Benson Boone wears dress to tease new single

[Kayioshka 3,199]

1 hour ago, AVeryGagaHolyDick said:

Didn’t Harry Styles come out as bisexual?

According to Wikipedia he said in interview that he never felt the need to talk about his sexual orientation... I can understand it but in an other hand it’s ambiguous on purpose and we know that his fans ships him with Louis. If he's straight that is queerbaiting. 

[Petie Estie 5,695]

it's giving football players putting on lipstick and party city wigs for charity in 2004

[REALITY 80,010]

7 hours ago, Bronco said:

The thing is. 

We can't have it one way or the other. 

If we as a community attack people for dressing and behaving this way, we're contributing to the othering of the this kind of public appearance that makes it harder for queer people.

There is a reason why bigots & the right wing media latched onto discussions of queerbaiting over the last decade and used it to further their agenda of reestablishing social restrictions on this kind of self-expression. 

Personally, I'll always believe that queer-baiting discourse was a trojan horse tactic to get the community to endorse its own oppression.

But the thing is, when cisgender straight guys do it, it's rarely because they're allies and they want to "do some good" for the queer community. Benson Boone isn't doing it because he's a huge ally and wants to make a statement about how people can dress however they want without fear of repercussion. He's doing it because it's "funny HAHA HEHE look at this straight man in a dress! He's ~totally~ breaking gender norms >.<"

In an ideal world, people would dress however they want to. Any person should be allowed to express themselves in any matter without fearing for their lives or safety. But that is not the world we live in, and stunts like this aren't progressing us forward. They make a mockery out of queer people (whether that was Benson's intention or not), and it only shows us the hypocrisy that comes with it. Sam Smith can't do it because they're actually queer and non-binary and not "conventionally attractive." Benson can do it because he's a hot cisgender straight man whose presence in a dress doesn't inherently call to attention all the problems queer people have faced throughout history.

If the straights really want to do something about it, do it in earnest. ACTUALLY go out and start dressing "unconventionally." Make it a statement and educate people. Putting on a dress for a funny TikTok isn't activism or normalization. 

[Alxjcgn 2,156]

7 hours ago, Bronco said:

Personally, I'll always believe that queer-baiting discourse was a trojan horse tactic to get the community to endorse its own oppression.

I miss Androgyny lol 

[Bronco 23,324]

2 hours ago, REALITY said:

But the thing is, when cisgender straight guys do it, it's rarely because they're allies and they want to "do some good" for the queer community. Benson Boone isn't doing it because he's a huge ally and wants to make a statement about how people can dress however they want without fear of repercussion. He's doing it because it's "funny HAHA HEHE look at this straight man in a dress! He's ~totally~ breaking gender norms >.<"

I mean there's numerous rumours he's gay and keeping it private (despite his ex gf's attempts to change that).

And like I explicitly stayed he's not breaking gender norms in a different post in this thread so I do accept that. 

But, I don't personally think we can argue in favour of breaking gender norms and decoupling clothing from gender norms if we attack cisgendered people crossdressing. Because the only way to do so, is inherently creating an "other" status for crossdressing which personally defeats the idea of decoupling clothing from gender norms. 

So long as we create a pedestal and try to enforce standards of how to wear clothing we are enforcing a mandatory performativity on clothing which is no different to the clothing based gender norms we oppose. 

Like I fully agree it isn't activism whats happening here. But I am firmly of the view that activists aren't actually serving their envisioned aims in their response to it either. 

[REALITY 80,010]

18 minutes ago, Bronco said:

I mean there's numerous rumours he's gay and keeping it private (despite his ex gf's attempts to change that).

And like I explicitly stayed he's not breaking gender norms in a different post in this thread so I do accept that. 

But, I don't personally think we can argue in favour of breaking gender norms and decoupling clothing from gender norms if we attack cisgendered people crossdressing. Because the only way to do so, is inherently creating an "other" status for crossdressing which personally defeats the idea of decoupling clothing from gender norms. 

So long as we create a pedestal and try to enforce standards of how to wear clothing we are enforcing a mandatory performativity on clothing which is no different to the clothing based gender norms we oppose. 

Like I fully agree it isn't activism whats happening here. But I am firmly of the view that activists aren't actually serving their envisioned aims in their response to it either. 

To your first sentence, those are just rumors. He may or may not be gay; we don't know. But as far as the general public knows, he's a cisgender straight man, and that's what I'm going to assume he is until he confirms otherwise.

The problem isn't the fact that he is crossdressing. The problem, in my opinion, is the intent behind it. And I do believe that makes a world of difference. I understand your points, but when the intention is to mock and make fun, I think the whole argument of "We should let cisgender straight people also participate in 'crossdressing'" becomes more and more moot. Again, they're not doing it as a statement or to break gender norms. They're doing it because they're making fun of us, and I don't accept that. 

I'm not saying that cisgender straight people shouldn't crossdress or shouldn't be more evocative with their outfits and gender expression. I think we should learn to normalize these sorts of things, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. It just promotes harmful stereotypes and hypocritical thinking. 

[JohnPokerface 407]

I'm not getting authenticity from this, very much forced and kinda cringe. 

[Bronco 23,324]

1 minute ago, REALITY said:

Again, they're not doing it as a statement or to break gender norms.

2 minutes ago, REALITY said:

I understand your points,

See, I don't think you do.

Because my point specifically is that by stating this kind of behaviour should only be allowed when meeting criteria is actively harmful in my viewpoint. 

It doesn't do anything to fight gender norms, it actively entrenches them and consigns queerness to a predefined and rules based third category. Which is inherently harmful to improving acceptance of queerness and actively eroding gender norms. 

We've spent years enforcing this kind of entry criteria to crossdressing. And it is now actively blowing up in our face, because we failed to erode norms and actively entrenched them while establishing a third category. By establishing that third category and enforcing gender performativity, we've created the weaponry the far right is using to reinforce their stranglehold over social identity and hierarchy. 

Do I wish Benson would make his politics clearer when doing stunts like this? Yes. But I think creating clear social delineation between right & wrong ways of doing this, we're aiding the oppressors who use these defined boundaries to establish control.

Its no different to when people within the community demand masculinity of trans men or feminity of trans women as part of transitioning. Or insist that trans men have cisgendered male privilege. We're forcing our queerness to accept the boundaries of our own oppression. 

[VelvetVenus 87]

Very Harry Styles of him. He is fcking hot though 

[REALITY 80,010]

2 hours ago, Bronco said:

See, I don't think you do.

Because my point specifically is that by stating this kind of behaviour should only be allowed when meeting criteria is actively harmful in my viewpoint. 

It doesn't do anything to fight gender norms, it actively entrenches them and consigns queerness to a predefined and rules based third category. Which is inherently harmful to improving acceptance of queerness and actively eroding gender norms. 

We've spent years enforcing this kind of entry criteria to crossdressing. And it is now actively blowing up in our face, because we failed to erode norms and actively entrenched them while establishing a third category. By establishing that third category and enforcing gender performativity, we've created the weaponry the far right is using to reinforce their stranglehold over social identity and hierarchy. 

Do I wish Benson would make his politics clearer when doing stunts like this? Yes. But I think creating clear social delineation between right & wrong ways of doing this, we're aiding the oppressors who use these defined boundaries to establish control.

Its no different to when people within the community demand masculinity of trans men or feminity of trans women as part of transitioning. Or insist that trans men have cisgendered male privilege. We're forcing our queerness to accept the boundaries of our own oppression. 

I do understand your point, but we're coming from different places. I don't believe my saying that cisgender straight men shouldn't mockingly crossdress is reinforcing gender norms. 

If he, or anyone else, is going to crossdress, just do it. I'm not necessarily saying that you have to proclaim something profound to the world every time you do it. The simple act of doing it is enough to help erode those gender stereotypes and norms that we, as queer people, have fought against for so long. My issue is that making a mockery out of it—which is what I believe Benson did in this specific scenario—is actively harmful. That probably wasn't his intention, but in my view, that's how it comes across.

And to that point, flippantly doing something like that is actually what the far right uses as weaponization against queer people. Quite frankly, I don't think the far right is thinking that deep. They see any deviation from heteronormative society as sinful and bad, regardless of intent. You could be the most progressive ******* in the world or the most conservative/"I'm not like other gays" gay, but at the end of the day, they'll come for all of us.

I also don't think this is anything like wanting trans men to be masculine or trans women to be feminine. I don't believe trans men or trans women need to present masculine or feminine, respectively. But the fact that they are trans means they have an inherent understanding of queerness that Benson does not. Now, I'm not saying that you need to have an understanding of queerness to crossdress, but it certainly does not help when you're a straight white cisgender man who's frivolously crossdressing when there are actual queer people who don't have the same luxury. 

[Ladle Ghoulash 49,927]

23 hours ago, elijahfan said:

Don't forget the A in LGBTQIA+.

Doesn’t the A stand for “asexual?”

[Ladle Ghoulash 49,927]

3 hours ago, Bronco said:

it actively entrenches them and consigns queerness to a predefined and rules based third category.

Genuinely the best way I’ve seen anyone explain this. Queerness, by and large, has to do with existing and acting outside of cisheteronormativity and that phenomena is as much about how that person’s behavior is seen by that world as much as it has to do with how a person identifies. Kind of reminds me of the hubbub surrounding Maddy Morphosis being a straight cis male drag queen and people saying because he doesn’t identify as a member of the community, he has no place in the drag world when, in reality, regardless of his gender identity or sexual orientation, the act of cross dressing or doing drag as a cis straight man is a queer act precisely because the cisheteronormative gaze *sees* it that way.

Also, queer theory aside: I do just think people being able to play with gender expression, clothes, fashion etc. should just be broadly permissible. With Boone or Styles, even if both are straight, I do also think it’s valid for straight cis guys to peacock and play with gender even if it’s for the female gaze. Just because something’s flamboyant doesn’t mean it’s always intended to be for gay or queer people.

[Ceres 3,326]

but WHY does it sound like KATY singing??? lolol

[chathonnete 1,007]

Yet if a real LGBT artist such as Troye does it he gets bashed

[NewEnglandWitch 14]

6 hours ago, chathonnete said:

Yet if a real LGBT artist such as Troye does it he gets bashed

Which is why we should not have any gate keeping about who can or can’t dress and act flamboyantly. Gate keeping it only perpetuates that crime