/fa/ - Fashion

[Anonymous No.15657177]

Waffen SS uniform thread

[Anonymous No.15657181]

>>15657177
They look absolutely GLORIOUS /GREAT

[Anonymous No.15657211]

>>15657177
>Waffen-SS
>black
The black 1932 pattern uniform was discontinued before the Waffen-SS was even a thing.

[Anonymous No.15657222]

[Anonymous No.15657230]

>>15657177
cringe

[Anonymous No.15657233]

>>15657211
>Tryhard edgy skull badges everywhere

>Completely unrelated to German uniforms of the past


>Implying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totenkopf

[Anonymous No.15657241]

wtc?

[Anonymous No.15657263]

>>15657177
What makes it soi

>>15657211
Oh yeah

[Anonymous No.15658351]

Overrated as fuck. Gay edgelord uniform. Why don't you mind your uncle Sam and get a big dick pink and green.

[Anonymous No.15658352]

I like German WW1 uniforms much better than the WW2 ones

SS ones in particular looked tryhard movie-villain tier (which I guess they were)

only exception was Waffen-SS camo but those were meant to be practical in combat and not ceremonial

[Anonymous No.15658356]

this is what I mean, the camo ones looked and worked well and were somewhat ahead of their time since use of camo wasn't standard back then yet

the black uniforms of regular SS and camp guards just look like pure cringe

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658364]

>>15658352
>SS ones in particular looked tryhard movie-villain tier (which I guess they were)

Do you seriously think the people designed the uniforms thought "hey, let's make us look like meany nasty movie villains?"

Like seriously?

You have it the wrong way around. The image you have of said movie villains is taken form the nazis after the propaganda campaign to paint them as pure evil.

>>15658356
Also, autism.

>not understanding ceremonial/guard uniforms compared to combat role uniforms

[Anonymous No.15658579]

>>15658364
>ceremonial/guard uniforms compared to combat role uniforms
This. The black getup was never intended for combat use. In fact, the SS themselves acknowledged this and outfitted guys who did field work with more utilitarian brownish-grey uniforms as early as 1934.

[Anonymous No.15658581]

>>15657177
easily the most overrated military uniform
late 19th-very early 20th mogs the shit out of it all day every day

[Anonymous No.15658596]

>>15658581
based

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658639]

Things to remember are that a lot of these uniforms look super smart and dressed up because the standards are much lower today. At the time, an average man would wear a suit (lounge suit) for most aspects of his life so the military uniforms wouldn't have been so shockingly out there and formal looking.

The pre-ww2 soldier uniforms look smart because they are based on the European tradition of men looking their best, using clothing to give a statement that you're am man of substance.

But for soldiers, that's a bad thing. It means they are not based on actual usefulness on the battle field.

Today if you're going running you might wear shorts and t-shirt. If you're walking in the snow, long pants and an overcoat. You have different clothing for different circumstances (this is what the American ww2 soldier would have) so his battle uniform wouldn't look super smart but if he was attending some military parade, he would have a different uniform. The Germans smarter uniform could be used on both occasions.

It's like the British colonial soldier in the Zulu wars in Africa. For the most part he would wear the standard British uniform being a red wool tunic. Which would be uncomfortable and too hot for Africa.

So for ww2, their uniform is based on a totally different thing compared to the Americans (and British) and not because they are some style Gods. If America/UK went the same way, they too would likely have had smart well dressed looking clothing exactly the same.

Germans while being advanced in some ways, followed the tradition that back then, a man had 2-3 outfits they wore 24/7 so they were one for all outfits. Be going to the store or attending something more formal. America went the opposite, creating more outfits but each one better for the job.

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658640]

Things to remember are that a lot of these uniforms look super smart and dressed up because the standards are much lower today. At the time, an average man would wear a suit (lounge suit) for most aspects of his life so the military uniforms wouldn't have been so shockingly out there and formal looking.

The pre-ww2 soldier uniforms look smart because they are based on the European tradition of men looking their best, using clothing to give a statement that you're a man of substance.

But for soldiers, that's a bad thing. It means they are not based on actual usefulness on the battlefield.

Today if you're going running you might wear shorts and t-shirt. If you're walking in the snow, long pants and an overcoat. You have different clothing for different circumstances (this is what the American ww2 soldier would have) so his battle uniform wouldn't look super smart but if he was attending some military parade, he would have a different uniform. The Germans smarter uniform could be used on both occasions.

It's like the British colonial soldier in the Zulu wars in Africa. For the most part he would wear the standard British uniform being a red wool tunic. Which would be uncomfortable and too hot for Africa.

So for ww2, their uniform is based on a totally different thing compared to the Americans (and British) and not because they are some style Gods. If America/UK went the same way, they too would likely have had smart well dressed looking clothing exactly the same.

Germans while being advanced in some ways, followed the tradition that back then, a man had 2-3 outfits they wore 24/7 so they were one for all outfits. Be it going to the store or attending something more formal. America went the opposite, creating more outfits but each one better for the job.

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658641]

>>15658640
More.........

Things like having all your fancy medals and ribbons looks good for the Germans, impresses people and other soldiers can tell who are the brave and combat veterans, but at the same time, they paint a great big target on your head for a sniper to take out the best soldiers.

tl;dr military uniforms are deeper than random style differences and have a background as to why

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658647]

>>15658640
>>15658641
This is of course in reference to their battlefield attire, and not the SS guard etc. like mentioned above.

As the war progressed the German battlefield uniform became less smart (and more useful) but the smart "one for all" led to fuck ups such as Stalingrad in which the uniform was not fit for purpose in the much colder climate.

[Anonymous No.15658668]

It's just a suit covered in tacky and tasteless edgy shit and nobility LARP.

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658678]

Like here the uniforms are not really practical but they look impressive, they raise moral, being dressed up and fancy looking, especially if you're from a poor background. Most pieces also add size be in shoulder or height to make you look much larger against the enemy.

So there is a good/bad side to most things. Germans tended to stick with that tradition, while Western allies went for actual functionality.

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658683]

[Anonymous No.15658689]

>>15658678
>Germans tended to stick with that tradition, while Western allies went for actual functionalit
That's like the polar opposite of what happened.
The only allies with slightly innovative uniforms at the beginning of the war were the brits and even then it was just simplified cuts so everything could come out of the factory faster. The french were still laughably sticking to their practices of the previous decades and just starting to deal in early camo. The soviets were "innovative" in that they had to redesign everything so they could equip their troops on a shoestring budget. The americans were the only ones who innovated that much because they had had no incentive to modernize since 1918 so they jumped ahead instead of going through slow, gradual progress.
Meanwhile, the germans had radically changed pretty much everything, had been the ones experimenting with muting colours, better uniform separation between branches of the army, civil uniforms and party uniforms...
Reich-era Germany was anything but traditional. Hell, that's why the nazis had a very hard time getting the approval and sympathy of what remaind of the local nobility and aristocracy and instead pandered to the industrial upstarts who were willing to compromise what little principle they had to get ahead in the centralized, planned economy.
At the end of the day, the nazis were and never denied that they were revolutionaries.

[Anonymous No.15658724]

Why are so many /pol/fags closet homosexuals

[Anonymous No.15658727]

>>15658581
Retarded opinion

[Anonymous No.15658740]

>>15658364
>Defending retarded nazis
>Namefag
Checks out

[Anonymous No.15658751]

>>15658678
that's early 16th century mercenaries

standardized uniforms didn't exist until the late 17th to early 18th century (iirc they were introduced by Eugene of Savoy)

[Anonymous No.15658886]

>>15657241
Seccsy

[Anonymous No.15658907]

>>15657241
she can be my totalitarian dictator any day of the week.

[CecilDrakeInSeattle !effayRxItQ No.15658912]

>>15658689
I'm mainly talking about Germany and USA, not France etc. It was other forces who had different uniforms for difference scenarios such as Russia having cold weather clothing while the Germans did not and their boots would fall apart. Meanwhile the Russia would have fur lined that other troops would take off the dead.

>The soviets were "innovative" in that they had to redesign everything so they could equip their troops on a shoestring budget

Which is what the Germans did as they started to lose the war and their resources become fewer. That's where a handful of their innovations came from. I mean they still fielded cavalry so a lot of these innovations and advancements were based in myth.

I've previously read a lot on the uniform thing from various sources and historians, maybe I am just not very good at putting it all into words. What I mean in basic terms is that there is a heck of a lot of nuances in the uniform designs and it does not boil down to (as often you see here and elsewhere) that the Germans just had good fashion designers or something so basic as that.

>>15658740
>has zero reading comprehension
>calls other retard

If anything I have defended why other forces were not as "superior"" dressed.

>>15658751
Ah yeah, I didn't mean it was a standard uniform but the "uniform" those mercenaries choose for certain reasons. My point was the "flashy" uniforms for the Germans had some parts based on previous European soldiers, ones that stood out, people envied and little boys wanted to be versus pure functionality.

It's happened for thousands of years soldiers wearing something flashy or something such as a celtic boar on a helmet to appear larger and more intimating. Maybe even the German Pickelhaube helmet added visual height too and the Imperial Guard of Napoleon bearskin hat. Combined with their shoulders tassels and tight breeches makes them look really broad and gives the V taper.

[Anonymous No.15658914]

>>15658356
Not a nazi, ss fan or wehraboo but i seriously love how german low boots look with the gaiters, seriously considered copying it seeing as i dress like im from the 30s and 40s anyway

[Anonymous No.15659255]

>>15657177
At least an BASED thread, we aristocrats of the soul must unite in our conquest of the internet!!!

[Anonymous No.15659367]

>>15658912
Completely doesn't know what he's talking about.