Conservatives slam Vogue and Harry Styles: "Bring Back Manly Men!"

Candice Owens and Ben Shapiro are two sexbombs so they know.

I would not describe Ben Shapiro as a manly man.

Ugh... Ben Shapiro and Alok Menon Vaid in one article.

Ugh... Ben Shapiro and Alok Menon Vaid in one article.

Wow I had no idea Harry was so good looking. Nice makeup job.

When did manly men ever go away. The most watched program any given random week in America is about 4 dozen swoled up gladiators pounding each other down a field. Action movies still trump the box offices as well as muscular superheroe. Just because andrognity and non gender conforming styles are getting their shine, does not mean this make a persecution of traditional masculinity. Why do conservatives see evrything as battle. It's vogue for christ sake. How is that war on masculinity. This is what I think clearly defines the difference between the conservative and lberal brain. And no I'm not a democrat. Conservatives see anything out of the ordinary or things that offend their tastes as some type of war on their lifestyle. It's crazy.

Maybe she should be more feminine and fix her dam edges and split ends. And no I'm not against natural hair, but her shit is snatched.

You don't have to be a conservative to think he looks like a fool

r8, Ok, thats not their criticism. Are you playing thick? They're making a societal, politically driven argument. But you knew that, and decided to play it thick.

It’s a straight man on the cover of a frau magazine so why should we care?

He looks good, in an asexual way. I only say asexual because he says that he is straight, but this is not going to turn on straight women. The dress isn’t going to be hot to most gay men either. He is being him, but it isn’t going to get him laid.

[quote]Monsoon referenced an Instagram post from activist and author, Alok Menon, who pointed out the differences between how Styles was generally received and how trans women of color are treated in the world

Haha! It's all about the TWOC at the end of the day, isn't it Alok?

Too bad my post is riddled with typos. Any message will be lost on DL grammar nazis.

You're so right, R11.

I don't know who this cover was supposed to appeal to.

Straight women? Nope.

Gay men? Nope.

Straight men? Possibly. But they don't read Vogue.

The only ones who could possibly care about a straight guy posing in women's clothing, is trannies.

So congrats, Vogue. You have the tranny readership. Hope you can survive on their readership, because you've pretty much lost everyone else.

I'd love to hear the sales figures on this issue once all is said and done. My guess is it will rival Lena Waithe's Vanity Fair cover for most copies pulped.

Has anyone ever explained why Harry likes to dress in drag so much?

[quote]I would not describe Ben Shapiro as a manly man.

He's more like a gerbil. He even sounds like what a gerbil would sound like if it spoke.

I think Styles is tiresome and the look is dumb, but who the fuck are these two scumbag shitheads who inspire terrorists who KILL people, to say anything about what a publication does?

Drag queens are nothing more than Gay Minstrels.

Does this Pommy munchkin have sex?

He's very plain compared to the other one±

They're not the only ones upset at Harry. Supposedly some trans,gender non conforming,nonbinary and others are also upset at him because he's getting praised by the media and put on the covers of magazines while they have not been and have been subjected to violence.

Harry looks like a cheeky little boy who is playing dress up with his mother's wardrobe. Nothing fashionable or edgy about it.

Are the days of otherworldly beautiful women on The covers of fashion magazines done with? This trend will kill some of the longest and most passionate threads of DL, the supermodel threads. Pharrell is on the cover of Allure this month. These men are fine and good, but they are no Gia Carangi!

I’m a millennial and I would say that, hands down, Harry Styles and Chris Evans are the two most common celebrity crushes among my female friends - and 95% of them would find that Liam Payne cheesecake nude way gayer than Harry in a ballgown.

Just bring back attractive men, even James Charles would have at least looked beautiful.

Why do conservatives act like they can't control any of this? First, there's already plenty of market for "manly men" and it's out there. Plus, if they're so hard up, there's plenty of money in conservative circles - start your own fashion and pop culture magazines and apply your "manly man" standard. Jesus.

Plus, they'll never be satisfied, because the REAL reason for paranoia is about a lack of "manliness" is decrease in working and middle class such that a substantive portion of "real men" have insecurity about being a "real man" because they don't feel in control of their destiny.

[quote]Plus, if they're so hard up, there's plenty of money in conservative circles - start your own fashion and pop culture magazines and apply your "manly man" standard. Jesus.

This is what is so pathetic about them. It's just like with Twitter. They're constantly screaming about "censorship" on there. Well now they have Parler and yet they're not fucking leaving Twitter. They announce they're going to Parler and still maintain a twitter account. Losers.

Harry knows his audience so he couldn't care less.

Saying that i don't think he looked good on the magazine. It was very random, just like they have a couple of dresses and make him wear them.

Being conservative is tough if you like anything remotely artistic. I remember some of them complainning about conservative writers didn't get any attention or awards (but the truth is the number of good conservative writers is pretty limited right now, specially if they are not genre writers).

And well, fashion never was conservative

Gimmicky. I'm whelmed.

As others have pointed out, acting as if all manliness has been wiped from the face of the earth because Styles was featured in a dress on a cover of Vogue is pretty dumb. With that said, it's hard to take any of these types of celebrities seriously when one questions whether it's done for publicity/attention/money-making or for actually being true to oneself. I don't think anyone these days really thinks Lady Gaga, parading around in weird clothes back in 2008-2011, was really expressing some deep-seeded part of her identity. She was acting like most younger people do, like a ding dong to get attention. Same with Styles running around in dresses. These aren't people expressing their femininity. They're dressing weird to get attention and to make a quick buck. And to be presenting any of this as part of a Trans Rights movement or equality, is a total bullshit. There is a big difference between Styles sitting around in some fancy ball gown and some young kid from an inner-city struggling with their identity. I'd actually take Vogue far more seriously if they wouldn't pander to these ridiculous celebrities whose only idea to be edgy or different is to wear clothing made out of meat or a guy in a dress.

At least Lady Gaga was always essentially a theatre kid, who turned her life and career into one great performance. As such her outrageous costumes were still in character, because she just has a theatralic personality. Harry Styles does not, if you ask me. He looks dressed up by his team of stylists and like he's afraid that if he's just himself and not edgy or artsy enough, it won't be enough to get recognition in the pop world.