ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 257 Comments

Tuesday’s Workwear Report: Nala Dress

Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices. I'm a bit funny with pleats — I've seen probably two pleated skirts in my life that I've liked, and yet I always like pleats elsewhere on a dress as a structural point of interest, such as here with the neckline detail. I wish the dress were just a smidge longer as styled on the model, but that's me. The dress is $345, and available in most sizes 0-12 at Reiss. Nala Dress Looking for a more affordable option? This previously featured dress is now down to $14(!!) (final sale), and this pretty blue wrap dress comes in regular and plus sizes for $70-$76. Another great option (but not much more affordable than the featured dress) is this blue Boss dress, now marked 50% off. Update: Link fixed! Sorry about that! This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support! Seen a great piece you’d like to recommend? Please e-mail tps@corporette.com.

Sales of note for 12.5

And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!

Some of our latest threadjacks include:

257 Comments

  1. I’ve been out of the dating pool for years but unfortunately I’m back! What are the best apps people use now?

    For reference, I’m 35 and looking for men my age/a bit older, in NYC, smart/nerdy/techy types, the smarter the better.

    Found previous bf on OKCupid which worked decently, but I think I’ve heard has changed? I prefer something like that where you can really get a sense of someone’s personality over the swipe apps that are all about the picture and a funny one liner. (Most dates I got from swipe apps were immediate duds but I couldn’t tell from the info I had before agreeing to the date.) Happy to be convinced of swipe apps’ awesomeness though, especially if that’s where everyone else is hanging out.

    And does using a paid app/buying upgrades actually help? I’m naturally cheap but wow I really want to find a good man, for good, so I don’t have to do this again. Any tips for that would be most welcome!

    1. I had a reasonably decent experience on Bumble, even though it’s all swiping. Lots of men of the type you describe. DO NOT PAY FOR ANYTHING! I would swipe, chat with 3-10 guys at a time, and set up first dates with anyone who still seemed appealing after that. I am now casually seeing someone who I met through this method who would not have fit in with a list of criteria I would have made on a more detailed app, but I enjoy his company. That said, I’m recently divorced so I’m not on any kind of timeline for finding something serious.

    2. OK Cupid has changed to be more like the other apps (Tinder etc). Before you could message anyone, now the only way someone sees your message is if you both match with each other. It’s really annoying. Of course, you can pay a fee if you want to see all the messages you’re receiving.

      Not in NYC but Bumble seems to be the most popular where I am. I hate all the swipe apps.

    3. The world has changed. You will need to be open to more casual connections involving hooking up, even after a single date. The older men want immediate gratification you will have to deal with. It’s best to know this before accepting a dinner date with him. Drinks alone should not be enough alone unless you are game.

      1. What kind of advice is this?! The idea that you have to put out just to have dinner is so retrograde and gross.

      2. Someone please tell me this is a troll and not real…I’m upset enough at the dissolution of my relationship and having to do this again.

        Whether this is a real comment or not, it did make me cry, so if you were aiming to freak out someone vulnerable, you succeeded.

        1. Even if it’s not a troll, this is not a thing. You don’t owe anyone anything for agreeing to go to dinner. If anything, I think the guys looking for the casual connection are usually pretty upfront about it during the messaging portion. And if that’s not your thing, you say “no thanks” and move on.

        2. I truly don’t want to upset you, but based on a not-great second date I had on Saturday night, I would say this set of expectations still exists, at least among some men. The best I can say is to go out with a firm idea of what your boundaries are and to be prepared to enforce them. And I met the guy in question on Match, so it’s not limited to swipe apps.

          And I’m sorry that it still is this way. I’ve dated other men who are more respectful.

          1. Yes I hate to say it but this person does have an (uncomfortable) point. A recent guy was shocked, SHOCKED, that I would not sl eep with him on the second date (and acted like something was wrong with me – he was trying to understand it). I was kind of taken aback by his surprise. Is this the norm now? I really thought there was no norm and that it was all on a case by case basis.

          2. Yeah. I don’t think she was saying that you owe a guy s3x if he buys you dinner, but that he will expect it. And (sadly) I think that’s largely true.

          3. There are tons of guys like this out there, just as there have always been. I think most of them are pretty upfront about it. I figure that anyone who pushes for me to put out (after I’ve said no) is just making my dating life easier, since they are clearly not for me.

          4. Just for a different perspective, I’ve found that in my mid to late 30s, men have been much less high-pressure about getting physical – I’ve found that people are much more focused on getting to know you and figure out if there’s potential there before moving things forward. That said, I’ve been very upfront about only being interested in a committed relationship, so maybe I’m screening a lot of these guys out.

          5. yep, agreed. it sucks but it’s just part of the (unpleasant) dating process these days. OP, I would recommend bumble and hinge – I had luck with bumble in LA and a lot of my friends like hinge. I’d also say be as open-minded as possible – I know you said the “smarter the better,” for example, but I would suggest that you give guys who don’t fit that description a chance too. At our age the pool is just smaller so compromises need to be made.

          6. I agree with January. Many men are gross, and some expect s-x as a quid pro quo, but just b/c they want something does NOT mean you have to give them this. S-x is a very personal thing, and for the lousy $75 they may spend on a meal for you does NOT entitle them to get intimate with you. Remember this even if others say it is becomeing more and more the norm. I know some mileanials think of sex as less intimate then kissing, b/c they will have s-x but they will NOT want to kiss you. That is NOT the way for me, and I was NOT brought up that way. I think the other op’s are right when they say you may not be ready to go back into the dateing pool yet. You are to vulnerable and sensitive. Once you realize that most men are not great, you won’t fall under the spell of some d-bag who just wants you to pull your panties down for them. I see it almost every week I go to the Hamtons, but I do NOT care, b/c I do NOT pull my panties down for any man, even if they take me out for a dinner. FOOEY on that!

        3. Gently, if this comment made you cry then maybe it’s too soon to start dating. I don’t agree with how the comment was phrased but I’ve learned that most people (men AND women) seem to be looking for something casual. Lots of men will approach dating through that lens. You’re never ever obligated to do anything you don’t want to do. Full stop. I think it’s important, though, to be prepared for the fact that a lot of men (and probably women, but if you’re not dating women then that doesn’t really matter) are making assumptions that might not match up with what you’re looking for. Forewarned is forearmed and all that.

          I’ve been admittedly naive about dating. Like – if I said I was really into a TV show and a guy offered to watch with me one night, it would not have occurred to me that he’s thinking we’re going to do more than just watch the show. It has been a really tough learning curve.

          1. Oh man this reminds me of freshman (college) orientation when a guy invited me to his room to “watch TV.” I was so naive and had no idea what that meant.

          2. To me, keeping things casual doesn’t mean having sex on the first date, it can also mean just going on dates and hanging out, without the expectation that it’ll turn into something serious quickly. In other words, dating to have fun, not having marriage on your mind when you go on that first date.

        4. This was not my experience at all, or that of my friends, FYI. I read that post as a troll. There’s always jerks out there, none of that is new. Listen to your gut. I do not spend time on dates unless I genuinely want to meet the person after messaging, and I do not go on a second/third/etc date if I was only meh about the first. I also don’t play games – if I like someone and want to text/see them/whatever, I express that clearly. And I look for people who appear to do the same.

          1. Right? The OP said she met her ex on OK Cupid – it’s not like she time traveled from the 1950s.

        5. I’d recommend putting something in the bio of whatever site/app you’re using that you’re not looking for a hook up or that you’re looking for something long term. It’ll weed out a lot of those guys, IME.

          1. Do you see the timestamps of the first several people saying CJ’s comment is atrocious? Could you perhaps learn to give feedback without being rude and condescending?

          2. Just because you think it’s atrocious and mean doesn’t mean it’s not true, is the point. And that moderation isn’t meant to police tone.

    4. The swipe apps are good for the initial 3-4 weeks, where you are the fresh face, and everyone else is new to you as well, but then I find the hits fall off.

      Match is the one I keep coming back to (thought I’m not in NYC)- you can sign up for free to get your profile out there, but have to pay to see messages. If you sign up (free) and then wait awhile, they’ll usually end up giving you a discount of some sort to start paying. My theory is that if the participants actually have to pay, they’re probably a little more invested in the process.

    5. Never, ever do anything you are uncomfortable with. Don’t listen to people who argue that the “norm” is to “put out” before you are ready. Enforcing your own boundaries should be the one cardinal rule of dating. Anyone who doesn’t respect them is worthless.

    6. I had good luck with Coffee Meets Bagel, 2.5 years ago and not in NYC though so maybe that’s not current or regional enough information.

      1. I know one of the founders of that app! I always get excited when I see people say they met their SO on it.

    7. I’ve had some good experiences with Coffee Meets Bagle as the original model is that it would match you up with friends of your Facebook friends (to the extent possible).

  2. The link to the affordable dress goes to the Nala dress.. which is gorgeous. Wish it was in the budget.

  3. Long story short, I learned this morning at 8:30a I have an interview today at 2p. I am wearing Sloan ankle pants from BR and an Amour Vert knit wrap top, which skews way too casual to me. I can stop at home to change, however, I have no suit that fits right now – my pre-baby suits are really dated and my immediate PP suit was cheap and doesn’t fit great anymore. My options are:

    1) wear a dress and a non-matching jacket (I have BR dresses in grey and navy that I typically wear without a blazer, but I probably have one to match)
    2) wear trousers, a blouse, and a scarf – I don’t think I have a great blazer to match my trousers, and most of my pants are ankle, not trouser
    3) stop at BR and buy a suit – I don’t love this option because I’m trying to save money, and I’m tall so buying pants off the rack is iffy, but I’ve never NOT worn a suit for a first interview

    My industry isn’t terribly formal (see above with all my ankle pants) but I’ve always done full suit for interviews. How important is that? What say ye, wise women of Cor po r et te?

    2. I would be happy with dress and jacket/blazer combo
      (I’m assuming jacket is sufficient to dress up and formalize the dress?)

      while I usually wear full suits to interviews as well, sometimes you have to go with the dress/blazer look and I don’t think it’ll kill you.

    3. Personally, I would go with option 1 and find some way to fit in to the conversation that you were just invited to the interview today. If they ask at 8:30am, they can’t expect that you will be dressed in a suit. For most people, that would just mean running out of their office wearing what they wore to work that day. And I’m not willing to drop a couple hundred dollars on a suit for a company that doesn’t bother to give me appropriate notice of an interview – but I realize that you may not feel that way

      1. IMO, mentioning a late invitation sounds defensive and possibly calls attention to your clothing. If your industry is fairly casual, dress with non-matching blazer should be fine anyway.

    4. I vote for option 1. I don’t think a blazer needs to match – don’t try to make it look like a suit. .

    5. I vote for dress plus blazer, and good shoes. Ideally matching in interview colors (black, dark gray, navy). Just mention in passing that you came straight from work, and you’ll be fine, particularly if you’re not in a conservative industry.

      When I hire (for a corporate non-formal company), I want people to look close to a suit, but I know they’re likely dealing with a current job and trying not to give away that they’re interviewing. Men in dress pants and a dress coat that they clearly threw on in the car are fine. Women in a dress or dress pants with a nice top and blazer that they added in the car are also fine.

    6. What were the circumstances of the last-minute interview? If the urgency was entirely on the side of the employer – and the people interviewing you will know that – I’d go with #1. If it isn’t as one-sided, I’d find time to get to a department store (Macy’s would work for me) and try to find an off-the-rack suit that fits well enough to interview in.

    7. depenfing on what you mean when you say the pp suit doesn’t fit great I would Wear that. IMO, wearing the “right” thing fir an interview is more important than flattering (up to a point). Second option would be dress with blazer- still feels like a suit. No matter what I would wear a blazer.

    8. Where are you geography and industry wise? My vote would probably be 1 with a scarf for a little interest. I don’t think full suits are necessary except in the most conservative industries, but something close to that formality level is hard to miss with and I think the dress/jacket combo gets you there.

      1. Midwest, medium-sized city, philanthropy is the industry. I appreciate all of the perspectives, I was freaking out a little this morning.

        2. In that case, I think dress plus jacket is exactly right. In fact, I think it’s better than a suit. (Former development officer in a large Midwest city.)

  6. I need to get a suit for a Very Important Meeting and some upcoming work travel.

    It’s important enough that suits that seemed fine (a bit dated in the lapels, but I didn’t wear enough times to justify a new one; a skirt fashioned with a front middle slit) just seem . . . amateurish.

    I envy now how a guy can go out and get a wool suit that if it fits, will be 100% OK. When I go to my important meeting, I will be one of the few women there and really want to rock it.

    I can barely find a wool suit that isn’t mostly polyester (and to me, polyster suits are quickly made shiny at the drycleaners). Or is somehow given a crazy bit of detailing (see, supra, front slit, or a contrast waistband or is fine, just your only option is Trendy Red).

    I’m too short-waisted to pull off Boss (which I think is beautiful, but while I’m 5-4 my torso is oddly proportioned vs the rest of me). Brooks Brothers to me doesn’t even look good on the models (maybe it’s the styling, the glares, something). I am about to try mail-order-roulette with Talbots (which doesn’t carry suits in stores), but I feel like at any price I just can’t find what should be a simple wardrobe staple.

    In my next life I will be a doctor so I can just wear scrubs + clogs + white coat and be done with this.

    1. Whoa. I’m 5’3″ but otherwise I thought maybe I wrote this and forgot. Literally came this morning to ask the same question. I need a grown up professional suit that won’t drown me (I’m short) or make me look like a blueberry (I’m more round than stick). Why is this so hard to find?!?!

      1. I am 5’4″ with a short torso and have had good luck with Ann Taylor and Talbots, though with Ann Taylor you obviously have the issue that a lot of their suits are polyester blends. With Talbots, I got a wool suit during their end of the year sale last December that is beautiful. I would recommend doing a petite size on top and a regular size on bottom. Also, you will likely have to get the suit tailored– Talbots pretty much makes their suits with the fact that you will get them tailored in mind. They are all fairly straight cuts. I get compliments on mine every time I wear it.

    2. Pendleton? Not sure if they carry the suiting in store or not, but they have 100% wool options. I’ve never bought a suit jacket from there, but I have a few dresses in suiting fabric that are nice.

    3. I don’t know if Jcrew is still selling suits but my favorite one is from there. I can’t wear Boss either for the same reasons and Brooks Brothers is too frumpy on me. I have a very flattering navy blue skirt suit from Jcrew, nearly 100% wool. I have no illusions that the wool is as good as would be on a men’s suit, but it looks good and I’m pleased.

      1. J Crew suiting is not 100% wool anymore. Not sure what the actual percentages are, they don’t list it on the website. But there is elastane in everything, and polyester in a lot of it.

        1. Also, most J crew stores – at least the ones near me – don’t carry suiting in-store anymore. It’s annoying.

    4. I am 5ft2in and in the same boat. I like MaxMara suits. Is that an option to try by you?

    1. Sheer black tights? You mean pantyhose? Never. Opaque black tights season starts at first frost.

      2. This isn’t great advice. Spanx makes excellent sheer black tights that looks great are is very flattering. When I go to court in the fall/winter that’s what I wear. Opaque black tights with a skirt suit doesn’t look right, unless maybe it’s 30 below.

        1. Agreed. I like opaque black tights but they can look really heavy with formal office wear, particularly black dresses/skirts. So I wear sheer black pantyhose with formal wear.

      3. Disagree. Black tights that are at least somewhat sheer are definitely making a comeback and look more current to me than totally opaque tights.

    3. I start wearing them when the high is less than 65, but that won’t happen until late October/early November.

    4. In Canada I feel like I see a lot of opaque black tights after Canadian Thanksgiving but rarely before. Interested if that’s just my workplace or if first weekend in October is common in other provinces.

      1. I won’t wear opaque black tights until after Canadian Thanksgiving either.
        In Ontario.

    5. This puzzles me so much. I cannot stand the feeling of tights. So constricting and uncomfortable. I’ve tried all sorts of mid-range brands. Maybe it’s the combo of being tall with substantial thighs, I don’t know, but my unwillingness to wear tights definitely limits my winter wardrobe options.

      1. I’ve found that control top tights are the worst. I am SO much more comfortable with sheer-to-waist (or whatever the name is for tights that don’t try to suck anything in).

        Signed,
        Also have substantial thighs

        1. Which tights do you like? Hue is good for length, but my goodness, they are narrow through the hips and thighs.

      2. Size up! I am tall with larger thighs as well, and I always have to get at least a size larger than whatever the chart says I should need for my height/weight.

    6. Speaking of, does anyone have recs on comfortable opaque black tights? I hate control tops, and always seem to be on a hunt for tights that don’t constrain my stomach.

      1. Commando tights! They’re super opaque, soft, and the waistband is not constricting at all. Love them, wore them yesterday (NYC).

        1. Not sure how common they are in the US, but I really like the DIM Touch line. Most comfortable tights I own and pretty resistant. They come in sheer and opaque (as well as a variety of nude colors if that’s your thing).

      2. I had good luck with A New Day black 120 denier tights from Target last year. No control top or other bells and whistles, just solid, plain black opaque tights. Bought 3 pairs, 2 actually made it through the whole winter, which is a rarity for me even with more expensive brands. The third pair fell victim to the cat.

  8. Kat, the link you provided for the “previously featured dress” leads to the blue Nala dress instead.

  9. Does anyone carry two cell phones (one for work, one for personal)? If given the option, would you prefer to carry one? I am starting a new job that will pay for a phone OR pay for my phone bill if all their security/email client/etc. are loaded on to it, and curious about pros/cons/practical tips.

    1. I carry two. Otherwise my employer can wipe my personal phone at any time and any place. Annoying to have two, yes. But not a big deal in practice.

    2. My sister just left a job with a pretty strict non compete and was required to turn over her iPhone, which she had purchased herself, but the company felt belonged to them because they paid the monthly bill. Read the fine print!

      I will admit I only carry one phone but my sister’s example has sobered my perspective.

    3. I carry two. I don’t like the idea of intertwining my work and personal life to that extent. Sometimes it’s a PITA but mostly worth it as I don’t like the idea of my kids pictures being on my work phone or my kids using my work phone to watch a video etc.

    4. Get two phones. You don’t want your personal data to be company property and/or discoverable in a lawsuit. This is a no-brainer.

      3. Having two phones does not necessarily protect your data from being discoverable in a law suit. It’s keeping your email accounts separate.

    5. BYOD policies are often tricky, and can result in your personal phone being bricked for security reasons. Most of my colleagues just forward their personal number to their work phone, so they get the convenience without the risk.

    6. This is really common at law firms. I’ve left two firms and never had an issue. No one carries two phones. On your last day, you hand over your phone to IT and they remove all firm stuff from it. They don’t completely wipe your phone ime – but they have the right to do so if you don’t physically hand your phone over before you leave (ahem, which I assume is what happens if you get fired and escorted out right away). Just make sure to auto-backup important things like pictures and contacts.

      Fwiw I tried the two phone thing at my first firm but it’s a huge pita. Honestly the biggest down side was that whipping out my personal phone during, say, a long boring lunch CLE clearly meant that I was responding to personal texts/emails and not work stuff. You kind of get the benefit of the doubt that you’re “working” if you’re using your only phone.

      1. +1. I used my own phone during my law firm days, and had no problems when I left the firm.

      2. I am always surprised to see the opposition to a single device here. I can’t think of a single co-worker who has two devices. Maybe this is a law firm thing.

    7. It’s more annoying, but I always go for a separate phone. The security measures that you give over to your company are not worth the permissions they require. Often times you give permission for your company to access all kinds of things on your phone, even other email communications, location data, media and document storage etc. At the least lowest of intrusiveness, you give your company the right to remotely wipe your phone, deleting all of your personal data. I don’t think it’s worth it.

      It’s unusual, I have never heard of personally, a company literally taking the personal phone of an employee since they paid the bill – you still own the hardware.

    8. I have one, but my company uses Blackberry’s Work/Access apps, so all relevant work information is stored on those apps. If my company ever needs to wipe work-related information from my phone, it would only wipe those apps, not the entire device.

    9. Everyone where I work has two phones. It’s really nbd. I kept forgetting to check my work phone for, like, the first week, but after that it was fine. The advantage of having two phones is you can put your work phone away and not be reachable when you need to.

    10. I carry two. Work in healthcare finance, so my emails often contain HIPAA-protected information. I would never want that on my own device.

      My biggest tip is to make sure you have purses with two phone pockets. As long as there’s a place to put them, it’s really easy to manage two phones. I love that I can leave the work phone (and work!) behind when I’m going out.

    11. I carry two and would *never* want to combine onto one device. My organization owns that phone and can restrict, read, delete, and use everything I do on it. They can also wipe it or ask me to hand it back at any time. My org is likely a hacking target (aren’t they all?) and while our security is pretty good, info on that phone is more at risk.

      Just the thought of having to figure out all my personal contacts again gives me goosebumps.

  10. Yesterday’s ‘things you learn from your 20s’ post had me thinking. I’m around the same age as the poster and during a recent therapy session I realized I’ve outgrown a lot of people in my life and my career goals have shifted so much in the past year.

    I feel like I need a life makeover of sorts and have an itch to expand my social and career network. I went to pretty small undergrad and grad programs and I feel like I’ve exhausted those networks to a certain extent. Some days I just want to apply for another masters program at a better ranked school to meet new interesting people and expand my career network. However, I just paid off my masters debt and I live in a large city that has a lot of opportunities that I feel I could utilize better if I just got out of my own head.

    So I guess what I’m asking is, how do I put myself out there more to meet more people? I’ve joined a few organizations based on my hobbies and its been a slow process to get to know people on a deeper level but I know it takes time. For the career stuff should I just go to random networking events? Contact people on linked in?

    1. YMMV with this one, but I joined the Junior League when I first moved here. The people I met through JL became my closest friends here. Although there was a certain amount of forced socialization, especially during the provisional year, I found that it helped make connections. I tried meeting people at Young Lawyer Division happy hours, but it’s so hard to go up to random strangers at a happy hour. I need a little more structure than that I think. It was easier to chat with people while sorting food at the distribution center or in the few minutes before a meeting. I’m sure the membership varies widely according to area, but in my large NE city, there’s a really diverse mix.

      1. Yes – junior leagues vary a lot by location, but if you’ve got a good one, it’s a great way to meet people. Mine is primarily young professionals. In addition, if you can, start having lunch dates – 1 or 2 a week with people, any people. Either contacts from young professional networking events, friends of friends, industry contacts etc. And don’t limit your scope to a certain age range.

      2. Junior League is very, very city specific. I have several close friends who are in JLW in DC and love it. I joined in my smaller midwest city and quit after one year– could not have hated it more. Check around for local experiences on the JL near you before committing. The good ones are efficient and philanthropy focused. The bad ones have meetings for no reason (a planning meeting to meet about the meeting to plan the next meeting) and spend more time on that than on actual philanthropy. And they like to use the word “mandatory.”

  12. After a never-ending reorganization and with morale at what feels like an all-time low, my company is sending out an employee engagement survey. Part of me wants to be brutally honest in my response. But the other part of me knows that the results will be twisted to fit the corporate narrative and used as one more tool to beat us into submission. Like we’ll go through this little exercise and then after that we’ll have to be able to demonstrate how engaged we really are, and if we aren’t it’s our own fault and not because the company is still totally dysfunctional.

    Apparently each department will get the (allegedly, anonymous) results and have to come up with a action plans to “enhance the employee experience” and improve engagement. I just don’t trust my company to do anything with this information that won’t hurt me. I think in writing this out, I’ve answered my own question, but I’ll ask it anyway – I shouldn’t answer the survey was honestly as I would really prefer to, right? It would be soooo satisfying ….

    1. You’d have to know your answers weren’t identifiable. I answered on of these quite honestly about my last company, including some comments about my C-suite boss, who was a smart person but an absolutely incompetent manager. At our subsequent staff meeting he mentioned the survey results and said, “I guess I have a lot to work on as a manager.”

      So, the results did get back to him, and clearly I was not the only person who was honest. I can’t say it changed him a lot but it was nice to see him even acknowledge that some of the problems were his and not ours.

      1. Well what good would the survey have been if the answers didn’t get back to your boss?

    2. I fill out those surveys with the answers the company wants to hear. Rumor is they are not that anonymous. It’s just best for job security to sugar coat it.

      1. +1 be careful. My boss’ admin who was quitting told me on her last day that all upward feedback is visible (i.e. my boss could read what I wrote and knew it was I that wrote it) to management despite some vague notion of anonymity.

    3. What do you realistically want them to do to ‘enhance the employee experience’?

      I agree that it’s likely a largely meaningless exercise but they will also want a few easy boxes to check to show they ‘did stuff’. Pick some easy stuff for them to do. This is how I got colored file folders. One admin used to do the ordering and we only had standard brown ones because she didn’t have ‘authority to order the expensive ones’. Turns out the colored ones were not more expensive, she just didn’t want to have to keep track of what was in stock for different types of folder supplies.

      Relatively meaningless? Yes, but when I’m in court, I like to be able to recognize the folder I need quickly and different color folders for different purposes helps that.

    4. Even if they set the survey up to remain anonymous, they will still retain certain data and timestamps that could make you discoverable. IF you have a position that isn’t unique, and IF you can answer the survey around the same time as a large number of your colleagues (ask around) then it might be worth your while, if for nothing other than getting it off your chest.

    5. I worked in HR/Legal and found out that all of the company’s “anonymous” surveys were actually not anonymous. Everyone had to login to use their computers (sharing workstations was a no-no) and you could only take the surveys on company computers…so it was not unusual for HR and management who had access to the back side of surveys to crawl through responses. Just FYI.

      1. Yes at my company it’s “anonymous”, but only in the sense that teams with less than 5 reports get rolled up to the next level supervisor. They are never truly anonymous because if there’s a serious violation reported, they want to be able to pinpoint the area to investigate.

    6. Idk, what level are you? I was blatantly honest on those, but I was also a director/VP and said the same things to our leadership team and HR staff.

      When I was in a position where I saw the results, they were pretty granular while being “anonymous.” So…my department of 25 had free text comments and I knew who wrote them based on the content- or at least could guess. But the point is to improve, so it honestly didn’t matter.

      I’d suggest sticking to constructive criticism with offers of actionable advice (“hold a brown bag” “when management presents a plan, stick to it- changin clurse every quarter is demoralizing.”) vs “managements attitude towards staff is obnoxious.”

      1. This is me, but I am middle management. Everything I put in the surveys I would say directly to HR or senior management. Interestingly enough, I am now in a business-unit wide working group that has been tasked with addressing the issues discovered in the last engagement survey that was conducted. Mostly to address a change in BU culture, so who knows what will actually get done, but at least they’re trying to show that they’re paying attention.

    7. My company uses these polls (Gallup). FWIW, I get anonymous results for each one of my team members. If there are open comments, I can always tell who wrote what…because I know my employees, their concerns, their writing style, etc. I agree with comments above to suggest concrete changes rather than voice broad complaints.

    8. If your company uses the Gallup employee engagement survey, it really is kept anonymous, with a caveat: your responses are shared with your management team, so if you are one of two people at the same level, then your boss has a 50-50 chance of identifying you.

    9. I work in a place that has had a lot of sexual harassment/assault problems which resulted in very low morale, so HR sent out a similar engagement survey. Most people, including myself, answered that we were very unlikely to report sexual harassment to our supervisors, but it didn’t ask why we were unwilling to report. HR read the results and assumed “oh, nobody knows the process for reporting! We’ll just send out more emails with the HR manual in them, and everything will be fixed!” The real reason is that we don’t trust our supervisors, and that they are all of the Good Old Boys, so we know it wouldn’t go anywhere. So frustrating.

  13. I had high hopes for the J Crew Going Out blazer previously featured here but it does not work for me. The size that fits well in shoulders and body is too tight around the neck, and it has more fabric than I’d like over the chest. Any other suggestions for similar styles that can be a versatile third piece for business casual outfits? Oh, and I am a true petite.

  14. I was trying to watch Killing Eve on the BBC America app (with cable linked) yesterday, but I couldn’t find any full episodes. I thought they were supposed to be available there. Does anyone know if they’ve changed where it’s streaming?

  15. How important is it that kids go to a good elementary and middle school? The elementary school we are zoned for isn’t very good, and the middle school is atrocious. The high school, however, has a fantastic IB program. We love our house – it’s a great size, only a few years old, and it was reasonably priced. When we built, I wasn’t concerned about schools, because I went to terrible schools and turned out OK, but now that we have a child (she’s only 1.5), I’m not sure if that is the right choice. I mean, I’m sure our kids will be just fine if we don’t move, but I want more for them. We could sell our house in a couple years and move to another house that is zoned for A-rated schools, but it would cost twice as much to get a comparable house. The location would be much better – closer to work, closer to restaurants, etc., but the thought of taking on a jumbo mortgage makes me mildly nauseous. We could afford it, but it would mean cutting back on things we enjoy. Thoughts?

    1. There are more than two options here. Keep looking. No, I wouldn’t send my kids to terrible schools. Absolutely not. My job as a mom is to give them the best start I can, and I can do better than that.

    2. Middle is more arguable, but I think for elementary I wouldn’t worry about academics. I would worry about safety though.

    3. I went to a great elementary school, horrible middle school, then great high school (it was private and did not have an IB program but I took a lot of honors and AP courses). I think if your child has a great foundation at home, you can afford a tutor for subjects they are not adequately learning at school, there are afterschool activities they can participate in, etc. – you should have your child stick it out until they get to the great high school.

      I lived in one of the best counties in the country but there were some zoning changes the year I went to my middle school and it went from pretty good to bad (academically and socially) in a matter of a year. My parents didnt want to take the risk for high school so they sent me to private school which was fine but my public high school would have been good too (no IB program mind you but not too bad).

      I think you should also consider the money youre saving by not moving and spending twice as much on a mortgage. That money you could put towards tutors, extra curriculars, and college savings that could set your child up to be fine (or even excel) once they graduate high school.

      1. We looked into it, but they are almost all Christian/Catholic, which we definitely don’t want. The cost of private school for two kids for 8 years would also equal the cost of moving to a better school district. Plus, I really want our kids to go to schools that are more diverse than the private schools in our area (which are overwhelmingly white, Christian, and wealthy).

    5. I would go private in that case. You definitely don’t want your kids going to an “atrocious” middle school.

      1. But do the math on private school .$25k/year for 8 or more years is a couple hundred thousand dollars. If you put that money into a house, you have an appreciating asset. Paying school tuition is essentially flushing money down the toilet. If you buy a more expensive house, you can sell the house when your kids are done with school and downsize to a smaller/cheaper place and then you have a nice nest egg for retirement.

        1. LOL paying tuition is not flushing money down the toilet, it’s building human capital. Your kids get all the financial advantages there, but most parents are probably willing to do that for their children.

          1. I’m not saying you shouldn’t give your kids educational advantages. But if you can pay $200k on tuition or spend $200k to buy a house in a better school district, the former is absolutely flushing money down the toilet. Even if the better house is $300k, it would probably be worth it over time because the house value will grow and you can sell it someday. I’m not saying don’t pay for your kids to go to a good school, just that you should be smart about it. In many cases, moving to the better school district is a smarter financial decision.

          2. I don’t disagree that this is a financial decision that should be looked at carefully, but you’re just plain wrong that paying for education is flushing money down the toilet. It’s an investment, just not one in a tangible asset like a house. And also one that parents are not likely to see personally the returns on.

          3. You’re just nitpicking language now. As I’ve already clarified, I wasn’t saying money spent on education is a waste, but rather putting $X amount into education when you could put the same $X into a house in a better school district that will appreciate in value is financially wasteful. I never said that if the better school district is cost-prohibitive or doesn’t exist that you shouldn’t pay for private school.

        2. Also, in my area you’d very likely pay an additional 25k in taxes, which don’t appreciate.

      2. Actually, I’m going to modify my response slightly. I think the most important think to look at is whether the kids and parents are engaged. Are they trying to make a lot happen with limited resources? Is the PTA active and inclusive? There is a huge difference in a bad school that tries to do more with what it has and a bad school populated by absentee parents and drop-out kids and terrible teacher retention. Take a closer look and then decide, but ultimately, please don’t send your kid to an atrocious school. I really wish my parents hadn’t done that.

    6. What are your metrics for “not very good” and “atrocious”? Test scores, or do you have actual info about terrible teaching, etc? In the first case, I would do more investigating, but would guess that it’s probably actually fine at least for elementary, and would strongly lean towards sending my kids there and not looking to move unless/until there’s an actual problem. Test scores are mostly determined by the socioeconomic background of the kids who attend the school. Most kids with engaged and educated parents will be totally fine at most schools – the marginal difference between mediocre and ‘great’ school is negligible. And if the ‘mediocre’ school is more economically diverse, they may be learning important life lessons and social skills. There are obviously exceptions, but I wouldn’t plan your life around the assumption that your kid will be one of them. If they are, you can adjust when the time comes.

      By the end of elementary, you’ll have a much better sense of what your kid need in a middle school, and you can reevaluate then. You might decide that the ‘terrible’ middle school is actually fine. You might decide that your kid needs the environment of a private school anyway – in which case, you’ll be glad not to be locked into massive mortgage payments.

      3. This is all true, but it’s not just about test scores. I’m sure a smart kid from a good family will have similar test scores wherever, but you need to consider the peer environment, whether there are lots of different subjects on offer, whether there are good clubs and activities available, etc. Don’t punish your kid with a crappy, unstimulating school environment just because their test scores will probably be fine either way.

        1. For activities, I think this is true in high school, and maybe middle school. In elementary, the ‘good clubs and activities’ are pretty easy to supplement on your own and kids still need a fair amount of time for free play. I don’t think it matters nearly as much at that age.

          And no, kids shouldn’t be in a crappy, unstimulating school environment, but my point was precisely that there are lots and lots of schools that are ‘mediocre’ in terms of test scores, but nonetheless provide good experiences. OP should absolutely investigate her local school – and that goes for everyone, because good test scores can also mask a bad school environment, if the student population is wealthy. But she should make sure that she’s evaluating the school on the basis of the right metrics. She should go talk to the principle and current parents, attend science fair night, do whatever she can to get an authentic feel for the school environment. If the teachers are competent and caring, her kids are very likely to do well in the school.

        2. Clubs/Activities are more of a High School (maybe middle school) thing. Elementary should be fine, and then you reassess the MS at that point. The other option is to find club/activities that aren’t linked to the school and supplement middle school with that.

        3. Well, this is for elementary and middle school. Maybe I went to terrible schools* but extracurriculars were nonexistent in elementary and very minimal in middle school (couple of sports, couple of arts). It’s not like 12 year olds are taking life-altering AP electives or earning a free ride to college through the middle school football team.

          *I didn’t go to terrible schools.

        4. Clubs and afterschool activities aren’t really a thing in elementary school. Kids go to afterschool care or home, so I wouldn’t worry about that. OP you have four years to think about this but honestly just send your kid to the elementary school then reassess at the beginning of fifth grade. You’re making your life too difficult now.

      4. Completely agree to this. I went to a school district that has low state rankings due to overall test scores, and was extremely socio-economically diverse. However, it had great programs and many/ most(?) students from the AP track classes went to top schools including a Ivys and flagship state school honors programs.

      5. Thanks for this. I’m in a similar position to op, and everyone in my family says the schools are horrible based on test scores. Is there another metric I should look at? Or is it a matter of meeting with the teacher/administrators? My husband keeps joking that we’re either horrible liberals or horrible parents.

        1. In terms of numbers, I would look at discipline stuff – if the school is genuinely unsafe, that would be a dealbreaker for me. But the rest of it is harder to quantify. I think you want to talk to teachers and administrators. At least around here, admin at schools like this are very happy to meet with prospective parents, because they know their school has bad test scores and they want the chance to show off the good stuff it has to offer and attract committed parents. But more important, I think, is finding and talking to current parents (ideally, ones whose values are aligned with yours and whose judgment you trust). Call the PTA, or ask around at the playground until you find someone whose older kids are at the school. They should be able to tell you the pros and cons (and every school will have some of each).

          And read Nikole Hannah-Jones’s stuff on school segregation if you want some reassurance that your kids will be OK. Sending your kids to schools with bad test scores doesn’t make you bad parents. I think it’s really important not to frame this as choosing between our kids and our values. I genuinely think that we are giving our kids an invaluable gift by sending them to a school whose student population reflects the demographics of the city we live in. We are not doing this to be self-righteous liberals; we are doing it because it is good for our kids.

        2. Sadly, if that’s the choice you face, I think it’s better to be a horrible liberal than a horrible parent. I was the token white middle-class child in diverse magnet schools in a large city. Elementary school was mostly okay, but junior high was miserable. There were safety, crime, and gang issues on campus, and I was the target of incessant bullying that was explicitly racially motivated. If you want to improve the schools for all kids, run for school board or county commissioner and fix the system. Don’t force your child to be the sacrificial lamb. Forcing your child to attend a terrible public school won’t make any difference to the school or for the other kids, and it just might ruin your own child’s life.

          Non-white parents are always praised for doing whatever it takes to get their kids out of bad schools. I’m not sure why it’s so terrible for white parents to want the same thing for their own children.

    7. I live in a big SEUS city. I live 2 miles from work (traffic is so horrid I leave before 5 every day; otherwise, it can take an hour for me to get home). House is older but still expensive. Schools are good but not the best. The “best” would wreck my commute or make me hire a PT nanny and are subject to being rezoned anyway as our population continues to grow (and what makes it better isn’t maybe that it is actually better but it is more SES vanilla with fewer low SES /ESL / free lunch kids so test scores probably just reflect that).

      Middle school is dicey everywhere in our city (like I know parents who move kids after things get rocky in/out of every school, even $25k/year private ones, b/c they just need a idiosyncratic reset).

      I watch things like a hawk and public schools are very much YMMV (one kid had a teacher leave mid-year and the replacements were just a series of supposed permanent subs who didn’t pan out) and we do math tutoring to catch up and pay for extras. I think my kids will be OK with “OK” schools. I am not sure that “better” schools will change their ultimate outcome but would make for a lot of life disruptions / friend disruptions for things that are working in all of our lives.

      1. You live 2 miles from work – you can walk! I would be so happy if I weren’t dependent on a train or car to take me to work.

    8. I’d move in your shoes. But DH and I are from families that really education and being in a good school district was paramount for us. Can you buy less house in the better location? Not sure if you want more kids, but our family of two adults and one child is very comfortable in a townhouse.

      2. You didn’t imply this, but I want to be clear that it’s possibly to really value education and choose differently. I’m a college professor; education is my life, more or less. But I genuinely believe that my kids will get a good education at our neighborhood elementary school, despite its poor-to-mediocre test scores. And, because I care a lot about education, I’ll be supplementing what they learn in school no matter where they go. But it’s much easier for me to supplement their reading/math/science/history than it is for me to supplement a diverse environment that will allow them to become comfortable interacting with people across a range of economic and cultural backgrounds.

        2. +1! This is the exact type of comment that makes people think that they either have to be horrible liberals or horrible parents

        3. I went to grad school for higher education administration and had to take a couple of classes in K-12 administration to fulfill requirements – the one takeaway I had is that if a kid has two college-educated parents, they can go to the crappiest school and generally come out fine in terms of learning outcomes, because of the way educated parents will supplement. Of course, if safety is an issue, that’s another thing – but education-wise, the above comment is spot on.

          1. I would caution that grade inflation disguises outcomes somewhat. I expect a motivated kid with engaged parents who went to a fine school to get straight As at university. But some of the kids who went to elite prep schools would be getting A+++s if the grading scale went that high.

          2. Supplementing takes a lot of time and money though. Even if you’re educated and well off, it’s a valid choice to want to send your kids to good schools so they can take AP classes and get independent mentoring from good teachers. It’s not like if your kid goes to a bad school you just hire one tutor and you’re done. Challenging a smart, motivated kid who doesn’t get challenged in school will probably require a combination of different after school and summer programs, as well as some individual tutoring and possibly being pulled out of school by parents in the middle of the workday for enrichment. As a working parent, the last thing I want to do is add all that to my plate. If I really wanted to manage my kids’ education that way, I’d home school them. I don’t, so I’d rather send them to good schools that can meet 95% of their educational needs, so I only have to supplement 5% instead of 50%.

            I’d also add that not so great schools can also be really rough social environments for smart, nerdy kids. It’s also a valid choice to not want your kids to be bullied or teased, and to send them to a better school so they’ll be more likely to find a community of like-minded kids.

        4. My comment above was eaten., but as the victim of this type of thinking I feel compelled to respond. If your children are white and middle-class, and you want them to grow up valuing diversity, you may be doing more harm than good by sending them to subpar schools where they will be bullied for being “rich white kids.” They will grow up learning that people of other races hate them and don’t want them around. It is much better to expose them to diversity through self-selecting programs such as summer day camps and multi-district summer academic programs, where the kids and families tend to have similar interests and values and bullying is not as rampant.

          1. This is wholly dependent on the population of the school and, in my experience, really only happens when the economic status of the students are really different. A diverse school doesn’t automatically mean poor/trashy/ghetto, and it doesn’t mean all the students are from the same background. This is unlikely to happen in a truly diverse, versus poorer inner city school.

          2. Fair point, but those truly diverse schools (a) are rare in real life and (b) are not going to have the lousy test scores that lead to these types of discussions. In real life, “diverse” usually means nearly 100% of the kids are eligible for free lunch. There might be some racial diversity, but not economic diversity.

          3. Diversity doesn’t necessarily equal poverty. My kids’ school has some poor nonwhite kids, but an awful lot of them are from middle-class or working-class families. And bullying depends a lot on how the administration chooses to address it. I went to schools where the attitude was, “work it out amongst yourselves, go away.” That isn’t what happens at my kids’ school.

          4. I’m not sending my kids to sub-par schools, I’m sending my kids to good schools that get bad test scores. It’s just not the case that economically and racially diverse schools are all hotbeds of bullying where white kids get picked on. I’m sure that some are, just as some wealthy schools with excellent scores are hotbeds of bullying where anyone who stands out from the white/Christian/wealthy norm gets picked on – that was my experience of middle school and high school. All parents should be actively investigating the culture at the schools they plan for their kids to attend. But there’s no reason to assume that low test scores equals terrible school environment.

            Also, on supplementing – there’s no school in the world that I won’t feel the need to supplement. My area of research overlaps with standard social studies curricula, and every curriculum I’ve ever looked at makes me cry a little inside because of how dumbed down or just wrong much of the stuff that gets taught is. But that’s equally true of schools across basically all demographics and test scores, including places like Palo Alto.

        5. Eh, I didn’t say you have to value test scores. But it’s absolutely important to use that our kids have good teachers, opportunities for advanced or supplemental help if they’re gifted or having learning challenges, and peers who will challenge them. That’s what “a good school district” means to us. Not test scores. I agree racial and economic diversity are good, but not at the expense of my child’s education if they’re mutually exclusive (they’re not in our area, and our kids will go to excellent, diverse schools).

        6. @ Sarabeth, are your kids in elementary school yet? If so, how do you manage the supplementation? In my experience as the parent of an exceptionally gifted kid in a “good” school with no gifted program to speak of, supplementation is both difficult and inadequate. What ends up happening is that the child is bored all day at school. This leads to a negative attitude towards school and bad habits such as not listening in class, not reading instructions, and making careless errors. It also means that the kid never has the opportunity to learn to work hard at learning anything. For a long time, my child actually believed that if you didn’t immediately know the answer to an arithmetic problem by just looking at it you must be dumb, and that learning algorithms for solving problems was useless. After a long day of boredom at school, the kid goes to after-school for a few hours, then arrives home at dinnertime starving and frustrated. It is very, very hard to spend that last hour or so of the day before bedtime trying to teach extra material to a child who’s spent the whole day being turned off to learning. And what if the kid wants to pursue nonacademic interests such as music or sports?

          In my observation, the only successful supplementation that really happens once a kid hits elementary school is supplementation aimed at skipping the child ahead in school. My daughter has a friend who was tutored in math for years with the goal of getting ahead but did not advance at school. The same friend was also tutored in Spanish and still started at the beginning when Spanish was offered in middle school. The tutoring didn’t really give her an edge or get her to a level in school where she was more challenged, and she hated it. In contrast, my daughter and another of her friends both completed entire courses independently over the summer so they could advance in those subjects. Both are much happier in school now that they are at a more appropriately challenging level.

          1. One kid in elementary, one starting soon. Our school is very good at individualizing math and reading stuff – this is actually because there are a fair number of underperforming kids, so they don’t go in with the assumption that they will all be at the same level to begin with. So breakout groups for language arts and math, with a part-time para who circulates to help and differentiated assignments. We are just starting to get into the the social studies and science stuff more seriously. There, supplementing is more about talking through stuff in more depth at home (I am a social scientist, my husband is a scientist, so this is kind of what we do all day anyway). We sometimes go a bit above and beyond on homework assignments, which I think her teachers find odd but endearing. I’ll also say that one of the reasons we live where we do is so that neither of us has a driving commute, which opens up some more time in our schedule for this kind of thing.

            Despite being a mediocre school by some measures, our school also does have a gifted program, on a pull-out model, so my kid also does that a few times a week. She is gifted, though not profoundly so, but also on the older side for her grade. We are monitoring things and considering skipping a grade in a year or so.

            The afterschool dilemma is real. We have chosen to hire an afterschool babysitter rather than use the on-site program, because we wanted her to have time to decompress. Sometimes she does homework with the afterschool sitter, sometimes she plays and we do it later. Either way, I think it helps make the days feel less long. The sitter also takes her to dance once a week; she has music lessons on weekends, but if she gets more serious & has weekday classes, the sitter will take her to those too. We have multiple universities local to us, so it’s been reasonably easy to find sitters for this kind of schedule, it may be harder in other places.

            Foreign languages are the thing that we feel least successful with right now, but the only good options around us would involve both private school tuition and a 30 minute commute each way, so that’s totally off the table for us. We are hoping to be able to live abroad for a year during a sabbatical at some point, and get a more serious immersion experience for our kids that way. I didn’t start learning a foreign language until 6th grade, but became reasonably fluent in two by studying abroad later on, so I’m ok with that plan.

            Final thought – I actually think your experience is a perfect illustration of the point I’ve been trying to make on this thread. There are definitely schools that are either 1) actually bad/unsafe, or 2) not a good fit for a particular child. But it’s not always the schools that get labelled as “bad” according to local common knowledge (which itself usually just boils down to test scores). If you have a profoundly gifted kid, then that kid probably does need a school that is willing to do more individuation, either through a gifted program or otherwise. That specific need is what you would need to look for, not a generically good/bad school.

    9. I think you’re borrowing trouble. An okay elementary school is perfectly fine, it won’t impact their future and so long as the school is safe a smart kid that is well-supported at home academically will do well and learn a lot. Honestly, “ok” schools are really most rough for kids that aren’t that academically inclined or have a rough background. As far as middle school, you’re a decade away and the quality of the school can change drastically in that time period, especially if your school gets a new principal or switches program format. Even if it remains horrible, I think its worth it to spend for three years on a private middle school in order to stay close to and zoned to an excellent HS program that will prepare your kid for college. HS is where the grades and academics matter most.

    10. Whenever these questions come up, folks seem to be most concerned that smart/gifted kids won’t be challenged enough in a “bad” school. That’s a valid concern, but I wanted to throw out there that the opposite might be true too. Smart and successful parents are not a guarantee that your kid won’t have learning challenges. Being in a very good school system can be a huge blessing if your kid needs extra support.

      1. On the other hand, my experience has been the opposite. In a high income so-called “good” school system, they didn’t have the structure to provide the special education services we needed. In a urban so-called “bad” school system, they were designed to provide those extra services and it was a lot easier to get the help we needed.

      2. I was an outlier in both directions (gifted in one area, deficient in another), and I believe I was situationally depressed in middle school (where I excelled, including in my area of deficiency because mediocre schools are mediocre). It felt like my life was being stolen from me. I don’t think my parents had any idea how dark my feelings were, but they listened to me when I asked for something better. I was so, so much happier in high school and college that for a while I felt like I should become kind of middle school emancipation activist (I realize there are higher callings).

    11. My kids went to a great elementary school, as far as test scores go. The middle school is HORRIBLE (no tests scores for these grades but honestly everyone hates it). The high school is excellent.

      I will echo what most others said, that smart kids with engaged parents will probably be fine in elementary and middle school, no matter where they go. And tutoring, even at $50/h is going to be cheaper than moving.

      If the middle school is still horrendous by the time your very young child gets there, consider private for middle school maybe.

      High school is definitely the most important.

      My middle child just went through the terrible middle school (coming from a good elementary), and has landed in the awesome awesome high school. This is only his second week and he LOVES it. He is so much more engaged than he was in the middle school, already. THIS is when I really want him to be engaged.

    12. The alleged quality of a school can change pretty quickly, especially if the elementary schools are on the upswing. This happened in my small urban school district – the middle and high schools were “terrible,” but now that there are more gentrifiers (mostly white people) at the school the reputation has improved quite a bit. And the racists have moved on to complain about “permit kids” who transfer in from a neighboring school district and are mostly non-white.

      I’d suggest touring the elementary school to see what is so not very good about it – a lot of times when people say a school is “bad,” it means that there are a lot of non-white and/or non-Asian faces. If the test scores are publicly available, look to see what the breakdown is by race/ethnicity.

      As for things like bullying, I went to an almost-entirely white elementary school (one Indian family) and my UMC white kids go to a very diverse elementary school where the poverty level just a hair above Title 1 status. They haven’t been bullied, and have a pretty wide circle of friends though they aren’t in the majority by any measure.

    13. Not a precise answer to your question, but I did IB in high school (as well as AP) and it made college a breeze for me (I went to a good college, too, not Ivy but top 10) and I ultimately went to HYS for law school. I still consider my academic experience in high school to be the most challenging one of my life and one that set the stage for my future academic and professional successes. In contrast, my elementary school and middle school were good but not grea (in fact – my parents deliberately did not send me to the GATE elementary school even though I was accepted because they wanted me to enjoy being a kid, which, in hindsight, I realize was a really good thing), and I never felt like I was at any real disadvantage (other than feeling like all my classmates were smarter than me – which in truth, a lot of them were lol).

      1. I had the exact same experience (in Canada). Pioneering IB high school, was MUCH more difficult than anything I ever did at uni, including law school. That is what mattered for me.

  16. Advice on what to say to get out of work binge-drinking while meeting colleagues in Asia? I’m going next month, and I’ll likely be the only woman there too. It’ll be a mix of people above/below/at my level, and the first time I will be meeting some of them. One of them has already started bragging about how they take visitors out for epic drinking nights…ugh. I’m a glass of wine every 2 weeks kind of drinker, so this is a non-starter for me.

    I thought about saying something like I’m on special meds or similar, but would rather have an excuse that doesn’t “expire.”

    2. Can’t you just say “No thanks, I’m good” when they offer you more? I don’t drink much and I never lied about medication or anything like that. I’d just nurse one glass of wine all evening and say no thanks when people tried to offer me more.

    3. Honestly, I’d just go along with it and either, take one or two drinks and nurse them all night long, or order virgin drinks or lime with sparkling water for yourself all night. Unless your coworkers are urging shots all night (who does that when you’re grown?), no one will notice.

      1. As the commenter below said, this really is different. And it absolutely is shots and/or chugging beers all night sadly.

    4. I would blame atrocious migraines.

      “Sounds like a ton of fun – unfortunately drinking like that gives me migraines that render me totally useless.”

      2. As a note, if I were in the US, I would just say, ‘Oh – I don’t really drink.’ Which is what I say.

        I rarely straight up lie, but in this case my limited experience (and my husband’s extensive experience) have shown me that this is one of the rare situations where you either have to have a solid lie to get out of it or you’re going to be pounding shots all night and getting hammered with your colleagues.

        I trust the OP to read the situation that they’re going into, but would still stick with my recommendation.

    5. Just commiseration, no advice. When I lived in Asia working in the corporate world, binge drinking seemed to be mandatory. The whole office would go out partying until 4am most weeknights (and only start the workday 11am or so), and there was no saying “I’m tired and will skip this one” as the boss was there and there was so much bro style pressure. This was a British company though, so binge drinking was not only enthusiastically encouraged, but if you opted out you were seen as not one of them. I’m older now and would care a lot less about fitting in (and now I care more about my sleep), but back in my twenties I obliged. I loved living in Asia but man, the bro drinking culture of the expats, that wore me out.

      1. +1 to all of this.

        In the US I’ve never encountered the level of judgment I did in Asia for not participating in work-binge-drinking. At this point in my life, if I went back, I would just say no thanks, I can’t drink like that. But I would do it knowing that everyone would definitely judge and just decide that I can live with that.

      2. Everyone I currently know who works in this culture keeps up with the drinking (and I know some people who moved on when they couldn’t keep up anymore). I think some of the comments here (“it’s not that hard!” “just say you don’t drink!”) aren’t familiar with the context. (I agree with them that it’s okay to draw boundaries, but from what I’ve heard it will be hard, and there may well be repercussions.)

    6. I have been there, and I have just said, “I don’t drink like that.” And then to avoid late nights, “I need my sleep.”
      I draw boundaries for stuff like this.

    7. “I don’t drink.” Repeat if necessary. I’m so tired of this myth that women need an “excuse” to skip something they don’t want to do. Be a grown-up and own it – it feels very empowering to be your own boss in peer pressure situations.

      1. +10000 It’s not that hard. “Thanks, but I’m sticking to water tonight.” “Oh, man, I didn’t realize it was so late! I need to get home to bed.” “Thanks for the invitation, I already have plans tonight.”

    8. Just say that you don’t like to drink? Lots of reasons why people don’t like to drink, you don’t have to give an excuse.

      1. I found other hard drinking cultures would give me a pass if I said I needed to pass to give my liver a break.

    9. As a woman, I think you’ll get a pass, honestly. Just say you don’t drink, and don’t. Or take the drink and just sip (barely) every time everyone else is tossing back the whole glass. Also, not sure where you’ll be in Asia, but i do think the culture is changing there related to drinking, so this is less of a “thing” than it used to be.

      1. Yes, I wonder if this is true. I’m Asian (but have never worked in Asia), and I feel like there is a lot of pressure for men to drink but not the case for women (fortunately). I really can’t imagine a group of guys expecting a woman to guzzle down alcohol the way they do.

        1. It’s not an Asian culture thing, it’s an expat in Asia thing. I was pretty surprised at the pressure when I worked there, and the repercussions for not keeping up with it. It really is a different world. Even the same coworkers would be very different when out in London compared to how they acted when in Asia.

          1. I can’t speak for “Asian” culture, but can absolutely say that business culture in Japan (among Japanese nationals working for Japanese companies) involves a LOT of drinking. Fortunately being a women largely gave me a pass.

    10. Unpopular suggestion – if it is for one night and it seems to be an opportunity to network/make connections and an expected experience, can you not just go along with it? Drink some shots, take some selfies and take an Advil/Gravol before bed with a bottle of water to help with the hangover.

      1. This is very bad advice. Do you really think it’s impossible to network without being drunk?

      2. Yeah, take a chance on giving yourself alcohol poisoning just so you can fit in with your peers. Great idea. To say nothing of the risks of getting sexually assaulted if she’s incapacitated (which she would almost certainly be since she doesn’t drink much and doesn’t have a high baseline for how much alcohol she can handle).
        Also not sure where she said this was a one time thing. Sounds like she’s going on a business trip to Asia and they will want to go out drinking regularly.

      3. As a small woman who can’t hold her liquor, I could not do this safely. A few shots for me is not at all the same as a few shots for a 200-pound dude who binge-drinks regularly.

        1. This this this. I weigh 110 lbs. A single shot if I’m already having a few drinks can make or break my night and ability to function the next morning whereas the guys have a bigger margin of error. I am not going to make myself sick or unsafe. God I wish a bottle of water and an Advil would be enough to deal with the hangover.

          I have a drinking-heavy firm culture and will repeatedly just say “haha, smile, no, really guys, I’m too small for shots, I do not want tequila, but I’ll take another glass of wine in a few. Cheers!” Then, take said glass of wine and nurse it forever. I’ll also dump drinks or shots if I have to. No one’s ever called me on it and although it feels annoying sometimes not to be able to just say no, it is what it is. I think what matters to people is that I’m still participating and having fun. I don’t get hounded and everyone still thinks I’m one of the group, which is the point of networking.

        1. To the contrary, I really having you around. Please don’t think the above person speaks for all of us.

        2. I’m a different Anon and I agree that NTMS frequently makes me roll my eyes or worse.

      5. This is terrible advice for someone who rarely drinks alcohol. I average 7-10 drinks a week and in a scenario like the OP is describing, I would probably stay out with the group and have a few drinks although I’d avoid taking any shots (or would discreetly dump them). I’m a social drinker though and know how to manage my intake so that I’d be okay the next morning. For someone who rarely drinks, I’d advise just lying and saying you’re on medication. You shouldn’t have to lie, of course, but if it’s the choice between lying or paying the professional penalty in this kind of rare circumstance, I’d lie.

      6. I would die if I tried to go shot for shot with male coworkers. In general, men can biologically process alcohol better than women (especially petite, thin women) but if you have no alcohol tolerance built up it’s a recipe for disaster. I’m pretty sure vomiting in front of your co-workers is less professional than saying “I’m good with this glass of wine, thanks.”

    11. I don’t drink.

      When people say why, you say:

      “Why do you ask?”

      or “Doctor’s orders”

      or “personal beliefs”

      Fin.

      If binge drinking is a job requirement, that’s not a job I want. In the short term, I would enlist the bartender and actively fake it. Throw shots over your shoulder. Drink a “gin and tonic” that’s actually a sprite with lime. I’ve done it and usually the bartenders are MORE than happy to help, especially if you tip them well in advance. I am not above beginning the evening with a twenty and a quiet conversation, and it’s worked. If they really want to know why, point to your belly and wink, or say you’re in recovery. In a foreign language, you may just need to write “AA” on a cocktail napkin.

    12. Often in the culture, it is accepted that women and foreigners are good binge-drinking companions. Sometimes, for a short visit, an alternative and separate event is arranged. Even if not, a polite decline is accepted.

  17. I realize I am super late to this party, but this weekend after a break-up (short relationship, break up was my idea, so I was more annoyed with myself and feeling mildly lonely rather than very upset), instead of doing the house projects I had planned, i started watching Hart of Dixie (no spoilers please – I’m about halfway through season 1). I love this show! Can’t believe I’ve never seen it! It’s such a silly show and the plot lines are kind of ridiculous, but I’m so enjoying the eye candy guys, her outfits, and the unfamiliar scenery for me (coastal Alabama).

    Are there any other similarly silly but entertaining shows like that you can recommend? Perhaps I will just stay in and binge watch this fall and not get back on the dating scene. It seems very appealing right now. :)

    2. I just got hooked on Private Eyes, a show from Canada. I think you can find it on itunes in the US. Clearly filmed in Toronto and embraces it absolutely. I think they even have hockey player cameos (although I wouldn’t recognize them). Premise is similar to Moonlighting back in the day or Castle more recently. And the star is Jason Priestly.

    3. I love Younger on TV Land. You can watch old episodes on the TV Land app. It’s about a 40 year old woman who is going through a divorce and has financial issues (caused by husband) so she needs to get a job after being out of the work force to raise her daughter. She worked for a few years in publishing before having a kid, but can’t get back in because no one will hire a 40-year old assistant. So she lies about her age and says she’s 26 and gets a job. I love all the characters (strong female relationships) and there are also eye candy guys/love triangle kind of thing too.

    6. Gossip Girl if you haven’t already watched it
      Witches of East End – My husband actually watched this with me. I guess the super natural element made it ok for him.

    8. Girlfriends Guide to Divorce just ended but it was light and funny, kind of like a SATC if they’d moved to LA, gotten married and then divorced.

    11. Pretty people who are fundamentally decent while engaging in love triangles and whimsical shenanigans are my JAM, as far as TV is concerned. I love Hart of Dixie utterly while recognizing that it is ridiculous.

      I would second the recommendation for Younger. I also would strongly recommend Jane the Virgin. Crazy Ex Girlfriend is also one of my faves, but is a bit more cringe-y as its core character has some serious issues (which the show engages with). Gossip Girl is great fun but the “fundamentally decent” part of the equation is missing. If you can tolerate Amy Sherman Palladino and the fast talking, Bunheads is also a good option.

      Some people are really fond of The Bold Type, although it wasn’t super engaging for me.

  18. HALP. We are coming to NYC for our anniversary in a few weeks (thanks for the excellent recs!!) and our AirBNB cancelled on us. I’m not interested in throwing good energy after bad.

    Can anyone recommend a reasonably priced hotel/vrbo/yurt on a roof in Brooklyn near Prospect Park? We’re adventurous types, so long as there are basic amenities like a bathroom and ac (you’d be surprised). We aren’t comfortable staying in a room in someone’s home.

    We are on a major budget, so I’m trying to find something between 200-250 a night that isn’t terrifyingly sketchy looking.

    1. Brooklyn local here. My in laws just stayed at the Holiday Inn on Schemerhorn which is more towards downtown Brooklyn but still relatively close to the park. I think the rates are around what you are looking for- they were happy with it.

    2. Well, it’s not particularly near Prospect Park, but I stayed at the Hotel Le Jolie in Williamsburg recently, and it seems like what you’re looking for–reasonably priced, bathroom, AC, basic room. Wifi was free, and continental breakfast was included. The staff at the front desk were nice and helpful.

    3. FWIW, Airbnb will give you a credit towards a replacement booking in these circumstances… as long as the host actually cancelled the reservation, as opposed to telling you to cancel.

    5. My parents like the Fairfield Inn on 3rd Ave and Butler. There are now a lot of budget-ish chain hotels along 3rd and 4th Aves in the Gowanus that are not right on top of the park but reasonably close. (The west side of Prospect Park runs along what would be 9th Avenue).

    6. This might be more adventure than you want but Hotel tonight is awesome. We stayed at the William vale recently in Bk and paid $97 a night for 2 nights. Booked two days before.

    7. The neighborhoods that you want to search in for are Park Slope, Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace (depending on what sort of subway access you want/need), and Prospect Lefferts Garden.

  19. Anyone have any good recs for a men’s shoe that is good for walking around NYC as a tourist? Something other than sneakers, that looks nice, and possibly be worn to a Broadway show.

    1. Magnanni shoes with the rubber sole. My husband wears them to work and commuting every day.

    2. My boyfriend has a pair of sketchers black leather boots that he loves. We bought them at Burlington coat factory. They are the most comfortable shoes he says, and they only have a little tiny embossed S, so they do not scream sketchers. I believe he wore them in nyc once.

    1. This doesn’t seem that useful. It tells me that I’m in the upper class, which I already knew. But the major downside is that it doesn’t seem to adjust the income brackets by location. Middle class is very different in NYC, SF, DC, etc then a small local city.

        1. Not the above anon, but its location feature is… weird at best. Like it lumps together the Philadelphia and Camden areas. Also, the level of information provided is really meager. Oh I’m in the upper 23% of income in my area? I didn’t need Pew to figure that out…

          1. I don’t even think it does that. It tells you the percentage of people in your area who are upper class. I played around with some different numbers and the %s with the bar charts don’t change.

        2. It tells you how many people in your area are in each class, but I don’t see anything that indicates that they change the cut-off amounts for the classes by area. 75k in NYC is very different from 75k in my midwest city hometown. If I’m missing something, let me know.

      2. It does adjust but not enough. The difference is slight – maybe $50k more to be upper class in SF vs a small Midwestern city. But homes prices vary by a factor of about 7-10, so I don’t think $50k a year is enough.

        1. How could you find this? I’m not seeing anything that indicates they adjusted by COL

          1. You have to put in your location and I played with different locations and got different answers for whether my $150k HHI family of 3 was upper or middle class.

  21. Where do you keep your family’s shoes? We have a big mud room and it seems that rather than keep shoes in a closet, we all store 75% of our shoes in the mud room. There are 5 of us, and 3 girls (though all under 8). How do we find a balance between keeping the shoes we wear in the mud room and not having like, 70 pairs of shoes in the mud room?

    Right now we have 4 pairs of shoes for DH (bean boots, sneakers, work (dress) shoes, boat shoes & flip flops.

    I have gym shoes, dressy sandals, birks, and my most commonly worn work flats.

    My kids have at least 4 pairs each- gym sneakers, fashion sneakers, fall boots, misc other.

    I keep all my super fancy shoes and all my heels in my closet. DH keeps most of his work shoes in or closet and his workshop shoes down in the workshop. Kids keep their cleats in the garage.

    Do I just embrace that the mudroom is the family closet and install massive shelves?

    1. This really isn’t that complicated. You have three options: 1) store shoes in the mudroom, 2) get everyone in the habit of taking off their shoes in the mudroom and then immediately putting them away in their own closets, or 3) have a designated time every X days that everyone puts their shoes away.

      Honestly this probably isn’t a hill I’d die on, I’d go for #1. Forget shelves, no one will use them. Maybe a plastic bin on the floor for each person? Controlling where the shoes get kicked off seems more likely to work than expecting people to organize shoes on a shelf/in one of those little shoe cubbies.

    2. Yes. Growing up us kids kept all shoes in the mudroom and parents kept some shoes in the mudroom on a shoe rack. It was quite convenient. I think this seems like a good use of a mudroom!

      1. +1. Isn’t keeping stuff like shoes and coats and umbrellas and school bags and sporting equipment the entire point of a mudroom?

    3. If you are a no-shoes-in-the-house family, you need to keep shoes that are worn regularly in the mudroom where they are taken off and put on. For my family, shelves work better than bins. People are no more likely to toss their shoes in the bin than they are to put them away on the shelf, and it’s easier to find the pair you want on the shelf than by digging in a bin. Shoes also stay cleaner and keep their shape better on the shelves.

      If you are not a no-shoes-in-the-house family, then each person’s shoes can live in his or her bedroom closet.

    4. Do you want your kids to not wear their shoes in the house? Then I think the mudroom sounds like the place for them to keep the shoes they wear regularly (not dress shoes) and should be set up accordingly. To me, that’s the purpose of the mudroom anyway.

  22. Is the NY&C dress modeled by Danielle from America’s Next Top Model, who won years ago?

Comments are closed.