NYT T Men's Style March 2018 : The Boys in the Band by Inez & Vinoodh

[Melancholybaby]

nytimes.com

 

[dodencebt]

Of course they made them hold hands and embrace. God forbid four gay theater men get photographed casually posing as other actors would without the "we are one" bullsh*t.

I don't think Inez and Vinoodh even tried to make them look appealing. Matt is the only one who remotely looks photograph-ready to me, which is so weird because all four are normally quite good looking.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ But given they are in the revival of such an Iconic play, this image makes total sense to me. It does lack the natural element, and feels very posed, yet it doesn't bother me in this context.

I really hope they do the play justice, but can't undersand how they can cut it down to one-act version without losing the essence of the original!

 

[iclawhands]

Of course they made them hold hands and embrace. God forbid four gay theater men get photographed casually posing as other actors would without the "we are one" bullsh*t.

I don't think Inez and Vinoodh even tried to make them look appealing. Matt is the only one who remotely looks photograph-ready to me, which is so weird because all four are normally quite good looking.

you could see any group of women or models doing this kind of pose in any editorial gay, straight, or otherwise. why does it bother you here?

 

[mepps]

Of course they made them hold hands and embrace. God forbid four gay theater men get photographed casually posing as other actors would without the "we are one" bullsh*t.

I don't think Inez and Vinoodh even tried to make them look appealing. Matt is the only one who remotely looks photograph-ready to me, which is so weird because all four are normally quite good looking.

Why are you triggered by an image of 4 men embracing and holding hands?
Their pose fits in perfectly with the theme of the play they're currently starring in on Broadway.

 

[Benn98]

I think maybe Dodecebt meant the pose is too stereotypical and gimmicky? I'd agree with him on that one.

 

[dodencebt]

I think maybe Dodecebt meant the pose is too stereotypical and gimmicky? I'd agree with him on that one.

Thank you, that is precisely what I meant. I am not "triggered" by gay men embracing, I am a gay man myself. I am just tired of this stereotypical image compositions when it comes to photographing gay actors or musicians.

 

[Melancholybaby]

Thank you, that is precisely what I meant. I am not "triggered" by gay men embracing, I am a gay man myself. I am just tired of this stereotypical image compositions when it comes to photographing gay actors or musicians.

The sight of men holding hands is still a trigger for many people, so even though it’s not a surprise only gay artists get to be depicted this way in magazines, it’s more than welcome for me. More welcome than having them posing in dudebro GQ style, which is the default for their straight counterparts anyway.

 

[mikel]

The sight of men holding hands is still a trigger for many people, so even though it’s not a surprise only gay artists get to be depicted this way in magazines, it’s more than welcome for me. More welcome than having them posing in dudebro GQ style, which is the default for their straight counterparts anyway.

Amen!

It could be percieved as stereotypical. But I don't care. What's wrong with that if it means we can see gay men show affection for a eachother on the cover of a mainstream magazine.

 

[FadeToBlack]

I love this. Can you get this in the UK? I really want to frame this cover because theres just such a beautiful moment they've captured there with some fantastic gay actors who are helping change the landscape of the acceptance of gay men and the LGBT community in pop culture.

 

[Melancholybaby]

^Don't quote me on that but shouldn't it come with the Times?