What’s happening on This Is Us right now is an emotional rollercoaster, even by This Is Us standards. (Consider this your spoiler warning.) Kate and Toby welcomed a baby boy, Jack, but he’s premature and facing health problems. Kevin relapsed and just had an interesting encounter with his engaged ex-girlfriend, Sophie. (Stay tuned to see if he mentions the latter to his current GF, Zoe.) Meanwhile, Randall and Beth are headed for a major fight, and we still have Jack’s very-much-alive brother, Nicky, to think about. It’s hard to imagine how This Is Us creator Dan Fogelman will tie everything up in the season three finale, but he has a plan—and it’s going to shock you.
“It feels very big,” Fogelman tells Glamour. “It feels like a real midpoint for us, and I’m very excited about it. The last five minutes of it are as big and sprawling and epic as we get.”
NBC
So what’s in store? Fogelman is keeping specifics locked down, but he did reveal a few tidbits to us. He says Sophie doesn’t appear in the season finale, so those hoping for a resolution about her coffee date with Kevin will have to wait. “I think there’s more to explore there between the two of them,” Fogelman says. As for next season, “You never know. It depends on what happens.”
Fogelman also revealed the finale dives “heavily back into the future,” so expect to learn more about Much Older Rebecca. Remember, we found out in the midseason finale Rebecca is the “her” Randall and Tess visit in the flash-forward, but we don’t know anything beyond that. Thankfully, more information is coming. “I think people will have some questions pertaining to the ‘her’ storyline answered, but there will be other questions posed that you do not see coming,” Mandy Moore (Rebecca) says.
Moore wasn’t surprised when she found out what happens to her character in the future. “My reaction was, ‘Oh, Rebecca,'” she says. “Dan Fogelman is a genius. I was like, ‘Yeah. OK. I see that. I believe that. I understand that. Yep.’” Much Older Rebecca’s exact ailment is still a mystery, and it probably won’t be revealed in the season finale. (Moore wouldn’t confirm or deny.) But she did debunk one fan theory: It’s not alzheimer’s disease. “I love how people are sleuths,” she says of the fans speculation that Rebecca has alzheimer’s. “I love that! That’s a good theory. Not true, but I like it.”
NBC
Speaking of theories, there’s a sad one floating around Twitter that suggests Beth (Susan Kelechi Watson) and Randall (Sterling K. Brown) will divorce. The state of their marriage is not good, and things hit a low point last week when Randall left Beth a nasty voicemail belittling her new job. Watson says what happens between the couple in the finale is “honest.”
“I think it’s those particular characters’ trajectories,” she tells Glamour. “It makes sense to me, and it felt like the right resolution.”
As for whether that divorce talk has merit, Watson’s staying mum. “I stay Team R & B,” she says. “Team ‘Brandall,’ however you want to say it. I hope for the best.” Brown feels the same. “I’m not Team Randall or Team Beth. I’m on the team that wants to see this couple work it out.”
As for the other two big storylines—Kate’s baby and Kevin’s relationship with Zoe—both Fogelman and his This Is Us co-showrunner Elizabeth Berger say we’re getting answers, but no hints for now. Chrissy Metz, who plays Kate, is “still grappling” with the finale and says it’s “unexpected.” Justin Hartley (a.k.a Kevin) echoed this sentiment: “It will leave you on the edge of your seat and make you wonder why there’s not an episode 19. For the record, there’s only 18 episodes. I think you’ll be rooting for these people even more, if you can believe that. “
There are beauty products that are necessities like a good cleanser, a reliable spot treatment, and a concealer that makes me look like I got enough sleep to be a functioning human. Then there are ones that are totally extra and make me feel like I’m living my best life, like pretty much anything Pat McGrath puts her name on. There’s a bit of a grey area, though, and some products straddle the line between the two, my current favorite being body oils. They have a purpose, sure, to moisturize your body, but they do their job in the most luxurious way possible.
Using a body oil takes moisturizing from a chore to a full-blown experience. When I rub myself down with a body oil after a shower (always moisturize your body when it’s damp!), I’m not in my subpar Brooklyn bathroom, I’m in a gorgeous spa somewhere in the Italian countryside preparing for my date with Timothèe Chalamet. Fantasy aside, they really work—they make my skin smell amazing and softer than any lotion can (I especially love to use one on my legs after shaving).
Dr. Ellen Marmur, a dermatologist in New York City, says that this extreme softness is because oils mimic the natural lipids found in our bodies and “like serums, they sink in between the cells and create a better smoother skin surface.” They also have protective qualities that some lotions don’t and are great at really locking in moisture. Dr. Joshua Zeichner, director of cosmetic and clinical research department of dermatology at Mount Sinai Hospital, adds that oils have natural emollient ingredients that help soften rough skin. Because of these qualities, they can be especially helpful if you suffer from super-dry skin or eczema, especially heavier oils like avocado.
A quick word of warning: If you tend to break out on your shoulders or back, lotion might be the better option for you, as oils can exacerbate body acne. But if you do reach for an oil, Dr. Zeichner recommends looking for ingredients like tea tree, coconut, or lavender oils, which are light enough to keep you breakout free.
If you want to get in on the fantasy, I’ve rounded up some of my favorites, as well as derms’ suggestions. Read on for the best body oils.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), who’s a little less than a month in her presidential run, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) plan to reintroduce the Family and Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act on Tuesday—a bill that would create a national program to provide up to 12 weeks of partially paid time off for workers dealing with either their own health (including childbirth and recovery) or the health concerns of a child, spouse, parent, or domestic partner. Workers would be able to earn up to 66 percent of their wages up to a capped amount, and it would be funded by a small payroll tax (two-tenths of one percent) paid by employers and employees
Thanks to the new class of Democratic representatives, there’s a chance the bill will in fact pass the House of Representatives this time around. (Gillibrand and DeLauro first put forth the bill in 2013.) “There is very serious momentum,” DeLauro told the Huffington Post. “We’ve got a new Congress, we’ve got the largest majority of women and young people.” For the bill to pass the Senate, however, Republicans would need to join Democrats, an uphill climb.
Still, the bill is better positioned to attract bipartisan support than ever. Because in 2019 it’s not just Democrats who committed to paid leave. You may remember that in his 2017 speech to a joint session of Congress, Donald Trump said, “My administration wants to work with members of both parties to make child care accessible and affordable, to help ensure new parents that they have paid family leave.” And the issue is one Trump’s daughter and senior advisor Ivanka Trumphas championed, albeit with a mixed reception from advocates. She is also reportedly working on a plan of her own with Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
DeLauro described family leave as now being at the “center of the debate, rather than the fringes.” HuffPost reports that 29 percent of candidates in 2018 made paid family leave a part of their campaign platforms, up from 4 percent in 2014.
The hope is all this conversation will lead to actual forward momentum on an issue so vital to American workers, but one that has remained unchanged at the federal level since the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) passed in 1993.
A bride has started an intense debate on Reddit after having an adults-only wedding ceremony—and asking one guest who brought her children to leave.
The Knot first reported that an anonymous bride posted a recap of her wedding-day drama on Reddit’s “Am I the Asshole?” thread. In her post, the bride said that she and her husband-to-be wanted a child-free event—and had requested an adults-only wedding on their invitations—but ran into some trouble when a guest brought her two kids, a toddler and a baby.
The bride says she allowed the children and their parents to stay through the ceremony but asked her wedding planner to confront the family at the reception.“At the actual wedding ceremony, I let it slide. I was preoccupied for obvious reasons,” the bride wrote. “I also thought that maybe they planned not to attend the reception or to have someone pick the kids up before it started.”
That didn’t happen, so the bride says she decided to intervene: “My event planner went to talk to the couple. I could tell they were arguing with my event planner though so I went over to help him. I think they thought I came to rescue them because they started going on about how rude my event planner was. I explained that I had actually sent him over to discuss the children. I reiterated that the event was child-free and said that I had stated so clearly on my invitations.
“The wife gave a sort of apology and then assured me that they were capable of minding their own children to make sure they didn’t get in the way of anything. I said that wasn’t really the point,” she continued. “That’s when my now-husband comes over and he and the other woman’s husband begin going back and forth and things got a little heated.
“Finally I snapped and said that they just needed to go, which, thankfully they did without much more noise. Still, the whole scene was incredibly embarrassing which is exactly what I wanted to avoid.”
The bride reiterated that her invitations requested that the wedding be adults only. “To be clear, all of my invitations stated that there were to be no children at this wedding,” the bride said in her post. “But she and her husband showed up with their infant and toddler (who I think is like 3-4).”
“I really hate that my wedding day had to be somewhat marred by this incident. According to my mother, everyone was talking about it and I guess enjoying a little dramatic entertainment,” she said.
The bride’s post has since gone viral, racking up more than 1,500 comments since it was posted to Reddit three days ago.
“I’ve had wedding invites and save the dates that say ‘we love kids, but this is an adults-only affair.’ Easy and explicit without being rude,” one commenter said. “The assholes we’re [sic] the ones who brought their kids to an explicitly child-free event. And then caused a scene when they were asked to leave,” another wrote.
Some, however, thought she could have handled the situation differently—and the bride updated her original post to add that “a few family members felt it was inappropriate to kick out the couple.”
Her edit also addressed the comments that other Reddit users left on her post. “Thank you all so much for the feedback. What I’ve gotten from this is that most people think that the couple was rude,” she wrote. “The feedback here has helped me not to feel guilty about that and just realize that not everyone has the same ideas about tact and manners.”
You can read the bride’s entire saga on Reddit. But it’s ultimately a good reminder for anyone planning on going to a wedding: Read the invitation before bringing the whole family.
The U.S. Open is making a major change to how it seeds female players for upcoming tennis tournaments: namely, by no longer penalizing female players who return to the sport after having children. It’s an institutional breakthrough and major win for women in tennis—and it comes after backlash surrounding Serena Williams‘ huge drop in ranking after returning to the sport from maternity leave.
After the French Open was widely criticized for their handling of Williams’ return to the tournament last month following her pregnancy—the former No. 1 was ranked No. 453 after her maternity leave—the organization has now spoken out to announce a change in post-maternity protocol, one that will no longer penalize any female player returning to the sport after pregnancy.
The Women’s Tennis Association, which ranked Williams at No. 451 following her maternity leave, also received backlash and mounting criticism for its inability to make seeding allowances specifically for pregnancies—though it does have a protection that grants them “access to eight events, including two Grand Slams, and wildcard entries into tournaments they previously won,” reportsFast Company. The organization has since said it would reconsider its position—but in the meantime, the U.S. Open has taken measures to move the needle forward on this issue by creating a special protection on seedings for women who return to the sport post-pregnancy.
The U.S. Tennis Association oversees the U.S. Open, and in an interview with The New York Times on Friday, USTA president and chairwoman Katrina Adams explained the reasoning behind the Open’s decision for seeding protection: “It’s the right thing to do for these mothers that are coming back. We’ve shown that we have been a leader over the decades, from equal prize money onward to what we are doing today.”
“We are all about social justice and equality, and this is definitely an instance of equality,” she continued. “We think it’s a good message for our current female players and future players: It’s O.K. to go out and be a woman and become a mother and then come back to your job, and I think that’s a bigger message.”
Adams went on to say that forcing a player to come back from pregnancy at a lower position than when she left would be like asking a top executive to return from pregnancy leave at an entry level position in her company.
“I’m a former player and I get it,” she continued. “I would not want to be the No. 32 player in the world who has worked hard in the last year to obtain this ranking. But we’re a Grand Slam, and we have the right and the opportunity to seed the players according to what we feel is justified.”
“Serena Williams is arguably the greatest player to ever play, with 23 Grand Slam titles,” Adams said. “She deserves the respect to be put in that position.”
The wedding of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry was watched by an estimated 47 million in the U.S. and U.K. alone. Her gown has already been dissected by every major newspaper and website the world over. And the wedding filled up Twitter and Facebook’s trending bars all day on May 19, the day of the wedding. It’s the kind of publicity you just can’t buy.
And yet, the impact on Givenchy and Stella McCartney, the two design houses responsible for the Duchess of Sussex’s gowns that day, is likely to be felt for years to come. Same goes for the silhouettes Markle chose to wear, which could more generally affect the bridal market as a whole. One need only look at the “Meghan”-inspired wedding gowns that were announced within hours of the wedding, with the intention to ship in a matter of weeks. The Royal Wedding fury isn’t about to die down any time soon.
PHOTO: BRIAN LAWLESS
Markle leaving her wedding ceremony at Windsor Castle’s St. George’s Chapel, wearing custom Givenchy Haute Couture.
Ever since she and Prince Harry went public with their relationship, Markle has had an effect on retail. Dubbed the “Meghan Effect” (or the “Markle Sparkle”), brands can’t keep the items she wears in stock—whether it’s a Strathberry handbag or a coat from Line The Label. Still, all estimates say that this phenomenon will only be kicked into overdrive with all things wedding related: Ahead of the Royal Wedding, consultancy firm Brand Finance estimated that Markle’s fashion choices for the big day would generate about $212 million in retail and apparel sales.
It’s a staggering number, but one that the data from the big day supports.
Clare Waight Keller, creative director of Givenchy, who designed Markle’s first wedding dress.
According to InfluencerDB, an influencer marketing software, @givenchyofficial got 3002 mentions and generated 12,234,710 likes on Instagram; @stellamccartney, meanwhile, got 1840 mentions and racked up 9,605,198 likes; @clarewaightkeller, 827 times mentions and 8,907,933 likes. By these metrics, the company estimates that Givenchy has earned $2.9 million while Stella McCartney has garnered $2 million just from its coverage on this one social platform.
PHOTO: WPA Pool
Markle in her second wedding dress, designed by Stella McCartney.
In data supplied to Glamour, eBay reported that searches for items related to Meghan Markle rose 146% on May 19 in the U.S. and U.K. (The impact was particularly felt stateside, where U.S.-based shoppers searched for Meghan Markle related items nearly five times more than those across the pond.) On that day, Givenchy was the most searched-for brand on eBay; other fashion labels associated with the Royal Wedding, including Oscar de la Renta (worn by Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland) and Vivienne Westwood (worn by Priyanka Chopra), rounded out the top five.
PHOTO: WPA Pool
A sample of the lace on Markle’s custom Givenchy Haute Couture veil.
Per e-commerce aggregator Lyst, traffic to Stella McCartney dresses increased by 3,000% on May 19, compared to the previous day.
Not only does the data suggest just how fascinated people were with the wedding itself, but also how in-tune they were to its details, taking into account things like who the creative director of Givenchy is, who’s responsible for the mother-of-the-bride look, and even what the protocol was around the bride wearing two dresses to the royal wedding.
PHOTO: WPA Pool
Markle and Prince Harry leaving St. George’s Chapel after their wedding.
“For a design house to create a gown for a royal wedding of this magnitude, it has a phenomenal effect on the brand,” royal wedding expert and British bridal designer Caroline Castigliano tells Glamour. “Look at Alexander McQueen after the marriage of Kate Middleton to Prince William…the gown elevated then little known Sarah Burton [the creative director of Alexander McQueen]…and the brand has gone from strength to strength across the world since.” This type of exposure could have a similar impact on Waight Keller, who, until know, has been little known outside of the fashion world: “While Givenchy is a successful and very famous design house, the creative director [is putting her] stamp on the brand quickly [because of this],” per Castigliano. “LVMH, which owns Givenchy, must be thrilled.”
It’s not just the brands associated with the wedding that will likely see a boost—don’t be surprised if you see bridal trends reminiscent of both of Markle’s wedding dress styles and choice of tiara. (eBay, for instance, saw a 72% increase in searches for tiaras on May 19, compared to a day earlier.)
“When you look back in history at royal weddings, you can see that in the eighties, when Princess Diana married Prince Charles, full dresses with leg-o-mutton sleeves, became very fashionable,” Castigliano shares. Same goes with Princess Margaret’s gown from her 1960 nuptials: “Princess Margaret married in a stunning gown by Norman Hartnell. While a ball gown shape, the gown was classic in styling with a long sleeve and high neckline with a fitted bodice…her gown was iconic and has influenced bridal design for years.”
PHOTO: Bettmann
Princess Margaret wearing Norman Hartnell to marry Antony Armstrong-Jones.
Then, of course, there’s Middleton’s Alexander McQueen wedding dress, which had a huge impact on the bridal trends (and is still inspiring dress styles in 2018)—though, it didn’t happen overnight.
“Kate Middleton’s long sleeve, v-neck and lace wedding gown shook the bridal gown retail business where the strapless gown had been the number one seller,” Susan Ashbrook, celebrity product placement guru and author of Will Work for Shoes: The Business Behind Red Carpet Product Placement, tells Glamour.
PHOTO: Chris Jackson
Kate Middleton on her wedding day, wearing custom Alexander McQueen by Sarah Burton.
“We found that trends spotted at Duchess Kate’s wedding, such as long lace sleeves and high-necked bridesmaids dresses, like Pippa’s gown, took a few months to gain popularity,” Lori Conley, Senior Vice President for Merchandising, Design, and Product Development for David’s Bridal, tells Glamour. “Consider the time it takes to plan a wedding. Most brides purchase dresses nine to ten months before the wedding, so newly engaged brides may purchase royal-inspired gowns, however, we may not see the trend showing up at weddings for many months.” It might’ve taken a bit, but Middleton’s dress did have staying power: “Seven years after that wedding we continue to see dominance of several trends evoked by her gown, for example the neckline, deep V, and structured lace.”
The Duchess of Cambridge’s wedding gown also killed the strapless wedding dress trend: Before the 2011 Royal Wedding, 75 percent of the dresses David’s Bridal sold were strapless; nowadays, 65 percent of brides opt for a more covered-up style, whether that’s tank straps or full sleeves… like Kate’s. The bridal retailer is using these learnings to shape its response to this Royal Wedding: “[We] are not replicate Meghan’s dress…[but] we will look to be inspired her gown and create our own interpretations,” says Conley.
Some bridal brands, though, have already doubled down. Morilee, which is designed by Madeline Gardner, started working on its riff on Markle’s wedding dress soon after the wedding, with plans to put it up for sale in the weeks following.
Direct-to-consumer wedding brand Floravere also just released its own Meghan-inspired gown, available to shoppers for $1,475.
“Members of our team were up at 5 a.m. on the West Coast waiting to see what she wore, mimosas may or may not have been involved,” Denise Jin, its co-founder, tells Glamour. “Since then…our collective of designers and artisans have been working around the clock to craft something really beautiful and one-of-a-kind that still captures the best qualities of her dress.”
Floravere isn’t a brand that regularly looks to celebrities for inspiration, but Markle and her dress felt like a unique opportunity, according to Jin.
PHOTO: Komanphotography/Floravere
Floravere’s M Markle dress and veil.
“In a lot of ways, Meghan really stole our hearts because she’s not just a celebrity bride, she’s a trailblazer,” she shared. “We were really inspired by their love story and the way she infused her own identity into the wedding. That ethos and independent spirit is exactly what we love about modern brides and ultimately, those are the women who inspire us and who we design for.”
What drew Floravere to Markle might just get at why this Royal Wedding will be such a retail juggernaut—because of what it and Markle represent.
PHOTO: DOMINIC LIPINSKI
Markle and Prince Harry during their wedding ceremony.
The Duchess of Sussex is very much a new kind of royal: biracial, a self-proclaimed feminist, an activist, a past successful career (in Hollywood, no less)… Because of that and more, she stands for an inclusivity that might make her one of the biggest style influencers in history. “Her subtle taste in all facets of her role as Duchess of Sussex will influence a new generation,” says Ashbrook.
