Dsquared2 Underwear F/W 2021: Michael Yerger by Christian Oita

[Legolas]

There are so many way to make someone appear big today that I have no idea why in this second thread people continue to discuss his junk, like, I hope this is not the case for every Michael Yerger thread now, we are already far enough from fashion discussions... I mean, just go on Instagram and hashtag search or explore - literally thousands of people doing the same.

However, I do have to say this is like... This is a certain sexy look comeback, but around 10-15 years ago it didn't seem so... horny? Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps it is just the social media effect that now everyone can tell what they think, and usually it just begins and ends with the peach and eggplant emojis.

Thank you!!! ... I feel the same way. There's a minority of straight men members in the forum, which I personally know, and over the decade I've been a member here, I've never seen them posting stuff like: mmm yummy, delicious, boobies, etc, when a sexy editorial of their favorite female models appears. It would be kind of creepy rigth? Well, this is just the same. Seriously guys, some of us don't wanna know that ... go to Twitter, Instagram, or a p*rn forum to relief yourselves. Let's keep it about the fashion-related stuff here: photography, castings decisions, etc. We already have enough sexual harassment vibes in the industry anyway ... let's not promote it here too.

 

[Deleted member 141523]

I saw him for the very fist time at the start of this year in GQ Latin America. He did a beauty editorial, it was all about his face. I thought at the "What a gorgeous guy!" He reminds me of to the male supermodels from the 90s in those Acqua di Gio by Armani campaigns. He can do more than underwear ads. I find him more like the male Grace Elizabeth because he has some retro allure. Emily Rata is more a celeb, an influencer/activist (but I don't dislike her at all).

 

[Phuel]

Thank you!!! ... I feel the same way. There's a minority of straight men members in the forum, which I personally know, and over the decade I've been a member here, I've never seen them posting stuff like: mmm yummy, delicious, boobies, etc, when a sexy editorial of their favorite female models appears. It would be kind of creepy rigth? Well, this is just the same. Seriously guys, some of us don't wanna know that ... go to Twitter, Instagram, or a p*rn forum to relief yourselves. Let's keep it about the fashion-related stuff here: photography, castings decisions, etc. We already have enough sexual harassment vibes in the industry anyway ... let's not promote it here too.

LOL This brand and this guy is loving the thirst— otherwise why the highlighting of nothing but the primal bulge??? If it’s only “fashion” you’re interested in, stay away from such threads where a sweaty, glistening naked man writhing about is the main point of visuals. Should we be discussing the design and fabric of his underwear?

BIG YES! body positivity for men shouldn't start and end with Tom Holland's "lips". I want all things menswear (shows, ads) full of Seth Rogen, Kenan Thompson, Jack Black, Kim Jong-Un and Jonah Hill types, you know, real everyday activist men with a heart of gold, male Palomas, the kind who install your internet, no unrealistic peachy butt/bulge/six pack tanned dudes that suffer so much achieving these bodies only to make ordinary men (especially gay men) feel terrible about themselves and like they'll never be accepted by the fashion industry. What men want is to see someone just like them in magazines, cause... all men look like Jonah Hill. And I think any man who is a consumer and dares to express minimal criticism, or like he longs for the aspirational side of an inherently exclusivist industry such as fashion or that simply admires extraordinary/too-good-to-be-true looks should receive major backlash for being a discriminatory bigot on track to destroy society.

You jest now, but such lowest standards of casting is already a reality and will be soon enough in designer underwear; with brands fighting to be the first to be the one to cast overweight/out-of-shape/obese men all in the name of the profiteering body-positive gimmick for underwear campaigns. Moschino sent out a paraplegic woman for no other reason than she is in a wheelchair: Why not an obese man for Calvin Klein Underwear, shot by Meisel? He’s already stooped to such lows with that Fendi x Skims nonsense.

Fashion is already looking like MAD Magazine level of satire— but taking itself so seriously with all the identity-politics/“diversity and inclusivity” rhetoric, there’s still a long way to stoop to the lowest of standards for profits yet!

 

[MulletProof]

Thank you!!! ... I feel the same way. There's a minority of straight men members in the forum, which I personally know, and over the decade I've been a member here, I've never seen them posting stuff like: mmm yummy, delicious, boobies, etc, when a sexy editorial of their favorite female models appears. It would be kind of creepy rigth? Well, this is just the same. Seriously guys, some of us don't wanna know that ... go to Twitter, Instagram, or a p*rn forum to relief yourselves. Let's keep it about the fashion-related stuff here: photography, castings decisions, etc. We already have enough sexual harassment vibes in the industry anyway ... let's not promote it here too.

Ever heard of Boomer? (a member, banned I think). There used to be plenty of straight guys here circa 2005 and there were comments like 'uhh nice to finally see boobs at Hussein Chalayan..'. It's not common to see that anymore because.. I honestly can't even think of a non-gay guy posting here for the past 10 years lol.

I totally get what you mean and I think some of these reactions can be a bit tasteless, because.. some know how to edit their comments, others lack that 'skill' and others simply think it's more risqué to not edit, but.. I will say, art direction is as valuable as the content of a picture, the message it sends out, the type of marketing it's enforcing, the type of reaction it's hoping to garner, the way it tackles a consumer's 'desires' in order to sell (intellectual desire -say, Helmut Lang back then- being much less discernible than the desire for a plain human practice we're all wired to such as sex). When you opt for the easiest route in imagery (sex, hormones, etc) and the public responds accordingly (with sexual and hormonal comments), is it really them at fault?. I think it's a bit problematic (in both men and women's ads) to think it is wildly inappropriate to make any comments on what a highly sexual or sexually explicit picture is conveying because it's 'creepy', it automatically faults the reaction and not the action. The consumer may have the last say but the companies financially orchestrating this type of marketing are the ones going out of their way to package sex to you and invite you to 'react'. Just like people will inevitably discuss climate change with an oil spill-theme editorial, same here.. people will talk sex because the image here is an open invitation to do just that.

Finally I think the recent surge has to do with the fact that campaigns like this have been rare since Tom Ford left Gucci and that type of 90s/early 00s vulgarity masked as decadence became less desirable, then uninteresting when everything looked sexless in fashion from like 2007 to 2015 and then 'inappropriate' because we live in.. paradoxical times.

You jest now, but such lowest standards of casting is already a reality and will be soon enough in designer underwear

Just for women! I'm yet to see the suits enforce this on menswear and men (gay or not) navigate the same predicament, with the same moral authority in which they quickly dismiss criticism from womenswear consumers. I mean, I just read no to James Corden but yes to Paloma. No, if you're going to have Paloma, then we must have a Kenan Thompson look-alike. Why on earth should we not? why should womenswear consumers be the ones embracing and nodding as usual? nah, here's to more body 'positivity' in menswear, see how long the overall concept lasts...

 

[Legolas]

LOL This brand and this guy is loving the thirst— otherwise why the highlighting of nothing but the primal bulge??? If it’s only “fashion” you’re interested in, stay away from such threads where a sweaty, glistening naked man writhing about is the main point of visuals. Should we be discussing the design and fabric of his underwear

Sure, the fact they are highlighting the bulge is actually part of the fashion, my first comment was actually about that so its not out of topic, my point was: we can discuss these things in a way it feels less tasteless like MulletProof just said? I can't help but imagine Bruce Weber behind the screen of these people when this happens. I don't give a damn if this guy loves it or not, every topic has its place on the net... commenting on his junk only while forgetting everything else just seems so out of place here.

 

[KoV]

Oof, this thread has turned into a great reminder that I need to stop spending so much time on here.

 

[MulletProof]

Sure, the fact they are highlighting the bulge is actually part of the fashion, my first comment was actually about that so its not out of topic, my point was: we can discuss these things in a way it feels less tasteless like MulletProof just said? I can't help but imagine Bruce Weber behind the screen of these people when this happens. I don't give a damn if this guy loves it or not, every topic has its place on the net... commenting on his junk only while forgetting everything else just seems so out of place here.

wait, that's more or less what I said but just want to say that I'm not at all criticizing tasteless comments: I think the reaction matches the campaign. The campaign IS tasteless and cynical. Look at the instagram video, what is the guy doing when he's not rubbing himself and his eyes are closed? moaning?? lol plus it's not a frontal shot of the underwear, it's a side shot so you can see he has ~one big dick!~. The lighting is the default lighting when you want to promise nothing but filth: red. Plus white sheets, oh and I forgot: the most generic, forgettable underwear. I mean, they're not playing around with the fantasy they're selling and what they're appealing to, every component must lead you back to the model's penis, and when it succeeds and the viewer focuses on nothing but that and it 'speaks' to his/her hormones.. frankly, NO ONE reacts to things that turn them on like 'oh what an exquisite subversion of intimacy is unfolding before my eyes' lol.. more like 'oh damn' 'whoa yum'. It's not predatory just because the pictures and videos are NOT asking for more, there's no 'everything else' on purpose.

 

[Deleted member 141523]

James Corden would fail because he's a comedian, and the ads will have him mocking David Gandy in a Zoolander way.

(Pd: sorry for the bad writing of my second post here, I was in a hurry ).

 

[Scotty]

Why not an obese man for Calvin Klein Underwear, shot by Meisel?

I volunteer.

 

[Deleted member 141523]

I recognize I'm softer with women, maybe because I'm a gent (believe it or not). I was raised in a certain way that women deserves all the respect, I'm 90s guy. Also I'm bisexual, and I have a conflict with that. The other day I was looking at the new editorial (for CR magazine? Don't remember well) with Candice and Irina, and I thought that it was very hot, but I only gave a like to that post, I didn't make a comment about it. I did comments about Jamie Dornan, Lil Nas, etc, and recently I said I would love to *** some "cakes" from famous actors (same that people wants to be as I said above). The good part of these conversations is that you try to understand what's good and what's wrong with yourself, how your mind was shaped.

In another note, I don't know were his from, he's unknown in my country, and I thought he's another male model as the rest. I don't find him like a terrible model, and I like a lot these pictures. If he's the wrong role model for these ads, well, don't buy or follow the brand.

 

[Vitamine W]

Yerger is hot. His crotch is hot. Yerger was smoking from the get go in Survivor, my other passion. Good for Dean & Dan, these old buggers.

 

[Phuel]

Just for women! I'm yet to see the suits enforce this on menswear and men (gay or not) navigate the same predicament, with the same moral authority in which they quickly dismiss criticism from womenswear consumers. I mean, I just read no to James Corden but yes to Paloma. No, if you're going to have Paloma, then we must have a Kenan Thompson look-alike. Why on earth should we not? why should womenswear consumers be the ones embracing and nodding as usual? nah, here's to more body 'positivity' in menswear, see how long the overall concept lasts...

From a marketing observation, unlike how women seem too eager to accept that being overweight/borderline-obese/obese is “body positive” healthy and a new standard, only so these brands can to sell more of their crap in the name of “progress", most men— both gay/hetero, even the big boys, will likely reject a fat flabby boy fronting a high-end/fashion campaign. But I’d say go for it Miuccia— anything to ensure your brand’s begging for likes/followers will succeed (...but somehow can’t see this translating to increased sales for this brand’s ever-spiralling crap-- even if Costco sells those Prada bags.).

(The big box websites/flyers do cast big men […or as the PC term, “husky”] alongside big women. I attempted to convince a client to go with a certain type of men— the all-American beefy, linebacker type once. But along with the difficulty of any of these types belonging to a model agency at the time [and they'd have to be cast from agencies that rep actors], the client rejected the proposal. I still would like to cast men with a rugby player/footballer/athlete’s bodies if the opportunity presented itself again, and given the right brand and demographic. Just like a more athletic— and fashionable thicc body for women would be a strong alternative to the typical 5’11”/size 2 model. Big, but healthy and strong being the targeted visuals. But once the flabby Paloma body type comes into play, it no longer looks high fashion. BTW, Paloma is still a pretty woman [when she’s made up/lit/shot skillfull]) worthy of a department store flyer, while that James Corden person… Them again, high fashion no longer looks high fashion these days, anyway. … Anyway, back on topic: His bulge is so poorly— and comically enhanced in post. Like, you can tell which PS tools are used, and with such a lack of experience…Again, like the horrendous retouching/post shown on the Vuitton/Versace campaigns, it’s laughably inexcusable that such high-profile brands sign off on such amateur post-production that’s the equivalent quality of filters on Insta.)

 

[Deleted member 141523]

If they make his "friend" bigger, the video was made by Lucasfilms/Disney. It's all there.

 

[McKinney]

I recognize I'm softer with women, maybe because I'm a gent (believe it or not). I was raised in a certain way that women deserves all the respect, I'm 90s guy. Also I'm bisexual, and I have a conflict with that. The other day I was looking at the new editorial (for CR magazine? Don't remember well) with Candice and Irina, and I thought that it was very hot, but I only gave a like to that post, I didn't make a comment about it. I did comments about Jamie Dornan, Lil Nas, etc, and recently I said I would love to *** some "cakes" from famous actors (same that people wants to be as I said above). The good part of these conversations is that you try to understand what's good and what's wrong with yourself, how your mind was shaped.

In another note, I don't know were his from, he's unknown in my country, and I thought he's another male model as the rest. I don't find him like a terrible model, and I like a lot these pictures. If he's the wrong role model for these ads, well, don't buy or follow the brand.

That's problematic...you need to reserve the same respect for men as you do with women. I'm glad you are starting to recognize that though also just because someone is gay doesn't mean we are OK with other people commenting degenerate things under our pictures

 

[Phuel]

If they make his "friend" bigger, the video was made by Lucasfilms/Disney. It's all there.

DIdn’t watch the video, ivano. Nor care to, frankly.

What I mean by “enhanced” is of the 2nd shot of him sitting with crossed legs: "Enhanced" is likely a poor choice of word. A more fitting word would be highlighted. The result looks awfully amateur.

 

[Deleted member 141523]

JPG/Facebook

This could reflect that diversity is only for women, but guys still the same.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

They look like instagram shots taken with an expensive iphone in good light

 

[Krystalblue006]

He looks good. The bulge shot looks cringey but its mostly the photographer’s fault

 

[Armani]

MOD NOTE (and this one might be long, so bear with me) :
Comments about plus-sized models as it relates to health fall under weight talk - this is a given, and doesn't require any further explanation, especially when it doesn't pertain to the thread in question.
We've discussed comments about male genitals in threads as an explicit form of objectification and came to the agreement that while these comments are uncomfy for many members and mods alike to read, threads of this nature typically don't completely derail as a result, nor are a common occurrence on tFS.
However, given the above comments, I feel every need to say this:

1) Everyone has a right to talk about diversity under whichever tone they may feel applicable, but repeated occurrences of these same comments coming from the same people are unjustified, especially when outright denouncing those of different shapes, sizes, races, etc. as valid figures, and, once again, especially when it has absolutely nothing to do with the thread in question. Hate speech = "abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation", according to Google.

2) To those who repeatedly bring up the male sex appeal in threads along these lines, check yourselves. If these comments continually result in these conversations, they will be deleted as well.

3) If anyone has complaints about unfairness to make, please direct them here: https://forums.thefashionspot.com/threads/hypocrisy-of-acceptable-posts.388695/
This is also not the place to have those conversations. Please note the Forum Rules on politics, weight talk, continual negative comments about the same subjects (as a ground for warnings), and pornographic content before posting. Subjects who are politicians, plus-sized, and/or activists can and should be discussed when applicable - however, negative comments about their political stances and/or weight can, and has, move(d) conversations into a discussion of ideologies rather than of the content itself. Comments oversexualizing the subject, as noted above, can, and has, do/done the same.

I have opened up multiple discussions regarding these topics and would like to kindly ask another moderator to make the final call on which comments should be removed and which should stay, in this thread.

 

[dior_couture1245]

1) Everyone has a right to talk about diversity under whichever tone they may feel applicable, but repeated occurrences of these same comments coming from the same people are unjustified, especially when outright denouncing those of different shapes, sizes, races, etc. as valid figures, and, once again, especially when it has absolutely nothing to do with the thread in question. Hate speech = "abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation", according to Google.

Again…you’ve proven my point entirely in my original post.

You are operating under the false assumption that simply because I do not support “body diversity” and I don’t subscribe to the “healthy at any size” movement that I am explicitly questioning the validity of someone’s humanity and existence??? And that I wish ill upon them???

When did I express “prejudice?” When did I say they were a lesser human being? Someone unworthy of love or kindness or dignity? Show me where? Is someone worthless if they don’t get a fashion campaign? Is that also what we’re saying now, too?

So what you ARE saying is that I have to just shut up, keep my mouth shut and enjoy obese people in fashion because by not enjoying it, I am de facto wishing they were dead??

And I love this whole “hate speech” blanket excuse for everything now. It’s always the one side who gets to decide what’s hateful, though, isn’t it? Do you care what I find “hateful” and “offensive?” I’d bet some serious money you don’t. Gives you all a nice excuse to censor whoever you don’t like and look like an angel doing it. And you get the shrug your shoulders and say “we’re just following the rules as defined by Google.”

Old dior_couture…repeat offender, always being HATEFUL and EVIL. Sorry I don’t just eat this slop called fashion up with smile.