English fashion in general (not suits, but regular clothing); the shoulders are always narrow, and if you combine that with the double-breasted design, as a man you'll never get a V shape proper.

I hope that clarifies.

Consider this. A standard peacoat in terms of sizing and fit. There's nothing wrong with it, except that it makes the hips look large, and the man fatter and stockier than perhaps he really is. It's not the man's fault, or the fault of the fit and sizing. It's the design of the jacket.

Even 'Bond' can't pull it off, even if he is tailored by the best in the English world. It makes his body proportions look not ideal. His waist is fat, his shoulders are narrow, and he looks like Hillary.

When you lengthen out the jacket, the hips are corrected into a military style 'skirt' of sorts. There's enough length on the thigh to overcome the expansion for the hips, so it doesn't look as extreme to the eye as it does with a normal peacoat.

I'm not saying that this is the ideal jacket. All I'm saying is that this is how you correct for the visual problem. Either it is cut at the waist (like bombers, blousons, cafe racers, etc.) or it's cut at the knee or just above....if it's mid-thigh it looks like Grimace.

As a last thought, here's a short peacoat. It looks fine, but look where it sits at the man's pelvis. In other words, the bottom end doesn't have to be wide to accommodate the buttocks like in a traditional peacoat length, so you can still have a look where the shoulders are slightly larger than the waist.

A peacoat really only serves to cover a military uniform jacket; without that, and without any head covering, it takes a man's natural proportions and fucks around with them.