A Mark Bryan post

[ChipsHH]

So I came across this on Instagram and went straight to watching the video…a little bit. I haven’t watched it fully but thought of you all when I saw snippets of it.

 

 

I’ve been following Mark Bryan for YEARS, when he was just recording his struts at a train stop on IG. It’s crazy to see how far he’s gotten at this point. I believe he was also a part of the forum at a point?

[Jkrenzer]

Nice link. He and I have the same taste in heels. I can't understand the need to undress during the interview no matter how the topic moved about.

The two interviewers, especially the person on right of the screen look rough and doubt either one has ever donned a nice pair of heels. His point is fashion should not be gender based and those 2 are as much proof as him and us.

[mlroseplant]

The whole disrobing thing was just really weird. Other than that, the interview was OK. Does anybody even wear a three piece suit anymore?

[Jkrenzer]

Agreed, the topic and discussion was very good. 

Yah, haven't seen a 3 piece in years.

[Cali]

Location, loction, location. I see a 3 piece suit about once a week.

I was struck by the lack of body hair on Mark, but why he strip is questionable. Maybe to show no bra etc.

[Chorlini]

I wouldn't mind wearing a 3 piece suit every day. I even have quite a few, but sadly the beer bug has caused me to no longer fit into most of them. I saw a video recently of Podcast of the Lotus Eaters where Carl was talking to a guest dressed in a 3 piece suit and he said why not dress your best whenever you can? Why look like a slob when you can look like a gentleman? It used to not just be normal, it was almost mandatory and even factory workers owned at least 1 suit. Will it make you look old fashioned? Probably. But it will also give you a leg up over all the casual dressed dudes in jeans and t-shirts. It might do wonders to your career. And maybe, just maybe it would motivate women to look more feminine again too?

[pebblesf]

Well, I am glad I watched this video in its entirety.  I feel Mark's explanations were valid, and he seemed honestly upset that he may have offended one group or another.  Mark is a great example of just what most of us are striving for, just to be a man in heels and some other traditionally feminine gear.   Personally, I feel that some of these groups are a bit too sensitive and have unfair expectations about how they should be addressed and treated by society.    Please don't misunderstand, I want everyone to be "their happiest self" for sure, in whatever form/identity that may be.  But, expecting the rest of the world to understand just what identity they are striving for along with addressing them in a very specific way, is unrealistic and perhaps just a bit self centered.  OK, I expect to get some criticism saying things like this, especially being a gay guy...  

PS:  I too, would love to hear Mark's explanation about shedding his clothing....  Not afraid to admit I'm envious though, but he has obviously worked hard to have those nice toned legs, and should absolutely show them off.  

[Shyheels]

I totally agree. Everyone should be free to be themselves but don’t expect the entire world to be focussed on your latest form of self-expression. A lot of people seem to be very precious about themselves these days, quick - even eager - to take offence and claim for themselves some new form of victimhood.

The guy taking off his clothes is just weird and any good he might have accomplished in normalising a guy in heels just vanishes. He becomes just another weirdo and only reinforces the stereotype that a guy in heels is weird 

[Puffer]

A frank, interesting and enlightening discussion.   Mark is clearly an intelligent, educated and articulate man, leading a typically masculine and heterosexual life - but generally in skirts and heels.   He is no male oil painting and could not easily pass as a woman, but (as he explained) he has no wish to be anything other than a 'person' wearing certain clothing of his choice, that happens to be feminine in style.   If he influences or persuades other men to adopt a more fluid appearance, without sacrificing their innate masculinity - and be accepted thus - then he will have done them, and us, a favour.  In that sense he is, whether intentionally or not, a first-class freestyle ambassador and deserves respect.

As to the undressing, my guess is that Mark simply wanted to demonstrate that he had a normal male body, albeit one that has benefitted from some grooming and toning, and that there was nothing 'unusual' (e.g. piercings, tattoos, pretty lingerie) to reveal.   It was not really necessary but served to demonstate further his frankness and lack of inhibition, without being salacious in any way.

[Histiletto]

I read the prior comments and decided to watch the videoed interview on You Tube. The main emphasis seems to be a person has the right to wear the clothing items they prefer without being labeled with a sex identity, orientation, nor any other socially defined associations. Mark stressed the concepts for wearing heels or flats, a dress, a blouse and skirt, and/or a shirt and trousers/jeans are just the adornment styles each person prefers to wear that really doesn't have any sex attachments. The sex identities for clothing items are socially promoted constructs that have been brainwashed into people's understanding and perspectives. The apparel including the footwear of the French King Louis XIV and these two other drawings of men were considered manly accents in earlier centuries. 

  

However today their stylish appearances have been socially promoted as women's assigned looks (not including the swords).

[Shyheels]

Women don’t need swords - they have stilettos! 

[Histiletto]

23 hours ago, Shyheels said:

Women don’t need swords - they have stilettos! 

Thanks for emphasizing the non-issue!

[Shyheels]

2 hours ago, Histiletto said:

Thanks for emphasizing the non-issue!

My! Rather touchy, aren't we? The historical link with men and heels is rather well known, as are the 17th century paintings you posted. If you like I can give you chapter and verse on the introduction of heels into Europe - the envoy sent by the Shah of Persia to the court of France in 1599, and the racy footwear worn by their cavalry officers, and how they cut a dash with their exoticism and swagger and made high heels a hot fashion at court for the next century; I can tell you about Louis XIV and his love of heels and England's King Charles II who, at 6'2" hardly needed the extra height yet wore four-inch heels to his coronation (as seen in his official painting); I can tell you about the daring coterie of high-born women in the early years of the 18th century who began wearing men's fashions until heels and bright colours began to be seen as something feminine; I could tell you about what sociologists call the "Great Male Renunciation" in the mid 18th century, the Age of Enlightenment, when gentlemen wanted to appear scholarly and intellectual, rather than preen around like peacocks at court, and forswore adornment in favour of sombre shades and practicality - an imprisonment of thought we've never really moved on from. 

So there we are. Happy now?

 

 

Edited December 22, 2023 by Shyheels

[Histiletto]

Shyheels, thanks for reminding me of various happenings as you briefly recapped a few spots of the appareling history. The swords are still non-issue.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Histiletto

[Shyheels]

Yes, God forbid we inject humour into the discussion