Gen Z's WW3 Fashion Trends Taking Over TikTok
Hot Topic
🔥 Full coverage and conversation on Politics
While President Donald Trump realizes that his Israel-Iran ceasefire agreement may not be as binding as he suspected ― both countries continue to fire missiles at each other ― Gen Z isn't wasting any time: On TikTok, 'WW3 fits' has been trending for days, with teens and twenty-somethings sharing the camo-heavy looks they jokingly say they'll wear in the event of a nuclear world war. Fun?
'First war kinda nervous,' Avery, a content creator, captioned a clip featuring her WW3 wardrobe, which includes a camouflage miniskirt and a bomber jacket.
A few TikTokkers who are enlisted in the US Army joked that they already had their WWIII look picked out for them, flashing to closets full of fatigues.
Ethan Hillis, 26, showed off his potential World War III looks in a video he was careful to caption: 'just a coping mechanism.' There's combat chic (a green trench coat), spy (a fedora and coat) and political ex-wife (basically MAGA mom cosplay).
'My WWIII fit is a bit of satire and a bit of style, think something like combat but make it couture,' Hillis told HuffPost in an email interview.
'I wanted to play with the idea of absurd preparedness while still looking fabulous,' he said. 'It felt like a funny and fashion-forward way to comment on the state of the world without diving into doom.'
The videos are all soundtracked to Kesha's 2010 hit 'Blow' (Sample lyric: 'This place about to blow, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh'), which only adds to the absurdity.
Most people joke along in the comment sections of the videos: 'This generation is so unserious. I love it,' one person wrote.
'This generation is only afraid of pregnancy,' another joked.
Others found the brand of humor distasteful, as the conflict between Israel and Iran continues to unfold and airstrikes have left at least 28 people dead in Israel and hundreds in Iran.
'Lives are at stake,' one person wrote in the comments of Avery's video. 'The future of our world is unfolding in front of us, and YOU POST THIS.'
Gen Z-ers we spoke to say they recognize the severity of what's happening and aren't trying to downplay it with their videos.
'The jokes are coming from a place of real exhaustion and awareness,' Hillis said. 'I don't think people realize how tuned in Gen Z is. All the irony and outfits are just the packaging. Underneath is real fear, and real care.'
Christina Spah, a 26-year-old who posted a video of her WW3 fits ― looks that are ''apocalyptic chic' meets 'functional mom,'' she told HuffPost ― sees the jokes as a coping mechanism.
'As a military spouse and stay-at-home mom, I don't have much time to cry or panic in difficult times. I have to hold my head high and pretend everything is fine until I put my daughters to bed at night,' she said. 'In the meantime, finding humor about the prospect of another war in the Middle East allows me to feel any form of control in this awful situation.'
Gen Z is used to using dark humor to get through hard times and trauma.
There's little that Gen Z ― the demographic born between the late 1990s and the early 2010s ― won't meme-ify: On social media, everything from the the 2023 Titan submersible fiasco, to the 9/11 terror attacks, and celebrities' deaths and suicides (or being 'unalived,' as they prefer to say) ― have gotten the meme treatment. (Gen Z wasn't even alive when the twin towers fell. To be, though, comedians were cracking jokes about 9/11 no less than a few weeks later ― at least Gilbert Gottfried was.)
They haven't experienced any comparable terrorist attacks but Gen Z has been through a lot themselves: A pandemic and lockdowns, the Great Recession for the older ones, school shootings and subsequent active shooter drills, protests over police brutality and political polarization that's damaged friendships and splintered families.
Gen Z's supposed 'unseriousness' on social media may actually be a deeply layered response to chronic exposure to the news cycle, said Rana Bull, a therapist who works primarily with Gen Z, and the owner of Burrow and Bloom Therapy in Arizona.
'They've experienced a constant stream of secondhand trauma through social media,' Bull said. That affects us all, but Gen Z experienced it in their formative years.
Secondhand trauma, or indirect exposure to distressing events, can desensitize people over time, especially when it's experienced repeatedly and without resolution, she said.
'For Gen Z, this has resulted in a sort of emotional callus; they're rarely surprised by negative news because, for them, it's not a rarity — it's the norm,' she said.
There's also a neurological explanation for why Gen Z may appear disengaged. The brain's threat-response system is activated differently when a stressor is experienced directly versus indirectly, Bull explained. Social media creates a layer of emotional distance — what psychologists call psychological distancing — which makes it easier to compartmentalize what they're seeing.
'Humor, irony and absurdity become coping tools that help them regain a sense of control or reduce emotional overload,' she said.
It's the same kind of dark humor used among first responders or health care workers, Bull said ― when something is too overwhelming to fully process, laughter is tension-breaking.
'So what might appear as flippancy or being 'unserious' is actually a form of emotional regulation and resilience, albeit one that can be easily misunderstood.' the therapist said.
Sage Grazer, a therapist in Los Angeles, doesn't see Gen Z as particularly 'unserious' as a generation. Gen Z came of age online (three quarters of Gen Z spend most of their free time online, and many get their news from it, too), so it's little surprise they process their emotions there as well.
But making arguably stupid jokes about incomprehensible geopolitical issues is a long tradition; consider how Charlie Chaplin used satire to defuse and address the looming threat of Adolf Hitler in 'The Great Dictator' in 1940.
There's limitations to treating things glibly all the time, or without much reflection on why it's your reflex, Grazer noted.
'Humor can lighten the mood or offer a more positive perspective but it can also become a defense mechanism to shield yourself from harsh realities,'the therapist told HuffPost.
'While we're not meant to bear the emotional burden of all of the world's tragedy constantly, leaning on humor can encourage people to be complacent or callous,' she explained. 'I also see exposure to all of the jokes as contributing to a numbing or disconnection from the reality of what's going on in the world.'
But given the unwieldy way President Trump and his war cabinet have communicated operations to the American public, an argument could be made that this conflict has an air of unseriousness, even if that's gravely not the case.
And unlike millennials, who grew up seeing friends and family enlist for US invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan, Gen Z has yet to fully experience the political culture of the US at war. (Granted, the US didn't end combat operations in Afghanistan until 2014, and the last United States military forces to depart the country did so on August 30, 2021.)
An earnest question on Reddit's No Stupid Questions subreddit over the weekend is a testament to how unfamiliar Gen Z is with the prospect of warfare: 'What are you supposed to do if a war actually starts?' a person ― one who was clearly either not alive or else very young at the height of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars ― asked. 'Like, are we just supposed to keep going to work as normal and live like nothing is happening? Do jobs give time off if you're city is targeted?'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Iranian president did not die in latest Iran-Israel war
"Breaking news! Helicopter crash / According to the report, the plane carrying Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi exploded (June 24)," partly reads the Tagalog-language caption of a Facebook post shared on June 25. It displays an image that appears to be from a TV report, with screenshots of comments plastered all over it. The Tagalog-language chyron says, "Foreign leaders offered their condolences after the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi." The posts circulated after Iran retaliated against Israel's major bombardment campaign on June 13 targeting Iranian nuclear and military sites and killing top officials (archived link). Residential areas have also been hit in the fighting, with the health ministry in Tehran reporting at least 627 civilians killed and 4,900 wounded (archived link). Iran's retaliatory attacks on Israel have killed 28 people, according to official figures. While Iran and Israel have been locked in a shadow war for decades, their 12-day conflict was by far the most destructive confrontation between them (archived link). A US-proposed ceasefire between Israel and Iran appeared to be holding June 30 (archived link). US President Donald Trump had accused both countries of violating the ceasefire he announced late June 23, but hours later he said that it was in effect. Several other users re-shared the circulating TV report as recent, and comments on the post indicate some users were misled. "Maybe this is just a show. Because Iran attacked last night," one user said. Another wrote: "Haha smell something fishy. Why did he die? Because they lost to America". But the widely shared image is from a news report in May 2024. Keyword searches of the news chyron found that the Philippine broadcaster News5 uploaded the report on its verified TikTok page on May 21, 2024 (archived link). The report originally aired on the May 20 newscast of News5's Frontline Pilipinas (archived link). Its video caption said in Tagalog: "The president of Iran was killed in a helicopter crash. The Iranian foreign minister also died from the accident." Visuals shared in the false post corresponded to the 1:06 mark of News5's video. AFP reported the helicopter apparently made a "hard landing" in the Dizmar forest between the cities of Varzaqan and Jolfa in Iran's East Azerbaijan province, near its border with Azerbaijan, under circumstances that remain unclear (archived link). Former health minister and long-time parliamentarian Masoud Pezeshkian replaced the late Raisi after winning the 2024 presidential polls (archived link). The election was called early following the death of the ultraconservative president Raisi, and took place amid heightened regional tensions and domestic discontent (archived link). AFP has debunked other false information on the Iran-Israel war here.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
This Isn't the Iranian Regime Change You're Looking For
Back when I used to be able to visit Iran, I remember always being surprised by the popularity of Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary's Guard Corps' elite Al-Quds force, who was assassinated on US President Donald Trump's orders in 2020. This was true even of Westward-looking Tehranis who loathed the regime and held parties where the alcohol flowed and the skirts were short. Asked why, the answer was always the same. Soleimani kept the foreign threats destabilizing other countries of the Middle East at bay; he fought them abroad so they wouldn't have to be fought at home. Islamic State, a Sunni-Islamist terrorist organization, could terrorize Shiites in Iraq and their Alawite cousins in Syria, but the streets of Tehran were safe. Soleimani played on this. He'd be photographed wearing fatigues out with pro-Iranian militias in Iraq, carefully curating a near mythological image of daring and skill. This resonated, even though he stood at the core of a hated regime, because he seemed to hold the ring for what most Iranians craved: normal lives, safety and a chance at prosperity. They wanted a nuclear reconciliation with the US and Europe, allowing for sanctions to lift and investment to return, for precisely the same reasons. But that was then. A 2015 nuclear deal was agreed but quickly eviscerated by Trump. The IRGC profited from the 'maximum pressure' sanctions that followed, taking over much of the domestic economy and trade (which became primarily smuggling). Inflation soared. Private business withered. Living standards plummeted. And the worse things got, the more the IRGC cracked down domestically. There is no new Soleimani. The very source of his popularity — that he kept the dogs of war from Iranian doors — has become cause to despise his successors. Al-Quds increasingly was in the business of using the proxy network he built to poke the US and Israeli bears. That obsession backfired spectacularly this month, with Israeli jets bombing Tehran and US B-2s dropping bunker busters on Iranian nuclear facilities. Soleimani would be hated, too, were he alive today, because he was a leading architect of all this hubris. Indeed, attitudes were changing even before he died. But I think his passage from hero to villain is the context in which to see Iran's next move, now the US and Israel have called off their jets. Change will come in some form, though likely not one we'd all prefer. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is 86 years old. He rules a youthful nation in which some 70% of the population weren't even born when the revolution that drives him took place. Having led the country into so desolate a cul-de-sac, his regime will pay a price. The question is how and at whose expense. Change can form around Khamenei or by the IRGC replacing or marginalizing him. But there are clear limits; the regime can't afford to acknowledge that the billions upon billions of dollars it has spent on a nuclear program, and the hundreds of billions more lost due to the sanctions, were all for nothing. It cannot be seen to surrender to 'The Great Satan.' Nor can it realistically afford to just carry on as before, pursuing reckless aggression abroad, while ruling by fear alone at home. A successful popular uprising is unlikely. Khamenei and the IRGC have faced major protests before and repeatedly crushed them. They have about 1 million men under arms, many of them heavily indoctrinated. Urban Iranians are also by now cautious, not just because of that experience, but also because they know theirs is an ethnically fractured country. They have no interest in becoming the next Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan. This leaves the best plausible outcome as a return to the popular age of Soleimani, so an internal regime recalibration rather than regime change. As Cameran Ashraf, an Iranian human rights activist and assistant professor of public policy at the Central European University in Vienna, puts it, we may all be surprised by how things unfold. 'The regime has had very strong emphasis on survival from day one,' he said. 'So, I think there is a type of flexibility there.' We saw some of that already in the carefully choreographed response Iran gave to the US bombing of Fordow. In such a scenario, negotiators would return to talks this week in search of ways to relieve pressure on the regime and Iran's economy, making limited concessions on the nuclear program in exchange. The IRGC would take a more defensive posture abroad. At home, authorities would relent in some areas of needlessly provocative domestic repression — like enforcement of headscarf laws — as they've done at times in the past. Any such course correction would be tactical. The Islamic Republic will not change its spots, until it is no more. But as I argued last week, there is no one-and-done when it comes to Iran's nuclear program, neither by diplomacy nor by force. Both sides would be trying to buy time. The alternative is that Khamenei simply doubles down, concluding that no diplomatic settlement is possible because the US is bent on Iran's destruction and can't be trusted. The focus would be on regime consolidation, rebuilding defenses and acquiring a nuclear deterrent as soon as possible. So far, most signs point to this uglier outcome. Driven to paranoia by the level of Israeli intelligence penetration that led to the killing of dozens of top military commanders and nuclear scientists, a brutal domestic crackdown is underway. As of Sunday, there was little sign the nuclear negotiations Trump has trailed for this week will in fact take place. The US and the West as a whole need to play a more subtle game. In the wake of the bombings, keeping Iran from pulling out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and from expelling International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors is vital. This should not be sacrificed to the pursuit of an unachievable certainty. Failure to reach a political settlement would all but guarantee further airstrikes and leave the region more unstable and prone to a nuclear arms race than before Trump's military intervention. More From Bloomberg Opinion:
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
UN Nuclear Watchdog Humiliates Trump With Brutal Iran Assessment
The head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog has obliterated President Donald Trump's claims about the efficacy of the United States' strikes on Iran. Rafael Grossi said American B-2 bombers did not cause total damage—or 'completely and totally obliterate,' as Trump said—to the Iranian nuclear program. Instead, he estimates Tehran can restart enriching uranium again 'in a matter of months.' Grossi's remarks are a blow to Trump and his administration, which has dismissed a leaked attack assessment from U.S. intelligence—which reached a similar conclusion as Rossi—as incomplete and untrue since CNN first reported on it Wednesday. 'The capacities they have are there,' Grossi told CBS News' Face The Nation about Iran's nuclear program. 'They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there.' Grossi, 64, is the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency—the agency that conducts inspections at nuclear sites around the world. He noted that the U.S. military had 'severely damaged' a trio of Iranian nuclear sites. Still, he said there is no indication that the program has been set back years, as the White House and Pentagon claim. 'It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage,' he said. The Argentine added of Iran, 'If they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.' The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast. A hotly contested debate has erupted over whether Iran was able to remove enriched uranium from its facilities ahead of the U.S. dropping bunker buster bombs. Trump says Iran was not able to, while Tehran insists that it did. Grossi said it is not clear. He noted that Iran said it was taking protective measures ahead of the strike, which would logically include moving uranium—its most crucial material—from nuclear sites, assuming they were able to. The director made clear his goal was not to undercut Trump. He pushed for a diplomatic solution with Iran, pointing out that the country has not always been truthful with U.N. inspectors over its potential progress toward a nuclear weapon. He said his watchdog group has found traces of uranium in Iran outside its three known nuclear enrichment sites. 'We were asking for years, 'Why did we find these traces of enriched uranium in place x, y, or z?'' he said. 'And we were simply not getting credible answers.' Inspectors have been shut out of Iran entirely since Israel attacked it on June 13, Grossi said. He pushed the country to let the U.N. in again. Grossi also noted that prior checks in Iran did not reveal proof that it was nearing the completion of a nuclear weapon—a conclusion also reached by United States Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard earlier this year. Gabbard has since changed her tune to say that Iran was indeed months away from producing a nuclear bomb after Trump called her assessment 'wrong.' Grossi said Iran's secrecy made it hard to be certain. 'We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending,' he said.
