The Fear of Harry Styles in a Dress

American conservatives and bigots have lost their collective mind. Something about Harry Styles wearing a ruffled Gucci ballgown is so jarring, so off-putting, so wrong that it has driven them into a homophobic and transphobic panic. The demands for “manly men” and accusations of Styles’ “feminizing masculinity” are cries of pain in an increasingly progressive world in which Trump has fallen and the dreaded liberals are taking over. So here’s what the Harry Styles-in-a-dress-phobes need to hear:

1. Gender and sex are two very distinct things, a notion that you can learn about in gender theory or read about on any readily available online source. Sex is biological and based on one’s reproductive organs. Biologically, one is either male, female, or intersex. Gender, however, is an entirely different matter, it’s psychological, social, and socially constructed. It’s not quite as clear-cut as sex or as many would like it to be and it is not confined to societal conventions.

2. Gender exists on a spectrum and one does not have to perform as the most masculine version of masculinity or the most feminine version of femininity. Styles identifies as a man, but he doesn’t necessarily have to reject any feminine side of himself. Doing so is where toxic masculinity emerges. Gender is a matter of personal presentation that is not dictated by or dependent on society’s narrow-minded and compartmentalized ideas of it.

3. We live in a gender binary society but that doesn’t mean that gender is actually binary. According to societal norms, there are men and there are women - that’s it. We see this very clearly and tangibly in public restrooms and clothing stores, but this doesn’t mean that only manly men and feminine women exist and are valid, society just isn't as progressive as we would like to think it is. These standards and expectations are products of misogyny and it is society’s responsibility to break the gender binary, something that Styles has done throughout his entire career, frequently wearing pink, pearls, and florals.

4. The purpose of this photoshoot was to dismantle and oppose toxic masculinity. Styles was not demanding that every man wear a dress, rather the point was that it is okay to, that the culture of toxic masculinity shouldn’t define one’s life. A man wearing a dress isn’t “undermining masculinity” as Ben Shapiro claims, rather it offers an alternative or foil to the traditional masculine identity we see so often in the media. The point is that one can be a man without fully leaning into the trope of football and beer. Styles is still masculine, he identifies and operates as a man, he is just in touch with and not in denial of his feminine side.

5. And, as the likes of Ben Shapiro and Candance Owens know very well, the sales of this particular edition of Vogue are not going to plummet. In fact, they will skyrocket. We can expect a generation of young people who will not operate as though they are confined by conservative ideals. They will define and present themselves outside of the binary, dressing in spite of outdated dictations of gender and functioning without gendered expectations. In a way, they will be liberated, and that is what is so absolutely terrifying to Shapiro and Owens - change.

6. Although the photographs and outfit have been commented on and criticized by political commentators and politicians (and this site is generally reserved for political issues), Styles’ presentation in Vogue is not a political matter. Shapiro and some other critics paint support for Styles as part of the leftist or liberal agenda, which it very much is not. Yes, leftists and liberals are fundamentally more accepting of the eradication of toxic masculinity than conservatives are, but more so morally than politically. It is highly unlikely that Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are particularly invested in Harry Styles’ choice of outfit for a Vogue photoshoot. I can assure you, Shapiro, that Styles is not connivingly plotting with Marxists and AOC to shred apart your ultra-binary norms. Marxist attacks tend to more closely resemble the Soviet planting of flags on the Reichstag in Berlin than they do an male artist wearing a ballgown on the cover of a magazine.

7. If you take any form of offense or opposition to the photoshoot, I implore you to recognize, dissect, and correct your internal biases. They exist, however much you may try to deny them. Insisting that Styles use his platform to promote and perpetuate the masculine standard, and fearing when he doesn’t, is blatantly homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic because it regards anything outside of the orthodox, masculine, cis-gendered heterosexual man with trepidation.

In the words of Olivia Wilde, “It’s pretty powerful and kind of extraordinary to see someone in his position redefining what it can mean to be a man with confidence.”