Peacoats

[Anonymous No.7215744]

Are peacoats not /fa/ anymore

[Anonymous No.7215750]

you can wear a peecoat if you have children

peacots are for dads

[Anonymous No.7215753]

b-but they're timeless

[Anonymous No.7215763]

No Only geos and Rick and wearing rain pants and bucket hats are /fa/ now gb2reddit NERD

[Anonymous No.7215778]

poeacot can be worn in thright circoumsatne just b sure it is could so you can wer a cot. that is wit i think it be shgould more like.

[Anonymous No.7215790]

>>7215744
They are /fa/, the problem is just that they're extremely over played, so many people wear em.

w2c hooded peacoat?

>>7215778
well put

[Anonymous No.7215802]

>>7215778
Did you have stroke while writing this? Jesus Christ.

[hardlystylin No.7215807]

a nice thick texture rich peacoat with enough body to hold its own is hard to beat. they're simple, classic, and informal enough it's not hard to pull them off with some sneakers or denim/leather footwear

it's just a good jacket to throw on when you want to look groomed but not all out. great heritage vibe too if you find the right one.

if you're not tall though, tailoring is vital.

[Anonymous No.7215825]

>>7215807
This. I just wear a peacoat as my go-to jacket, its warm and simple.I dont see why there's such a negative connection to it here

[Anonymous No.7215829]

A peaCOAT, i.e. something that covers part of your legs, is timeless.
The twinkletoe superskinnyslim bumfreezer look is going to be remembered as cringingly as bellbottoms and leisure suits.

[Anonymous No.7215835]

>>7215825
Because they're hella 2011 and dadcore and mall core and gay give me leayher duffel bombers with hella drape plz

[Anonymous No.7215833]

if it fits well and looks good then wear it

it's pretty well a basic at this point

just wear a better one than everyone else

most people have a boxy old navy one

not too hard to do better

[Anonymous No.7215848]

>>7215829
peacoats have never really covered the legs though, that's what greatcoats are for.

[Anonymous No.7215850]

Peacoats are for men with small penises.

[Anonymous No.7215853]

>>7215848
Those are below the crotch, which is what I meant by covering part of the legs. So we're not really in disagreement.

[Anonymous No.7215861]

/fa/ 2009: Peacoats and skinnies
/fa/ 2013: Parkas and skinnies

[Anonymous No.7215864]

>>7215853

the crotch isn't your legs ya dingus

[Anonymous No.7215870]

>>7215807
Perfect description.

[Anonymous No.7215874]

>>7215861
/fa/ 2015: Astronaut suits and skinnies

[Anonymous No.7215876]

>>7215835
I imagine a 17 year old northern californian who is failing hs pre calc and english comp saying this

[Anonymous No.7215878]

>>7215864
The peacoats you are posting are longer than the torso, i.e. are below the crotch, i.e. cover part of the leg, i.e. surpass that point at which the legs meet the torso otherwise known as the crotch, i.e. go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.7215888]

I've only been here for 6 months or so and wanted to ask if duffle coats have made a big hit in the fashion world or online? I like them and want to get one

[Anonymous No.7215897]

>>7215878
"covers part of the leg" isn't "covers the crotch" you utter nonce, get over yourself.

[Anonymous No.7215907]

>>7215744

why do peeps always button up the last button (bottom left in dat pic)

[Anonymous No.7215916]

>>7215888
I feel like they're sort of blowing over.
Parkas are definitely more in, but it isn't like peacoats are beating duffle coats or anything, so I guess you could get one.

[Anonymous No.7215926]

fishtail, bomber, giant hobo-esque DRKSHDW rag looking coat or gtfo

[Anonymous No.7215945]

[Anonymous No.7215956]

>>7215888
Im going to cop a fur coat this winter. They look completely decadent and no one ever wears them but I think I'll be able to rock it.

[Anonymous No.7215957]

no

[Anonymous No.7216423]

>>7215874
/fa/ 2017: Trench coats and skinnies. Retroautisimcore