No.

I don't have all good reflections of Mens Fashion week. Take a look at this.

From the critically well received Louis Vuitton men's collection for Spring/Summer collection. I say No, first because of the way it has reminded critics so much of bike messengers. Being from Philly, I cannot particularly connect this interpretation of a biker to the ones I am familiar with. This leads me to the fact that the audience's enthusiasm must have been reverberations from nostalgia of bike messengers from the past... or maybe ones from another country? Because bike messengers here do not subscribe to leather, nor bags big enough to be worthy of wheels. Which forces me to question the man that Louis Vuitton wants dress. Because the price tag for looking like a bike messenger or... normal with those bags do not seem appealing. Either way, I need to clear some things up.

Second...

I don't like this silhouette at all really. It reminds me of myself in boxer shorts before I've gotten into my pants, but with my oxfords on already. No. I don't like to be reminded of that or any other vision I've had like that of any other man. But that might just be me in my comfort zone, boxers after all are not the edgy man's uniform. I feel more like: "No Sir, I'd rather not feel like I'm seeing you below the knickers, wear some socks that are invisible or not so high."

In all this reminds me of other things:

A look from the Christian Dior Couture lingerie inspired collection.

from Jezebel.com

Not exactly the same, but conceptually that same pants-less Gaga uniform (yeah I read The Cut, AND?) I get the same feeling comparing both of these. Yes this look has a skirt, but a lace, silken lingerie bottom under a traditional Dior silhouette. As if to reform the previous quote to 50 years to the past: "Oui Madame, Mr.Dior has liberated you with a different look, finally, but you should not feel free enough to mosey without your culottes or skirt or whatever you might wear at this time."

So would both or any of the pictured looks be called progressive? Rebellious? Misguided? Well, it depends on how you view higher pants on men and women plainly without bottoms. Is this the future? Maybe I'm just not cultured enough (yet) to wrap my head around the conceptual and historical references. Maybe this is just a subject I should revisit... like an old book that you understand more the second time around.

But back to Men's. It was head on with the tonal relations of the pieces (familiar Vuitton), which could be worn with other things to maintain a more bike messenger feel. But maybe that's just a runway's unrealistic view of things.