Image Courtesy of Anthony Pham.

I used to be relatively indifferent about Harry Styles. In fact, I might go as far as to say I didn’t like him. The reason? I knew almost nothing about him.

A recent interview fueled a discourse involving Harry Styles that is best described as an uneducated attack on perceived homophobia. I’ll elaborate first by addressing Harry Styles’ image.

I’ve heard the term “gay cosplaying” tossed around to describe Harry’s “intentional” desire to deceive others into believing he’s queer. This idea that he “dresses gay” actively engages in the stereotypes it seeks to kill. It feeds into the assumption that anyone who paints their nails or wears bright colors, mismatched prints, or flared silhouettes isn’t heterosexual.

Gucci’s Creative Director and long-time friend of Styles, Alessandro Michele, recently teamed up with Styles to announce a new fashion collection. In an interview about it, he reflected on Harry’s love for fashion.

“Harry has an incredible sense of fashion,” he noted. “Observing his ability to combine items of clothing in a way that is out of the ordinary compared to the required standards of taste and common sense and the homogenization of appearance, I came to understand that the styling of a look is a generator of differences and of powers, as are his reactions to the designs I have created for him, which he has always made his own; these reactions restore me with a rush of freedom every time.”

Harry’s care for fashion is clearly more than just a superficial marketing scheme. There’s also been an obvious evolution in his fashion taste. The first time he publicly wore anything even close to his current style was in late 2015 at the AMAs. He faced criticism for his white floral Gucci suit. For example, a news article titled, “Did Harry Styles raid his grandmother’s wardrobe for the AMAs?” Tweets at the time were already making statements such as: “Harry styles literally wakes up every morning and thinks about how he can make his wardrobe choices ruin my life.”

This was three months after One Direction officially broke up. Dressing unapologetically himself resulted in more backlash for Harry Styles, yet he continues to do it to this day. To me, that seems like directly the opposite of a marketing move.

In fact, during his years in One Direction, there was a greater push to make him fit the typical “boy-bander” image. It’s no wonder his style changed so dramatically in the following years of his departure from One Direction. He went from having his public image heavily managed to the ability to further dress authentically himself.

This was also around the first time he told The Sun that he has “never felt the need” to label his sexuality. “I don’t feel like it’s something I’ve ever felt like I have to explain about myself.” Despite this, many have jumped to label Styles a “queer-baiter.”

Let’s briefly talk about what queer-baiting means. As defined by dictionary.com, “The term queerbaiting refers to the practice of implying non-heterosexual relationships or attraction (in a TV show, for example) to engage or attract an LGBTQ audience or otherwise generate interest without ever actually depicting such relationships or sexual interactions.” It is a common issue, the most popular examples of it being TV shows like Sherlock and Voltron. They bait a queer audience in because they expect to see a gay relationship, but then never commit to it.

But, Harry Styles isn’t a TV show. Harry Styles is a person. He might have an image to uphold, but it’s unreal to push a gay relationship onto him-or a label, for that matter.

I don’t know exactly what is expected of him. Is he only really queer if he publicly dates a man? Is he only really queer if he’s never been with a woman?

I’m not going to discuss the legitimacy of Harry Styles’ relationships with women or his history of beards because I shouldn’t have to. Realistically, it doesn’t matter if he’s only ever publicly dated women.

Queerness isn’t defined by who you’re currently dating. A bi woman isn’t any less bisexual because she dates a man, and a bi man isn’t any less bisexual because he dates a woman. To suggest otherwise is inherent biphobia, an issue that seems to be rampant in these discussions.

Harry said it himself. “Am I sprinkling in nuggets of sexual ambiguity to try and be more interesting? No.”

Additionally, being labelless is not synonymous with heterosexuality. Many people explore their sexuality at their own pace. If he’s been open to himself about not being straight for years, he likely struggled with it while actively having to hide it being in a boy-band. For half his life, he’s had the media peering into every aspect of his life and relationships. To me, it seems perfectly acceptable to keep private whatever you can. But even that, he said, isn’t what it’s about.

“It’s not like I’m sitting on an answer, and protecting it, and holding it back. It’s not a case of: I’m not telling you cos I don’t want to tell you. It’s not: ooh this is mine and it’s not yours. It’s: who cares?“

Due to his lack of a label, it’s understandable that many people get upset that with his level of fame, he often gets credit for things other out queer people might get backlash for. He’s able to do certain things, like painting his nails, that someone who isn’t a famous white man might receive more negative response to. Similarly, many people reference his instances of wearing dresses as an attack on those originally responsible for blurring the lines between masculinity and feminity like A$AP Rocky. It isn’t fair that Harry gets so much of the credit for normalizing it, but it also isn’t his fault. That is a problem that directly correlates with the society we live in and the overwhelming size of Harry Styles’ influence.

The biggest backlack Styles is receiving at the current moment also has to do with his position in the closet, a Twitter user writing, “I actually think it’s fine to make being publicly gay a prerequisite to publicly critiquing gayness.” This comment sparked from Styles’ critique of the fetishization of queer relationships in film during press for My Policeman.

I believe user Phoenix Stone’s reply is best put. “Where has he publicly critiqued gayness?” he wrote.

“So much of gay sex in film is two guys going at it, and it kind of removes the tenderness from it,” said Styles. “There will be, I would imagine, some people who watch it who were very much alive during this time when it was illegal to be gay, and [director Michael] wanted to show that it’s tender and loving and sensitive.”

I can see how some people could interpret his statement as ignorant. Though he isn’t wrong that gay relationships are often diminished to only the sexual aspects of them in film. Gay men are frequently shown as only interested in sex or not in healthy relationships. It doesn’t mean that there is anything wrong with casual relationships or sex, nor does it mean that it should be considered taboo. Rather, he’s suggesting that the portrayal of a relationship outside of just sex is important too—especially in a movie with a story as raw, painful, and real as My Policeman.

To diminish a movie to only the aspect of it being gay is to take away from much of the intricate story. Queer media is oversexualized, is fetishized, and it is underrepresented.

One article interpreted his words in a way that suggests he’s “[stressing] his new same-sex romantic drama is not as gay as it sounds.” I disagree. I think he’s doing the opposite. He’s saying that it’s so much more than just sex. It’s not just a shallow perspective of what gay relationships are like. As he noted, it’s a story “about love and about wasted time.”

I know it might be disappointing for some people that Harry Styles is not more open, and I get that. It would be nice for him to be a solid figure in the community, but he also has no obligation. He’s already done so much just by making his concerts a safe place for LGBTQ+ people to feel accepted.

“I want to make people feel comfortable being whatever they want to be. Maybe at a show you can have a moment of knowing that you’re not alone.”

I implore anyone who is still convinced he’s really part of a ten-year-long marketing scheme to consider the only two ways this discourse can really go: Harry Styles is either forced to come explicitly out of the closet, or he has to stop expressing himself the way he wants to. Neither are options anyone, especially members of the queer community, should be promoting.

WORKS MENTIONED

Baker-Whitelaw, Gavia. “Harry Styles under fire for his comments about gay sex scenes.” Daily Dot, 23 Aug 2022, http://www.dailydot.com/unclick/harry-styles-gay-sex-my-policeman/

Dictionary.com, 17 June 2021, www.dictionary.com/e/slang/queerbaiting/

Emmanuele, Julia. “Harry Styles Denied That His Sexual Ambiguity Is About Being ‘More Interesting.’” Bustle, 14 Dec, 2019, http://www.bustle.com

Lodge, Guy. “Harry Styles’ comments on gay sex and sexuality are frustratingly coy.” The Guardian, 24 Aug 2022, http://www.theguardian.com

Stone, Phoenix [Pheenips]. Twitter, 24 Aug 2022, twitter.com/Pheenips/status/1562334235628900352?s=20&t=0b5v2REEEeQF5JMJvoxgQw