There are two things I know to be true about this coming Sunday: I'll be watching wall-to-wall coverage of the Golden Globes, and the show's host, Ricky Gervais, will make jokes so wildly inappropriate that I'll be muting the TV more often than the camera inevitably cuts to Jennifer Lawrence and Amy Schumer drinking, giggling and fake-grimacing.
It's not that I can't take a joke, but my 4- and 7-year-old daughters will be watching with me, and while I'm normally happy to try and explain rude humor, the fact is that I just want to watch the show with minimal interruption.
That also means that I don't want interruptions during the pre-show red carpet spectacular. The only thing more fun than watching A-listers get drunk and eat when they don't know the camera is on them during the Golden Globes is watching them outside beforehand twirl for the cameras and gush about which celebrities they're excited to see that night.
I'm not excited about the trend wherein people think celebrities need to be asked more substantive and less trivial questions on the red carpet. #AskHerMore, "Flip the Script," and now #WorthSaying are all a thing wherein very smart people are campaigning for the bar be raised for what women on the red carpet are asked—beyond "Who are you wearing?" and "How long did it take you to get ready for tonight?"
Can't a couture gown just be admired without knowing where someone stands on reproductive rights or the presidential election?
While they are, indeed, silly questions, people like me actually like to hear the answers. I'm all for empowering women, equality and all that kind of good stuff—except when it comes to award shows. Must every second of every day be about the advancement of a cause?
Can't a couture gown just be admired without knowing where someone stands on reproductive rights or the presidential election? Who really cares about Sophia Vergara's politics, anyway? Or Channing Tatum's take on North Korea? Is hearing Kate Hudson's reaction to President Obama's action on gun control making someone—anyone—a better person? Can we just know if her diamonds are borrowed or she gets to keep them?
Since when do we expect news of substance on E!? And if they need to expand their news horizons beyond the state of Kim Kardashian's butt, must it start during award show season?
While we're at it, how come no one's going after Jimmy Fallon to see why he doesn't delve deeper than classroom instruments with Mariah Carey? After all, his platform is stronger and longer than a red carpet award show. Or is it possible that entertainment shows can just be allowed to entertain without expecting a deeper commitment to more intellectual topics? Perhaps entertainment executives know that most people turn to CNN for news (ish), and to channels like E! for lighter fare.
Celebrities who don't like being asked to put their hands in the mani-cam certainly don't have to be interviewed there, or at all. Although, really, few celebrities actually complain about it—the red carpet and "Who are you wearing" is generally a quid pro quo for the people who loaned, gifted or paid celebrities to wear their dresses, shoes, jewels and purses.
I already feel the weight of trying to raise two girls into women who know they are less than no one else. Yet I find zero problems letting them watch women being asked what they're wearing while men are asked more intelligent questions. Not every conversation needs to be a deep one. Besides, if the men looked as glamorous or as interesting as the women, they'd be asked about their hair and nails, too. Hollywood may not know how to cut checks evenly, but when it comes to a vapid fixation on looks, they definitely don't discriminate.