Julia Fox’s Halloween costume, which drew heavy inspiration from one of the most haunting and tragic moments in American history, has sparked a firestorm of debate across social media. The striking outfit — a bubblegum pink skirt suit, white gloves, a pillbox hat — was altered in a way that drew immediate attention:
the entire ensemble was stained in bright crimson. On the surface, it appeared to be a standard Halloween getup, but its deeper significance quickly became clear. Fox had chosen to reference an event that remains seared into the collective memory of the American public: the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Fox’s outfit recreated the infamous pink Chanel suit worn by Jacqueline Kennedy on November 22, 1963, the day her husband was tragically shot in Dallas. The resemblance to Kennedy’s appearance in the immediate aftermath of the assassination was chillingly accurate, complete with fake blood splatters covering the front of the suit, running down the skirt and jacket, as well as staining her gloves, stockings, and face.
In photos shared from the Halloween event, Fox can be seen standing before the cameras wearing an almost identical pink suit with navy trim, styled in a manner strikingly similar to how Jackie Kennedy was dressed on that fateful day.
The accessories were also carefully chosen to complete the iconic look: a matching pillbox hat, crisp white gloves, navy blue heels, and a navy handbag.
What made the costume particularly jarring, however, was the presence of bloodstains—prominently visible on nearly every piece of the outfit—which evoked a deeply disturbing visual.
Fox’s makeup, hair, and overall presentation left no ambiguity about the historical reference she was making—the intention behind the look was unmistakable.
Unsurprisingly, the outfit divided online opinion almost immediately. Some viewers saw it as an inappropriate and tasteless mockery of a national tragedy, while others defended Fox’s artistic choice as a provocative statement.
One person wrote, “This is despicable. What is wrong with someone who does this? No respect.” Another critic said, “Girl, what? This is disturbing.
Why would you do that? Jesus, have some respect for his family.
Poor taste @juliafox.” Several others echoed similar thoughts, expressing outrage that a woman would adopt such imagery and make light of such an emotionally intense and painful chapter of American history.
“Jackie witnessed her husband’s assassination,” one comment read. “And to see her reaction afterward was heartbreaking. This was a tacky and disgusting choice.”
Another simply commented: “So inappropriate,” while others described the costume as “a mockery of a tragedy.”
Yet, amidst the backlash, there were defenders of Fox’s artistic expression. “Oh please. Nothing wrong with this. Seen this many times over the years.
It’s been 62 years,” one person wrote. Another added: “Controversial maybe, but this costume is so good.” A third comment read:
“I don’t care for her at all. But this is awesome. It’s just a costume.” Some viewers felt that Fox was making a statement about the resilience of Jacqueline Kennedy, rather than mocking the event.
They suggested the look was meant to draw attention to the trauma of that day, rather than to trivialize it.
After the criticism poured in, Fox took to Instagram to explain her intentions behind the costume.
In a lengthy post, she clarified that her aim was not to disrespect the historical significance of the moment but rather to honor it and make a broader sociocultural point. “I’m dressed as Jackie Kennedy in the pink suit.
Not as a costume, but as a statement,” she wrote. She explained how, after her husband’s assassination, Jackie Kennedy famously refused to change out of the blood-stained suit, insisting that the public should see the horrors of the event.
The post continued: “The image of the delicate pink suit splattered with blood is one of the most haunting juxtapositions in modern history—beauty and horror, poise and devastation.”
Fox described Jackie’s decision as an act of extraordinary bravery, pointing out how the former First Lady’s refusal to change clothes was both a form of mourning and a protest against the violence that had been inflicted.
“It was performance, protest, and mourning all at once,” Fox wrote. “A woman weaponizing image and grace to expose brutality.
It’s about trauma, power, and how femininity itself is a form of resistance.” She concluded her explanation by writing: “Long live Jackie O,” and credited her hair and makeup team for helping her achieve the look.
Despite Fox’s explanation, the reaction was not universally positive. Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of Jacqueline Kennedy and President Kennedy, expressed his displeasure with the costume on X (formerly Twitter).
Schlossberg, who is the son of Caroline Kennedy, condemned the outfit as “disgusting, desperate, and dangerous.”
He went on to say that he was sure his late grandmother would have been appalled by the decision to recreate such a painful moment in history.
The pink suit itself, now preserved in the National Archives, remains one of the most historically significant items of clothing in American history.
After the assassination, Jacqueline Kennedy returned to the White House with her blood-stained clothing still on, as a deliberate act of defiance, and it was later placed in a bag by her maid, Providencia Paredes.
The suit was eventually sent to the Archives in 1964, accompanied by a note that read: “Jackie’s [suit] and bag — worn November 22, 1963.”
The note, written on stationery belonging to Jackie’s mother, Janet Auchincloss, was never signed, leaving the decision to send the suit to the archives uncertain.
The Kennedy family never requested the suit be cleaned, and historians note that it was preserved for archival purposes.
Experts point out that the blood stains and other residues are considered part of the garment’s historical significance, adding to the object’s narrative.
Phyllis Magidson, curator of costume and textiles at the Museum of the City of New York, stated that the stains and imperfections are integral to understanding the story behind the item, while conservator Gail Murphy, who has seen the suit, described it as “essentially looking brand-new.”