Corporette.com

Updated: Dec 15, 2020 203 Comments · by

Suit of the Week: RTA

The Personal Shopper (TPS) |

This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

For busy working women, the suit is often the easiest outfit to throw on in the morning. In general, this feature is not about interview suits for women, which should be as classic and basic as you get — instead, this feature is about the slightly different suit that is fashionable, yet professional.

Did you see our roundup of plus-size suits for interviews last week? I found a ton of new-to-me brands, including ones like RTA, available at 11 Honore.

The blazer runs in sizes L-XXL and is on sale for $357 (woot!); the brand also offers an intriguing “blazer bodysuit.” Readers who wear plus sizes, what are some of your favorite brands of suiting?

collage of 4 plus-size women wearing interview suits
Some of our favorite plus-size suits for interviews as of 2024: Calvin Klein / Eloquii / Universal Standard / Talbots (not pictured but also J.Crew)

Sales of note for 9.30.24

Sales of note for 9.30.24

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

Some of our latest threadjacks include:

About Kat

Kat Griffin is the founder, publisher, and editor-in-chief of Corporette. You can read more about her here.

Comments

  1. Back-to-Back Conference Calls

    New to sr. associate life and getting looped into a TON of calls I am not running and don’t really participate in, but still need to pay enough attention to help with revising deal documents and knowing what’s up (since partners know I am on these calls).

    It’s great to have more context around these deals/matters, but I cannot focus during back-to-back calls (sometimes up to three hours).

    Help? Tips? Ways to stay awake and engaged? I’ve tried taking notes, but keep getting distracted.

    • IL

      Get some sort of wireless headphones and pace around. I throw in yoga or ballet stretches during especially long stretches so my posture doesn’t suffer. Obviously this only works if you are off camera!

    • Anon

      Knit! I have an ongoing simple project that lives in my office for conference calls.

      • Explorette

        Second to knitting. I always have a “conference call” project going. Something really simple that you don’t have to think about, but provides me just enough distraction to keep me from getting bored.

    • Anonymous

      The point is to actually absorb the info, so you need to trick yourself to focus better. Can you pretend you are a newspaper reporter on a deadline and need to cover this as a story? (Confession: I used to work as a reporter so this may be a “me” thing!) What about sending yourself an email afterward as if you were the project manager that summarizes what was said and what folks will do next? Bonus is that if you ever need to copy and paste anything, you’ll have it handy.

    • NYNY

      If you only need to participate in a small piece of the agenda, are you able to request that it be first (or last) and you can drop off early or join late? That way you can focus on what you need and carve out more time for your follow-ups.

    • Anonymous

      You really need to take notes. I would prepare a list of what you know to be the open issues and take notes on the decision on each and who needs to implement it. That way you start developing the skills you will need to be the trusted resource who can circle back and flag issues, coordinate effectively with your colleagues, and advance in your career.

  3. Zoom / overhead lighting + glasses

    The room I do zoom calls from has overhead lighting. My reading glasses seem to catch the glare, so it looks like I have illumination coming from the lenses. It is weird-looking, but I’m not sure I care, as I don’t look bad, the setup just looks weird (I’ve tried tilting and moving around a bit, but I think it’s from the glasses, but I need them to read comments, etc.).

    Does this happen to you? It’s a bit of sort of demonic possession as a look, but it’s 2020, so why not?

    • pugsnbourbon

      This happens with some folks I’m on calls with and honestly it barely registers. If it bugs you, could you try using a bright desk lamp, aimed away from you (so the light isn’t so harsh) and turning off the overhead?

    • Anon

      It happens to me but I don’t really have a way to fix it. If it bothers other people who I’m meeting with, well they have too much free time on their hands.

    • anon

      I don’t wear glasses but I’ve never noticed such a thing on anyone who does because I spend 99.9% of my time on video looking at myself lol

      • Airplane.

        At least I know it’s not just me. I constantly stare at myself. I will change a setting to not show myself if it’s a meeting I really need to focus on.

    • Anonymous

      I think eye contact helps make your communication more effective, so it’s worth spending time to get this right–especially since it looks like zoom is the norm for the foreseeable future. Are you using blue light blocking glasses? If so, switch to normal readers. The other advice is to light (desk lamp will do) from behind your laptop or slightly above. A bright clamp “ring” light runs about $25 on Amazon if you want to go fancy. If you can tun out the overhead even better.

  4. Nelly+Yuki

    Can someone recommend some resources to teach me about life insurance? I’m a reasonably intelligent person, but I don’t know anything about it.

  5. Anon

    how exactly does a recount work? is it the same people who did the counting the first time around? do these poor people ever get to sleep?

    • pugsnbourbon

      If memory from 2000 serves, it involves a lot of very tired-looking people armed with magnifying glasses. And vivid discussion of hanging chads.

      • Anon

        Omg the hanging chads. I lived through that too as an adult voter, but I think the 2020 legal challenges to come will make hanging chads seem like child’s play. And I 100% think that election was stolen from Gore.

        • Nesprin

          And now three members of Bush’s legal team are on the supreme court! Am sure that they’ll be impartial!

      • Anon

        I don’t think there are hanging chads anymore, they fixed that issue :)

        There was a Wisconsin recount in 2016 too and Trump netted 131 votes, so I’m not too worried. The margin in Florida was also only a few hundred votes. When the margin is 20k+ it’s almost impossible for things to change through a recount. That said, I would be much more comfortable if Biden wins all three of AZ, NV and PA, so that a challenge to the results in any one state can’t flip it to Trump. It looks a lot sketchier for courts to go around overturning results from multiple states than from just one state.

    • Anon

      I have been an attorney for a hand recount. Each side has an attorney; in smaller races, the candidates are also there. (In a larger race, there are too many polling locations for the candidate to be present.) The ballots are unsealed; they are taken out of the boxes; and they are recounted one-by-one. The person doing the counting states who they think the ballot is for; if either side objects, they lodge an objection. If there cannot be agreement (usually the standard is “intent of the voter”), that ballot goes through an appeals process. Otherwise, the ballot is counted for one of the candidates and the next ballot is assessed.

      Given that at least one county in Michigan transposed numbers and another added on a zero to Biden’s total, part of the purpose of a recount is to ensure that the original numbers were reported correctly. There are allegations of problems with ballots from Sharpies, which bleed through the paper. A ballot scanning machine may see stray marks and not count the entire ballot. This is called an “overvote;” the machine thinks that the person voted for more than one candidate. If a voter did not fill in the circle entirely, the machine may read it as an “undervote,” wherein it thinks that the voter blanked the ballot. Those things are actually very hard for machines to pick up but very easy for humans to discern.

  6. Sorry to re-open this can of worms...

    Sorry to re-open this but I got caught up on this morning’s thread late and had some thoughts / questions for the women posting about their support for Trump / Republicans. If you “hate the R’s position on social issues”, what else is more important? If the “MAGA crowd scares you” then why vote for someone who empowers them? What personally about the D’s positions and the liberal agenda are so dangerous? If the economy is so important, what genuinely has Trump done for a lower-income rural voter (who doesn’t own a farm)? How are we supposed to reach lower-income rural voters and be empathetic? What are your feelings on climate change?

    And to be clear, I completely understand why anyone pro-life or anti-LGBTQ would vote for Trump. I know how legal immigrants disdain illegal immigrants and that there is a lot of racism in non-white communities. I understand if you personally own a business and want to reduce all regulations, climate-related or not, or if you own a farm that you vote for Trump. I do think it’s difficult to reach out to lower-income rural voters when there are ones that blame other people and immigrants for their situation. I am extremely socially liberal but otherwise very moderate; I do not support Medicare for all, I do not support free college, I don’t support “cancel rent”, etc. I think unions should only be for unskilled labor jobs and find it very hypothetical when D’s blast police unions but support teachers and nurses unions. I hate the woke left. The area I am most fiscally liberal on is the environment because I do believe we need swift action and it will cost money to prevent the worst of climate change. I voted for Biden because I did not believe that he had a liberal agenda and ultimately I weigh social issues more important than financials, but I also understand I am very fortunate, make $230K a year, and can afford it.

    • Anonymous

      I still don’t get how free college and cancelling student loans will work. Someone has to pay or repay and my guess is that “someone” is the taxpayers, most of whom don’t even have a college degree, so it feels unfair to make others pay someone’s $$$ loans when others never even had a chance to go (or figured that they couldn’t afford to go).

      Free rent is a way to make all apartments get converted into condos and sold at fire-sale prices (which probably benefits people of some means vs people who really need affordable rentals).

      I get that people are optimists and dreamers but I think a lot of people just don’t think things through or imagine that you can stick it to people in the form of higher taxes or by cutting other things (and a lot of the budget goes to entitlements, which you can’t really cut).

      • Anon

        I don’t have a strong opinion on the loans, but the free college tuition is going to be junior college for two years and in state tuition for two years, tuition only. No room and board. It would easily pay for itself in the taxes on the higher income that person would ultimately earn. It’s an investment really.

        • Anonymous

          Also maybe it would do something to prevent all the tuition hikes and price gauging and mismanagement of funds, so it actually be less costly than the sum of all the outstanding student loans or whatever.

      • Anon

        Debt forgiveness has a long history (literally, debt crises are some of the earliest crises in recorded history). There are a lot of models to learn from. Many countries today are already doing much better than the US with less money to draw on. So it’s not all imaginary, really.

        • Anonymous

          I doubt that forgiving student loans that can be in excess of what a house costs in rural America would be popular. It just seems like a great transfer of wealth to the “haves”.

      • Anon

        Biden only wants to raise taxes on people making over $400k a year. It’s a very rare person that doesn’t have a college degree and makes this kind of income.

        • Anonymous

          I just don’t think that there are that many people making >400K to possibly pay for all of those making less (never mind those living on a tenth of that). At some point, and I think it gets here sooner than later thanks to COVID wrecking government coffers, taxes go up on a lot more people than advertise b/c the math won’t otherwise work out with pay-go.

          • Anon

            I don’t have the exact numbers handy, but raising taxes on the rich by even a small amount raises huge total sums of money. The 1% has the vast majority of the wealth in this country. You can search for the exact numbers but it was staggering to me.

      • Anonymous

        You realize that basically all of Europe has free college right? It’s not that hard.

        It’s paired with a high school education system that graduates kids in the non-college stream with actual job qualifications so they can be hairdressers, vet techs, pharmacy techs, plumbers, electricians etc.

        The American idea that you only deserve a decent education if you pay for it via private school and private college is trash and privileges the wealthy.

        • MyOpia

          THANK YOU, I am always wanting to point this out, other places exist, yo!!!

          I did a graduate degree at a European uni, but as a non -citizen, I paid tuition … $400/ semester :)

      • Anon

        What gets me on the tax thing is that Trump’s plan raises taxes on the middle class incrementally through 2027. The Dems are literally saving Rs money with the tax increases above $400k plan. But the misinformation rampant in the media these days is atrocious.

        • Ellen

          Dad says he wants the State and Local Tax Deduction back, and the $10K cap lifted Is the Democrat plan giving him back his $10K?

    • Anon

      From what I’ve heard from the mouths of non-extremist Rs who legitimately understand that Trump is a pretty awful person and fairly incompetent are pretty much single issue voters (amongst them a lot of the stuff you mentioned in the second paragraph), or have been successfully indoctrinated to catastrophize the concept of D’s or “liberals” in power – let’s not even talk about the fact that mainstream D party is in actuality fairly moderate. I’ve heard a lot of “I don’t like what the R’s are doing right now but the D’s will XYZ”. XYZ being take away my guns (this isn’t true), raise my taxes (this isn’t true except for the very rich who pay almost nothing), or give people social services that they don’t “deserve” (whether or not someone deserves gov’t assistance is a complicated topic with a lot of morality tied into it).

      I honestly think your run of the mill non-crazy Rs don’t have any real concept of the actual platform of moderate Ds. If they did they’d more or less be okay with it – obviously leaving out abortion and LGBTQ rights if they lean conservative on those issues. I think there is standard agreement that there are issues in certain areas – healthcare costs, college costs, school funding, increasing domestic jobs, a standard income should be able to support a family, to a lesser extent excessive use of force by police and/or their budgets. Even recreational mar*juana isn’t as controversial as it used to be.

      • ugh

        Yeah, I think moderates on either side have a lot of common ground with one another. Agree with the tendency to catastrophize. What I see with some Rs is a willingness to discount the extreme right’s views as hyperbole that will never happen because it’s impractical or wouldn’t actually get through the various checks/balances inherent in the system. Yet, every single radical idea that comes from the far left is taken as an imminent threat even though those things are equally unlikely to come to fruition as proposed. The willingness to put up with Trump’s nonsense and to ignore that his words/actions have actual negative repercussions is what really frustrates me. If you think his idea of [insert terrible idea] is ridiculous, why do you continue to tolerate the clown?

    • Anon

      This question is not going to work. People have tried to explain their opinion beliefs only to be told they are wrong, they are a horrible person, are voting against their own interests, etc. Until people are willing to listen without judgment, this question is not going to be answered. (I am very, very liberal, have never voted for a republican, think Trump is horrible. I am also guilty of this.)

    • anon

      Things I’m for – abortion but only before viability +/- 25 weeks not at 35 weeks, racial equality along with equal rights for LGBTQ, women etc, police reform (not defunding), gay marriage, law and order, charter schools, energy independence. Dreamers’ path to citizenship. Free speech, even if it’s not “politically correct.”

      Things I’m against – death penalty, socialism, free tuition, free rent, free “minimum income”, no filibuster, lots of immigration, free borders, sanctuary cities, green new deal, gun control. Major changes to the Constitution. Almost everything AOC and Bernie want, I’m against.
      My vote wouldn’t do anything, as I am not in anything close to a swing state.

      Trump is not perfect, but the media and the left have vilified him, most specifically with the statement that he said “there were good people on both” sides and that he didn’t repudiate the KKK, white supremacists etc. He has repudiated white supremacists at least 5 times. The statement of good people on both sides was talking about people who wanted statues torn down, not the white supremacists.
      People on the left who only read the NYT and democratic sources don’t have the full picture. I read the NYT, WaPost and WSJ daily, along with my true-blue coast state’s flagship newspaper. I do also occasionally listen to FoxNews. But I can guarantee I get more exposure to the left via media than the majority of democratic voters do. My twitter feed includes Trump, Harris, Biden.

      Kamala Harris tweeted a cartoon video last week that said she wanted “Equality of outcome, not equality of opportunities” which is a Marxist/Communist philosophical statement. I wholeheartedly repudiate this belief.

      Threatening to impeach Trump before he even took office is a mark of an unhinged thought process.

      If I were in charge, the Supreme Court would have to be balanced with a 5-4 split (conservatives mostly in charge) and both right and left viewpoints considered. Over time, the country has become more liberal and I’m ok with that but I want it to be rational and slow and constitutional.

      Five-ten years ago, I would have been considered a moderate. I don’t consider myself Republican or Democrat but would probably be hated by most democrats. Republicans are more welcoming.

    • Anonymous

      But isn’t Trump … the most rascist? Are you saying Republicans are pro-Muslim? And that somehow supersedes all the rascist actions they’re taking within the US? I really don’t know. Can you tell me more about this?

    • Anonymous

      Let me take a shot at this. What we are missing is a concrete plan to create jobs that does not have the UMC bias that the path to stable employment is college or retraining as tech workers. Over the last two decades we have collectively taken actions that have gutted key parts of our economy. We have let companies outsource most of their manufacturing overseas, and the Dems have been complicit in that and in letting companies offshore most of the resulting revenue. That guts both our manufacturing base and the money available to us for social programs. We have done international trade deals that let products in from countries who do not pay fair wage, do not respect the environment, etc. We let truckers drive our roads in trucks that meet Mexican standards. Trump promised to pull out of trade deals, to impose tariffs in key industries, and to string arm companies into on-shoring additional jobs. What he has done is a mess because he does not know how to consult and negotiate and implement. What the Dems need is a competing plan that delivers real middle class jobs and also accomplishes key policy goals. They also need to work with the unions including the police unions. Finally, on the environment instead of scaring the crap out of everyone with the Green New Deal, look at what we can do here to prepare for climate change and have an actionable plan for employing workers to raise roads and bridges harden levies, install more energy efficient equipment, help the West manage forests etc. And stop scaring everyone involved in fracking, natural gas is a better alternative to coal and can be a bridge to lower emissions.

    • Jeffiner

      I grew up in a very, very rural and very, very poor area in the South. Most people there are obviously Republicans. One specifically told me she hates Trump, but thinks Dems will take their guns, put them on lockdown, censor their speech, outlaw their churches, create open borders, and eliminate law and order. She pictured a future run by Dems as that of the second Back to the Future movie, with brothels and casinos and the country being dirty, dangerous, and scary. So many others agreed with her. They voted for the Republican Party, not Trump.

      I don’t think there’s any way to tell them NONE of that is in the Democratic platform. And I don’t know how a Dem would even start to try and get their votes.

      • LaurenB

        Right. This is what I mean. This is someone who literally believes that the Dems will outlaw their churches. How do you “reason with” or “understand” someone like that, who isn’t thinking clearly and dealing in reality? This isn’t “oh, I disagree with the Dems on farm policy / the environment / tariffs” where ok, people of good faith can have differing opinions.

      • Anon

        I mean it’s really hard to argue that these things aren’t in the democratic platform when, if you go to San Francisco, Seattle, or Austin – there are tents in every park and human feces on the streets in the name of social equality.

        • Luc

          This is very puzzling to me, as an Australian – equating left wing politics with human despair. In Australia, we do have homelessness, but nowhere near on the scale of many countries, including the US. I live in the third largest city (less than 10km out of the centre), and if I see a homeless person in town I’m a bit surprised. It’s just not that common (though I think it is bit worse in Sydney and Melbourne). So, we pay our taxes, and then stuff is filtered back – university is heavily subsidised, for instance, and you don’t have to pay up front – instead you can pay it off when you start earning “real” money. A lot of people have private health care, but we have a full public system if you don’t. We are not routinely denied medical care, and I do not know of a single person who has ever suffered severe financial distress due to medical bills, because we would just go through the public system and wait a bit longer. And emergencies are always treated.
          All of these things you mention – tents in the park, faeces on the street – are caused by a lack of public infrastructure and welfare funding, not by the Democratic platform. I’m not saying Australia is perfect AT ALL, but things like public medical care and compulsory voting don’t automatically lead to the downfall of civilisation. And I have never ever seen human faeces on the street.

        • Jeffiner

          In the first debate, Chris Wallace tried to point out that Republican cities like Tulsa and Fort Worth have race, crime, and violence issues. They also have large homeless populations. As do San Diego, Miami, and Jacksonville, which also have Republican mayors.

          Dems push for infrastructure and social programs to help people have a home, hold a job, recover from addiction, etc. Dems do not encourage sleeping in tents and pooping in the park.

    • Seventh. Sister

      For my parents, the only thing they truly care about is how well their portfolio is doing. They don’t mind the racism, but it’s really that money is their chief concern. Some people in their income bracket care about taxes, but they don’t because they live in a state with very low taxes.

      I think for the captains of industry, the MAGA stuff is for the rubes, they want lower taxes, and they know that they won’t be living in a country where their mistresses won’t be able to get abortions. Money solves any personal problem they’d ever have, and they love money more than anything else.

  7. Anon

    One positive thing amid the darkness for me: today I convinced a family member that racism exists in the US today. Yes, sadly there are people who needed to be convinced. On my part it took keeping a cool head (something I am not usually capable of) and presenting scientific studies which my family member could relate to. I typically shy away from confrontation and I am happy I changed a mind today.
    My technique: For instance, just saying blacks as a whole have lower levels of education or access to job opportunities or that there were fewer blacks at high levels in organizations wasn’t enough. I had to establish active causality i.e. show that this was not due to other factors but due to racism. Among other things, I quoted the Harvard study showing that blacks who used white person names on resumes were twice as likely to get called for an interview. Also that with the same education and performance evaluations, women get paid less than men for the same job titles – therefore, sexism exists. I couldn’t just say the average woman (or minority) earns less than the average white man (“well maybe they didn’t work as hard/weren’t ambitious enough/weren’t qualified enough”). The resume/changing names study was great because it made it clear the candidate was the exact same otherwise, and the difference was only in the recipient’s minds.
    I am glad I had these data points at hand and would love to have other examples along this vein to keep in my back pocket to address these questions when they come up again!

    • Anonymous

      I recommend ‘Lean In’ by Sheryl Sandberg for lots of good example on these types of studies. Obviously more useful for sexism vs racism though. I don’t love the book’s message as a whole but the data points she references are high quality with footnoted studies.

      She has a couple examples like 30% increase in orchestras hiring women musicians when the auditions were done behind a screen and the musician’s gender was not revealed until after the decision was made. (not 100% sure on exact number, but I think I’m remembering correctly).

      • Anon

        Yes, I’ve read and love Lean In and that’s where the resume example came from. I would love to see something similar with quoted studies for race. For instance, I googled to find that juries were 12 times more likely to convict a black man for the same crime as a white man. But I don’t want to leave room for arguments that there may have been other factors that made one person “more guilty” than the other…

    • Anonymous

      Thanks for having this difficult conversation. Great to hear a win today!!

    • Monte

      The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein –a great, relatively brief and easily digestible book that documents structural racism in the housing industry and its ongoing impact on black generational wealth, education, and employment opportunities.

    • emeralds

      This is super-late but on the off chance you’re still reading, Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson and Ava DuVernay’s 13th should have a lot of stats for you about racism in the criminal justice system.

  8. Anon

    Just wanted to chime in on the Latino/Latina/Latinx vote thread from this morning. There is a LOT of diversity within this one phrase and I think a lot of people chase the L vote as some sort of unicorn when it is far more complicated. We can’t lump them into a single category. There is a huge difference between Cuban Americans living in Florida and Puerto Ricans living in New York and Mexican Americans living in Arizona and so on. Not to mention the diversity inside what pundits have grouped together, like skin color, wealth, assimilation into American culture, religion. There is definitely a religious sect of the “Latino vote” that sided with the evangelicals, and that isn’t surprising. A simpler way to think about it – Trump won the Latino vote and Biden won the Latinx vote.

    • Anonymous

      I agree. We had this come up at work. Someone wanted to change it to “Latinx” in a document specifically to send a message of inclusivity, which sounded great, but when we learned that very few Latino/Latino people identify using that term, we didn’t. To use your example, the program at work that this related to was for very poor, low-SES Latina women living in border regions – NOT well-educated, middle-class Biden voters. If we had used Latinx, we almost certainly would’ve been speaking to the wrong target audience.

      • Anon

        Hmm, how do you know that group isn’t Biden voters as well? Seems like a weird assumption to make.

        • Anonymous

          I’m sure many of them are, actually – what I meant and should’ve said was “well-educated, highly progressive women” or similar. A lot of people who haven’t been to college have never even SEEN “Latinx.”

    • Anonymous

      I wrote Latinx because I was too lazy to write out Latino/Latina on my phone. Sometimes it’s not worth commenting if people breeze over the main point of a comment and go right for policing language use.

      • Anon

        It’s not policing language use when the two terms mean very different things, like OP explained here

        • Anonymous

          Yeah but like ten people jumped on the fact I (mis)used that term and no one bothered to read the substantive response. Dismissing people because they don’t use the exact right term isn’t helpful.

      • Anon

        It’s not policing language when it’s relevant to the conversation. In the discussion this morning, posters were discussing the phenomenon of woke white people telling certain groups of people how they should feel. The use of Latinx is perfectly on point for that topic. My Latin language skills are rusty, but doesn’t Latino technically encompass Latino/Latina in that the male form of a word is used when describing a group of men and women?

        • LaurenB

          It does; it’s really ridiculous to get hung up on this, IMO. It smacks of the people who would use “womyn” because the word “women” has “men” in it. Good lord, move on to issues of substance.

        • Anonymous

          It does, but a lot of women are really over having men be the default humans in speech. Then there are also advocates who want to include people who do not consider themselves male or female.

          • anon

            This is true but it’s also not a good reason to start using a word to describe a group of people if that group doesn’t like the term. Either type out the full words Latino/Latina or use the shorter version of Latino

    • Anon

      Honestly, I think a lot of liberals are in denial about just how unpopular the “T“ activism part of LGBT is right now. Unlike like gay marriage, which is an issue that everyone can understand if not agree with, the activism today is so focused on jargon and rules and stuff that 99% of people can’t understand, even if they are well-meaning. Obviously there are a lot of people who are not well-meaning, but I always cringe when a “coastal elite“ calls someone a bigot for saying “sexual preference” or saying “women have abortions.”

      • Anonymous

        I agree — this eats up a lot of bandwidth for the true believers and makes the whole cause look silly by people who often know and have no issues with someone who is L or G. People who don’t mind cousin Larry marrying his very good friend Bruce so that Bruce can stay in the house and get social security when Larry dies (and maybe put Larry on Bruce’s health insurance) often can’t go all the way to “people with a cervix” or the extreme ends of the spectrum of issues. But if it’s my way or the highway, many people will take the highway and continue to break bread with Larry and Bruce.

      • pugsnbourbon

        Yeah and trans folks sure do know how unpopular they are. Every goddamn day. It’s not a great feeling.

        • Anonymous

          I know this is a personal issue for you, but I’m sure you can see how some of the really doctrinaire, my-way-or-the-highway advocacy is driving people away from the left. It’s not just on this issue, but it’s one of several where I think there is a huge divide between the intellectual elites and ordinary voters.

      • Jeffiner

        Didn’t white women gain suffrage in the US by distancing themselves from Black women, and implying that if white women got the vote, they wouldn’t interfere with the disenfranchisement of Black women (or men)? Letting the T and B populations fend for themselves while gaining civil rights for the L and G’s is really low.

  9. Anonymous

    I’ll post this here on the afternoon thread where it won’t get much traction since it’s just a vent: I feel like liberals are being told to spend all their time relating to rural Republicans and trying to see their POV, but it’s not going both ways. I try to say things like climate change is real and it’s an important issue for me and I get called a libtard. I say women’s rights matters and I get called a snowflake. Then I get yelled at for not being understanding and sensitive when a Republican wants to spread outrageous lies about COVID (literally “inject yourself with bleach stuff”). How can I be understanding about that? It’s literally, fundamentally, insanely wrong and there isn’t a middle ground. I can empathize with your economic concerns, your family, your religious values, whatever, but why am I not allowed to criticize lies, but you’re allowed to denigrate all of my beliefs?

    • Anon

      Yeah I agree with you. And I live in a rural red state and am put off my some of the snobbism here towards the “rurals.” But there’s definitely a double standard as far as getting out of your bubble goes. Trump voters mostly live in bubbles too.

      • Anonymous

        Agree at being appalled at the negative “rural” sentiment. Some people need to humble themselves/recognize their own privilege/have some respect for humanity/etc.

        • LaurenB

          “Recognize my own privilege”? I grew up in a working-class neighborhood living with my grandfather who worked 2 jobs to stay afloat, my friend. Think Archie Bunker’s neighborhood. I’m hardly to the manor born (or is it to the manner born?).

        • Anon

          This is where I am. My problem isn’t ideological differences between Democrats and Republicans, I voted for Biden. What I find disgusting is bashing people who live in red states and painting them with a broad, offensive brush that does not uniformly apply. It’s not acceptable for other demographics, it shouldn’t be here.

    • Anonymous

      Because they have a disproportionate amount of power via a Senate and Electoral College system that strongly favors rural America. Their vote matters more so if we want the country to swing blue, they need to be convinced.

      • Anon

        This. Like it or not, this is the reality. I care more about getting the right candidates in office than about what is “fair” in terms of discourse and rhetoric. If that means I have to subject myself to a double standard, so be it. It sucks but whining about how it’s unfair that I get called a snowflake when you have people on the other side who protest Starbucks every year for not having Christmas-y enough Christmas cups hasn’t proven an effective strategy in changing the results of elections. So I’m done trying to do that. I hope you’ll join me.

      • Anonymous

        I would love to see a conversation about what it would take to raise them up or put them in better positions so that they can develop their knowledge/ understanding … vs the angry blaming and finger pointing. A lot of the rural crowd is plagued by a lack of access to better information because the education access/system in their community is poor … they’re so focused on paying rent with a low wage job that they don’t have time to research/verify information themselves before voting if they even have access to the internet … or whatever.

        I may not be expressing myself well here, but a lot of factors go into the rural vote & it’s not just one type of voter though there are systemic reasons they might vote red.

        The discussion here the other day on WV and the challenges it’s residents may face that result in the inability to lift themselves out of poverty there was enlightening. Many shared some the challenges that any of us from rural communities face. If we could have a discussion like that it would be great but that’s not happening here in regards to politics. Why not?

    • Anonymous

      The adherence to the lies is something else. It’s like a stubborn faith without any evidence (scientific evidence or even morality). You can’t refute it because it’s not actually based on anything real.

      • LaurenB

        +1. I can absolutely respect different opinions on whether tariffs help or hurt the US, or whether industry X / city Y should be bailed out or whether there should be race preferences in college admissions or a dozen other things. Those are legitimate differences where reasonable people can make arguments on different sides and reasonable people can hold different beliefs. But these people believe in LIES. Obama was born in Kenya, Biden wants to cancel Christmas, Covid is a hoax and masks deprive you of oxygen so you’ll faint. Why is that something I need to respect?

    • PolyD

      You’re not alone…

      I’m supposed to understand why they keep voting for a party that undermines all the rules and standards of our democracy that they can, but they don’t want to understand why, for example, it’s bad for a president to just hand out security clearances to his unqualified children, or bribe other countries for dirt on his opponents. When I try to make this case, I either get, Oh, they all do it, or Oh, Trump’s just a clown. Like we’re supposed to ignore the fact that the guy is a liar and thief and not very bright, and vote for him anyway because…why??

      It’s very very frustrating. I am pretty convinced nothing will change in the US until Fox News goes away. And Sinclair Broadcasting. So basically we’re screwed.

      • What's the matter with Kansas

        I’m a little reluctant to wade into this today, but the tendency of lots of Americans (not all, obviously) to vote for someone that’s literally against their self-interest is not new. Look up “What’s the matter with Kansas.” The general idea is that we tend to idolize people who’ve “made it” (in whatever form that takes; apparently some Trump fans are well aware that his business ventures are in the toilet but they still appreciate that he can fake it, so to speak). Just trying to point out that this is a broader thing than 2020 or Trump or Biden or Hillary.

    • Ribena

      I agree. I’m in the UK where I campaigned to stay in the EU and us ‘remainers’ have spent years trying to understand the concerns of people who wanted out. Not once has any of them asked me why I I feel strongly about being part of the EU.

      • Anonymous

        Sympathies, I think Trump is our Boris and that we have all been swamped by a lash back against our transnationalism. It left too many blue collar workers behind.

    • Anon

      Agree and that’s why I think so many voiced frustration on the other thread. I would like someone to explain to me why Democrats/progressives bear all the responsibility for reaching out and building bridges with people who transparently have no desire to build bridges with us, and who ridicule and denigrate us at every opportunity. I do not see the point in it. If I saw some receptivity to ideas or different points of view from that side, I might feel differently. As it is I feel I’m being asked to put myself out there and forge relationships with people who believe Pizzagate is a real thing and call me a libtard. I would rather save my time an energy for an activity more likely to create change or reap rewards, thanks anyway.

    • anonymous

      Who is calling you a libtard and snowflake? Are these people you know in person – like friends and family? If so, I don’t know if there’s much you can do. They are clearly close minded and not open to change.

      If this is happening with random people on the internet then there is really nothing you can do.

      The only thing I can think of is to do is support organizations I believe in or volunteer. I only have control over what I can do individually to make the world a better place.

      • Anonymous

        Libtard came from an uncle who has since died (haven’t been called that since). I’ve heard snowflake from two other family members, but I hear it from online randos more. Overall, the name-calling is actually rare, but putting down my beliefs as idiotic for no good reason (literally they just say my ideas are dumb or wrong without offering evidence) is common. I have family in red states but live in a blue state.

        • anonymous

          Sorry that you have family members who are like that. I think anyone (either republican or democrat) who resorts to name calling and won’t engage in a rational, thoughtful discussion is a lost cause. There’s no way you can reason with these people.

          Sadly, I think the most accurate representation of our future is the movie Idiocracy.

    • Anon

      More than 90% of media parrot liberal views. What more platform do you want?

      • Anon

        I can’t believe you’re trying that ish here. Read the room, genius. That kind of brainless propaganda doesn’t fly here. Go post on Breitbart or something.

      • Anonymous

        yeah, so weird how all those organizations with fact checkers insist on writing about actual facts.

      • Anon

        That is patently untrue. Listen to NPR if you want a centrist view. But most Fox News diehards think NPR is leftist. (It isn’t. It’s consistently ranked as centrist and fact based)

        • Anon

          I listen to many NPR shows that have call ins and they always/often feature call in people on all sides of the issues, and feature politicians from all parties. I’ve heard plenty of Democrats get called out for BS by NPR during interviews.

          • Anon

            In fact there is a valid criticism to be made of centrist approaches like this. Say someone has a crazy idea, like covid is a hoax. So they bring in an epidemiologist on one side and a covid denier on the other, as if both sides have equal merit.

          • Anon

            That’s not really what NPR does though. They’d bring in two epidemiologists with differing perspectives about how to handle reopening, but neither would be a Covid denier. They don’t give credence to a fringe view but they still find plenty of ways to have reasonable debate on issues.

      • LaurenB

        Yes. Just like Fauci “parrots” that Covid is real and masks work. Protip: It’s not parroting if it’s truth.

    • Dear+Summer

      Yes. They aren’t asking you to “understand” them because they want to reciprocate. They just want to turn the attention back to them because they truly believe that they matter more and that conservative concerns are the only real concerns.

      • anon

        Exactly. In 2016 I didn’t hear a heartfelt plea to be seen and heard. I heard “Ha! You better start pandering to US, WE’RE the REAL Americans and if you keep insulting us and pointing out our racism then we’ll just vote for a huge jerk who is totally racist and blame it on you, because you were mean! Identity politics is bad! EMAILS!”

    • anon

      Agreed. I’m supposed to reach out and try to understand these people who voted for someone who thinks its okay to grab women by the p*ssy? Like fox news isn’t full of comments trying to “own the libs”? Why is a rural voter any more of a real American than I am?

    • Anonymous

      Are you actually talking to actual people? Like who are all these people yelling at you and calling you names?

      • Anon

        well, how about this morning’s tr0ll, for one? She didn’t use the phrase, but the sentiment was totally there.

    • Anon

      Agreed. This along with the election week + superbowl week obsession with the “real American” which apparently doesn’t include the >50% of us that live in cities, etc drives me up a wall. I read Hillbilly Elegy, Educated, etc. What are the conservatives reading? Pretty sure not the fantastic POC, immigrant, and other “liberal” viewpoint pieces of literature from the past few years.

      • Anon

        Well, actually, I am reading this blog. I read White Fragility and some others that were recommended here. I watch CNN and MSNBC until I get tired of all the angry ranting. I watch Fox every once in a while to compare viewpoints. I listen to music and watch TV shows that reflect culture that definitely skews left. Have you found a show that reflects a conservative viewpoint lately? I used to enjoy traveling to NYC and other cities but I haven’t felt comfortable with that for the past four years. I read the NY Times and listen to NPR. And I certainly don’t call people names or complain about anyone saying Happy Holidays. I did not vote for Trump although I have family members who did. I do not cancel them, because I love them and I do not believe people are one-dimensional. My father was a Republican, my mother was a Democrat, my brother has a degree in political science, and I grew up with lively political discussions. And yet I am afraid to post here because I am a white moderate conservative Christian woman from a small SEUS town, so I know I will get shot down. Yes, everyone has a tendency to live their lives in their own little world, but we are actually exposed to your beliefs and ideas more than you realize.

        • Seventh Sister

          Can I ask why you don’t feel comfortable traveling to cities? I live in a big city with a fair number of tourists, and I wouldn’t dream of confronting someone there for a visit over some perceived political difference. My response to tourists is to leave them alone unless they look super lost, though I am inclined to ask them if they need directions if they are on a Metro platform after 9pm because it isn’t straightforward and I want them to get back to their hotel/AirBnB without having to take a rideshare.

          • Seventh Sister

            I will admit to my mouth dropping open in shock when in the before times, an out-of-town mom visiting my kids’ dance studio* told her 16yo daughter it was too dangerous to walk down to the ethnic grocery store on the lower level. It was broad daylight, the store has a security guard, and it’s usually filled with elderly people getting vegetables. Maybe there was a homeless guy on the sidewalk 50 feet down the block, but really, it was perfectly safe.

            *They rent studio space for private classes from time to time.

    • anon

      I feel the same way. FWIW no R President has ever won the popular vote in my lifetime.

      • Anon

        That’s actually not true unless you’re 15.

        1992, Clinton received 43% of the popular vote; Bush, 37%, Perot, 18%.
        1996, Clinton received 49% of the popular vote; Dole, 41%, Perot, 8.4%.
        2000, Al Gore received 48.38% of the popular vote; Bush, 47.87%.
        2004, Bush received 50.73% of the popular vote; Kerry, 48.27%.
        2008, Obama received 52.93% of the popular vote; McCain, 45.65%.
        2012, Obama received 51.1% of the popular vote; Romney, 47.2%.
        2016, Trump received 46.1%; Hillary Clinton, 48.2%.

        In 7 elections, 4 of them had a plurality popular vote winner and 3 featured a candidate breaking the 50.01% barrier. In the latter, it was once a Republican and twice a Democrat.

        Fact matter.

        • anon

          Bush stole the 2000 election so the subsequent one is irrelevant IMO. Either way your stats prove how deeply unpopular Repulicans are.

          • Anon

            Quit while you’re behind.

            I deliberately omitted the elections of 1988, 1984, and 1980 (two of the three are within my lifetime and all 3 are within the lifetime of most women on this board) because they were such blowouts for the Republicans. I can include them, if you like.

            If you want to talk about “how unpopular” Republicans are, last night’s results disprove that. Beyond the top of the ticket (I was assured by pollsters there would be an epic blowout), y’all got crushed. Not a single Republican Congressional member lost reelection, but many Democrats did. Senate looks to be about an even heat, even though the Republicans were defending all the seats they gained in the absolute smash of 2014. (That was the year that the Democrats were down to levels not seen since 1928.)

            The stats would also prove that every Democrat except for Barack Obama is “deeply unpopular,” and Obama managed the amazing feat of doing worse (lower vote total) in reelection than in his first election. Off the top of my head, that’s the first time an incumbent got a lower vote total and still won the general since the 1800s.

            Bush did not steal the 2000 election, and the Florida debacle (wherein Al Gore wanted to selectively recount) in no way invalidates 2004.

            Maybe you’re just embarrassed and throwing off a petty response because I showed you up.

        • anon

          Whoops, I stand corrected. But one popular vote winner in my nearly 30 years of existence is … not great.

      • Anon

        I am all for abolishing the electoral college but I hate when I see things like this that suggest it would mean that automatically Republicans would never win. If we did away with the electoral college (which we should!), no one can predict how voter behavior, campaign spending, campaigning, etc. would change, all of which would have a major impact on voter turnout and how people actually vote and probably who the candidates were. As a very simple example, I live in New York and know plenty of conservatives who don’t bother voting because NY always goes D for Presidency and Senate and half the time the congressional seat is an unopposed D. When I voted this year, more than half the ballot was uncontested. These are people who might vote if there was a national popular vote. And people like this exist in every single state and include conservatives and liberals alike. It’s really impossible to know for sure what the impact of moving to the popular vote would be.

        • CO+Mountain+Girl

          What about switching the Electoral College to a split vote rather than winer take all? It seems that might be a compromise from both sides?

          • anon

            There’s been some research into this that suggests it would further exacerbate the problem and result in an even smaller group of the population deciding elections so I’m personally against it.

    • Anonymous

      the senate is fundamentally non democratic, and the population shift to big cities over the last few decades resulted in people in those less populated states now having disproportionate political power through the senate. im hoping one natural solution with covid adn remote work is that big blue cities start to move to smaller/medium cities everywhere and maybe that will help

    • Anon

      Oh, I absolutely 100% agree. I wonder if we’ll ever reach a point where the left is not expected to coddle the feelings of white racists? Maybe when the demographic shift is large enough.

    • LaurenB

      Yes. Note that the NYTimes, the WaPost, and all similar media routinely do the “let’s go out to the diner in rural Kansas and talk to the folks there” but you never see the opposite. The rural Republicans are in way more of a bubble. Remember the discussion the other ay about wishing people Happy Holidays vs Merry Christmas? Who’s in more of a bubble — the Catholic person in Boston who is at least aware there are Jewish people sharing the same city, or the evangelical in Alabama who wouldn’t know what Hanukah was if he tripped over it?

    • Anonymous

      I think it was Politico that had a really good article on how the GOP ended up anti-science. Trump added post-fact. My view is that they have a party supported by big business denying reality — from tobacco is safe, to fracking did not cause those earthquakes, to there is no global warming —aligned with the religious right who does not want evolution or biology taught. They have consistently over the years denied reality and Fox etc. has capitalized on it until it’s a war on both science and facts, since facts tend to arrive courtesy of science. I don’t know how you fight it given the closed loop media other than to push education with a meaningful curriculum and to push online portals to fact check like Twitter is.

    • anon

      It’s not about who’s allowed to do what. It’s about winning. If you, as a Democrat, want to win, you will figure out how to relate to the people whose votes you want. if you’re not willing to do that, then you’re choosing to lose in order to maintain some vision of being right or righteous. Look, I’m a liberal democrat too. I want to win. I will therefore learn to see things from others’ perspectives and see how I can appeal to them. And if you think that answer has to be “be racist or an awful person” you’re wrong. A lot of these people voted for Obama twice. That doesn’t mean they’re not racist, but it does mean they can be enticed with the right inducements.

  10. Anon

    Is there a professional/not snarky way to tell a student that starting an explanation to their supervisor (about the work I do, as a well-recognized SME) with “I don’t mean to be insulting, but…” is a really poor idea? They are allegedly old enough to know better, this isn’t their first career.

    The amount of effort it would take to fire her is not worth it for the amount of time she has left with us (3 weeks) so I may just let it drop but wanted to see.

    • Anon

      It may help to make a categorical thing? There’s almost no context in which “I don’t mean to be X, but…” doesn’t involve “being X.”

    • Sal

      You should absolutely kindly tell her – she’s there to learn. How will she learn if you don’t teach her? I like to say how I used to make similar mistakes (where I can find some reasonable parallel) when introducing constructive feedback.

    • Anonymous

      “Betsy, that’s not an acceptable way to present an idea to your supervisor. It’s rude and makes clear that you think you’re about to say something insulting.”

    • Anonymous

      Are there some phrases you can teach her for this situation that would be better received? Something that softens criticism or acknowledges her inexperience Like, “would it be important to consider x” or “are we overlooking y” or “I’ve consulted with an expert & the results were” Just let her know it didn’t reflect well on her to present it that way & teach her some professional language for that awkward moment of questioning a superior.

    • Anonymous

      I think this is a 2 part problem, first explain that using that phrase in a professional setting is inappropriate and then second look at the content of the comment itself, was it valid information? My boss would absolutely consider himself a SME, but he’s not he just supervises SMEs. There are many times when my boss will quote a law entirely incorrectly and I have to gently correct him to prevent a bruised ego, and I’m sure if men had an equivalent forum he would make some snide comments about me, but ultimately it’s my job to be right and I had to correct him.

    • Anon

      Thing I maybe should have mentioned: she’s twice as old as I am. So it feels weird to “teach” her professional language. I know it’s my role to help her learn but I’m pretty new to supervising so still trying to figure this kind of thing out.

      I’ll work on an email to her with some of the suggested language.

      • Cat

        I would do this with a conversation rather than an email, frankly.

        The substance of what follows “not to be insulting” matters. If she’s really trying to understand something but it’s poor choice of words, then saying “I might have misunderstood” or “maybe I don’t have the full picture” or “can I clarify why you are saying X when I’d previously heard Y” is better.

        If she’s busy trying to cut you down or show off but is completely misguided, it’s a different conversation.

        • Sal

          Yeah you can’t do this in an email. It doesn’t matter if she’s older than you – she’s a student, it’s your job to teach her.

      • Anonymous

        I would do face to face as well and of course try to leave your own ego out of it (c’mon, is that seriously something you would fire an intern over regardless of time left?). Whether she is older than you should have no bearing. It’s helpful feedback. I wish someone would have done this with an IT guy I used to work with. Almost every conversation would start “How can I put this in a way you would understand?” So off-putting even if he did have something insightful to say. (FWIW, he said this whether you were male or female, senior or junior role, etc.–so I don’t think it was malicious. Was just a weird conversational tic that was completely rude and needed to be stomped out.) I was junior to him and didn’t work together all that often, so I didn’t try to address it. But I later overheard a room full of folks talking about it after he left to work elsewhere and felt kind of bad for him.

        • Anon

          Realized after that I should have explained more. Totally not something alone!!!! Of course not. But she’s got a ton of issues. She won’t do the work, won’t answer direct questions during meetings about her work or assignments, and is super rude to us and staff. We’ve talked to her about it and she’s ignored us. She does things like make coffee unmuted (video on) during meetings and ignores us when we ask her to mute so we mute her from our side, she unmutes to say something super rude that shuts down conversation among the other interns, and stays unmuted. It’s a disaster all around and this is just indicative.

          Also, she was wrong. Not a matter of interpretation. She was totally wrong.

          • Anonymous

            What a joke that you think it’s easier to do nothing about this person. She’s a problem for you every minute of every day and you’re employing her why?

    • Anon

      “I don’t mean to be insulting, but…” is what you say when you’re being insulting. This is not just a supervisor thing; it’s a life thing.

      General life advice: whatever follows “I don’t mean to be rude/insulting/condescending…” should *not* be said.

      Yesterday, I was talking to people I had never met (county employees working at the polls; I was a campaign-appointed election day attorney) and was aware that what I was about to say would sound condescending. I started speaking, stopped, and said, “What I was about to say would have sounded really condescending and that’s the exact opposite of my intention.” Then I paused, thought about what I was trying to communicate, continued with, “You’re all doing a really great job and I haven’t seen the problems here that I have seen in previous elections.” I’m not even good at interpersonal skills and I know that’s a vast improvement over “I don’t mean to sound X but….”

      • Senior Attorney

        I feel like just straight-up telling her “that’s what you say when you’re being insulting” should do the trick.

  11. Michigan Law Suit

    Can someone talk me through the logistics of the Michigan law suit? What happens now and next?

  12. Anon

    I will get accused of “pot stirring” with this, and that’s okay with me, because I want to hear people’s responses. Here goes:

    The experiences of native-born Black Americans, and the experiences of non-Black POC immigrants, relating to navigating and surviving in white America, are fundamentally distinct and different. Change my mind.

    • Anon

      I…don’t think this is that controversial? I think most people agree that Black people and non-Black people are treated quite differently in the US and that the experience of immigrants also tends to be different than the experience of native-born Americans.

      • Monday

        Ha! We are not the same poster, but obviously had the same reaction. With the way this post was presented, I thought “Buckle up…” but then it turned out to be a pretty widely accepted statement that I’ve never heard anyone dispute.

        • Anon

          I’m the OP. I asked the question because over the years, here on Corporette, I have seen posts by “WOCs” or “POCs” who identify themselves as immigrants and then proceed to talk from a place of seeming authority about the “WOC/POC experience in America.” I have seen posters make equivalencies between their experiences as South Asian or Indian immigrants to the United States and what native-born BIPOC women go through. I have always wondered, when I see that, how equivalent those experiences really are. On any level. That same thought was triggered this morning when the poster identifying herself as some kind of flag-carrier for conservative WOCs everywhere posted her message scolding Democrats for not understanding POC/WOC. Which I am willing to admit may be true. But from that post alone, I can say I do not think that poster has had the same experiences as, say, my biracial Black/Native American friend who was born into poverty in St. Louis. By any stretch of the imagination. So I find it problematic, to say the least, that equivalencies would be made by that poster or others here. In speaking about these issues – or really any issues – I think it’s important for all of us to remember that because we may belong to a particular subgroup, speaking on behalf of that subgroup (or a wider one we could claim membership in) is fraught with potential issues. I think I have seen some, shall I say, interesting, commentary from folks who seem to want to claim a mantle that identifies them as having been marginalized or impacted in the same way that others have, when in fact they likely have had a very different experience because of their racial background, national origin, etc. Words mean very specific things and I think it’s important for people to be careful in the language they use to describe themselves and also make equivalencies between their experiences and those of others who are really nothing like them.

          • Anon

            I think you’re upset because you realize you’ve been doing what’s being described. Or you’re the conservative POC princess from the other thread. Sorry you got roasted, but you did kind of deserve it.

          • Not-black

            I think that you should basically find something better to do then stress about who does or doesn’t have it hard.

            POC and Black mean different things. There’s a reason why I don’t go around saying POC lives matter instead of Black lives matter. That doesn’t mean that being other than White isn’t challenging. Sheesh.

    • Anonymous

      Why would anyone try to change your mind or engage with this? Obviously they are.

    • Monday

      I don’t think this is controversial? People of different races and national origins have different experiences. There are some commonalities, and some differences.

    • Ribena

      Oh I totally agree with you. Fundamentally distinct set of challenges.

      I mentioned up thread I’m based in the UK. My parents’ new MP is a white American lady (I think now a dual citizen?) and talks all the time about how that means she understands the immigrant experience/ the experience of being a minority in the UK. Um. I somehow suspect the challenges she faced are very different to those faced by people who aren’t white, or with poor English, or who are members of minority religious communities.

    • anonymous

      I agree. I’m Indian. My family moved to the US back in the early 80s. Both my parents went on to get masters degrees and well paying jobs. I went to a predominantly white high school where a lot of people went to Ivy League colleges.

      In my experience, I noticed racism from Indians towards Black Americans. These were people of my parent’s generation, not my necessarily in my friend group.

    • Anon

      What you asked is not really controversial.

      Similarly but not what you asked, one of my good friends is Black and an immigrant. I am white and immigrant. We’ve had numerous discussions about how our experiences are the same as immigrants and different because of our respective races. We’ve also had numerous conversations about what she sees as differences between Black American and Black immigrant culture, as well as the culture of her country of origin. There are notable differences between each of these groups’ experiences.

      I also have multiple friends who are non-Black POC born in the US. One is 3rd generation American born. They have a unique experience too, very different from non-Black POC immigrant. If anyone is looking for fiction recommendations in this area, I liked Celeste Ng’s “Everything I Never Told You” and John Okada’s “No-no Boy.”

    • not-black

      Non-white but white passing name. Obviously not white as soon as you see me. No accent.

      I work somewhere with no Black lawyers where I am basically now the token non-White person around. Like today at court I was literally it. I can’t tell you it would be worse if I was Black but I feel comfortable saying that would still suck.

      Does that help?

  13. Colleges with no SAT/ACT

    I know that a lot of colleges are SAT/ACT optional (more so now that kids can’t really take tests). How exactly are admissions working? Just grades / purported rigor of coursework? Recommendations?

    I feel like everything will be really subjective (e.g., private school kids get lots of glowing recommendations and zooming public school kids who have never met their teacher are left begging for recs from last year’s teachers who generally are overwhelmed / didn’t know the kid that well / don’t care b/c they are drowning now) or a total crapshoot.

    I just did a very cursory recommendation for someone (for grad school though) and it was an on-line thing that took longer to register for than it did to complete; I sense it will not really be of much value and is just a box-checking item. I just wonder if now, without scores to offer (even if not required), some kids will not seem to be bright shiny pennies that they otherwise could be and they’ll just be a fungible herd (many of whom don’t thrive on zoom school).

    What gets me mad is that I know someone where the grandparents send the kids to a boarding school and you know that those kids will be as spit-and-polished as can be. Regular kids, I fear, don’t stand a chance this year.

    • Anonymous

      Yeah, I was really surprised by this. I know the criticism is that the tests are racist, but I can’t think how that applies to the maths section.

      • Anonymous

        I’ve seen some really offensive stuff about how the lack of women and/or POC in STEM is reflective of the fact that STEM is not inclusive of “feminine fields” like astrology or that mathematics is “masculine.” Like WTF??

      • Anon

        Because kids who are smart but struggling with poverty and oppression are not going to get test prep and other advantages that better off kids take for granted

      • Anon

        My understanding is that one of the reasons schools historically moved away from entrance exams (“you scored high enough to get in”) to more subjective applications with personal statements is that more privileged white kids were being displaced by immigrants and POC who studied harder than them. This was true even though there are hundreds of ways to make standardized tests favor privileged white kids and we use them all (sometimes even in the math section, like relying on cultural references in word problems). Of course entrance exams still left out brilliant students who didn’t have the same educational opportunities or testing skills. But they say a lot of the benefit of a more subjective application has gone to people who have the right cultural capital.

    • Anonymous

      Regular kids don’t stand a chance ever, unless there is something very unique about them (the only bassoon player from a rural midwestern county who also fences) and someone in the know takes an interest in them and guides them through the admissions process. Every halfway smart kid now has a 4.75 GPA and a near-perfect SAT score, so SAT scores aren’t really helping kids the way they used to when stellar scores were less common. I unknowingly screwed my kid over by not having the grades for the high-school level courses she took in middle school dropped from her transcript. Even if she gets straight As for the rest of high school, those courses will drag her GPA down because the other moms all took the option to cancel the 4-point high school credits earned in middle school so the 5-point high school courses would weigh more heavily in the GPA. I’m not rich and powerful, so my kid who already had awesome SAT scores at age 12 is not going to Stanford and is going to have to settle for paying full freight at some second-tier liberal arts school no matter what. So I wouldn’t worry about it. Kids aren’t going to be harmed by losing out on the SAT when it didn’t really differentiate among them anyway.

    • Anonie

      I agree! I was a strong test taker as a student and my SAT score is what propelled me into admission at a top 20 university. Biracial POC who grew up middle class. I had a great home life on the outside and some definite privileges, but I also had undiagnosed depression, serious home life issues my teachers wouldn’t have know about, etc…I got mostly A’s but couldn’t crack the performance pressure of straight A’s most semesters. Studying for the SAT was my sweet spot, as it required less “endurance” and more hard-core studying sprints. I feel for kids like young me who would benefit from a chance to take the tests.

    • Anon

      I don’t know but if kids can’t take them, they can’t take them. These are extraordinary times. Let’s grant them some grace.

  14. fish out of water

    I’ve been a lawyer for 10 years but don’t litigate or do ADR. A colleague had an emergency and I’m going to jump in on a plaintiff mediation tomorrow. (Representing plaintiff – wrongful termination allegations). I do general corporate work and have been through all the complaint docs, it makes sense to me, but I am nervous about how to advocate and negotiate tomorrow. Is there anything I can do, read, or watch tonight to help prep? Rescheduling isn’t an option, we think it’s unlikely we’ll settle, but must mediate.

    • Senior Attorney

      The most important thing is to know what the case is worth so that you won’t (a) accept an unfavorable settlement or (b) let a good settlement pass you by.

      Also, it’s important to know what your plaintiff REALLY wants. Sometimes it’s not exactly (or not only) what you think. Once I settled a multi-million dollar real estate deal by getting the other side to put a plaque on the property acknowledging that my client had designed the improvements.

      And you probably know how to negotiate, but Getting to Yes by Fisher & Ury is the classic and you can read it in an hour or two.

    • Anonymous

      Negotiating doesn’t take any special technique. Know what your client wants, start high, see how it goes.

    • Anon

      I practice defense-side employment work. In a wrongful termination case, a reasonable settlement value is going to largely consist of lost wages and benefits. These cases are very fact-specific, but generally, I see (reasonable) Plaintiff’s counsel trying to land on 6 months-year of lost wages/benefits, sometimes also health insurance for 6 mos (gives the plaintiff coverage while he tries to find a new job). Remember that lost wages and benefits are mitigated by whatever the plaintiff is earning now if he has found a new job since termination. It is also common to try to recoup the Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees and to claim some level of emotional distress damages. Add all these numbers together to determine where the plaintiff would like to end up and then negotiate as you would a normal settlement. Other non-monetary relief plaintiffs will seek in this type of case, in addition to $$, are reinstatement (this only is an option if either side would consider bringing the plaintiff back for work and that is often a non-starter for one or both sides) and a letter of reference.

  15. Anon

    Looking for recommendations. I received a $100 Amazon gift card that I’ve decided to use to buy headphones (willing to go a bit over if needed). Intended use is calls and videocalls while working from home. I dont need a lot of noise canceling although some would be nice for trash pickup day. I think comfort and voice clarity are biggest priorities with unobtrusive appearance also a key factor. I dont currently listen to music while working (but maybe headphones would change that). I’m not an Apple person.

    • Cat

      If Airpods are comfortable for you, don’t just write them off bc they’re Apple. They can pair on Bluetooth just like anything else.

      • Anon

        I wouldn’t recommend airpods for calls. I like them for other reasons, but they are unreliable for my work calls because I’ve gotten a lot of feedback that there is bad audio quality, etc.

    • eertmeert

      I really really like my Avantree wireless bluetooth earbuds. They are low profile, easy to connect/disconnect, have a charging case that is good for i think 4 full charges. The case recharges in a few hours as well. I can use one at a time or both. They are also affordable and work with my small ear canals. If you are looking for over ear headphones, they have those options as well.

      Avantree Tiny True Wireless Earbuds for Small Ear Canals, Sport Bluetooth 5.0 Earphones with Noise Isolation & Mic, Comfortable & Secure Fit, 36H In Ear Headphones with Wireless Charging Case – TWS115 – these are them, bought on Amazon. Link to follow.

    • Nesprin

      I have an anker set (the around the neck kind) which I’m kind of in love with. They’re ~50$, battery lasts for ever, sound quality is great.

  16. Anon

    I want to ask one question of all of you who say you are scared of liberal agendas and higher taxes and when someone points to Europe say “but we are too different from them” or “but they are not doing so well”:

    What about Canada?

    Hardly anyone ever mentions it and I am just curious, why?! (Not in terms of you will move there, in terms of let’s make USA be more like there).

    I lived most of my life on a different continent, have been in Canada for 10 years so am looking at it from a pragmatical PoV, it’s not some Canasain patriotic pride speaking in me. It is closer to the US than Europe, has provincial governments, people hunt and shoot guns, different cultures in different provinces, and still manages to have accessible healthcare and education, less violence, church-state separation etc etc etc.

    Surely you can see this?! If European countries seem too distant, why is noone ever saying “let’s follow the Canadain example”? Is it for psychological reasons, lobbying, something else….?

    • Anonymous

      Americans have a lot of distain for Canadians. My DH is American and I’m Canadian, we live in Canada, but we often visit the US. They treat us like lepers and it’s truly shocking. I think Canadians have a common understanding that certain topics are off the table and have been settled. Even conservative candidates won’t come for abortion, health care or marriage equality. The US would need to get to that common understanding and separation of church and state which, based on how rural Americans have treated me, will never happen.

      • Anon

        Not all Americans. I think many of us “liberal elites” really envy them right now.

      • Anon

        Oh, I love Canadians and I love it if I am mistaken for Canadian (rather than American) when I travel abroad. Canada isn’t perfect and has its own racism issues and problematic history with its First Nations, but it’s better than America with respect to health care, social issues, etc. I was pleasantly shocked the first time I spent some time up there…

    • Anonie

      I definitely hear this sentiment often! Although for someone who lives in the Southeast and has only visited Canada once, I probably have an unusually high number of friends/acquaintances with connections to Canada or bordering states.

    • Anon

      I am a Canadian and I thought of this often when we legalized gay marriage years ago, or pot more recently.

      All the conservatives in the US having an absolute meltdown about giving people equal rights to marriage, while up here we were getting along just fine and the world didn’t end when gays could marry!

      I have never been so grateful to be Canadian.

    • anon

      I don’t mean to be insulting, but… j/k.

      I think American culture is more oriented toward Europe. We’re well aware of historic ties to the UK. Many white people are aware of their family’s immigration from European countries, and of course, many Black people are aware of their enslavement by Europeans. Despite Canada’s proximity, I think these historic ties lead to the tendency to compare the country to Europe.

    • Aunt Jamesina

      The argument I’ve heard (that I absolutely disagree with) is that Canada has a much smaller population.

      A point I’ve made when discussing issues like this with conservatives is to ask which conservative countries we could look to for good examples of [education/healthcare/insert issue here]. I basically only ever hear that we shouldn’t “follow” anyone because we’re so different and special.

      • Anonymous

        The smaller population things also doesn’t hold because 80% of the Canadian population live within 2 hours of the US border. And even the majority of other areas are within a day’s drive. There are large unsettled or very sparsely populated areas in the far north and that makes the population density look different than the US if you compare population to landmass and don it account for how the Canadian population is actually distributed. The urban/rural divide in the US and Canada is very similar.

      • Anon

        The argument I have heard is that Canada is less diverse. I haven’t fact-checked that.

        • Anonymous

          In the rural areas it is not very diverse but that’s also largely true of the US rural areas (Midwest). Bigger cities are quite diverse – the majority of people in Toronto were not born in Canada for example. Vancouver Metro is majority Asian in some areas.
          Canada admits more immigrants as a proportion of the population than the US. There is not the same history of slavery but there is still a fraught history with various minorities being treated poorly including Indigenous, Chinese, Japanese and Black Canadians. We just had a major commission on issues faced by the Indigenous population.

          We are much less homogenous than most European countries and likely a better comparator in that regard.

    • Monte

      Canada is not aspirational for many Americans. There are plenty of things that are problematic about Europe from the point of view of Americans, but Canada has more of a little sibling feel. And yes, I realize that that is not fair but that is the sense I get from talking to folks. Life in Toronto or Calgary might be a better analogy for most Americans than life in Paris or Oslo (to say nothin of non-metro areas), but those comparisons do not have a lot of intrinsic appeal. And I say that as someone who would consider moving to Waterloo tomorrow…

      • LaurenB

        Well, I don’t think most of America is very aspirational right now. Like I want to go spend time in Idaho, where the lieutenant governor believes Covid is a hoax and puts her gun on her Bible? I used to want to travel this country by car and see all the beautiful sites, and we actually planned on doing that this year (before the pandemic hit, of course). Now? No thanks.

Back to Top

About

Work with Corporette®

Serious Stuff

work fashion blog press mentions