John Lewis taking piss now

The cold look over the shoulder, the weird body proportions, the little girl socks and massive shoes - the whole scene gives off a creepy vibe.
I'm glad they didn't do a shot with the model sitting down because that dress is very, very short.

It's creepy and extremely unchristmassy. I don't have an issue with men wearing what they like, individuality is great. But this gives weird, sinister undertones and I have no idea who it's supposed to appeal to.

I don't think the dress itself is incredibly ugly might look okay on some people, but the style doesn't suit the model in question.

Second pic is like 'give me nanna's got backache getting out of her chair'. All v unsexy.

The socks and shoes are horrible!!!!

To be fair that's an incredibly ugly dress and even the most stunning human in the world would be hard pushed to make something quite so hideous look attractive.
But what is that photo / print / drawing in background meant to be?
The advert has a very 1970s feel to it, maybe that was the intention, I can almost smell the boiled cabbage and over cooked sprout aroma.
I'm assuming the clothes the model is wearing is for men, I think they might have their work cut out selling enough to make a profit.
No issue with men wearing dresses or skirts, but I would have thought the market would be very small. Still if JL want blokes to be their only target audience good luck with staying in business. Maybe whoever runs JL has had enough and wants to see the business fold, maybe they are hoping for an enormous payout?!

I have an instinctive ick reaction to the image. I think it's because women have been so under attack that I feel the image purposefully mocks women. Once again men can be anything they choose - even if it's something that belongs to women and it's something women have and will suffer to obtain (unobtainable body proportions).
There's something very odd with the distorted view and childlike pose.

It reminds me a little of the CK ads with Kate Moss that were made to look like basement porn. Kind of deliberately slightly shit so as to look edgy.

Anyway - I don't really believe "some men just like to wear dresses and then they are men's dresses." If they are made for women they don't really fit men, and men's "dresses" which are made for them aren't called dresses.

There are men who like to be highly edgy in terms of fashion, or are rock stars, which is totally legitimate but it's not that they just "like" those things. The whole point is to be unconventional and push a boundary. This is a small group, btw.

And apart from that there are men who want to dress as women, which is fine in some cases (on stage, Halloween, escape from prison) but not so much in others (peeping in women's toilets.)

It's the exact same glare that Mr Denton from The League Of Gentlemen would fire at anybody he feared may be planning to harm his precious toads!

.

I mean, how people want to dress up in the comfort of their own home is up to them...

Isn't John Lewis supposed to be slightly aspirational? And Christmas supposed to be festive.
To misquote Regina George "that's the frickin ugliest christmas tree, outfit and living room I've ever seen."
I don't want any of what that advert is advertising, and, no, I don't particularly want to be 6'4 either.

The model looks like a serial killer eyeing up his next victim over his shoulder. Hardly the spirit of Christmas.
Which idiot thought this was a good idea?

No, I mean the one in my post at 21.10. That’s the JL photo that’s in the dress section, OP’s photo is a different one, ‘sent in a direct mailing to their customers’.

Yes, that seems to be the main point. There's nothing whatsoever stopping a man from buying and wearing this or any other dress, regardless of whether he identifies as a woman or as a bloke who just likes wearing dresses.

It's just that the vast majority of people who would want to wear it will be women, so it's a very odd choice indeed to ignore virtually all of your potential customers for that garment, who naturally want to see what it looks like on a female body.

The same as, if they were selling a climbing frame in their toy department, there's nothing at all stopping anybody of any age from buying one and enjoying using it themselves - but it would seem very peculiar indeed if they decided to show it in their catalogue being used by a group of 30yo builders or a bunch of pensioners, rather than by actual children who would represent 99.999% of the people who actually want to use it.

Lots of drive by scolders coming out on this thread.

‘Take that, you silly women!’

🙄

Meh - really don't understand the concern here (apart from the white socks - definitely object to those).

This is a French connection model not JL. Says at the bottom.

His head looks very wee!

Well that's going to sell loads of dresses to women...what even is the point? Men can wear dresses, sure, but what percentage of them do? And I bet they don't shop at JL! So a bunch of middle aged women get the pleasure of this ridiculousness.

Did anyone read the naked civil servant? Fifty years ago, 100 years ago men were incredibly brave and non-conforming to wear dresses and make up - more power to them. Boys who do it now are the saddest and most conventional and sheeplike individuals who bow down before the current thing with the total approval of all "good thinkers", teachers, Guardian, HR and the nanny state. These NPCs have very high rates of mental illness and are not in any way non-conforming.

I don’t mind seeing men modelling (or generally wearing) women’s clothes or vice versa. Very boring and miserable picture though.

Twilight Zone??