90% of clothing innovation and options being for women is kinda ridiculous, even if women are the ones who go shopping for clothes more often.

And i´m not talking about the US only here, this is happening from China to France, Argentina to Canada, almost all men dress the same around the world. There are very few places i can think off where men´s fashion is varied and innovative.

most men dont care about fashion, they only care about comfort. face the facts, if you are male into fashion you are zesty, by that i mean youre a fagggggggggggggggg.

>>18492900
but i like dominating women with my big muscles (ಠ益ಠ) there must be a way to keep looking manly and fashionable without going full security guard or gay porno man

>>18492878 (OP)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Male_Renunciation
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/39293/39293-h/39293-h.htm

After the french peasants revolted and cut the heads off of the nobles for wearing fancy clothes, living in fancy palaces and eating fancy food while the peasants suffered, the aristocracy of western europe quickly changed, the women began wearing the simple regency dresses you see in bridgerton and then men had what came to be known as the great male renunciation, where they gave up any claims to being beautiful and instead only kept simple and practical clothing in their wardrobe. It became poor etiquette to show off your wealth and instead, if you were wealthy, what you own should simply be made of the best materials you could afford and by the best tailors and craftsmen but should otherwise be no different than any other man. This lead to men simply wearing nothing but dark suits, with each generation making it more and more casual, the idea that men should not stand out from other men is now deeply ingrained into the male psyche, where less educated men will call a man "gay" if he dares differ from the norm, though the conclusion is the same.

If you are young, you will be following trends. Once men are past their late 20s, they often get sick of keeping up with trends and instead start looking at timeless, vintage fashion whether that have a flavor of workwear, office wear, Ivy League, etc.. Most “innovation” is really nothing more than the constantly changing trends. They’re here for a moments notice and then they’ve morphed into something else. It’s kind of weird when old dudes try to dress trendy, just really off putting most of the time. You can be a full grown man and have a great sense of style while leaning into something more traditional. You just need to learn the basic building blocks of crafting a good outfit. Proportions and color theory. It really brings you milestones if you manage a good physique after your 20s

>>18492907
so through these past centuries men fearmongered men into looking like NPCs with the threat of being called a fag... and this spread through every modern society and everyone thought it was ok? Damn...

>>18492908
i am sure i can pull something off as i already find i dress nicely, but even then, in how i experiment with my clothes, it still doesn´t go past wearing layered jackets/hoodies and shirts along with jeans or cargo pants and a switch in color. Women have so many more options in cuts a type of wear its not even a competition. I think footwear is the only category where men really have as many options as women have

>>18492912
Well, men aren’t valued in society based on their standard of beauty. Men are valued based on their ability to acquire resources, monopolize physical violence, and acquire status. With that said, I wouldn’t think too hard about why society hasn’t generated an absurd abundance of various fashion styles for grown men. Just use what you have and get creative with it

>>18492911
no, it was about wealthier men not losing their status and wealth by larping as just normal guys so the normal guys didnt see how much they were being screwed over, the same reason modern ceos larp as normal guys like warren buffet "living" in the same $300k house in nebraska (whilst also owning multimillion dollar homes in laguna beach and ranches 250k acres of ranches and farms in several countries). Its just the low class, uneducated men who attribute men trying to be different as "gay"

>>18492907
Weren't nobles supposed to be elite knight warriors? Why didn't they easily kill some untrained twink peasants?

>>18492925
>Weren't nobles supposed to be elite knight warriors?
You can't beat numbers with training in a pre-modern warfare era. 100 peasants will kill you no matter what even if half of them die in the process.

>>18492878 (OP)
What's the purpose of "fashion?"
Once you define that (for us, or more importantly, for yourself), you'll be able to compare that purpose to "modern day" and "the male sex." With enough comparisons from any number of cultures under any number of varying circumstances, you'll come to realize that

most men (see: heterosexuals)
don't care
about
pretty colors on their pants.

>>18492907
I would be a bit weary about citing the The Great Male Renunciation and it's reasons. It was coined by John Flugel, who was part of the Male Dress Reform Party in the 1920s, who protested the dress of the period. The founder of the group, William Ralph Inge put forth that theory based on his opinions rather than any historical fact as far as I can tell.

Now, there could be some truth, but I think it was more likely that flamboyant dressing had reached its' peak as the clothes were difficult to wear and highly impractical. As the aristocracy moved into sporting and other physical activities they needed clothing that would work for these new lifestyles thus military and equestrian inspired clothing would come to dominate. As for color, it was there, albeit somewhat less flamboyantly, during the regency period anyway. Beau Brummel largely was responsible for the darker colors, and had some influence during his lifetime, but that lack of color didn't take over until the late Victorian and Edwardian periods.

>>18492878 (OP)
Because men think it's gay to care about their appearances

>>18492878 (OP)
social media seems to be making into a come back
>>18492988
>As the aristocracy moved into sporting and other physical activities they needed clothing that would work for these new lifestyles thus military and equestrian inspired clothing would come to dominate.
Aristocracy has always served as knights in war tho

>>18492994
Not really, knights were their own class, the aristocracy furnished their knights and money for war. Later they would end up being the officers of the modern militaries.

>>18493004
https://www.quora.com/In-medieval-times-did-noblemen-dukes-marquis-or-kings-take-up-weapons-and-fight-in-battle

You can look at designer stuff which is pushing the envelope. Reality is very few people care about being innovative - and looking good as a man is a solved problem.

>>18492907
Colors never went away. Men used to wear suits in all kinds of colors and patterns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. We don't see it because all we have of the pre-1950's is black and white photos.
The 70s were the peak of men's suits and clothing in general. They came in every color, patter, and cut imaginable.

>>18492915
>Well, men aren’t valued in society based on their standard of beauty. Men are valued based on their ability to acquire resources, monopolize physical violence, and acquire status.
both are perfectly good sources of external validation for both genders from both genders though
>>18493055
>The 70s were the peak of men's suits and clothing in general.
>the age when everyone wore a suit was peak
????????? no

Bring back robes

>better sizing
>no need for tailoring
>less waste
>cold? just slap on another
>no need to hop around on one foot one taking it off

>>18493066
Suits weren't the only thing men wore in the 70s.

>>18493071
The 70s looked so much more futuristic and utopian compared to modern day bland, dystopian NPC fashion.

>>18493071
>>18493073
i too learn about what ordinary people wore by reading catalogues and fashion magazines

>>18493079
Do you know where to download scans of Italian menswear catalogs from the 90s?

>>18493079
Far better and more practical than the mentally ill garbage they shit out in modern fashion shows.

>>18492878 (OP)
Because most men are fatfucks now. Fashion is for thin people. With women you can at least cover the lard up with layers of clothing. And fat women still care about fashion despite looking ugly. It's hard enough to get men to care about fashion, let alone fatfucks who couldn't care less about what they're wearing, because deep down they know nothing fits properly or looks good on them anyway. Most of them shamelessly walk around in public dressed in an old t-shirt with blown out collar and basketball/cargo shorts. They will wear those same clothes to work if they were allowed to.

>>18493089
Surely there must be a way for fatties to at least look respectable. Whomever creates new /fa/ for them will hit gold

>>18493094
There are plenty of ways they already can. They just don't care anymore, because modern negrified society doesn't shame people for dressing like degenerates and hobos in public, because dressing up is "tryhard", and like someone else said, "gay", to modern men. The more casual men dress, the more "keepin' it real" they are being, like their hood rat gods.

Only handsome and tall men these days care about fashion because it makes women chase them even more
Average guys don't because they are invisible to women either way, and they need to chase women to get pussy

>>18493101
You don't dress up for pussy. That's what manwhores do. Men dress up because they have discipline, dignity, self-respect and respect for others around them. They don't want to assault people's eyes and mind with ugliness, degeneracy, disorder and uncultured behavior. The way you dress is a reflection of your state of mind and worldview. If you dress like a nigger, then it's because you think like a nigger, live like a nigger, and act like a nigger, because we live in a negrified world.

>>18493106
post one of your fits please

>>18493055
>>18493058
>>18493061
>>18493071
>>18493072
>>18493073
>>18493074
You DO realize that WOMEN bought shit from magazines, not men, right?

No, I'm being very, very, very serious, here; these are all MAGAZINES, CATALOGUES of fashion clothing and FEMALES, WOMEN, WIVES were the only humans that purchased these from their husband's bank accounts. It wasn't marketed to men, it was explicitly, overtly, and remarkably marketed to WOMEN.

Men did not give a shit. More like "annoyed" that their females were spending their money on stupid shit like bell-bottoms.

>>18492878 (OP)
>90% of clothing innovation and options being for women is kinda ridiculou
not really.
women have more choices in style and silhouette and color. but all their clothes are cheap and made of plastic.
high quality women's clothes at any price range are extremely hard to find, and high quality men's clothes are not very hard to come by.
women have more choices but it's all shit and slop at the end of the day. you would probably know this if you had any female friends because they complain about it endlessly.
that being said yes men's fashion is kind of boring and stagnant but its less stagnant than it was a decade ago now that people are moving away from flexing brands and streetwear.

>>18493201
lol definitely not the case. buying clothes from catalogues was the norm until like the mid 70's early 80's. i go back and look at photos of my dad and his dad, he was extremely dapper before he got married and had kids.

>>18493070
its funny, you can read shit from back then and they are complaining about this motherfucker wears his toga too loose, or this motherfucker is wearing his robe belt too high. Nothing ever changes.

>>18492958
Then we should each kill half
Together we can prevail

>>18493127