They did say trouser suit was okay...

hey, they said pant suits were ok. I've seen practical, low or no heel, non-slip shoes that still look like dress shoes, at least enough for a job interview or trip to the goddamned white house. no excuse for gym shoes or flip flops

They didn't really cave because that website has not been updated for awhile, a lot of people did overact because they given interviews before to journalists who have worn trainers or not worn a suit.

Seriously, American press corps? You can't be bothered to show up in a suit? That's just sad.

Am I the only one who finds all OTT marriage proposals fully disingenuous? Like, if you're so unsure that I'm going to say yes that you need to convince me with a huge production? Grosses me out. Or alternatively, so convinced that I'm going to say yes that you don't even consider how uncomfortable it might make me if…

I think it's time for my all-time favorite ms manners question!!!

STOP!

Do you really think you can win me over with an article about tiaras, Mark? Just kidding, of course you can.

Yeah, I actually wish that entertainers would say LESS about the "issues of the day". Because most of the time, they have nothing to add to the conversation.

I don't really like either of these people but I am puzzled by many people's expectations that entertainment stars are somehow required to comment on stuff like this. I really don't care if any of the people I follow weigh in on politics or social issues. It just isn't something I expect out of them.

I agree. This is a case of 2 assholes being assholes.

BRITS AND ENGLISH ARENT THE SAME.

I know this is Jez and idolizing celebrities is ok here, but putting strangers (who have a very constructed public persona) on a platform is a recipe for disappointment.

He asked [Cara], " You got any of the bad shit?" To which she said, "I ain't got the bloat for nothing, bitch!") as Kendull threw him a parched look that said, "Please pay attention to me, please pay attention to me, please take a picture with me or my Satanic pimp of a mother will punish me for not meeting this…

Aaaah. I am a historian, 20th century beauty is one of my specialty areas, and this gives me HIVES. It's not even remotely accurate. It's more like a makeup artist's vague modern take on decades past. Pretty, but NO.

I want to love this, but it's all just so innacuracte. It like, the stage version of each look, rather than real historical accuracy. The overall feeling is right, but the details are all wrong.

They were way off for most of those decades. I'm not even talking about the brows. Make up and hair was off.

Her eyes were also way underdone for the 1920s. They had these crazily made up doll eyes that the silent movies loved doing close ups of. She barely has anything on her eyes.

I can't take this video seriously because her eyebrows did not change a bit. And what REALLY differentiates a lot of these decades is the brows. The 20s-30s were all about super thin brows—basically lines. They started filling back in in the 40s and 50s (where that super sexy high arched brow was in). 60s with no…

I wish the looks were more dramatic.