2018 Oscars Fashion by Someone Who Knows Almost Nothing About Fashion

My wife and I watch the Oscars every year, and we chat about which dresses and tuxes we like and which we don’t. She knows waaay more about fashion than I do. I know virtually nothing except that I can identify a wide variety of women’s shoes. (Slingbacks, kitten heels, open-toed pumps — don’t even get me started.) We dutifully watched the 90th Oscars last night, and I give you now my best-ofs in my own categories.

Best-Dressed Woman — I have to go with Nicole Kidman, who wowed in a gorgeous blue number, the ginormous bow and all.


Best-Dressed Man — Black Panther‘s Chadwick Bozeman, for sure. So cool. So very, very cool.


Worst-Dressed Woman — At first I thought, Oh, it’s Emily Blunt, who I think is marvelous, but she sure missed last night. Then I saw someone named St. Vincent, who is apparently a singer. I don’t know why she hung luggage on her shoulder, but I wish she hadn’t.


Worst-Dressed Man — Armie Hammer. Armie, really? Red velvet?



Best Necklace — Gal Gadot. Is it ga-doh or ga-dot? I have no clue, but that necklace was somethin’ else.


Best Red — Allison Janney, who looked “stunnnn-nnniiinnnggg,” according to the E! team, who used the term like 87 times


Best Blue — Nicole Kidman again, though Jennifer Garner’s blue was beautiful as well

nicolekidman     jennifergarner


Best Use of Black — Hands down, Lupita Nyong’o, who always looks elegant


Nicest Try, But Yeah, No — Margot Robbie, with her strikingly square shoulders and a dress that did nothing for her. Her hair looked weird too.


Best Pink — The almost unrecognizable but always lovely Viola Davis


Most Matronly — Maya Rudolph, who looks like she might be pregnant under all that red stuff


Best Balloon Curtains — Andra Day. Nothing more to add.


Best Didn’t Work Then, Doesn’t Work Now — Rita Moreno


Assorted Notes

  • allisonwilliams
    Allison Williams

    Allison Williams looked diaphanous, a word I learned watching Juliana Rancic and which I would like to use more often but hardly ever can.

  • Helen Mirren and Meryl Streep, as always, looked elegant.
  • If I could own one tux, I would choose the one Common wore. Really sharp. Plus, he’s awesome!
  • Whoopi Goldberg — Oh, Whoopi. Sigh.
  • And why the dinky heck was James Ivory wearing a drawing of Timothée Chalamet on his shirt? Kinda creepy.


Gotta LUV That Spam!



Sexuality More Static Than Previously Thought

Alfred Kinsey
(Great biography here)

I’ve thought for a long time that human sexuality was fluid, that there were a nearly infinite number of forms. Much of that thought was based on information from Alfred Kinsey’s landmark studies back in the 60s, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. A new study has made me rethink that concept.

Kinsey and his colleagues conducted an enormous number of interviews and individual studies—more than 17,000, in fact. His work was both hailed as a new psychological benchmark in human sexuality as well as derided for its rather unconventional research techniques. In any case, Kinsey described a rather linear spectrum of sexuality, with exclusively heterosexual at one end, exclusively homosexual at the other, and a fluid baseline of varying bisexual responses.

A recent study by researchers at the University of Washington, however, indicates a more categorical model. The researchers studied behaviors of 33,000 individuals. The results indicated that a model of distinct categories suits the understanding of sexuality better than does Kinsey’s spectrum model.

In the category model, individuals may be said to belong to one of a number of categories. The category with the greatest number of people is—no surprise there—heterosexuals. Just 3 percent of males and 2.7 percent of females were found to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual. The researchers did describe some fluidity within the categories, but for the most part sexuality was seen as rather static.

Basically we heterosexuals are pretty much the same. One category, lots and lots of people.

But for everyone not heterosexual, the categories are far more complex. “There is a class of people who are heterosexual,” explains Alyssa Norris, lead author of the study, “and then a class that’s non-heterosexual. There’s a fantastic amount of diversity within those classes, especially that non-heterosexual class.”

That doesn’t mean we should put any more labels on people than they already have; it just means that diversity rules the day. Fluidity, not so much.