On the heels of Fright Night, Halloween in St Andrews draws to a close. Personally, Halloween is one of my favorite holidays, taking 2nd just behind St Patrick’s Day. I love to see everyone’s costumes, especially the unique and creative ones. Even if it is a particularly basic costume, something about the group enthusiasm is that, for one night, everyone becomes someone else. While the concept has admittedly matured as we’ve gotten older, I’ve never quite lost my love for it, and I know I’m not the only one.
celebrity halloween culture
Extreme and over-the-top costumes, such as Heidi Klum’s, are a highlight of Halloween for many. Seeing what celebrities do with their excessive wealth and resources is always a fun reflection on the holiday. Whether that be Haylee Baylee dressing in an over-the-top Fish Tales-inspired outfit as Lola or Heidi Klum’s husband as a stone statue to her Medusa, often the only ‘crime’ of these costumes is their ostentatious nature.
I would argue, however, that this year we have seen several costumes that toe the line of acceptability, blurring the line between what is appropriate as a costume and what is sexy. Likely, this has always existed, but for one reason or another, the controversial Halloween costumes this year seem particularly ill-suited to the widely beloved tradition of Halloween.
children’s characters and Halloween
My first proposed costume that blurs this line of acceptability may be controversial. Still, it is less an all-encompassing statement of unacceptability and more a condemnation of specific iterations being worn. The Paddington Halloween costume is beloved by many, whether that be through nostalgic associations with the character or the inherently cute nature of dressing up as a stuffed bear. Overall, I love this costume; it is an adorable concept, particularly for kids to dress up as their favorite toy.
Where I find this costume verges into slightly questionable territory is in the adult iterations of it, many of which I saw on the streets of St Andrews this Halloween. To be clear, this isn’t a costume only for children; I think if done right, it can also be suitable for adults. The line became crossed when I saw “sexy” Paddingtons walking about the streets. To be very clear, this is not a judgment of the women choosing a sexy costume for this Halloween. There are so many excellent adult options that can be dressed up in both a tasteful and showy manner, I question why, of all these options, it was necessary to sexualize a children’s toy.
Paddington is not unique in this concept of Halloween costumes that play on this idea of aging up childhood concepts. Other popular examples include Disney princesses, Toy Story, or even cartoons like The Smurfs. The sexualized nature of some of these I think could also potentially be questioned. I find there to be a stark difference between dressing as a sexualized literal teddy bear and playing up existing elements, such as corsets, in a princess dress. While this complaint is more of a personal opinion, discourse over the ethics of sexualizing children’s toys and characters is not necessarily new. Kendall Jenner experienced this backlash firsthand through her sexy Jessie from Toy Story look. Through this, we can see that the waters have become increasingly murky in terms of which children’s concepts can be successful adult costumes, with much of the audience backlash and general judgments boiling down to personal preference or sensitivity.
the struggle of dressing as a real person
However, one controversial costume I would argue is very black-and-white in nature, pointing to a larger issue: dressing as real people and turning their struggles into a fun Halloween costume concept. This is, of course, Julia Fox’s Jackie Kennedy costume. When I first saw this on my timeline, I genuinely couldn’t believe it. I think many people felt the same way; there was something so startling about seeing Fox’s model-esque high cheekbones and Halloween makeup in a replica of Jackie’s suit from November 1963, complete with fake blood and gore down the front of it. Taking such an iconic woman’s pain, a woman who is not that far removed from us in 2025 as her grandchildren are currently alive, and wearing it as some publicity stunt or Halloween costume is honestly shocking. And if it was a publicity stunt, it may have worked because the backlash was so fierce that Fox then went onto social media to justify her decision in an Instagram post.
This spinning of her insensitive at best and downright disgusting at worst Halloween costume felt honestly a bit silly, as she claimed the costume was in fact “not… a costume, but… a statement”. This initial claim was honestly a bit ridiculous, especially considering she wore this “statement” to a Halloween party hosted by Urban Decay. What else would you attend a Halloween party in than a costume? Fox then went on to claim her statement paid homage to Kennedy’s “brave” decision not to change from her clothes in the face of “brutality”. My skepticism of this post is apparent by now. In short, I firmly believe that Jackie Kennedy does not need Julia Fox to recreate the worst day of her life for press and attention. Jackie Kennedy is a cultural icon, and even if Fox’s Instagram claim was genuinely her intention, Jackie Kennedy does not need her to make this statement. Her wearing her husband’s blood and likely brains on herself was less a calculated move for femininity or an act of bravery, as Fox frames it; more likely, she was traumatized, attempting to piece together the impact of what had just happened with little thought to changing her clothes.
This whole situation raises a different ethical concern about the Halloween costume: the impact or meaning of dressing as a real person. Julia Fox was not the only celebrity to test the bounds of dressing as an honest individual. Winnie Harlow, the Canadian supermodel, chose to dress as Whitney Houston at the 2001 BET Awards. It may not be obvious why this is considered controversial; however, when one looks deeper into Houston’s personal life at the time, the issue with the costume becomes clearer.
This performance sparked concerns about Houston’s well-being due to her erratic behavior during the awards. These concerns proved not to be unfounded as the singer passed away 11 years later with confirmed influences of cocaine that contributed to her accidental drowning. While this costume is less outwardly inflammatory than Fox’s, it still begs the question of to what extent it is alright to pose as real people, to capture a potentially low moment in their lives, and to preserve and promote it.
ethics & Your halloween reaction
Again, the depth of reaction here is very deeply personal, with one’s own ethical considerations likely driving any reaction to either of these costumes. Nevertheless, when involving real people, it is very important to consider both the real-life implications of a costume and the moment you may be highlighting in that person’s life. Similarly, care should be taken when choosing to use any piece of children’s culture, making sure to respect its origins or, if certain aesthetic expectations are not easily feasible or acceptable, choosing a different costume.
As always, ethics depend so much on personal reaction that there will never be an easy answer to any costume controversy. Still, the best we can do in the meantime is choose our own costumes with tact and consideration, especially when referencing certain subject material. As for me, I’m already cooking up my own ideas for Halloween 2026, and I cannot wait to see you all again on the spooky streets of St Andrews.