Brynn, since you asked...

I never expect corporations to offer something as sophisticated as a genuine contribution to sexological thinking, much less advancing any purposeful cause (like changing the narratives on gender). Advertising is in the business of exploiting social trends to sell product. In that respect, I agree with those who say "another example of taking one sex and dressing it like another for shock effect, ho hum, he might as well be Milton Berle."

BUT...I will say my own initial reaction to this was not "just some man wearing ladies' shoes" but rather "Wow, that's pretty hot." To my eye, he doesn't look ridiculous in the least: he looks sexy and makes those shoes look even sexier.

And, as a member of the market they're targeting (het/het-flexible women who spend waaaay too much on shoes), perhaps that's the reaction they sought. 1. it isn't just another group of women I'll never look like flaunting expensive shoes 2. when I'm not looking at the shoes, I'm looking at someone who is hard to pin down: cross-dresser? shoe fetishist? trans? And in that respect, it changes the advertising narrative which, for the most part, re-enforces the same old stereotypes.

I realize they are exploiting a trend, but that's okay with me: I sort of wish they hadn't added the copy. It'd be more powerful without it. And I wish more advertisers would exploit the rising consciousness of gender diversity and shock more people into redefining what's sexy.