This Side of the Pond

A young chap by the name of Harry Styles has found himself in hot water after appearing on the cover of this month’s Vogue in a dress. This, according to some people, is going to destroy the very concept of masculinity.

Now, I’m no fashionista, so I don’t really know what it means when someone wears a “periwinkle Gucci gown with slim black blazer,” but it does sound pretty fancy. And I will admit that it doesn’t seem like the sort of get-up that’s going to work up a ladder fixing a roof.

But I still have trouble with this claim for several reasons, the first of which is that Harry Styles is a pop star. He was at first a member of One Direction, a boy band that caused almost as many teen screeches as The Beatles, and is now a solo artist.

In the Venn diagram of fashion, this means he sits at the intersection of “needs to get everyone’s attention,” “has a lot of money” and “doesn’t spend much time on practical tasks.” We barely bat an eye when female stars swan around in suits made of meat – looking at you, Lady Gaga – and lycra onesies.

It shouldn’t be much of a surprise that the boys need to find their own way to stand out. A flannel shirt and jeans just isn’t going to cut it if the aim of your day is to attract paparazzi and walk red carpets, all in the name of ensuring you are as famous by bedtime as you were when you woke up.

Boy bands have tried various ways to achieve their own “look”, usually by wearing outfits that don’t quite match, but were also very clearly taken out of the same closet and look like they were set out neatly the night before by their mum to be worn for the family Christmas photo.

A lot of bands fall down the rabbithole of trying to make things match – you don’t have to look far through photos of NSYNC to find them in identical white shirts – but it rarely works. My favorite example of this is a band that never made it outside of Britain.

East 17 was named after a London postcode and featured four members who wanted you to think they’d do well in a bar fight. They wore what they seemed convinced was the typical uniform of working men from the east end in the 1990s, including tattoos, leather jackets, gold chains, t-shirts and even one or two photoshoots in tank tops and utility coveralls.

East 17 wanted you to think its members were straight from the working class side of London. Perhaps that’s exactly what they were at one point but, several successful albums later, it’s unlikely they were thinking of taking on a trucking route.

Maintaining their pre-fame image would have been more convincing if those coveralls hadn’t been pristine, or if they’d worn the kind of knock-off leather jackets you can pick up for ten bucks down the market, instead of the thousand-dollar designer version.

Also, the image did not necessarily jive with the music they were making, an issue that came to a head when their label insisted they release a Christmas song. It was, as you might expect, a ballad. It even featured the tinkle of church bells, for added festive effect.

In the accompanying video, East 17 tried to balance the “hard man” image with the soft and fluffy nature of Yule. Their answer to this conundrum was matching snuggly coats in pure white with fluffy hoods. They looked simply adorable.

I also object to the idea of Harry’s dress having much of an effect on masculinity because the true artists of the music world have never been shy about their clothing, and it’s never been a problem before. Perhaps the best example of this is both British and easy to describe as a genius.

I speak, of course, of the one and only David Bowie. From lightning bolts on his face to off-the-shoulder bodysuits and spiked hair with eye patches, there was a man who wasn’t afraid to express himself. He even wore a dress on the British cover of “The Man Who Sold the World” and, as far as I know, we haven’t been suffering a drought of manly men since 1970.

And finally, I object because the very idea of dresses being solely for the female form has only been around for a century or so. Skirts were standard dress in most of the ancient kingdoms, including on the Greek demigods, and we Europeans were fine with dudes in dresses right through to the Middle Ages.

King Henry VIII was a big fan of skirts, and I don’t think anyone was still wondering about his manliness by the time he got to wife six. The Scots would be horrified to have their masculinity questioned every time they wore a kilt – and if you’re still worried, these days you can get utility kilts with handy pouches for your tools.

It was only the Victorians who thought skirts were for girls, and that lot had funny ideas about almost everything. Since the 1960s, men have been trying to win back the right to enjoy a pleated dress, ranging from David Beckham’s famous sarong to Iggy Pop in his black skirt and handbag. Even Kanye West and Mick Jagger have been photographed in a dress, and French designer Jean-Paul Gaultier throws a few into almost every collection he makes.

Nope, I don’t agree that dresses are causing a decline in the world’s testosterone – if Harry wanted to skip through daisy fields in a tutu, why should it mean anything at all? I think the biggest danger we’re facing is that this trend might take off and I’ll have to share my wardrobe with the husband. He’s not shown the slightest interest, but I will be keeping an eye out, and I’m telling you right now that I’ll draw the line at sharing my high heels.