Talk:Slouch hat

message: This is my first page, so advice as to how to format a title, or break the links at the end into new lines will be appreciated.  (I'm fully planning on coming back and cleaning this up and adding to it, just don't quite know what I am doing yet)  Thanks -Skylark 19:20, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The slouch hat wasn't invented in the 1800's, it's considerably older. The name "slouch" refers to the fact that one side droops, as opposed to the other that is pinned up. Examples of this style of hat can be seen on English Cavaliers in paintings from the 1600's as well as court dress of various people from all over Europe at that time. This site has some more information about the evolution of the Australian Slouch Hat and some indications of where it came from: http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-uniforms/slouch_hat.htm 
-I added a little bit of very general knowledge history as well as a definition of the actual name to the beginning of the article.OzoneO (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is inaccurate and needs a bit of revising

message: I've added some very basic info on the NZ slouch hat. It is still worn on occasion. Ozdaren 08:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The image that was used by this article to illustrate the NZ slouch hat was deleted because it was a non-free content image that was deemed replaceable. As such, is there anyone that is able to upload a free content photo as a replacement? The suggestion is that in order not to have the photo deleted like last time, that someone - probably a Kiwi soldier who actually owns a NZ slouch hat - takes a photo and uploads it similar to the example that a user uploaded for the Australian version. Can anyone help with this? AustralianRupert (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NZ slouch hat 

message: I noticed that the following statement was made:
Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel regard the slouch hat as a parade item of dress, and although army standing orders for dress allow it to be worn in the field, most soldiers do not, as it is almost a disgrace to allow it to get unnecessarily dirty.
I disagree with this as a grade 2 slouch hat is often worn in the field by diggers. The idea of it being almost a disgrace implies a whole degree of reverence that does not exist. Ozdaren 02:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think that this comment is exactly right anymore. Certainly, Australian soldiers used to wear the slouch hat out field, but I don't think this has been done for a while. I have been in the Army for five years and certainly I have not seen anyone wear the slouch hat out field in that time. We are now issued with proper "bush hats" (or "hat, ridiculous" in Q speak) which are essentially just hats made out of similar material to camouflage jackets and trousers. Having said this, in some units the slouch hat is required to be worn whilst working in a barracks situation - other than headquarters. For example, at a particular a engineer unit whilst not out field or doing field training, the sappers are required to wear their slouch hats instead of bush hats even whilst working on equipment etc in the compound. Certainly the slouch hat is held in high regard, though, and in some units it is only ever worn whilst on parade, e.g. units where berets are worn. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've been out of the army for a long time but I'll try to work in a comment about grade 1 and grade 2 slouch hats. 203.216.0.150 (talk) 02:49, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverence 

message: wore during the indochina war and known as "chapeau de brousse" (translation of slouch hat). don't know its origins. there were two models this one, (French Foreign Legion 1st BEP airborne w/US vest/UK trousers/FR MAS-36 rifle) it remembers the imperial australian model this one/two (WWII US type?). Paris By Night 19:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: nothing about the French slouch hat?

message: A lot of police here in Bangalore wear these too. Not sure if it's just a Bangalore/Karnataka thing or if it occurs elsewhere.—Wasabe3543 09:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian police 

message: I think this should be addressed. A floppy, tattered slouch hat (often adorned with safety pins, feathers, etc.) is a classic piece of the archetypal Southern "mountain man"/"hillbilly" persona - Jed Clampett (of the Beverly Hillbillies) is just one example...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seethaki (talk • contribs) 04:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Association with American hillbillies? 

message: The link to a Tripod contributor has some neat pictures, but the text does not rise to WP reliability standards (presumably the intent of attaching it as a ref to first mention of "Kossuth hat". I focus on text, but perhaps others with an image interest can figure out whether we can display the relevant pics.--Jerzy•t 23:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tripod link 

message: Pulp Heroes and fictional private-eyes in general 'often' (almost universally) wear slouch hats. Should this be mentioned in the article? My only trepidation is that I don't understand the differences between slouch hats, Fedoras, and other similar hats. So I'm not really sure which page the reference belongs on. --illumi (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Popular Culture: The Pulps

message: There is some confusion between 'slouch hats' and, well, hats.
Histroically, the term 'slouch' contains with it the notion of a falling away from usual standards of smartness  appropriate to a gentleman or soldier. It stems from the assumption that gentlemen and soldiers properly attired had their hats 'cocked,' that is with the brim turned up, as was the fashion in the 18th century, but the notion persisted with the introduction of the narrow-brimmed top hat at the turn of the 19th century.
In the 18th century, gentlemen out shooting might sometimes wear a slouch hat and soldiers in America wore their hats uncocked, some times with the brims cut down as well, to provide better shelter from the elements as well as cope with the exigencies of active service. 
It is in America that we first see the practice of soldiers turning up one side of the slouched hat, allowing the attachment of a cockade and a feather. This was not entirely an innovation since, as has been pointed out, this had been a fashion in the 17th century and became associated with military costume- Royalist 'Cavaliers' and the like. This romantic notion was probably not lost on wearers in the 18th century or later, for instance, by the followers of Kossuth in Hungary nor with American soldiery who wore the style formally and informally during the War between the States and after. 
These hats were not 'slouch hats' per se. A hat is not a slouched hat because it has one side turned up. The so-called 'Kossuth', 'Jeff Davis' or 'Fra Diavolo' hat, adopted by the U.S. Army as its Full Dress headgear between 1855 and 1858, was anything but a slouch hat.
However, the growing practice of turning up one side of the hat in a military context and, inevitably, with an increasingly formal aspect, meant this distinction was lost. Meanwhile, the term 'wide awake' also came into use in colonial and frontier contexts for the typical 'slouch' hat.
Adopted by Australian colonial contingents in 1885, the familiar slouch hat was also worn by paramilitaries in Africa during the 1890s. During the Boer War, it eventually replaced the cumbersome Foreign Service helmet among British units. Subsequently, in 1902, the British Army adopted the felt 'slouch' or 'bush' hat style as its headgear in Service Dress with the left-hand brim very smartly turned up. Ironically, it was not suited to European climate and tended all too quickly to become a slouch hat indeed. It was soon replaced by the peaked cap accompanied by the Wolseley helmet for tropical service. However, the form would re-appear in use by British Empire troops during the Second World War in both Africa and the Far East. 
It is still worn today by the Ghurkas, uncocked, in No. 2 Dress and, of course, remains the emblematic headgear of the Australian Army. The slouch hat remained in use by Australian troops throughout the 20th century and has become most closely associated with that country and its soldiers.
It is ironic that, in Australia, fulfilling the function of the original slouch hat is the 'Hat, floppy' or 'Ridiculous' while the Slouch Hat is principally a smart or Dress item. JF42 (talk) 16:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the place to post mini-lectures or soapbox views. Add to the article if you have a source. Otherwise you can help correct the grammar and general structure. Djathinkimacowboy 23:20, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Djathinkimacowboy: "This account is a suspected sock puppet of User456246478845 and has been blocked indefinitely...This page was last modified on 25 October 2012 at 10:16." Clink on link  for further information.JF42 (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slouch 

message: From the current article: "Some units of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps such as cavalry and light horse regiments wear emu plumes behind the Rising Sun badge. This is a reference to a practice dating from World War 1, where Light Horsemen would chase down emus and steal their feathers to mount in their hat as a mark of their riding skill.[3]"
Incorrect to say that a: its a reference to Light Horseman chasing down Emu's and b: even associating it as starting with WW1. 
Emu Plumes (Kangaroo Feathers) in Slouch Hats dates back to the Queensland Shearers strike of the late 1890's. The Wide Bay Mounted Infantry are accredited as the first to wear Emu Plumes in their slouch hats at this time. The whole 'chasing down emus' story is a romantic bit of fiction made up later on. Soon ALL Queensland Mounted Infantry units wore them as part of their uniforms - and this practice was continued for all Queensland Mounted Infantry units raised for service during the Boer War (1899-1902). When Australia raised troops for WW1 the 2nd Light Horse Regiment, raised in Queensland, campaigned loudly for the right to wear their Emu Feathers due to their strong historical association with them and this request was granted to them exclusively. They were very upset when the 3rd Light Horse Regiment arrived in Egypt and were wearing 'their' Emu Plumes. They protested this but it was decided that ALL Light Horse Regiments could wear the Emu Plumes on their Slouch Hats providing that they purchased them themselves.
Today the Armoured Corps units of the Australian Army follow this tradition and wear their Emu Plumes on the left side of their slouch hats or berets.
https://www.awm.gov.au/encyclopedia/lhplumes/feathers/ 
http://www.anzacday.org.au/education/tff/slouch.html
203.206.139.218 (talk) 03:33, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emu Plumes (Kangaroo Feathers) - Australian Light Horse 

message: From Users>Australia:
Can Somebody fix this?
:"A Unit Colour Patch is worn on the right of puggaree, while a Corps or Regiment Hat badge is placed to its [???] and the General Service Badge (The Rising Sun) worn on the left brim which is folded up and clipped into place."    Heavenlyblue (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Word lacking 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slouch hat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100920015848/http://diggerhistory.info/pages-uniforms/nz-slouch.htm to http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-uniforms/nz-slouch.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It says: "The name "slouch hat" refers to the fact that one side droops down as opposed to the other which is pinned against the side of the crown." Immediately next to that claim is a photo of a soldier wearing a hat that has neither side drooping, and neither side pinned to the crown.
The caption on the photo doesn't say that the hat is a slouch hat; it just identifies the wearer. Should this picture be removed? Or should the text be altered? Maybe it would help if the photo was just moved to a place in the article where it doesn't directly contradict the article text?
MrDemeanour (talk) 17:47, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History