noahfence1d

[noahfence1d]

The fact that this could be referring to several fandoms that I watch is kind of horrifying. That being said - I kind of hope this is true, that someone is actively trying to shut down the out of control toxicity and conspiracy theory-led harassment that extends beyond just the principals involved but into any and all acquaintances and business associates. It’s just beyond the pale. 

#kinda wish it wasn't actor/actress but *musician*

[noahfence1d]

It’s hard to go anywhere without encountering Harry Styles’ unparalleled, experimental, and often ‘70’s-inspired fashion sense. Whether someone is most familiar with Styles’ boy-band-cutie era or as an innovator in modern menswear, one can definitively say that the musician often lives up to his surname. Styles’ outfits at his most recent appearance at the 2021 GRAMMY Awards do not disappoint, as he continues to move fashion in a more gender-fluid direction.

Styles opened the award show wearing a full leather Gucci suit, which he accessorized with a light green feather boa — but his best look of the night was arguably the yellow plaid blazer and purple feather boa combination he wore to the red carpet. While Styles’ Grammy fashion may not have been as “groundbreaking” and controversial as some of his previous looks, such as his historic solo appearance on the Dec. 2020 cover of Vogue, he wore bright-colored boas, a piece of clothing most often associated with femininity. Nevertheless, it is hard to separate the fashion from the political statement it is inherently making.

The firmly established gender binary in fashion means that when men like Styles wear historically “feminine” clothing, it undoubtedly creates controversy (the dictionary definition for the word “dress” even states that it is an “outer garment for women and girls”). From his floral-print suits to his custom Gucci dress and newfound obsession with boas, Styles has consistently mixed elements of both masculinity and femininity into his sense of style, challenging the gender binary that many of his peers uphold. But why has Harry Styles since become the poster child for challenging toxic masculinity?

While Styles does bring necessary attention to the issue of toxic masculinity, particularly in regard to fashion, his position of privilege in society as a white man means that he takes up more space than the queer people of color who developed the fashion he now wears. Additionally, Styles’ refusal to put a label on his sexuality allows him to benefit from Black and queer culture for his aesthetic in a way that can be reckless and extremely damaging, while still being able to benefit from the privileges of being perceived as a straight. While labels are by no means necessary when it comes to sexuality and gender identity, as a highly influential and powerful public figure, Styles’ perceived distance from the queer community can allow his highly impressionable fan base to appropriate Black and queer culture without acknowledging its pioneers.

By centering Harry Styles, a white man, in the fight against toxic masculinity, we begin to celebrate white celebrities who present as existing beyond the gender binary at the expense of Black, Indigenous, and people of color. Styles’ androgynous sense of style is being held as the default while erasing and ignoring the existence of BIPOC individuals who have been doing the same thing for decades — such as Prince, Jamie Windust, Little Richard, Hari Nef, Lenny Kravitz, Alok V Menon, and Lil Nas X, to name a few.

Because the media has often tokenized queerness, the praise that Styles receives for his sense of style outside of the confines of the gender binary conveys the message that if you are white, straight-passing, famous, and conventionally attractive then you can dress in a gender-nonconforming way on the red carpet of an award show without worrying about becoming the next victim of a hate crime as many queer or nonbinary, especially Black gender non-conforming and transgender folk, have to worry about in their day-to-day lives.

Styles’ fashion sense can no longer be recklessly praised for pushing toward the abolition of gender norms and toxic masculinity. As stylish as Harry Styles may be, we must recognize that the gender binary itself is a tool of white supremacy and colonial violence, and must begin to move beyond putting cisgender white men, such as Styles, on a pedestal for doing what other celebrities — especially BIPOC and queer celebrities — have been doing for decades.

#white privilege #toxic masculinity #Harry Styles

[noahfence1d]

#to read

[noahfence1d]

I mean... this article isn’t wrong. (Aside from a few things a fact checker should have verified like dates and ages of the parties mentioned.)

#Olivia Wilde #Harry Styles #Don't Worry Darling #Kristin Stewart #the journo used to be editor in chief at Billboard so he's no hack tabloid journo

[noahfence1d]

hi. i wanted to ask whether or not it’s ok to take comfort in a person that has not officially come out as trans but has included many forms of gender expression in their work? i’m trans and when i listened to this artist’s work (harry styles - she & fine line) i connected with the songs immediately? i found a lot of people in the community who too connected to the songs and interpreted the lyrics as a struggle with one’s gender identity. at first i was against calling harry trans because i thought it was wrong, but then after reading master posts i discovered that he constantly portrays gender in his work (using the trans flag on his album cover; being ok with his friends referring to him with she/her, miss, ‘sue’ instead of ‘harry’, and sis; his obsession with babies and especially wanting to get pregnant; relating himself only to female artists; etc.) and now i’m really confused. it feels comforting as a fan to relate to him and i, and a lot of other fans from the community, sometimes refer to him with he/she/they instead of he/him (he never said his pronouns are he/him). is that wrong? every time my (trans) friends and i refer to him with pronouns other than he/him or tell people not to assume he’s cis as he never specified that, other (usually cis. a trans fan called me transphobic and told me to stop seeking validation from cis white men.) fans will start calling us transphobic and delusional and attacking us to the point we had anxiety attacks over it? i’m just really confused right now. i don’t want to misgender anyone but i don’t understand why relating to someone who, from their actions, could be part of the community is wrong. i’m not out to anyone irl and sometimes i wish people caught on to the little things i do and recognise that i am part of the community. i don’t understand why people keep shutting down the idea the harry could be trans when he never said he was cis and was ok being referred to as she.

he has previously said that there are no lines between what's masculine and what's feminine for him anymore. i'm sorry this is so long and thank you

(You also sent in the song lyrics - thanks for the easy reference! - but I’m clipping those for length reasons.)

Disclaimer before I dig in: I am not a Harry Styles stan, I know very little about him, most of what I am going to say specifically about him is stuff I researched about specifically to answer this ask. I want to speak mostly generally to your question.

Okay, so you posed a pretty succinct, straight forward question. “i wanted to ask whether or not it’s ok to take comfort in a person that has not officially come out as trans but has included many forms of gender expression in their work?“ However, there’s also a lot of context to this ask that makes things not so straight forward, and there are several distinct issues touched upon here I want to delve into. But it seems a good a starting place as any to start with the direct question you asked.

Yes, of course it’s okay to find your own meaning in art and role models and relate to art your way from your perspective based on your experience. In fact, that’s nearly the entire purpose of art! And it makes sense too, that we as social creatures would look up to and be inspired by celebrities, artists, mentors, role models, etc. Feeling connected to and less alone because someone in the spotlight plays with gender presentation like you might or want to makes a lot of sense!

However, we have to remember that A) sometimes art is just art, and B) someone being in the spotlight doesn’t mean we actually know or understand them or are/should act familiar with them.

As an example, a couple years back, Will Jay released a song called “Never Been in Love” that pretty much exploded with aros and aces and became a bit of an anthem for a lot of us. Many wondered if he was aspec himself and there was a lot of queries about it (and I saw quite a few blogs reminding folk that they were allowed to relate to the song even if it meant something different to Will Jay or he wasn’t actually aspec). Earlier this year, he released the song “Lies” where he admits that he was writing songs he thought people would relate to and he actually had been in love even before writing “Never Been In Love”. That should do nothing to diminish how meaningful the song was to people, though! If we related to the song, we related to the song, and if it was meaningful and made us feel seen and understood, that’s great! A lot of times, art is personal, but sometimes art is just an exploration.

This concept applies even more to people themselves. It is soooo easy to idolize and romanticize people you’ve never actually met and really only see the persona they want you to see. Yes, they share personal information with the world and they experience a general lack of privacy that makes you feel like yeah, you really know who they are. But how can you really, personally, intimately know someone without interacting with them, chatting with them, getting to know them one on one? It’s fine to have role models and feel represented by and relate to a celebrity - just do not lose sight of the fact that what you’re feeling is personal feeling on your own end. It’s not something that this celebrity has actually built with you.

To put this another way: it is fine to headcanon fictional characters, but it’s not okay to headcanon real people.

Now, what I’m building up to here is that there are a lot of assumptions I am seeing - from both sides - that we cannot truly know because all we know is what Harry [or anyone] chooses to share with us. I’d like to break this down by going through some specific points.

at first i was against calling harry trans because i thought it was wrong

Okay, there are two sides to this.

1) It is wrong to apply a gender label/descriptor to someone without their permission.

2) In a cisnormative society, “cis” is the default gender label/descriptor to apply to everyone, and that’s equally wrong, so I get why it feels like a rebellion of the system to go “well, there are Reasons they could be trans, so I’m just going to go ahead and call them trans”.

We should get away from automatically labeling everyone as “cis”. However, the way we fix this isn’t to just decide we get to apply whatever label/descriptor to someone we want.

If someone hasn’t clarified or specified their gender (and you can’t/it isn’t a good or safe idea to ask them), it’s the safest bet to go by what they seem to be majority being called or what you can find of them referring to themself as.

In some cases, when someone seems to be specifically avoiding labeling themselves or uncomfortable with labeling themselves, it may be most comfortable for you to also avoid labeling them just as much as possible.

being ok with his friends referring to him with she/her, miss, ‘sue’ instead of ‘harry’, and sis; his obsession with babies and especially wanting to get pregnant; relating himself only to female artists; etc.)

It’s worth considering - is this something for friends only? Or is it open to fans and other public sectors?

Usually if something is for friends only, it’ll be kept out of public eye, but if only friends are doing this, is this something that is only being shared with you or is it something you’re entitled to as well?

Aaaaaaaaalso, it has to be pointed out that it’s binarist and cisnormative in it’s own way to equate different names/pronouns automatically with being trans or being a specific trans identity. Wanting to get pregnant? Do you know how many cis women I’ve heard go on and on about wanting a penis so they can pee standing up (like... all of them anytime we’re outside or camping)? Plenty of cis people use pronouns you might not expect! You don’t have to be trans/nonbinary to use multiple or ‘atypical’ pronouns. Cis people are allowed to use other pronouns as well! They’re allowed to have names typically associated with other genders! Not all gender nonconforming or genderqueer people/people queering gender are trans! Not everybody exploring their gender nor gender presentation is trans!

not to assume he’s cis as he never specified that

It’s great to not assume someone is cis! But that doesn’t automatically make them trans.

i don’t want to misgender anyone but i don’t understand why relating to someone who, from their actions, could be part of the community is wrong.

Do you specifically, absolutely need to gender someone in order to relate to them?

i don’t understand why people keep shutting down the idea the harry could be trans when he never said he was cis and was ok being referred to as she.

I’ve only recently seen a tiny bit of this ‘discourse’ around on twitter, but what I see is a few issues/points:

A) It’s not up to us to claim someone as trans if they have not come out as trans. Coming out is an extremely personal choice and should be up to each individual. “Claiming” them is basically dragging them into something that very well may be not theirs. And if it is theirs, why would you want to steal that moment of getting to determine and declare that away from them?

B) We are all so done with cis, able-bodied white folk being prioritized above the rest of the queer community!!! There are actual, legitimate, out trans people that can be your trans role models and they’re being shoved to the back of the closet in favor of a privileged, white Schrödinger’s Trans. Let’s uplift our actual community instead of getting stuck on someone who may or may not be a part of community - and may not even want to be a part of it!

All that being said, I do want to say something really quickly on Harry himself because it ties back into the assumptions we’ve been talking about. Harry’s sexuality has long been a question on fans and journalists minds, and Harry has pretty consistently made it clear that he’s not really interested in labels or boxes. Harry’s gender is not something that has been asked about, talked about, or answered on much. And his comment on masculinity and femininity? Let’s remember that, like pronouns, masculinity and femininity don’t automatically or inherently relate to one specific gender or not. And, quite frankly, it is faucet of toxic masculinity and cissexism to equate a gnc man/man in a dress with being trans. Men are allowed to wear dresses and makeup and heels! Men are allowed to be soft and nurturing and to cry! Cis or trans, men are allowed to be these things, and arguing that they’re trans simply for doing or being any of these does continue to enforce dangerous and strict views of the gender binary.

Okay, it feels like I kinda put you through the wringer, so I want to go back and reiterate: it is 100% valid to relate to and feel connected to/inspired by someone on the basis of their presentation and gender exploration. It is not valid to claim ownership over their identity because of this. It is possible for two people to experience same or similar things and yet come to different conclusions about themselves!

If Harry Styles as an icon is important to you, I’m glad you can have that! But not everyone will or has to share your connection, and the only one actually qualified to speak on Harry’s gender is Harry himself. Harry could be trans, but it’s his right and his right only to claim that label. Any assuming we do is just that: an assumption. And I want you to be careful with your own feelings getting too attached to the image of Harry you’ve built up in your own head only to potentially have them shattered if Harry decides to speak on things and it turns out his feelings don’t mean what you thought.

Your identity is valid regardless of how Harry Styles feels or identifies. You feeling validated and seen and represented by Harry’s actions is valid regardless of how Harry Styles feels or identifies. It’s great to have role models and be inspired by people, but remember that at the end of the day, you need to be able to rely on yourself to keep up your ego and determine your sense of self.

~Pluto

[noahfence1d]

I get that harry has been sexualized, and it’s awful that it happened to him so young, but he clearly encourages it now. it’s part of his marketing. if he was uncomfortable with his sex symbol status, he wouldn’t make blatant sexual songs and even more sexual videos. also, harry doesn’t even go on social media, so who are those thirst tweets hurting? It just feels misogynistic to tell women that they can’t feel and express sexual attraction to a man

let’s try this again: just because someone is incorporating their sex life in their art, it doesn’t give strangers a free pass to insert themselves in that person’s sex life. put yourself in harry’s position. how would you like it if people you don’t know started continuously talking about how much they want to fuck you and detailing just how they want to do it. even if you didn’t see everything that was said, i’m sure just the thought of it would make most people highly uncomfortable. no ones saying women can’t be attracted to harry; he’s an attractive person. what isn’t okay is objectifying him and treating him like he’s yours to talk about in that way. what isn’t okay is groping him when he’s on stage singing a fucking song. what isn’t okay is photoshopping him in between your thighs and tagging him in that photo. what isn’t okay is acting like his songs about sex are written about his feelings toward the listener and using it to justify those actions.

women have been expressing their attractions towards all members of one direction for years but the way harry is treated has always been worse. just because he talks about his sex life doesn’t mean he’s encouraging you to become part of it. don’t get it twisted.

read this ask that @aliensyndrome answered. she articulated my thoughts in more detail but this should not be an if/but situation. harry styles has been sexualized since he was a child and there are no ifs and buts following that sentence. end of. 

[noahfence1d]

Honestly, I get really confused when Larries always say H hates being sexualized. If you look at it from an objective point of view, it is very clear that H and his team are using a "sex sells" marketing strategy. He's not uncomfortable being sexualized because that it literally part of their promo plan. Sex attracts attention. Hshq is using sex in their marketing to create an effective and memorable campaign and it's working. He literally advertised the album as being about being sad & sex. 1/2

“He did nude photoshoots. His music videos for lights up and WS obviously rely on the sex angle. If he built his whole image on sex appeal, then why blame harries for sexualizing him? They are doing exactly what hshq wants them to do. Them thirsting over him makes them keep streaming and giving him views. People are hardwired to notice sexually relevant information so it’s smart of his team to use that to their advantage to keep him relevant. Everyone else can see it except for larries. 2/2 + Harry never said he was uncomfortable being sexualized. He doesn’t care because it helps his career and he loves the attention. He said he was uncomfortable thinking about being seen as a sex symbol because it’s a weird thing to think about yourself but he didn't say anything about being sexualized. Anyway, actions speak louder than words, and his PR is all about catering to to people’s sexual fantasies so I think he's more than okay with it”

I’m choosing to answer this because there is.... a lot to unpack here. To start, i’m incredibly sick of seeing people pretending that “sexuality,” and “sex appeal” are the same thing as “sexualization” especially when it refers to hypersexualization. it’s not and it never has been. you can find someone attractive and have that person perform sexuality, at any level, and still not display sexualization of this person. it’s not a complicated concept. there are many facets of harry’s life that has been built to fit a lothario image that does drive off the hyper-sexualization of him as an image and a person, but it goes beyond just his team using it for fan? engagement? the media has perpetuated it as well since he was 16 years old (a child). past “girlfriends” have perpetuated it when their relationships end. talk show hosts like ellen and james corden would consistently push this angle regardless of whether or not they were friends. red carpet reporters have asked these questions directly to his face. past models who have worked with him in any capacity have helped this narrative along by moaning his name and sexualizing him. ben winston has no problem feeding into it. there’s branches that split from the whole that has fed into this goliath image that has been sexualized for ten years of his life.

and you think...... he’s comfortable with that? you think he likes that he can stand next to any woman and be plagued with stories about fucking them? you think he thrives off the fact that every part of who he is and what his body looks like is constantly on parade when tied to this image? you think he doesn’t care that much of the GP and those in the industry think he’s incredibly easy and will sleep with anyone and anything so long as he gives them a smile? you think he thought it was funny when he was visibly uncomfortable having howard stern ask if he wanted to fuck his therapist because she was a woman? you think he enjoys the fact that he has to watch out who he’s around or even nice to because so many have gone to papers or online and fabricated stories about sex or relationships for clout attached to his name? you think it makes him laugh when people talk about his sex life and publications like GQ pushed him to tell them how many people he’s slept with as a 19 yr old? you don’t think he cares that he’s lost a lot of his youth and control of his image due to sexualizing tycoons?

you also confuse me with the points you made about him playing into a hypersexualized image. you use examples that are so highly misconstrued it feels detached in every way. he didn’t do nude photo shoots. he did one photoshoot that featured a nude and the nude was not in any way put on display as an act of sexual fodder. it was sensual. it was fragile. it was soft. it was a piece of art and seeing as how you didn’t see it that way only falls more on you than it does anyone else. you can be nude and do that without inviting in ideas of sexualization. nothing about that photo screams sex appeal. regarding the music videos..... congratulations, you missed the entire point again. the Lights Up music video was meant to depict his experience with fame and sexualization. those pulling at him from all angles represents everyone wanting a piece of him as he just wants to exist. how his career and life since he was 16 was built off never being his own— he’s always been “on display” for everyone else. he not once touched any of the models, and he ended up riding away from it all at the end of the video finally free. even when talking to radio hosts about the video he touched on how personal that song was to him. yet the media and fans alike drew it differently and labeled it a sex orgy lmao. and with WS..... it’s the media that first drew the hyped up sexual energy tied to that song. the blatant headlines about oral sex which then hyped up fans. yes, they used the video to display oral sex but nothing about that video was sexualized in a way that would’ve been expected. the ones that have a right to be upset about the WS video are wlw because of how it could go about sexualizing the WOMEN not harry.

so again, stop pretending like sexuality and sex appeal is anything like sexualization. it isn’t, and just because something or someone portrays him in a “sexy” light doesn’t mean it’s okay or even appropriate to sexualize or objectify him based on that. olympic swimmers can be pictured as sexy because of the tight clothing, built bodies, and athleticism but that doesn’t green light sexualization of them. antoni porowski can show off his body and pose sensually (even sexually) and that doesn’t mean it gives you the okay to objectify him and his body. i theorize a big reason why harry is often seen in baggier clothes now, beyond his fashion sense, is because without showing any discernible part of his body, it stops those from sexualizing him on his off time. so, has HSHQ used his already laden image and sexuality to push further into this sexualization? yes. has fans been conditioned to think of him sexually because of this ingrained narrative? of course. but does that mean we’re all lab rats being fed what they want and we have no say or conscious decision in the matter? no.

many artists use sexuality and sex appeal in their art and images. men, women, non-binary folk etc., etc. but that doesn’t mean they love being sexualized or have no qualms about it. take for example, halsey. she’s never been shy or against showing her sexuality and sensuality in her work, music, and persona. does that make it okay to objectify and sexualize her just because she does that? of course not. do you hear how you sound when you say these things? it’s very concerning. i’m sick of people wanting justifications for sexualizing artists— especially harry. if this was a woman, this argument for or against sexualization wouldn’t even exist. but since it’s harry it’s okay? i’m so tired of it.

[noahfence1d]

How is it that Harry Styles is the only one touring this summer?

His North American tour starts in 24 days. No one can get a refund, people made travel plans and from HSHQ? Crickets.

No other artist has this kind of arrogance. This is truly unconscionable:

JUN 26, 2020 - WELLS FARGO CENTER PHILADELPHIA, PA

JUN 28, 2020 - CAPITAL ONE ARENA WASHINGTON, D.C.

JUN 30, 2020 - CENTRE BELL MONTREAL, QC

JUL 3 & 4, 2020 - SCOTIABANK ARENA TORONTO, ON

JUL 6/7/8, 2020 - MADISON SQUARE GARDEN NEW YORK

JUL 10, 2020 - TD GARDEN BOSTON, MA

Sorry. But this is bullshit. Respect your fans. Barely THREE WEEKS AWAY.

#Love on Tour 2020 #Harry Styles #this is honestly the most utterly arrogant and tone deaf thing I have ever seen #HSHQ #Jeff Azoff #Full Stop Management #do your fucking job #and don't come into my inbox defending this #Harry can't manage to reschedule LIKE EVER OTHER ARTIST OUT THERE? #bullshit

[noahfence1d]

Rachael Mrocka - the complaint that she got called out by Harry for doing “NOTHING”.

[noahfence1d]

[noahfence1d]

#@latimes on instagram

[noahfence1d]

Phan, Dan and Phil were a long term conspiracy. They admitted that they were real.

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt, anon. But I think you don’t understand what Conspiracy Theory means.

There was no great conspiracy theory behind Phan in the way of all the others I have outlined. It was ongoing speculation, accusations, and highly invasive detective-work done by fans in a vast effort to OUT THEM. Phan did not claim to be in relationships with others, nor did they try and deflect the attention by faking other relationships. Phan were preserving their privacy – that’s literally it.

Where, in other true conspiracy theories relating to others, there is always THE BIG BAD – aka The Powers That Be (TPTB) – that is strictly enforcing this “closet” or other form of concealing the reality of their romantic situation via literally illegal means – the key being that the main characters (because let’s be real – they are viewed as mere fictional characters than actual humans) are being FORCED to continue the charade and are desperate to escape the cage they are in due to various evil manipulations by those who want to… destroy true love? (honestly, I don’t even know anymore)

Examples? (these are just a few off the top of my head)

Faked birth certificates (which, ya know… illegal and a felony – “GIVE ME THE DNA TEST!” is a frequently repeated cry): Louis Tomlinson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Jensen Ackles, Jared Padalecki, Armie Hammer, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

Hired/fake children OR hidden children (CHILDREN!!! – “SHE WAS NEVER PREGNANT!” is a frequently repeated cry): Benedict Cumberbatch, Kristen Stewart, J2, Louis Tomlinson, Catriona Balfe/Sam Heughan,  Prince Harry & Meghan ,

FAKE MARRIAGES (seriously…): Catriona Balfe, Darren Criss, Karlie Kloss, Benedict Cumberbatch, Prince Harry & Meghan

Statements that they are not a couple/that they are not gay/that the conspiracy theories are FALSE: I mean… all of them… Louis Tomlinson, Sam Heughan, Darren Criss, Chris Colfer, Taylor Swift, Jamie Dornan… the list goes on.

That being said, there is also AMPLE evidence that this kind of speculation is HARMFUL. And NOT WELCOME. So, is the point of the speculation, accusations and detective-work to prove that you are RIGHT? Or is it that you are just kind of a shit invasive fan who has no boundaries and treat the people you profess to admire like paper dolls to be manipulated for your pleasure? Because these are real people, anon. They don’t welcome it.

I’ll leave it with a few quotes, though there are many, many more. Feel free to add to this post, because I am sure all of you that read this, who are NOT tinhat conspiracy theorists, have loads more.

“Aggressively speculating or trying to out someone is really bad. They might not be gay, in which case, we’re just harassing someone and probably stereotyping, and if they are, there’s gonna be a reason why they haven’t talked about it.”  - Dan Howell June 2019

“….because you never quite become ok with people sexualizing you and your friendships for their sick pleasure….” - Lauren Jauregui 2017

“I’d like for you to stop accusing all my friends of dating me.” Taylor Swift 2014

[noahfence1d]

With his movie star looks and rock star mystique, it’s no surprise that Harry Styles is enjoying the greatest solo success out of all his One Direction bandmates. Yet his second album also confirms him as the quirkiest of the quintet. There has been no drive for big pop bangers, trendy trap beats or headline-grabbing collaborations. Instead he has tried to make music he actually likes.

With a team of LA-based writers and producers, he concocts charming offbeat ditties that glow with California sunshine, all melody, harmony and colourful, imagistic lyrics that don’t give much away. Styles claims the songs are all about “having sex and feeling sad”, yet they are jammed with so many references to strawberries, watermelon, sunflowers and cherries it could be a concept album about a visit to an organic Beverly Hills greengrocer.

His songs are charming but inconsequential, resolutely old-fashioned, drawing influences from offbeat singer-songwriters of a certain vintage. The playfulness of Harry Nilsson, whimsy of Paul McCartney and wayward soulfulness of Van Morrison all come to mind, with the proviso that Styles is not in their league. Acoustic guitars and pianos mingle with thick keyboards and live percussion, and an occasional burst of rocking electric solos. Styles picks up a dulcimer for Canyon Moon, a song that apes early Joni Mitchell, albeit without her intellectual rigour.

Fine Line favours touchy-feely sensuality (“The world’s happy waiting/ Doors yellow, broken, blue”) and catch-all choruses (“I’m going, oh I’m going, I’m going, oh I’m going, I’m going, oh I’m going home”), interspersed with the kind of obscure personal references that, bereft of context, remain opaque to the listener: “I heard Jenny saying/ Go get the kids from school” is a line tossed into Canyon Moon without a hint of who Jenny or the kids might be.

From Father John Misty to Weyes Blood, there are way more interesting singer-songwriters than Styles mining the musical seams of classic Americana, but few of them have the attention of a mass, mainstream, young pop audience. If all that Fine Line achieves is to open up new directions for his One Direction fan base, it will have justified its existence.

#fine line reviews #Harry Styles

[noahfence1d]

When Harry Styles played the O2 Arena in 2018, his fans illuminated the cavernous venue in the colours of the LGBTQ Pride flag. Coordinated by a social media account called The Rainbow Project, each seating block was allocated a different colour, so that when Styles played the song Sweet Creature, an enormous rainbow emerged from the crowd. I was there, and it was pretty magical. But it was also emblematic of how Styles’s fanbase views their idol: as a queer icon. 

There’s arguably never been a better time to be an LGBTQ pop star. Acts such as Sam Smith, who came out as non-binary earlier this year, Lil Nas X, the first gay man to have a certified diamond song in America, Halsey, queer boyband Brockhampton, pansexual singer Miley Cyrus and Kim Petras, who is transgender, have all enjoyed an incredible year, bagging the biggest hits of 2019.

Still, when Styles shared Lights Up, the lead single from his forthcoming second solo album Fine Line, there was a collective intake of breath. The song and video - in which he appears shirtless in what looks like a sweaty orgy as both men and women grab at him - was heralded as a “bisexual anthem” by the media and fans on Twitter, despite not really making any explicit or obvious statements about sexuality or the LGBTQ community. Instead, Lights Up was just another example of the queer mythologising that occurs around Harry Styles.

As a member of One Direction, Styles was – aside from Zayn Malik – the group’s most charismatic and enticing member. From his first audition on The X Factor to the band’s disbandment in 2015, the teenager from Cheshire managed to elevate himself and his celebrity swiftly rose to the A list. Helping him along was speculation about his private life: during his tenure in the band he was romantically linked to everyone from Taylor Swift to Kendall Jenner.

But there were two other rumoured relationships that dogged Styles more than the others. The first was his close friendship with radio DJ Nick Grimshaw. Styles and Grimshaw were often photographed together, and there were anodyne showbiz reports about how they even shared a wardrobe. 

Inevitably, rumours suggested they were romantically linked. In fact, so prolific was speculation that during an interview with British GQ, Styles was asked point blank if he was in a relationship with Grimshaw (he denied any romantic relationship) and, in a move that upset many One Direction fans, if he was bisexual. “Bisexual? Me?” he responded.  “I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure I’m not.”

The second, and perhaps most complicated of rumours, was that he and fellow bandmate Louis Tomlinson were in a relationship. Larry Stylinson, as their shipname is known, began life as fan-fiction but mutated into a wild conspiracy theory as certain fans – dubbed Larries – documented glances, gestures, touches, interviews, performances and outfits in an attempt to confirm the romance. Even now, four years after the band went on “hiatus”, videos are still being posted on YouTube in an attempt to confirm that their relationship was real.

For Tomlinson, Larry was fandom gone too far. He has repeatedly rejected the conspiracy. Styles, meanwhile, has never publicly discussed it. In fact, unlike Tomlinson, whose post-1D career trajectory has seen him adopt a loutish form of masculinity indebted to the Gallagher brothers, Styles has largely leant into the speculation surrounding his sexuality. Aside from the GQ interview, Styles has told interviewers that gender is not that important to him when it comes to dating. In 2017 he said that he had never felt the need to label his sexuality, adding: “I don’t feel like it’s something I’ve ever felt like I have to explain about myself.”

Likewise, during his time touring with One Direction, and during his own solo tours, the image of Styles draped with a rainbow flag became ubiquitous. He has also donated money from merchandise sales to LGBTQ charities. His fashion sense, too, subverts gender norms: Styles has long sported womenswear, floral prints, dangly earrings and painted nails. 

Nevertheless, Styles’s hesitance to be candid has met with criticism. He has been accused of queer-baiting - or enjoying the benefits of appealing to an LGBTQ fanbase without having any of the difficulties. I’ve written before about how queer artists, who now enjoy greater visibility and are finding mainstream success, have struggled commercially owing to their sexuality or gender identity. 

Styles, who is assumed to be a cisgender, heterosexual male, doesn’t carry any of the commercial risk laden upon Troye Sivan, Years and Years or MNEK, who all use same-gender pronouns in their music and are explicitly gay in their videos. His music – with its nods to rock’n’roll, Americana and folk ­– doesn’t feel very queer, either. Looking at it this way, the queer idolisation of Harry Styles doesn’t feel deserved.

“The thing with Harry Styles is that he often does the bare minimum and gets an out-sized load of credit for it,” says songwriter and record label manager Grace Medford. For Medford, who has worked at Syco and is now part of the team at Xenomania records, Styles’s queer narrative has been projected on him by the media and his fans. “I don’t think that he queer-baits, but I don’t think he does anywhere near enough to get the response that he does.”

Of course, Styles does not need to explain or be specific about his sexuality. As Medford puts it: “he’s well within his rights to live his life how he chooses.” However, he has also created a space for himself in pop that allows him that ambiguity.

It’s a privilege few pop stars have. Last year, Rita Ora was hit with criticism after her song Girls, a collaboration with Charli XCX, Cardi B and Bebe Rexha, was dubbed problematic and accused of performative bisexuality. Even though Ora explicitly sang the lyric “I’m 50-50 and I’m never gonna hide it”, she was lambasted by social media critics, media commentary and even her fellow artists until she was forced to publicly confirm her bisexuality.

But the same was not done to Styles when he performed unreleased song “Medicine” during his world tour. The lyrics have never been confirmed, but the song is said to contain the line: “The boys and the girls are in/ I mess around with him/ And I’m okay with it.” Instead of probing him for clarity or accusing him of performativity, the song was labelled a “bisexual anthem” and praised as “a breakthrough for bisexual music fans”.

Of course, there’s misogyny inherent to such reactions. But there’s also something more layered and complex at play, too. “There’s such a dearth of queer people to look up to, especially people at Harry’s level,” posits Medford. “With somebody who is seen as cool and credible and attractive as Harry, part of it is wishful thinking, I think. 

“The fact is, he was put together into a boyband on a television show by a Pussycat Doll. And he has rebranded as Mick Jagger’s spiritual successor and sings with Stevie Nicks; he’s really done the work there. Part of him doing that work is him stepping back and letting other people create a story for him.”

One only has to look at how Styles’ celebrity manifests itself (cool, fashionable, artistic) in comparison to that of his former bandmates. Liam Payne (this week dubbed by the tabloids as a chart failure) has been a tabloid fixture since his public relationship with Cheryl Cole and relies on countless interviews, photoshoots and even an advertising campaign for Hugo Boss to maintain his fame. 

Styles, meanwhile, doesn’t really engage with social media. He also rarely appears in public and carefully chooses what kind of press he does, actively limiting the number of interviews he gives. Styles’s reticence to engage with the media and general public – perhaps a form of self-preservation – has awarded him a rare mystique that few people in the public eye possess. 

This enigmatic personal, along with his sexual ambiguity, his support of LGBTQ charities and his gender-fluid approach to fashion, creates the perfect incubation for queer fandom. It also provides a shield against serious accusations of queer-baiting. As Medford argues: “Harry’s queer mythology has been presented to and bestowed upon him by queer people whereas other acts feel like they have to actively seek that out.”

Ultimately, the way that Styles navigates his queer fandom doesn’t feel calculated or contrived. For Eli, an 18-year-old from Orlando who grew up with One Direction, seeing Styles “grow into himself” has been important. He suggests that Styles’ queer accessibility has helped to create a safe space for fans. “Watching him on tour dance on stage every night in his frilly outfits, singing about liking boys and girls, waving around pride flags, and even helping a fan come out to her mom, really helped me come to terms with my own sexuality,” he explains.

Vicky, who is 25 and from London, agrees: “To be able to attend his show with my pansexual flag and wave it around and feel so much love and respect - it’s an amazing feeling. I’m aware so many queer people can’t experience it so I’m very grateful Harry creates these safe spaces through his music and concerts.”

There’s appeal in Styles’s ambiguity, too. Summer Shaud, from Boston, says that Styles’ “giving no f—-” approach to sexuality and gender is “inspiring and affirming” for those people who are coming to terms with their own identities or those who live in the middle of sexuality or gender spectrums. “There’s enormous pressure from certain gatekeeping voices within the queer community to perform queerness in an approved, unambiguous way, often coming from people with no substantive understanding of bisexuality or genderfluidity who are still looking to put everyone into a box,” she argues. “Harry’s gender presentation, queer-coding, and refusal to label himself are a defiant rebuke of that “You’re Not Doing It Right” attitude, and that resonates so strongly with queers who aren’t exclusively homosexual or exclusively binary.”

Shaud says that the queer community that has congregated around Styles is another reason she’s so drawn to him. “Seeing how his last tour was such an incredible site of affirmation and belonging for queers is deeply moving to me, and as older queer [Shaud is 41] I’m so grateful that all the young people growing up together with Harry have someone like him to provide that.” 

In fact, she argues that there’s a symbiotic relationship between Styles and his queer fans. She cites an interview he gave to Rolling Stone this year in which he said how transformative the tour was for him. “For me the tour was the biggest thing in terms of being more accepting of myself, I think,” Styles shared. “I kept thinking, ‘Oh wow, they really want me to be myself. And be out and do it.’”

All of the queer Harry Styles fans I spoke to agreed that it really didn’t matter whether their idol was explicit about his sexuality or not. “It’s weird that people scrutinise people who don’t label [their sexuality] when they have no idea what that person feels like inside or, in Harry’s case, what it’s like to be under the public eye,” argues Valerie, who is 18. “It’s an individual choice, not ours,” agrees Vicky.

Ollie, 22 and from Brighton, takes a more rounded view, however: “On one hand, I think that quite simply it isn’t any of anyone else’s business. On the other, if you place yourself in the public eye to the level of fame that he has then you should be prepared to be probed about every minute detail of your personal life, whether you like it or not – you should at least be prepared to be questioned about it.” Still, he says that the good that Styles does is what’s important: “He brings fantastic support and attention to the community, whether he is actively a part of it or not.”

Arguably, the ambiguity and mystery that surrounds Styles only allows more space for queer people to find safety in him and in the fandom.

Still, if fans are expecting a queer coming of age with new album Fine Line, they will be disappointed. Lyrically, he doesn’t venture into new territory, although there are some new musical flares. He also seems like he’s started to distance himself a little from the ambiguity, too. “I’m aware that as a white male, I don’t go through the same things as a lot of the people that come to the shows,” he told Rolling Stone. “I can’t claim that I know what it’s like, because I don’t. So I’m not trying to say, ‘I understand what it’s like.’ I’m just trying to make people feel included and seen.” Having said that, within weeks Styles appeared on Saturday Night Live playing a gay social media manager, using queer slang and even wearing an S&M harness.

And so the cycle of queer mythologising continues, and is likely to continue for the rest of Styles’s career. And maybe things will change and maybe they won’t.

“If you are black, if you are white, if you are gay, if you are straight, if you are transgender — whoever you are, whoever you want to be, I support you,” he said earlier this year. “I love every single one of you.” In a world where LGBTQ rights are threatened and there’s socio-political insecurity, perhaps, for now at least, that’s enough.

#I think me and my GC wrote this

[noahfence1d]

@FallonTonight: @NiallOfficial reads “Twas the Night Before Christmas” in 7 different accents 📕🎄 #FallonTonight

[noahfence1d]

[noahfence1d]

Harry rehearsing at the a Forum (via alima_lee)