instagram | Introduction to Gender & Sexuality Studies

For https://www.autostraddle.com/

Do you ever see an ad and just think. . . an effort was made. Was it successful? Absolutely not. But the company tried. Is that always enough though? How close to a good amount of effort is close enough to accomplish the purpose? How far off does a company need to be to be ineffective? These are all questions I’ve been asking myself and my friends in regards to the “High Neck Longline Bra” from Girlfriend Collective that swept the media (well, swept my targeted ads on social media) a bit ago. This product is marketed as a supportive and compressive sports bra, but the caption on their Instagram ad, pictured below, is “Full coverage plus a layer of power mesh for extra support. *Wink*”. Yes, they wrote out the word wink in asterisks. No, I’m not sure why they didn’t just use a semicolon-parenthesis combo.

Girlfriend Collective [@girlfriend]. Picture of Instagram ad for Girlfriend Collective’s High Neck Longline Bra. *Instagram*.

If you’re in a pretty intense sport, you might look at this bra and see a good supportive bra. If you’re somewhere in the genderqueer category, you can squint a little bit and see a potential binder alternative. Not only is it possible, but this realization already happened very visibly in the comment section. This realization has both positive and negative side effects, as I’ll explain later. Below are some of the comments on this ad, with names and profile pictures marked out for privacy. My personal favorites are “Binder 💞light💞” and “besties this is a binder”.

*Screenshot of comments on Girlfriend Collective’s Instagram ad.* Girlfriend Collective [@girlfriend]. Picture of various comments on the ad above. *Instagram*.

These sorts of comments are harmless, or at least seem to be. Using sports bras as binders is not a new concept to people with breasts that do not identify as cisgender women. Buying actual binders can sometimes be inaccessible to people who might not be out to the people they live with. Many times, young people will bind unsafely with Ace bandages or sports tape instead of a binder to either avoid outing themselves or accommodate their financial situation. At times like these, it’s easier for someone to convince their parents to buy a sports bra over something marketed as a binder.

Does it actually work as a binder though? According to two of the TikToks I found, yes!! Isn’t that exciting? Accounts @salemnight (he/they) and @cowboinary (they/them) on TikTok both did reviews on the High Neck Longline Bra from Girlfriend Collective. Salem gave a holistic and visual review of how the bra looked in comparison to his other binders and bras as well as answering some common questions, while @cowboinary focused more on how the bra felt and compressed in comparison to their other binders. These TikToks I found after simply searching “girlfriend collective binder” can serve as an incredibly useful resource to young people or closeted people looking for binders that are accessible to them, as well as assuring people that it does actually work as a binder.

*Screenshot of comments on Girlfriend Collective’s Instagram ad.* Girlfriend Collective [@girlfriend]. Picture of an exchange in the comments of ad pictured above. *Instagram*.

However, the visibility and accessibility of this product might also serve as a detriment to its usefulness in some ways. Above, with names and profile pictures yet again blocked out for privacy, you can see an exchange between two users in the comments section of this Girlfriend Collective ad on Instagram. One person asks “WHY would you want a HIGH neck bra??” Another user responds explaining that it’s a binder, marketed as a sports bra “so those who are in the closet or in an unsafe environment to come out in can get one to help with dysphoria without outing themselves and risking harm”. The first user responds positively in a reply. However, imagine for a second that you’re a young trans man, looking for a way to convince your transphobic parents to buy you a binder or allow you to get one without coming out. They think it’s an odd request, to get a high neck bra, go onto Instagram, ask this question, and get a response that could potentially force you into an uncomfortable situation. This may or may not happen, but it’s not ideal, right?

The rise of social media and marketing on these platforms has resulted in a multitude of both problems and benefits. Benefit: people are funny in the comments of what, to them, is an obvious secret binder. Problem: the discrete nature of the marketing can be ruined by people thinking it’s funny. Benefit: TikTok provides a platform where multiple people can assure you in different ways that a product is going to work how it says it will. Problem: TikTok provides a platform that brings so much attention to a certain product that even a month later, most sizes are sold out (including my own, sadly). These pros and cons don’t necessarily cancel themselves out, but it’s an interesting and complex issue that companies who aim to produce these discrete products should consider.

So. With this High Neck Longline Bra ad, I just think. . . an effort was made. Was it successful? In my mind, partially. It’s rather expensive for an improper binder at $42, where there are other less expensive options. However, the brand is incredible with size-inclusivity and sustainability. The company tried. Is that always enough though? How close to discrete is close enough to accomplish this subtlety? How far off from discrete does the company need to be to have people aware that this is a secret binder? Is the *Wink* enough, or should they have just put a semicolon and a parenthesis? Many of these questions are unanswerable, as we don’t yet have enough experience with these hurdles (I really do think they should’ve just used a little 😉 though). These questions and conversations are important, regardless of our lack of answers, as our goal as consumers and producers of media should always be to learn more and adapt to the times. While we have these conversations around discrete marketing, I’ll be watching my email carefully for an update on when the bra/binders come back into stock. For, uh, research.

By Alice Berndt

Written for Jezebel

On November 13, 2020, jaws dropped and 1D fans swooned when the cover image for Vogue’s December issue was released. The shot features former boy bander and current pop sensation Harry Styles dressed in a black and white lace gown and black cropped blazer, his hair swept to the side in an intentionally effortless flop. He is the first man to appear solo on the cover of Vogue in 127 years. As the cover reads, “Harry Styles makes his own rules.” [Vogue]

Framed against a sprawling green meadow and clear blue sky, the British singer squints into the sunny distance. He holds a blue balloon to his lips, mid-blow, showing off an array of chunky rings, including one in the shape of an “H” and another in an “S.” The photo is iconically Harry — sexy, androgynous, playful, and edgy.

Since the beginning of One Direction’s seemingly eternal “hiatus” back in 2015, Styles has been making a name for himself as a solo pop rock artist. In addition to releasing hit singles like “Sign of the Times” and “Watermelon Sugar,” he has also become a fashion icon, breaking free from his 1D wardrobe of V-necks and skinny jeans and embracing more traditionally feminine styles like colorful blouses, bootcut pants, and dresses. For the most part, fans and the public have been accepting of his style transformation, which recalls music legends of the past including David Bowie and Prince. But for some, this Vogue cover took it a step too far.

In a move that sparked contentious debate, conservative commentator Candace Owens retweeted Vogue’s post on Styles’ cover shoot and wrote:

“There is no society that can survive without strong men. The East knows this. In the west, the steady feminization of our men at the same time that Marxism is being taught to our children is not a coincidence. It is an outright attack. Bring back manly men.”
[Twitter]

Yowza. Owens received immediate backlash from liberals, feminists, and Styles’ fans alike who claimed she was being sexist and close-minded. She was criticized for her assumption that masculinity and strength (or lack thereof) are directly connected to wardrobe — a man cannot be “manly” if he wears a dress.

This assumption stems from centuries of clothing acting as a marker of gender — men wear pants and women wear dresses and skirts. Period. But is Owens implying that the inverse is true as well — that women cannot be feminine if they wear pants? Certainly Owens herself has been spotted wearing pants on more than one occasion. Commentators wondered how an article of clothing could limit or “attack” masculinity and strength but not femininity or grace.

In a reclamation of Owens’ derogatory words, Styles posted an image to Instagram from his cover shoot with Variety and captioned the post “Bring back manly men.” The caption combined with the cheeky photo — Styles in a powder blue pantsuit eating a banana — pokes fun at his haters, addressing the situation while also making light of it.

Styles is certainly not the first celebrity to be criticized for their clothing choices, so why did this get so much attention? Perhaps because it’s far less common for a woman to publicly shame a man for his outfit than vice versa. We’re used to female celebrities being called out for “scandalous” or “overly sexy” clothing (Billie Eilish’s British Vogue cover, for example), but typically male celebrities wear what they want or what their stylists give them and that’s that. It also cannot be ignored that Styles has a massive fanbase that has grown alongside his career since the inception of One Direction in 2010 and is prepared to defend him regardless of the context.

In talking about gender and fans, we must engage in a conversation about privilege. A quote from Styles on the Vogue cover reads, “Anytime you’re putting barriers up in your life, you’re limiting yourself.” For Styles, a straight white male celebrity with a net worth of over $80 million, he has the comfort and freedom to express himself through his clothing without fear. [Vogue]

For many others, including female-identifying, LGBTQ+, and POC celebrities, what they wear is often the biggest target for ridicule, criticism, and objectification. These individuals must first break down the barriers placed in front of them by society before they can even consider those they may have built for themselves.

With that simple act of reclamation via his Instagram post, Styles had, in the minds of many, “won” the argument. For many others — celebrities or not — the complexities of how they use clothing to express themselves is a never-ending fight, both internally and externally. [Vogue]

Don’t get me wrong, I worship Harry Styles as much as the next Gen Zer and wouldn’t dare question his status as a cultural icon. As actress and director Olivia Wilde says of Styles, “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.” By breaking free from the societal binary of gendered clothing, Styles utilizes his privilege to pave the way for others. But his work is far from being done. [Vogue]