The Brief

Children’s Hospital Los Angeles — one of the country’s oldest and largest providers of gender-affirming care for children and young adults — now finds itself at the center of the national debate over transgender care for young patients.

The hospital faced criticism and an investigation from California’s attorney general after it paused taking in new patients under 19 for gender-affirming hormone therapy in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order that aims to restrict transition-related care for youth.

But Friday afternoon, the hospital confirmed to LAist that it was lifting the pause, saying it had been briefly needed "to assess the potential impact of recent federal policy changes."

California Attorney General Rob Bonta applauded CHLA’s decision and vowed to stand by the hospital’s work.

"While the Trump administration attempts to bully and intimidate through its threats to withhold critical federal funding, California remains firm in its commitment to uphold the dignity and rights of all," Bonta said in a statement. He added that the state will continue to legally fight "the President’s executive order targeting transgender youth."

How we got here

In its Jan. 28 order, the Trump administration wrote that the federal government "will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures." The executive order called gender-affirming treatments "chemical and surgical mutilation."

The Trump administration has been attempting to enforce the order by restricting, or threatening to restrict, federal grants linked to transgender healthcare, including to L.A.-area health providers.

Many healthcare institutions now find themselves in a quandary, even in states like California with anti-discrimination protections. Outside California, providers in Virginia, Colorado and New York made similar moves to restrict care, despite state protections against gender identity discrimination.

Children’s Hospital L.A. found itself in a similar bind: The hospital’s Center for Transyouth Health and Development is the largest clinic treating transgender youth in the country, as well as a leader in clinical research for trans youth.

Though it now risks crossing the new administration, its pause in care for new patients also risked running up against California’s "shield laws" designed to protect this type of medical care, not to mention creating ill will within a community they’d dedicated themselves to serving.

L.A. City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez, whose 13th District includes CHLA, had blasted the earlier decision in a statement; protesters had assembled outside the hospital; and doctors from other local providers had publicly criticized the pause.

Was the pause in care legal?

Two lawsuits against the Trump administration will determine the answer to this question. In the meantime, it depends whether you ask the state or the federal executive branch.

Under California’s anti-discrimination law, healthcare providers can’t discriminate against transgender patients.

In a letter to CHLA, Bonta said: “Electing to refuse services to a class of individuals based on their protected status, such as withholding services from transgender individuals based on their gender identity or their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, while offering such services to cisgender individuals, is discrimination.”

Bonta also said any fears over a loss of funding were unwarranted, and he committed to protecting CHLA and its patients. Several federal judicial rulings have also blocked parts of Trump’s executive order that aimed to freeze funding.

The hospital indicated Bonta's support was crucial to its decision to reverse course, saying “in light of commitments from ... Bonta to seek additional protections for CHLA and its patients, CHLA is lifting its pause on the initiation of new hormonal therapies for patients seeking gender-affirming care, effective immediately.”

What happens next?

This is a legal battle playing out on several fronts.

Oregon, Washington and Minnesota have sued the Trump administration over the Jan. 28 executive order, and the ACLU has filed a separate lawsuit on behalf of private individuals. California has not yet joined these suits, but Bonta filed an amicus brief in support of the latter case on Feb. 21.

Adding to the uncertainty is the belief that laws affecting access to care for transgender people could change.

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to weigh in this year on a case determining whether state bans on care for transgender minors are allowed.

Elana Redfield, federal policy director of the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute, said the case in Tennessee likely won’t directly affect access to transgender care in California, but it could give Congress momentum to pass federal legislation that restricts access to gender-affirming hormones and surgeries.

“This is about federal funding, and pretty much across the country, most providers of gender-affirming care do receive federal funding of some kind,” Redfield said. “So I think it's going to remain a very concerning issue until it gets resolved.”

Another open question is whether CHLA will once again begin to offer gender-affirming surgeries for patients under 19, which are still on pause at the hospital. (The hospital said the decision to pause surgeries for people under 19 was in place before Trump’s executive order.)

Advocates for the LGBTQ community have criticized the pause in surgeries as well, which CHLA said are still available to the hospital’s patients once they turn 19.

Ariela Cuellar, spokesperson for the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, criticized CHLA’s decision-making even after the pause on gender-affirming hormone therapy was lifted, saying that any pause in care amounts to a denial in care.

“It goes against so much other research and findings from [the American Academy of Pediatrics] that have stated that this care is life-saving,” Cuellar said. “ We need to hold these hospitals accountable in these decisions moving forward, keeping those politics aside from caring for the patients.”

A closer look at the hospital's finances

According to the most recent data available for CHLA, two-thirds of the hospital’s total inpatient and outpatient revenue came from Medicare and Medi-Cal, totaling $723 million.

The threat of losing some of this funding could put the nonprofit hospital in a tricky position, but not a unique one.

About 60% of gross revenue for hospitals in California comes from Medi-Cal and Medicare, according to state data.

CHLA, meanwhile, had about $1.7 billion in net assets in 2023, according to the hospital’s most recent tax filings.

How are other health providers handling this?

Other area hospitals have continued to provide care while they evaluate what Trump’s order will mean for their patients.

Children’s Hospital of Orange County said it is reviewing Trump's directive and is “committed to providing evidence-based, safe, compassionate care to children in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.”

St. John’s Community Health, which has more than a dozen locations across Los Angeles, says it will not bow to the Trump administration’s order — and says it is making plans to make up the anticipated funding losses.

Healthcare providers “should never bend to the whims of the Trump administration and fall in line — we must continue to challenge and resist all attempts to harm marginalized communities, no matter the political risk,” St. John’s President Jim Mangia said in a statement.

What the medical community says

The American Academy of Pediatrics has supported gender-affirming care for minors since 2018 and opposes “any laws or regulations that discriminate against transgender and gender-diverse individuals, or that interfere in the doctor-patient relationship.”

The American Medical Association, the Endocrine Society and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, among others, have also taken similar positions supporting gender-affirming care for adolescents.

For 24 years, I've been bringing together audiences here in Southern California ahead of the Oscars so we can review our favorites together.

Last week, we had a packed house at the Alex Theater in Glendale for our annual Film Week Academy Awards Preview.

We gathered nine of our regular FilmWeek critics, whose voices listeners hear on LAist 89.3 on our weekly review of movies. Hundreds of LAist listeners and readers who attended also got to vote for their personal favorites.

If we missed you March 7, we have clips of all 10 of the best picture nominees and the favorite for best animated feature. I have to say, I really loved sharing the experience of the movies with so many people. We'd love to see you in person at next year's event.

Meet the FilmWeek critics

• Tim Cogshell: FilmWeek critic, Alt-Film Guide and CineGods.com
• Christy Lemire: FilmWeek critic, RogerEbert.com and co-host of the Breakfast All Day podcast
• Lael Loewenstein: FilmWeek critic
• Wade Major: FilmWeek critic and CineGods.com 
• Amy Nicholson: FilmWeek critic, film critic for the Los Angeles Times and host of the podcast ‘Unspooled’
• Claudia Puig: FilmWeek critic and program director for the Santa Barbara International Film Festival
• Peter Rainer: FilmWeek critic and the Christian Science Monitor 
• Charles Solomon: FilmWeek critic, Animation Scoop and Animation Magazine 

Watch our full Oscar preview story

Best Picture

Nominees

Bugonia
F1
Frankenstein
Hamnet
Marty Supreme
One Battle After Another
The Secret Agent
Sentimental Value
Sinners
Train Dreams

• Critics consensus: Sinners
• Audience: Sinners

Best Director

Nominees

Chloé Zhao, Hamnet
Josh Safdie, Marty Supreme
Paul Thomas Anderson, One Battle After Another
Joachim Trier, Sentimental Value
Ryan Coogler, Sinners

• Critics' consensus: Paul Thomas Anderson for One Battle After Another

Some other critics said that while they wanted Coogler to win, they thought the Oscar would go to Anderson.

Best Actress

Nominees

Jessie Buckley, Hamnet
Rose Byrne, If I Had Legs I'd Kick You
Kate Hudson, Song Sung Blue
Renate Reinsve, Sentimental Value
Emma Stone, Bugonia

• Critics' consensus: Jessie Buckley for Hamnet
• Audience choice: Emma Stone for Bugonia

Lemire said that while she'd love to see the win go to Rose Byrne, she called Buckley the "only lock of the night"

Best Actor

Nominees:

Timothée Chalamet, Marty Supreme
Leonardo DiCaprio, One Battle After Another
Ethan Hawke, Blue Moon
Michael B. Jordan, Sinners
Wagner Moura, The Secret Agent

• Critics' consensus: Michael B. Jordan for Sinners
• Audience choice: Michael B. Jordan for Sinners

Best Supporting Actress

Nominees:

Elle Fanning, Sentimental Value
Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas, Sentimental Value
Amy Madigan, Weapons
Wunmi Mosaku, Sinners
Teyana Taylor, One Battle After Another

• Critics' consensus: Amy Madigan for Weapons
• Audience choice: Teyana Taylor, One Battle After Another

Best Supporting Actor

Nominees

Benicio del Toro, One Battle After Another
Jacob Elordi, Frankenstein
Delroy Lindo, Sinners
Sean Penn, One Battle After Another
Stellan Skarsgård, Sentimental Value

• Critics' consensus: Sean Penn, One Battle After Another
• Audience choice: Sean Penn, One Battle After Another

Best Original Screenplay

Nominees

Blue Moon, written by Robert Kaplow
It Was Just an Accident, written by Jafar Panahi; script collaborators: Nader Saïvar, Shadmehr Rastin, Mehdi Mahmoudian
Marty Supreme, written by Ronald Bronstein and Josh Safdie
Sentimental Value, written by Eskil Vogt, Joachim Trier
Sinners, written by Ryan Coogler

• Critics' consensus: Sinners, written by Ryan Coogler
• Audience choice: Sinners, written by Ryan Coogler

Best Adapted Screenplay

Nominees

Bugonia, screenplay by Will Tracy
Frankenstein, written for the screen by Guillermo del Toro
Hamnet, screenplay by Chloé Zhao and Maggie O'Farrell
One Battle after Another, written by Paul Thomas Anderson
Train Dreams, screenplay by Clint Bentley & Greg Kwedar

• Critics' consensus: None
• Audience choice: Train Dreams, screenplay by Clint Bentley & Greg Kwedar

Best Animated Feature

Nominees

Arco
Elio
KPop Demon Hunters
Little Amélie or the Character of Rain
Zootopia 2

• Critics' consensus: Tie, Little Amélie or the Character of Rain and KPop Demon Hunters
• Audience choice: KPop Demon Hunters

Best Documentary

Nominees:

The Alabama Solution
Come See Me in the Good Light
Cutting Through Rocks
Mr. Nobody Against Putin
The Perfect Neighbor

• Critics' consensus: The Perfect Neighbor
• Audience choice: no vote

While the only officially gendered awards for the Oscars are for acting, it’s no secret the Academy historically has favored men when it comes to handing out statuettes. Between 1929 and 2026, women made up less than 18% of all nominees, according to a report by the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.

If you exclude the acting nominees, women have been nominated for just under 13% of all awards in the nearly century since the awards began, said Stacy L. Smith, who founded the initiative in 2005 to track inequality in entertainment.

Smith said the numbers, while stark, aren’t surprising.

“This industry cannot change itself,” Smith said. “To create change, you really need to work with folks and bring them in.”

To better understand where gender disparity stands today, we analyzed who actually speaks in the 10 films up for what many consider to be the highest honor in film: best picture at this Sunday’s Academy Awards.

Why? Because gender disparity in dialogue tells us something about the kinds of films that get nominated for awards — or made in the first place — and whose stories tend to be institutionally valued.

We went into this analysis knowing that historically, films that contend for best picture have been dominated by stories driven by male characters. We analyzed the 10 nominated films of 2026 and also analyzed the 2025 nominees to determine the most recent patterns.

Our findings: Women characters spoke about a quarter of the words. That’s down from a third of words in last year’s nominated films.

“Whether we look at just who's on screen, and now when we look at how much they speak, your findings reiterate this real lack of inclusion for women and girls on screen,” Smith said.

The details:

Men overwhelmingly dominate dialogue in eight films. In each — save for Bugonia — at least 70% of the words go to men. Bugonia has the narrowest difference at 56% men and 44% women, snagging the third-highest percentage of female dialogue.

Two films stand out for having twice as much dialogue by women than the overall average of 25%. In Sentimental Value, women speak 57% of the words, and in Hamnet, they speak 51%.

One Battle After Another is the only film where an explicitly nonbinary character speaks. However, their number of words spoken — 25 — is so small compared to the rest of the dialogue that it comes out to 0.2% of the film.

Hamnet is the only best picture nominee to be directed by a woman: Chloé Zhao.

How this compares to last year

Last year, women spoke the majority of words in three films: Emilia Perez, Wicked and I’m Still Here. In all three, women spoke at least 60% of the words.

In 2025, like this year, one film directed by a woman, Coralie Fargeat’s The Substance, was nominated for best picture.

Why lead characters matter 

This year, Sentimental Value, Hamnet and Bugonia have the biggest share of dialogue by women among the best picture nominees. They’re also the only films with a lead woman character.

Michelle (Emma Stone), the main character of Bugonia, speaks the most out of the three women in lead roles. Of the leads in nominated films, she ranks fourth overall behind Marty (Timothée Chalamet) in Marty Supreme, Victor Frankenstein (Oscar Isaac) in Frankenstein and her own co-lead, Teddy (Jesse Plemons).

Agnes (Jessie Buckley) from Hamnet ranks fifth. Nora (Renate Reinsve) from Sentimental Value ranks eighth behind the male leads from One Battle After Another and Train Dreams.

We should note that what constitutes a “lead” role can be subjective. For the purposes of this analysis, we based it on plot summaries and the prominence of the character in the arc of the film.

In most films, lead characters talk more than people in supporting roles. Sentimental Value and Train Dreams are the exceptions. Stellan Skarsgård is nominated for best supporting actor for his role as Gustav Borg in Sentimental Value. Borg speaks about 2,000 words, while his daughter, Nora, speaks about 1,300 in what’s considered a lead role. And in Train Dreams, a man narrates (Will Patton) and speaks about 1,500 words, while Robert Grainier (Joe Edgerton) speaks about 1,400.

Half of last year’s best picture nominees had a woman as the lead character. Female leads outnumbered male leads seven to six, and they generally spoke a greater share of dialogue than them too — save for Cardinal Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes) from Conclave and Bob Dylan (Chalamet) from A Complete Unknown.

Unlike this year, not all films with a woman in a lead role had majority women’s dialogue overall. In Anora and The Substance, women still spoke less than men.

However, lead characters did speak more words than any other character individually — except for in Wicked, where Glinda (Ariana Grande) speaks about 200 more words than Elphaba (Cynthia Erivo).

To try to measure how interested characters are in themselves compared to others and compare that across genders, the analysis looked at how often characters speak “I” words such as “I,” “me” or “my” (among others) versus “you” words like “you,” “your” or “yours” (among others).

We found that women speak more about themselves in half of the best picture nominees. That includes Sentimental Value, Bugonia, Frankenstein, Marty Supreme and The Secret Agent. Admittedly, this is a limited evaluation. It doesn't include first-person plural words like “we,” it doesn’t include third-person pronouns like “he,” “she” or “they,” and it doesn't include the names of characters if they're used to address others. The bottom line: It shouldn't be taken as definitive, especially not without context from the movie.

What women talk about on screen has been the subject of interest for some time. In 1985, Alison Bechdel, a graphic artist, started talking about her criteria for watching a film. Now commonly called the Bechdel test, she said a film had to 1) feature two women characters who 2) talk to each other about 3) something other than a man. This analysis did not measure whether the best picture nominees passed the Bechdel Test, but it’s nonetheless an alternative way to measure women’s representation.

Looking at this data comprehensively — while taking into account the percent of words spoken by women, which films have a woman lead, the content of women’s dialogue and its relationship to their share of words — one film emerges as a standout.

And the Oscar for Most Woman-Driven Story goes to …

An image from the film "Sentimental Value."

(

MK2 Films

)

Directed by Joachim Trier, the Norwegian film Sentimental Value follows sisters Nora (Reinsve) and Agnes (Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas) as they reunite with their estranged father, filmmaker Gustav Borg (Skarsgård). Elle Fanning also stars in a supporting role as actor Rachel Kemp. Aside from best picture, the film received eight other nominations.

Sentimental Value has the highest percentage of words spoken by women. It’s one of just three films with a woman lead. And women refer to themselves more than they refer to the characters they speak to.

It’s the only film where women speak the majority of words and where their word choice favors themselves.

How we got here

Sexism in Hollywood has been the subject of scholarly research, books and, yes, movies. Women are underrepresented in what’s known as “below-the-line” roles, as well as in top executive positions. While the #MeToo movement that called out powerful men in Hollywood led to some actions, change has been slow.

Carolyn Finger, a former media analyst at Variety and Luminate, said conversations around representation — like the #OscarsSoWhite social media campaign in 2015 — help to bolster change in the industry. But there’s still much work to be done.

“What I’ve observed is that when those conversations happen, there is incremental change, but it’s not often sustained change,” Finger said.

This dialogue analysis, she added, “look[s] at who literally has a voice.”

To be clear, the quantity of words spoken is just one measure. On screen, sometimes silence, an action or a particular facial expression carries a greater message than words could convey. And a male-driven story may still have strong, nuanced and well-written women characters.

What's next

Smith said that to create change, studios need to adopt more equitable hiring practices and ensure the films they produce reflect the people watching them.

“If you’re a shareholder, if you go to the movies and buy tickets. If you support these companies by watching their shows, communicate back at what you’re not seeing and why that’s a problem,” Smith said.

Still, this year could be a potentially historic Oscars ceremony. The Annenberg Inclusion Initiative reported that a record-tying 33% of this year’s Oscar nominees are women. Hamnet director Chloé Zhao is the second woman, and first woman of color, to be nominated for best director twice. And if she wins, she’ll be the first woman to win best director more than once.

The 98th Academy Awards will take place 4 p.m. Sunday.

Wanna watch the Oscars this weekend with other movie lovers, but don’t want to host a watch party yourself? Many Los Angeles bars and restaurants have you covered.

While the fifth annual “Official” Oscars Watch Party held at The Academy Museum is sold out, there are still plenty of places showing the Academy Awards live. Here are a few to check out below:

(And when it comes to your Oscar ballot, LAist has you covered with expert predictions — and heated debates — from FilmWeek’s 24th annual Oscars Preview.)

Brazilian Oscars Watch Party

Sunday, March 15, 3 p.m.
Dusty Vinyl
11326 W Pico Blvd., West L.A.
COST: $50; MORE INFO

LAist events columnist Laura Hertzfeld suggests checking out this unique watch party: “Why not celebrate with the Brazilians and their nomination for (the excellent film) The Secret Agent? Dusty Vinyl is being turned into a 1977 secret-agent-themed hideout for the occasion, with a bespoke menu (food is included) and live music before the show starts; '70s costumes encouraged.”

The Hollywood Roosevelt’s Academy Awards Viewing Gala

Sunday, March 15, 3-10 p.m.
The Hollywood Roosevelt 
7000 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood
COST: $375; MORE INFO

If you’re looking to splurge on a four-course dinner and get as close to the actual Academy Awards (held at the Dolby Theatre) as possible, the gala at The Hollywood Roosevelt is your spot. There’s also the added fun of watching the show in the ballroom where the very first Academy Awards were held in 1929.

Beers, Burgers and Best Picture

Sunday, March 15, 3:30 p.m.
33 Taps, all locations
Culver City, Silver Lake, DTLA, WeHo
COST: Free; MORE INFO

All 33 Taps sports bars will be showing the Oscars live on Sunday.

Oscars Watch Party at The Greyhound

Sunday, March 15, 4 p.m.
The Greyhound Bar & Grill
5570 N Figueroa St., Highland Park
COST: Free; MORE INFO

The Highland Park bar and grill will have an Oscar ballot contest with a $5 buy-in for a chance to win a cash prize.

Rooftop Red Carpet Dinner + Watch Party

Sunday, March 15, 2:30 p.m.
Elevate Lounge
811 Wilshire Blvd., DTLA
COST: $39; MORE INFO

If a “celebrity-style atmosphere” with a red carpet, rooftop views and 360 degree photobooth is what you’re looking for, Elevate Lounge has got you. Your VIP ticket includes complimentary hors d’oeuvres for the first two hours of the event from Takami Sushi & Robata.

Oscars Trivia + Screening Party

Sunday, March 15, 2 to 10 p.m.
2636 Huron St., Cypress Park
COST: Free; MORE INFO

This trivia night, Oscar ballot contest and watch party is free, but formal attire is required. Trivia begins at 3 p.m., before the show starts.

Dinner in WeHo + the Oscars

Sunday, March 15, 4 p.m.
La Boheme
8400 Santa Monica Blvd, WeHo
COST: Free admission; MORE INFO

The West Hollywood Mediterranean restaurant will be showing the Oscars on their projector screen and offering Happy Hour specials all night (which they also offer every Monday-Thursday and Sunday).

It’s hard to look at a restaurant menu without being able to order anything from it, but Tien Nguyen has made it her mission to do exactly that.

Nguyen, a food writer and Los Angeles Public Library creator in residence, has been digging through the library’s archives of restaurant menus, some of which go back to the early 1900’s. She’s specifically focused on the neighborhood we now know as Koreatown, and says tracing the evolution of dishes offered can help us understand its history.

“ L.A.'s Koreatown is a really great example of the ways we can look at menus and see how the neighborhood has changed over time,” she said.

She’s been sharing her research with the public, and will be giving a talk this Saturday at L.A. Central Library’s Taper Auditorium.

How restaurants reflect K-Town’s history

In the early 20th century, Koreatown was mostly known as Wilshire Center. Its Art Deco apartments were freshly built, and landmarks like the Ambassador Hotel were trendy spots for celebrities and dignitaries.

“There's one menu that I remember that is in honor of Albert Einstein and his wife Elsa, and you could see there was a big feast and banquet for them,” Nguyen said. “There were also menus for the king and queen of Greece.”

But soon after, other L.A. neighborhoods became in vogue and Koreatown hit a period of decline, even as high-rise buildings started to go up in the mid-20th century.

Following that, Koreatown started to take shape as into the diverse ethnic enclave it is today. Nguyen ties the changes to the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which removed the United States’ highly restrictive quotas on immigration from certain countries, especially those in Asia.

About the menus

Nguyen told LAist the menu of the Korean restaurant The Prince is one of the best examples of this evolution. The restaurant now offers comfort food favorites like bibim mandu and its signature dakgangjeong. But in the middle of last century, it was known as The Windsor, and offered European continental fare.

The Windsor's food offerings from 1958.

(

Courtesy Los Angeles Public Library

)

“ It looks like they have great cocktails, they have really great fresh fruit alongside steaks and all sorts of different types of pastas,” Nguyen said. “When I look at those menus, you do have a bit of FOMO, but at the same time, I also am a person of color. So there's also this recognition that maybe I wouldn't have been welcome in some of those spaces as well.”

In the 1990s, the space came under new ownership and became The Prince – a Korean restaurant that still preserves its Old Hollywood charm.

“The thing to get there really is the Korean fried chicken, the tteokbokki – the rice cakes – and the Korean pancakes,” Nguyen said.

Another example which shows the emerging Korean influence of the area comes from the restaurant Beverly Soon Tofu, which opened in 1986. The restaurant’s menu was painted onto gourds, one of which is currently on display at Koreatown’s Pio Pico Branch Library until the end of the month.

Nguyen, who co-authored a cookbook with Beverly Soon Tofu’s founder Monica Lee (not to mention two books written with Kogi’s Roy Choi), said the menu was inspired by Korean countryside decor.

Monica Lee of Beverly Soon Tofu, pictured soon after her restaurant's opening in 1986, along with a letter announcing the opening.

(

Kevin Tidmarsh/LAist

)

“ These dried gourds were also used as lanterns, so that was her inspiration for wanting to make it look like a menu, because her restaurant at the time was decorated kind of like a countryside restaurant,” she said.

As Korean-Americans settled in what Monica Lee called a sometimes “hot, busy and bothersome” city when she founded her restaurant in 1986, they shaped the neighborhood into the largest Koreatown in the United States – and also shaped the way Americans far and wide eat.

An translation of Beverly Soon Tofu's opening announcement.

(

Kevin Tidmarsh/LAist

)

“ You go to Trader Joe's, and there's that kimbap that was really popular for so many years,” Nguyen said.

Korean-Americans did this alongside many other immigrant populations that call Koreatown home – many of its strip malls represent cuisines from several different countries.

“What's kind of amazing about that to me is that it is something that feels natural,” Nguyen said. “ Koreatown has a large Oaxacan population, for example. It has a very big Bangladeshi population. And so all these foods, all these cultures, [mingled] together to create a food culture that I think is so distinctly Los Angeles.”

Nguyen also credited Korean restaurants with sourcing fresh ingredients locally – even though they aren’t as celebrated as other Californian restaurants for doing so.

How to attend the talk

Nguyen will give her talk “Menus as Neighborhood Maps: How Los Angeles Restaurant Menus Tell Stories of Community Formation” at 10:30am Saturday, March 14, at the L.A. Central Library’s Taper Auditorium.

You can RSVP here.