Anthropologie/Instagram: "Man in a dress" Instagram post...

[Coder]

https://www.instagram.com/p/CryzD30J54F/

This might work for those who don't have Instagram:
https://www.picnob.com/post/6836554467261224652341/

So - this turned up in my google searches via an outrage article. The link is to an instagram post, which Anthropologie featured of a man wearing different dresses, doing dance moves, and wearing high heels. No apparent makeup, so this wasn't drag. It's about as close to "man in a dress" as you can get when it comes to advertising.

DISCLAIMER: I generally post what I find, but all of the news articles about this are outrage articles about "men erasing women" and such stuff. Specifically, that verbiage is in relation to transwomen winning competitions against cis women, or taking cis women's spots on women's-only magazines. I am not, am not interested in discussing any of this. Near as I can tell, Harper identifies as a "he", "male" and so those articles have no bearing on what Anthropologie posted, except that the outrage articles conflate two issues that are unrelated.

What I am hoping to discuss are themes along the lines of "is it fair for women (and men I guess) to be upset over one tiny Instagram post" and "what do the negative reactions have to say about society as of yet" and "whether or not he should have twirled his dress so high in one of the shots". Even "what does this portend for the future for clothing brands". But please for the love of god - let's not let this devolve into a heated post.

So what say you all? Obviously, the dancing was relevant to Harper's profession (ballet dancer) but it obviously won't entice "manly men" to wear Anthro's clothes. In fact, it probably has the opposite effect. For the life of me nothing of what he wore was of interest, not sensible in a "everyday wear" but then advertising often doesn't push people in the direction of "sensible wear". At least, not for Anthropologie.

Many of the brands Anthro sells make some really cool skirts you cannot get from any other retailer. I have many skirts from Anthro (most bought second hand), as well as sweaters and some tops. Provided you get the right size, their stuff generally fits, and is usually made of high quality fabrics and materials.

[crfriend]

What I am hoping to discuss are themes along the lines of "is it fair for women (and men I guess) to be upset over one tiny Instagram post" and "what do the negative reactions have to say about society as of yet" and "whether or not he should have twirled his dress so high in one of the shots". Even "what does this portend for the future for clothing brands". But please for the love of god - let's not let this devolve into a heated post.

What I fail to understand here is where the sense of "outrage" comes from, save that it's likely a few unstable individuals with (1) tooo much time on their hands, (2) bad attitudes in general, and (3) nothing better to do than throw rocks at random passers-by.

Breaking the thing apart, what I sense is:

a) This was a fashion/art shoot,
b) The guy is a ballet dancer by profession, and
c) He was wearing a dress.

To further clarify, "art" takes many forms, much of which is designed to elicit emotions, Dance moves can be provocative -- by design -- and that whilst the dress is unusual in day-to-day public settings is not unheard of at all in the theatrical world. He was probably perfectly comfortable in the dress and executing the moves whilst wearing it. Thus, my "Why the outrage?" sentiment.

If we were to use the notion of, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." much of this faux outrage would simply vanish or be exposed for the silliness that it is. Face it, what we adorn ourselves with is not going to have one lick of effect on the real problems that afflict a lot of people.

On the "turf issue"... Men need to take back at least some of the ground that's been stolen from them -- most especially in the way that men are allowed to deploy emotions. We also ought to take back some of the sartorial ground that we surrendered in the Great Renunciation. This is not "erasure" or "cancel culture"; this is merely reasserting that men are human beings just as much as women are. I challenge anyone to dispute that, or to really dispute that men have been being put systematically at a disadvantage for decades.

But none of the above should be able to cause the sense of "outrage" that it seems to, and this makes the "outrage" sound contrived and even comical. The problem is that the outrage coupled with an increasingly-large population of mentally ill individuals can create real trouble for real people in the real world -- and that's the real problem with all of this.

[Offkilter69]

While I am a full supporter of the LGBTQ community, I do not wish to be associated with it, simply because I am not part of it. To me, this ad is Anthropologies’ attempt to be supportive and promote said community. The model’s flamboyancy is not going to inspire straight men who are on the fence about trying out a skirt or dress to do so- quite the opposite. Nor does it tell the world that men can wear skirts and/or dresses and still appear “masculine”. This is more a political statement by Anthropologie than a true promotion of the MIS movement. That was not their agenda. Unfortunately, it only hurts MIS.

[Coder]

This is more a political statement by Anthropologie than a true promotion of the MIS movement. That was not their agenda. Unfortunately, it only hurts MIS.

I was thinking something along the lines of - someone needs to get a bug in these companies's ear's and encourage them to model "regular" guys wearing clothing in a realistic way. The problem is, it wouldn't be shocking enough. It's a hard challenge - develop a set of skirted outfits that have universal appeal.

[Offkilter69]

This is more a political statement by Anthropologie than a true promotion of the MIS movement. That was not their agenda. Unfortunately, it only hurts MIS.

I was thinking something along the lines of - someone needs to get a bug in these companies's ear's and encourage them to model "regular" guys wearing clothing in a realistic way. The problem is, it wouldn't be shocking enough.

It might actually be shocking in a different way- good way. The general masses have already stereotyped men who wear skirts as gay or trans wannabes. This ad unfortunately validates that, at least in my eyes. An ad featuring a well-known professional athlete or “hunky” celebrity of some sort modeling a skirt without twirling or sashaying about might inspire some men to don a skirt and women to look at MIS in a different light.

[crfriend]

I was thinking something along the lines of - someone needs to get a bug in these companies's ear's and encourage them to model "regular" guys wearing clothing in a realistic way. The problem is, it wouldn't be shocking enough. It's a hard challenge - develop a set of skirted outfits that have universal appeal.

The biggest part of that challenge is to define what a "regular guy" is. We're not exactly a homogeneous population. We are vastly more than The Marlboro Man; our body-types are widely divergent, our IQs are widely divergent, our senses of style are widely divergent (which is the main reason this community exists!), and our personal experiences are similarly divergent.

What'd be necessary is to shoot "in the wild", that is, in public settings with the man in a skirt appearing entirely "normal" save for the style sense. A selection of assorted scenes would need to show off various occupations and professions -- and the various styles deployed. Styles would likely vary with setting; for instance what'll work in an office setting is not likely to work on a construction site.

As an example, had I been wearing skirts when I was doing computer field service would have been one style, and when I was confined to an office would have been something different, and now that I'm "remote" (i.e. working from home) it's different still. I have an oscilloscope of a similar type that I used to carry from time to time on the streets of Boston along with my tool bag when I was doing field-service work; that line of work is now dead in the "If it's broke throw it away and buy a new one" mentality of today, and 'scopes are no longer even remotely required (which is one of the reasons I got out of the field -- all the challenge and fun had gone) -- but it'd make for an interesting photograph. (I may have to stage one if I can find a proper old-school tool-bag. The 'scope weighs almost 30 pounds and the bag more than 10 which explains why I was a bit more "buff" back in the day.)

So, here's the main question: "What comprises an "average guy?"

[moonshadow]

I'm outraged...

Good old Appalachian internet... plays a split second, buffers for 60... at this rate it will take almost a half hour to watch this 20 second clip...

I reckon some people out to be thankful they can actually access content to be "outraged" over...

So I don't really know what's going on, but if it's just the usual tribes getting pissed off about someone wearing a feminine garment... tell them to get in line. My God it's a long line.... hope they packed a lunch.

It could be worse friend... you could be trying to watch outrage porn on an Appalachian internet connection....

[Coder]

So I don't really know what's going on, but if it's just the usual tribes getting pissed off about someone wearing a feminine garment... tell them to get in line. My God it's a long line.... hope they packed a lunch.

It the usual - they got a bad case of the vapors and are currently quaking in their boots.

As for the oscilloscope photoshoot - all for that! I too have a hard time defining the average guy - we are in almost every profession in the world - and what typical advertising uses is often opposite of what the regular dude wears on the street.