US Vogue December 2020 : Harry Styles by Tyler Mitchell

[A.D.C.]

In regards to Indya Moore, I feel like it would be a lot more impactful if they chose a trans woman who wasn’t necessarily deemed “passable”.

 

[THD96]

I agree with almost everything you said in your post, but in what universe is Indya Moore a household name? I’d love to see her get a cover, but I’d wager only around 1% of Americans have any idea who she is.

I mean same can applied to Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Claire Foy, Florence Pugh (she seem very fond with up and coming British actresses) and Alicia Vikander ( can you believe she have 2 covers already).

 

[TZ001]

I mean same can applied to Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Claire Foy, Florence Pugh (she seem very fond with up and coming British actresses) and Alicia Vikander ( can you believe she have 2 covers already).

At least all the actresses you mentioned have some major awards or nominations

 

[KoV]

I mean same can applied to Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Claire Foy, Florence Pugh (she seem very fond with up and coming British actresses) and Alicia Vikander ( can you believe she have 2 covers already).

I disagree. Indya is gorgeous and I’m not putting them down, but they’re not even the main character and certainly not the best actress on Pose, which is not a very widely-seen show. Everyone you mentioned has had leading roles in major, widely-seen films/shows, numerous awards, and is just undeniably more famous.

 

[JPineapple]

Indya Moore moore appeared on the cover of Elle, of course they’re known enough to be on the cover of Vogue.

 

[Lola701]

I agree with almost everything you said in your post, but in what universe is Indya Moore a household name? I’d love to see her get a cover, but I’d wager only around 1% of Americans have any idea who she is.

They are Hollywood and they are Fashion. They starred on a fairly popular show and had a contract with Louis Vuitton. This is still Vogue after all...You wants the most "glamorous" representation.

You don't need to be known by everybody. Only 1% of Americans knows who they are but at the same time, only 1% of Americans reads or cares about Vogue even if the impact of that exceed 1%.

 

[dontbeadrag]

I do agree that Indya Moore is the closest one to get the Vogue US cover, but they haven’t had their "it" moment yet. They are getting there, though. I guess if they land a major leading role or a couple of campaigns, especially LV, this is the way to go.

The comment about them being more "passable" is true, but if I were trans, I would've probably been very offended by that statement.

The fact that they were on Elle has absolutely nothing to do with her getting a Vogue cover, Vogue caters to the top of the top in fashion, Elle is way more mainstream and for the general public, to be frank. The demographic of Vogue and Elle aren't even in close categories.

On the topic of this ridiculous cover once again: I am still baffled by the fact that some people find this new or innovative. There has been about one million better attempts at gender bending and mixing female and male fashion. Brad Pitt is sure one that is close as it is a mainstream star and a similar trick, we have also had Sexual Revolution ed and cover for W by Meisel, which shows how it should be done. Obviously the idea is there, but the execution s*cks b*lls. I am not even mentioning about a hundred photographs by Testino that attempt it as well.

Who thought that such a delicate and deeply social topic is okay to be envisioned by a 25 y.o. artist with no emphasis on concept in his works (like, at all) is beyond me.

Maybe if anybody at the Vogue HQ thought a bit deeper than "oh, let's put a guy in a dress", then it would be much better. While I think the trans topic is irrelevant here, because it is a totally different thing, the gay and gender roles topics are still present.

If they had the brains to probably show how hard it is for a gay person to do anything with crossdressing without being bullied by homophobes AND by the "masc" gays themselves. Or if they showed Harry experiencing the same stuff that a lot of women have to deal nearly everyday such as simping, harassment, fashion judgement (men not as much, you can be a buff guy and everybody will drool, even if your taste is horrible, e.g. Henry Cavill), and many other issues that are still present.

This here just shows nothing in regards to the both parties.

Does this raise the conversation? Yeah, sure. But this is not the right conversation, we should not be discussing the ways to improve this, we should be either baffled or repulsed by the idea and the concept, but not by the execution or the technical aspect of this.

 

[Phuel]

I'm starting to hate this a little less now, but I still find it bizarre. Harry Styles on the cover of Vogue, pfft...

And I do believe that it would've worked better if the styling (or photography or the cover subject) was stronger. This absolutely iconic cover story from no less than Rolling Stone came to mind this morning as I looked at Harry's editorial again. I mean, I'm biased cause it's Brad, but this story is to this day one of my favorite editorials ever - he rocks those dresses in every image and there's so much energy and sass and damn is he hot in that little sequined dress. This is what I'd like to see when it comes to straight men in women's clothes posing for a fashion magazine. What they did with Harry is neither surprising or unconventional - in my opinion, it's just boring. Seeing someone (like Brad here) who otherwise wouldn't ever be seen in womenswear would've been far more interesting.

rolling stone

Brad’s is such pure, sexually-charged masculinity and testosterone with a hardcore, kinky edge in those dresses. It’s all so very primal. There’s an absolutely adult, even sophisticated direction in those shots that provoke both women's and men’s lusts and trusts the reader to reach for a level of maturity to deal with such provocation. Such imagery would be considered toxic masculinity and offensive to the kidz these days. Thus it’s Disney Harry’s inoffensive and PG-version of drag for children. It’s all so children playing dress up and taking pics for their Insta: But it’s now desperately trying to be political by calling such juvenile styling gender neutral LOL

It’s all so tame, harmless Teen Vogue for suburban girls and their mums. It’s cute. But this shallow level of desktop-creativity is not Vogue.

 

[KoV]

Apparently Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens are going after Harry/Vogue for this. I'm inclined to say some people on this forum may overestimate how forward-thinking or open-minded most Americans are, and the politics and risk of shaking things up on such an iconic/respected magazine. I mean, we've just had *more* people vote for our incumbent President (over 70 million!) than voted for President Obama in years past. Clearly there's quite a bit of distance between what many people here view as envelope-pushing and new, and what the American public views as envelope-pushing and new. Whether it's Lizzo or Harry Styles in a dress, the cover of Vogue means something to many Americans (even people who don't normally read the magazine still respect its reputation/authority), and so whoever Anna puts on the cover (and what they're wearing) can make an impact and upset people if it's seen as disrupting the status quo. I'm not saying Anna is the most progressive editor around, but I think it's a mistake to dismiss this as meaningless. In fact, I think it being a sort of "Disney" take on gender-neutral is exactly why it's ruffling feathers. It's so safe and mainstream-friendly, and that's why it could potentially have broader impact! That's why more conservatives get more upset about things like "Modern Family" or "Glee" than they did "Queer as Folk" or "Looking"

 

[Kiyoko]

It’s all a very bad joke … but I’m not laughing

 

[Mercury6181]

Apparently Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens are going after Harry/Vogue for this. I'm inclined to say some people on this forum may overestimate how forward-thinking or open-minded most Americans are, and the politics and risk of shaking things up on such an iconic/respected magazine. I mean, we've just had *more* people vote for our incumbent President (over 70 million!) than voted for President Obama in years past. Clearly there's quite a bit of distance between what many people here view as envelope-pushing and new, and what the American public views as envelope-pushing and new. Whether it's Lizzo or Harry Styles in a dress, the cover of Vogue means something to many Americans (even people who don't normally read the magazine still respect its reputation/authority), and so whoever Anna puts on the cover (and what they're wearing) can make an impact and upset people if it's seen as disrupting the status quo. I'm not saying Anna is the most progressive editor around, but I think it's a mistake to dismiss this as meaningless. In fact, I think it being a sort of "Disney" take on gender-neutral is exactly why it's ruffling feathers. It's so safe and mainstream-friendly, and that's why it could potentially have broader impact! That's why more conservatives get more upset about things like "Modern Family" or "Glee" than they did "Queer as Folk" or "Looking"

Yes, this cover is definitely causing a stir both in the fashion world and not. A lot of people on this forum who have knowledge of fashion have been saying this isn’t boundary pushing but for a lot of people, a majority of Americans, this is boundary pushing. And for some of those Americans (cough cough Trump supporters) find this to be TOO boundary pushing and are spreading a lot of hate about how he isn’t “manly” enough. So as people on here ridicule for this not being boundary pushing, keep in mind that for the general public this is pushing boundaries. And like I said, not everyone likes a boundary such as whether there are differences between men and female to be pushed especially for conservative, far right people. I am American and I showed these images to my dad, a 50 year old democrat not at all conservative, and he too was taken aback to see a man in a dress. So as stated, this may not be the most boundary pushing thing in the world of fashion it is still boundary pushing for the general public and even still a bit in fashion. And for men struggling to be able to wear what they want, seeing a man on the cover of Vogue proudly wearing a dress can help give them confidence, even if it has already been done and as others put it “PG-13”

 

[THD96]

Apparently Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens are going after Harry/Vogue for this.

Are we really surprised tho, this is the same person that gave us that Wet A** P-word .
I'm still indifferent about the cover but the editorial is growing on me. Maybe because undeniably Harry is so tall and handsome as hell/ he so bad but he does it so well .
Print media is dying so in a way I'm kinda happy when they gather is much attention tbh. It's a great boost for everybody involved.

 

[tigerrouge]

I don't think the magazine knows who the Vogue reader/subscriber is these days - they've gone from pushing 'Vogue Values' at the start of the year, which seemed to centre around celebrities being pregnant or having lots of kids, to ending the year with a man wearing a dress.

And there's no strong vision behind any of it - just the sense that, each month, Vogue is going down a list to see what traditionally non-Vogue sections of society might be out there to mine for clicks and subscriptions.

Oh, they'll want the applause for finally being 'inclusive' and they'll take it, while expecting people to accept these unimaginative scraps served up to them at the end of the day when Vogue are desperate.

All these years, right beside Vogue on the newsstand has been the music press, which has promoted and celebrated performers and individuals exploring all sorts of definitions since the 60s - a rich visual library stretching for decades which could be called upon by any fashion magazine when creating something for their own pages. But Vogue's going to pretend that doesn't exist. It's not worth the effort, you know. Vogue doesn't think that we are worth the effort.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

I'm not saying Anna is the most progressive editor around, but I think it's a mistake to dismiss this as meaningless. In fact, I think it being a sort of "Disney" take on gender-neutral is exactly why it's ruffling feathers. It's so safe and mainstream-friendly, and that's why it could potentially have broader impact!

They do not buy the magazine. Ultimately she should be thinking like Tigerrouge said Who exactly are her readers/subscribers. It's not just pathetically tame, it's simply nothing new, the few people buy fashion magazines nowadays have a certain aesthetic knowledge, i do not see why they should be fobbed off to make a broader point.
There are sections of society revel in being permanently outraged, it is meaningless and clearly a form of attention seeking politically motivated, particularly when you had for decades people like Prince. Bowie and Mercury and a whole legion of gender bending mainstream acts that are bought by people in both ends of the political spectrum.

 

[ivano]

For example, I bet only the people that is a fashion consumer knew about the cover girls in that tragic april cover. But there so many people that deserve to be on the cover, to spread their voice, that you can't push them into a magazine that has only 12 issues (11 in this case) by year. The only way is doing multicovers (we hate them, and most from Vogue Italia) and group covers. I don't see american Vogue as a fashion magazine, is a twin publication of Vanity Fair with less politic contents, but reflects more the Hollywood culture, not fashion. Naomi's cover was a surprise because they don't want models on the cover. It's a shame and an irony that fashion models fronting a fashion magazine don't sell good in America and others countries, but you put the hottest stars of the moment and work good for them even if the picture and styling is a disaster. It's like seeling our soul to the devil because we want to keep our business alive but you loose your reputation and good name because is part of the deal.

 

[PowerDroid]

I heard that this is the most successful cover for Vogue this year, in terms of 'clicks' and 'likes'....
It's all a bit depressing that we have come to this.

 

[caioherrero]

Any reviews?

 

[zowiebowie]

Because Alessandro Michele made him believe that a man in a dress or a skirt had anything to do with being gender-fluid. So, he played along with it and now, after a real deep and efficient marketing, he is able to cash on that...

I can only imagine how sad his fans will be in 5/10 years when they realize that he was just a man wearing a dress and not challenging at all the status-quo of gender. When you are rich in the entertainment world, it’s not challenging at all.

WTF is the matter of being a cis-man wearing a dress? Do you have to be gender non-conforming to be a male-born person wearing a dress???

I don't get the need for so many labels. I don't get the need for so many rules either.

David Bowie did it. Prince did it. So. what?

 

[JPineapple]

^^ At least if magazines gonna "steal" a trend made by the LGBTTIQ+ community to make a political statement, they should put LGBTTIQ+ on their covers, not just behind them. As an lgbttiq artist said: Media need to stop praising cishet people with one hand and silence lgbtq+ people with the other.

 

[helmutnotdead]

just wake me up when Indya Moore gets the cover.