Suit of the Week: Banana Republic
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.
If you're hunting for a very trendy suit, this deep red one from Banana Republic hits a lot of good notes. I like the wide velvet trousers, as well as the oversized double-breasted blazer. I DO like the monotone styling but not the cropped cami; this velvet cami or wool one-shoulder might be MARGINALLY more appropriate. (Really, though, know your office here — historically these would be “only acceptable if you keep your jacket on” kind of tops.)
While I like the matching pieces worn together, the pieces would also be great as separates — I'd suggest a simple fitted top or bodysuit with the pants, and probably more fitted pants with the blazer also.
The suit is on sale, though, as are the camisoles, with tons of sizes left.
Looking for something similar in plus sizes? This red suit is available up to size 36, and both Eloquii and Wildfang have double-breasted velvet suits.
(BR also have this suit, which I'm surprised to see at Banana Republic — discuss. Abercrombie has a bunch of similar cropped blazers, but then, I've always thought of Abercrombie as a younger store.)
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!
Sales of note for 2/7/25:
- Nordstrom – Winter Sale, up to 60% off! 7850 new markdowns for women
- Ann Taylor – Extra 25% off your $175+ purchase — and $30 of full-price pants and denim
- Banana Republic Factory – Up to 50% off everything + extra 15% off
- Boden – 15% off new season styles
- Eloquii – 60% off 100s of styles
- J.Crew – Extra 50% off all sale styles
- J.Crew Factory – 40% off everything including new arrivals + extra 20% off $125+
- Rothy's – Final Few: Up to 40% off last-chance styles
- Spanx – Lots of workwear on sale, some up to 70% off
- Talbots – 40% off one item + free shipping on $150+
I went to a party over the weekend and was kind of shocked by how low the quality of men was. Short, balding, poorly groomed, rude or not thoughtful, inattentive in conversation, making crass jokes. The thread this morning about Starbucks meet-cute really hit home how hard it is out there for dating – so many pitfalls you can run into. There are just not a lot catches out there.
Not fair to lump short and balding in with the bad behavior and bad hygiene. Not only are they immutable characteristics, they also don’t automatically make someone unattractive. My husband is 5’8″ and I think he’s really hot! (And a kind, funny person, great dad, etc.) There’s not wanting to settle for someone you don’t like or aren’t attracted to, and then there’s being too picky, and to me ruling out anyone who is short or balding is on the latter side of the line.
+ 1
+1
This made me laugh, I’m 5’10” and for some reason I absolutely love a good short balding dude.
On the extremely small chance this is not a tr0ll – short or balding and not remotely the same as crass or poorly groomed.
I do think there is something to the idea that by the age of 35 (or possibly even 30), most eligible men (and by that I mean men who are relatively attractive, relatively successful, and relatively decent people, emphasis on relatively) are coupled up. Then as people start to get divorced in their mid-late 30s, some of these eligible men go back on the market.
But being short should not be grouped in with the rest of the characteristics you listed. Balding, debatable, but at least there is some element of choice there.
How is there an element of choice in balding?! It’s genetic!
You can choose to shave your head (in which case you are not “balding”, you are bald by choice), or you can get hair treatments, or whatever.
Are there any non scammy hair treatments?
Shaved head is not an option in some backgrounds/ cultures. This is strongly associated with neo nazis in much of Europe.
I’m not sure I’d say a shaved head because of balding is any different. It’s still hair loss. And I agree all the non-surgical hair treatments are scammy and don’t work. My dad is quite bald despite diligent Rogaine use since early 30s. You do you, but I think it’s pretty mean to judge a guy for not wanting cosmetic surgery to fix a “flaw”(how is that different than a guy judging a small chested woman who doesn’t want a boob job?). And no my husband isn’t bald so I don’t have a horse in this race, I just think this is stupidly shallow.
How is balding an element of choice?
This reminds of this rich guy who kept wanting to bring me on his business trips. I googled him and found out he was a plaintiff against some hair transplant doctor who gave him ED. I still considered going just for the adventure but started dating someone else exclusively. I hope he had his day in court. But yes, I suppose balding is a choice to some extent.
The choice is to shave your head…..some people try to hang on wayyyyy longer than they should.
Is that what you would do if you had alopicia? Really? Do you not know that not all men have a smooth head? This is just a mean comment.
Short and bald aren’t really things that men can do anything about, and neither of those attributes make them unsuitable as partners.
The rest of it, I have to agree.
I’m not even sure why I responded to this, as I’m sure it’s intended to stir the pot and nothing else!
The age of man is over. The time of the women has come.
You know what? Many of my divorced (or equivalent) female friends started dating women and it seems to have worked out well for them!
I’m bi and if heaven forbid my marriage falls apart I’d never date another man again.
Stanley Tucci is short and bald…..
I think balding men who shave their heads are hot.
Stanley Tucci is in his own category. This whole thread is irrelevant to me except for this comment lol
I don’t find him attractive at all, although he seems like a nice guy.
His new series about eating in Italy totally turned me off!
I love Italy and Italian food but that show was so boring!
Stanley Tucci is hot.
He’s a dead ringer for my husband. I think he’s hot AF.
Do you want them to do comb-overs? B/c I’m not sensing a lot of other options available to the bald crowd.
I mean. Rude is a problem. Idk why short or balding is.
Clearly you need to start going to better parties.
As an aside, I have to wonder what your definition of ‘poorly groomed’ is if you think short and balding men are ‘low quality’. (I know someone who thinks facial hair and anything other than a high and tight are signs of poor grooming so…)
What? Short beards are the best. I was team no beard until I met DH and saw the gardening benefits. He varies the length to my requests.
Correct – tall, college educated men with all of their hair are a small portion (like 10% or less, depending on how you define “tall”) of the population. That does not even get into issues of basic human decency and emotional maturity.
That’s why, despite being 5’9, I dated men my height or sometimes shorter than me and DGAF about hair status.
I’m 5’10” and DH is 5’9” and starting to lose hair on his crown. I don’t think I ‘settled’. He’s also an accomplished research scientist and a super involved dad.
I’m 5’11” and have always dated around my height or shorter. In my experience guys who are 5’8” to 6’ ish are happy to date really tall women, but super tall guys want to date really short women. I had 6’5” friend in college who wouldn’t date women over 5’5” because he needs a full foot of height difference. I think it’s because their height is a defining characteristic for them (in a way it isn’t for average height men) and they feel threatened by tall women. I want someone to do a psych study about this because I find it so fascinating.
5’10” and I 100 agree with this. Same experience.
I love this take! So interesting!
I would also add that I’ve reentered the dating world recently, and I’ve had multiple degrading, verging on violent gardening experiences. For clarity, we were engaging consensually, but the tack these men took on consensual play was shocking.
I always noticed that my girlfriends dated tall men instead of good looking men and I still think they’re crazy. If you’re going to be shallow at least try for adorable children! I’m kidding…mostly…
I’m 5’11” (not the commenter above) and have always been more attracted to height vs conventional looks. Attraction is different for different people! My friends have husbands who are 5’7” and are more conventionally attractive than my husband, but to me I could never ever see myself being attracted to them.
I think for some women, it makes them feel smaller, more feminine, whatever. Read into that what you will! I’m 5’9” and have always been most attracted to the men who are close to me in height.
Same. 5’11” here and am usually attracted to men who are my height or within a couple inches either direction. My husband is 5’9” and the most conventionally attractive person I’ve been with. I’m tall enough that it would take an NBA player to make me feel truly petite, so I never really had that fantasy. I also think sex is generally better when you’re roughly the same height. It helps if everything lines up, so to speak.
You sound so shallow. No wonder you are alone. Watch the movie Shallow Hal.
I think everyone is *still* rusty on social interactions. A dear, longtime coworker dropped by my office (they work in a different location) and apologized for something that happened a few weeks ago. Genuinely, I’d forgotten all about it! I was touched but I think everyone is still working on how to “people” again.
FWIW, I have a friend with a handsome, wealthy older boyfriend who is short-ish (she’s quite tall) and bald. I really like him, though I feel like he won the jackpot (she’s gorgeous and brilliant and kind) tbh.
And the guys are probably saying the same about the women.
I know there have been some comments here over the years about how working for a non-profit you support isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Can people who’ve worked for causes they were really passionate about share more? I’m in the early stages of the interview process with a big name nonprofit in an area I feel very passionately about. I’m really excited about the possibility of working in this field, but I’m guessing it would be a big step up in terms of hours and stress from my current job in higher ed, and I’m worried I’m crazy to walk away from such a flexible, easy, albeit boring job in this current stage of life (I have kids in preschool and early elementary school).
Worked at a Big Name National Nonprofit that supports a cause I to this day feel passionately about. I first worked as a “field soldier” for the org for a few years before working in-house watching and contributing to the sausage making daily. I will forever and ever regret taking the latter position.
Nonprofit was under funded, under staffed and those who were staffed were absolutely martyrs for the cause and expected everyone else to be, too. The most senior manager was maybe 30 years old with, in hindsight, super marginal experience managing and motivating people. Also, it was like Stepford-Wives-Meets-Office-Setting…? I might do a poor job of describing this but envision someone reading a “how to manage” or “this is what an office setting should look like” type book one time and then implementing every strategy and insisting everyone else implement the strategies/practices constantly. Like, all meetings – ANY meetings – started with a big piece of white paper on the wall and someone leading a “Norm Setting” session a the start of the meeting, establishing what the objective of the meeting was, how we would engage with one another during the meeting, etc etc. Fine. There’s absolutely a place for that, but also …STOP?!? Be humans and not organizational behavior robots?
I have so, so many other examples of to share but it literally makes my blood boil to recout. I will say when I quit I had to get an attorney involved because I was outright harassed during my two week notice period… “how could you abandon this cause?”, “look at the damage you’ll do to the Widget we advocate for!!’, “you have no integrity!”, “we’ll make sure you never get a job in this city again” and so on. It got really ugly. They withheld paychecks, expenses I filed and other c r a p during my final weeks and the weeks after my last day trying to protest my leaving (I was a mid level sausage maker – hardly mission critical).
If I love a cause, I will support it financially or with volunteer hours but I will never again go in-house to contribute.
Oh my goodness I’m so sorry that happened to you. Thanks for sharing your experience.
I found it just so incredibly emotional. As someone else said, at the end of the day it is, in fact, a job. And there are standards and expectations of any healthy, productive work environment, of which my work environment severely lacked. Because so much of the staff was young and without families, children and other obligations, the expectation was work, work, work, work, work. Because the cause. Because the work. Because the change.
I know my organization receives national recognition all the time and my resume is certainly enhanced because I was a part of the organization at multiple levels (even now being in the corporate world), and I’m appreciative of that, but I would just go in eyes wiiiiiiide open. Find someone at the org to get the real download on what the work/life balance is, culture, etc.
I also left a Big Name National Nonprofit, and leadership were vocally unhappy I was leaving. They asked if I could give a month’s notice instead of 2 weeks because it would be better for them. They questioned my commitment when I said that wasn’t possible. I had been at the org 4 years, and I had worked in the Cause before, so it was hard to not take their reaction personally. I felt very attacked. People quit jobs! It’s a thing that happens.
The reason I left is there was nowhere else for me to go. I had hit the top in terms of responsibility in my department, unless the Big Boss left. Lack of advancement opportunities unless someone quits or retires is very much a thing in nonprofits.
I worked at a small (10 people globally, fewer than 5 in my office) nonprofit about ten years ago and it was terrible – no structure, the Executive Director was a horrible leader, we had no staff so I essentially ended up being HR and IT and the role I was hired for. For most of my friends who work for nonprofits, they have had very mixed experiences. There are two large national/global non-profits I would no longer consider supporting based on what friends have shared about the toxic work culture and poor treatment of employees (one of them is Ronald McDonald House). Another friend works for a large national non-profit and has had a more mixed experience – really flexible work schedule, great benefits and decent salary, but bad leadership at the top. I would say the common denominator here is leadership. If you can get a sense of what leadership is like for this org, that should give you a sense of the culture. Is there anyone you know who has worked with the CEO/Exec Director in the past? If you get farther along in the interview process or receive an offer, it might be worth asking a question about turnover (or finding that out through your network).
I spent some years working for a nonprofit, a few years back. It was overall a good experience – I learned a lot – but I wish I had read about Founder’s Syndrome before I started working there, as it was definitely an issue for that organization. The founder was still in the executive director spot after 32 years and despite being asked by the board to create a succession plan, she kept demurring and putting it off. After that long in the same position, she’d managed to engineer the board so that it was mostly either loyalists, or people who didn’t want to rock the boat, so there wasn’t an inordinate amount of pressure on her to figure out the next move for the organization. She was a benevolent dictator, but definitely a dictator – it was her way or the highway and people who couldn’t get on board with her vision and her plans were out within a year or so. She did a lot of information hoarding/guarding so that she would be the only person who knew some information or had certain relationships (I’m sure thinking it would be job security for her).
TBH with kids your age, I would get really clear information about what the work-hours and schedule expectations are from the nonprofit. Everyone at our nonprofit was expected to attend after-work and weekend events either for the population we served, or as part of fundraising. It was multiple times a month, not multiple times a year. Some of our folks with younger kids really struggled with it.
There is also still this whole thing in nonprofits where “we’re doing this because we love it, not for money” which continues to be parroted even if the ED or other people in the nonprofit are making high salaries for the geographic area they’re in. My ED’s comp was reasonable (part of my job involved reporting on financials for grant reports, so I knew what everyone made) but we knew of other nonprofits where the EDs were making well into the six figures, in an area where the median income is $54,000 per year for a family of four, and some of those EDs were paying their own employees such low salaries they qualified for public (or nonprofit!) assistance. Ask a lot of questions about the organization’s compensation philosophy and how they select job candidates for open roles. If they start talking about “well, we really want people here who love the cause/want to help people and the money should be a secondary consideration” – take that answer for what it is, and know that getting decent comp may be a problem.
Thanks for your thoughts! The comp was listed on the job ad and even the bottom of the range would be a decent step up from my current salary (comp is terrible in higher ed too) but not life-changing or anything. The job is fully remote, so I don’t think evening and weekend events would be an issue. There is some travel (the ad said 10%, they said 10-20% in the screening interview) but that would be a plus for me. DH is supportive and I would like to do more work travel. One of the things I like least about my current job is that I haven’t gotten to go a business trip in years.
I would ask about whether you’d have evening meetings with the Board/subcommittees/community partners, which are typical in nonprofits.
Yes – when I worked in development at the local branch of a national non-profit I was expected to attend 1-2 after-hours events per week – board meeting, fundraising event, networking activity, whatever. And I was making around $40k a year – not exactly the kind of money that helps make up for crazy hours. It was really exhausting for a single women in her twenties I could not imagine doing that with young kids. It sounds like a remote position might require less of this but I would be crystal clear on that expectation before signing on.
For business travel, be aware you’ll almost certainly be using the federal per diem rate that depends on the city. It will never be enough to actually pay for 3 meals a day. This frustrates me to no end if I have to go out of town for a week, and I end up subsisting off of granola bars and fruit because otherwise I lose money eating out.
Even when I worked in the private sector they used the federal per diem rate for reimbursements. I don’t think this is unique to non-profits.
The low salary in nonprofits compared to corporate makes it more difficult to absorb. I can’t afford to eat out daily, let alone multiple times a day.
I’ve spent pretty much my whole career at nonprofits (and in the arts, which is probably pretty different than say, academia), so don’t have a good basis for comparison, but the pitfalls are generally that you don’t get paid very well, and at the end of the day, it’s a job. There are incompetent/mean/dumb/etc people that work at non-profits as well as for-profits, and they can still make you miserable even if they are ostensibly doing it in service of a good cause.
If it is a really large organization, you are more likely to have more resources of all kinds, and incompetent people are more likely to have less impact just because the staff is larger and can dilute their impact more. (I think the same is probably true for large vs small for-profit businesses).
A lot of small nonprofits really rely on young, idealistic people willing to work for nothing and underpay their staff, and those people tend to burn out and get jaded as they get older. If you have been in the workforce long enough to know how much money you need to live on and are comfortable with the compensation going in, and if the organization is large and well-established, you’ll probably be fine.
Unless the organization is truly huge, you may also find limited opportunities for advancement just because there aren’t a lot of jobs to begin with. To get more than a cost of living salary bump I’ve generally had to switch employers. Bonuses do not exist.
I’ve also never worked anywhere with a significant budget for things like staff professional development or employee perks. Parties tend to be pot luck. The chairs in our conference room, which were originally a hand me down from the executive director’s husband’s law firm and appear to be circa 1988, are all falling apart. My computer has a DVD drive. Our HR dept. is one person and we don’t really have performance reviews. No one but the organization’s two leaders has an assistant. There is never enough money. For context, the organization I work for has about 65 FT staff and an annual budget of $28 million, so it is fairly large.
+1 to hand me down office supplies. My current org has over 150 staff, and my past over 300. We had so many mismatched, broken down supplies that our Board donated when their offices upgraded. We regularly get calls from random people who want to donate an out of date computer/printer. Sometimes they get upset when I say no.
+1,000,000
I’ve spent my career in nonprofit development at medium to large organizations, including 2 national orgs. I have close friends in higher ed, either in student services or as faculty members. Higher ed will have better systems and structures in place. Nonprofits are constantly expected to make do with so little because funders want to invest in the “mission”, not the “overhead”. This mentality is changing somewhat, but not fast enough.
Funding realities translates into little to no HR or tech support. You’ll be expected to order your own office supplies, even as an executive. Even though I make a low six figure salary, my compensation would be so much higher in the for profit sector considering I raise millions of dollars and supervise a large team.
You won’t ever be able to hire all the staff you need. People constantly need to be flexible and take on new projects. You’ll have Board meetings and be expected to clean up after them because there’s either no janitorial staff, or they come once a week. Staff refer to themselves as “a family” to cover up toxicity.
You’ll be expected to be available 24/7 due to “rapid response” opportunities/emergencies that pop up. You’ll likely use PTO. It’s so common to not be able to take our PTO due to the volume of projects that come up. I often see people on this board write things like “if you’re the only one doing your job function, then your company needs to hire someone else”. That makes me laugh. At a nonprofit, you’re almost always the only one doing your job, and no one else can or will do it for you.
Toxic leadership, or just plain un/der qualified leadership is rampant in nonprofits because there are so many lifers who start at entry level and keep getting promoted from within. Meanwhile, they never have any leadership training or professional development. Leadership will justify dysfunction by thanking you for caring about the mission.
You’ll likely NOT use PTO.
Some other points that come to mind – I’ve had to pay for a lot of things, from routine stationary to a laptop and a mailhouse order, out of pocket and wait for reimbursement, despite having a corporate card, because of low limits.
There can be tension between frontline staff who directly serve clients and those in administration, development, or finance.
It can feel like friends and family don’t respect my career because “it’s a charity”, like somehow services should be magically provided by unpaid labor. I still get asked why I’m paid and why isn’t my job a volunteer position.
I work in an underfunded state university and your post has given me new appreciation for it.
I currently work for a medium-sized National Nonprofit and it’s overall a great place to work: amazing benefits, smart colleagues, interesting and challenging work, and the pay is good. We also have funds for professional development and there’s mandatory supervisor training . I do think that the work-life balance could be improved but I take vacations where I’m totally offline and we have a sabbatical program and great parental leave. Depending on the department, there can also be issues with advancement. I’ve worked at other nonprofits previously that have had the issues discussed in this thread such as toxic leadership, organizations with founders syndrome, organizations with low funding and poor pay, and organizations with no work-life balance.
My advice: I think it depends on the organization and would both ask a lot of questions during the interview process and would try to talk to someone who works there. I’ll also say that our Glassdoor reviews are fairly accurate. For funding, all nonprofits publish a Form 990 which is public, so I would definitely review it to get a sense of how financially stable they are. Recession fundraising is hard.
Day 10 of COVID and finally testing negative. I’m so, so tired, and really out of breath when walking up a hill or even up stairs. What helped you heal from the lingering post-COVID symptoms? I have family visiting so I’m already fortunate in that my mom is cooking nutritious meals. I try to get as much sleep as I can and I am taking vitamins. Do I have to just give it time now? I wish I could get back to exercising but I don’t feel up to it. Maybe some slow walks to get some daylight, but that’s about it. I’m also feeling a bit depressed, which could be from the fatigue and not leaving the house for 10 days. (I’m already on an antidepressant but it seems to work less well at the moment.)
Melatonin has anti-inflammatory properties, so I’d add that to you vitamin regimen if you haven’t already.
Patience! I had a mild case (two days of sitting on the couch level sickness) and I was exhausted for months after. Honestly probably took 6-8 weeks before I had some of my stamina back.
Agree with this. Both my husband and I were wiped out for weeks.
Yes, of course you need time.
Sleep, start eating better, walks are plenty of exercise and yes yes yes you need daylight. I would also buy a Happy Light and start using that daily. If you are prone towards depression, then definitely doing those simple changes should help.
Rest. Lots and lots of rest. If you push yourself too hard, you’ll just set yourself back in your recovery.
Yes this. I needed a lot of rest. Slowly I started feeling better enough to get up and do things, but it really took longer than I thought was reasonable.
– Melatonin, every night for 5 nights
– Drinking one Emergen-C packet a day for those same 5 days
– Generally focusing on healthy foods and regular meals – tried to limit takeout and junk food to the bare minimum and I drank a lot of smoothies (but it was summer then, so easier to do that)
– Getting a LOT of rest, like going to bed at 8 (to wake up at 6:30), taking a short nap in the afternoon, etc.
– Not pushing it on getting back to my workout routine. I did walks around my neighborhood vs. going to the gym for a couple of weeks.
I was back to about 95% a week after I tested negative and then it just got better from there. I do think it takes time and it seems to take more time for some people than others, regardless of what they do to aid their recovery. I have friends who got it and were completely fine within a week, and others that were still fighting fatigue and shortness of breath a month later (all these people were vaxxed, FYI, so that wasn’t the reason). It hits some people harder than others.
I hope you feel better soon!
Time. I had it in winter of 2020 before we knew how to diagnose it and it took me several months to get past the daily intense, breathless fatigue from every little thing. It slowly tapered for several more months where the bouts of intense fatigue grew further and further apart. Nearly three years later I have finally not had a spell in several months.
Time. I did go back to my workouts, but I took it very easy. It was nice to get back in the swing of things.
I had mild Covid before thanksgiving and finally tested negative on day 10. Although the symptoms were mild the fatigue was next level. It was still intense for at least two weeks after then slowly got better. I was used to working out daily and subbed walks and gentle yoga for my workouts. I took frequent naps. Lots of nutritious foods as others have mentioned. I’m just now at 95%. I also feel like mood took a serious hit and I’m not sure if I fully recovered on that front but it’s better.
Took me over a month to get over the fatigue
Adding to this that protein and hydration helped me a lot. I’d also consider acupuncture. It really helps with exhaustion and brain fog, but it’s a multi-week commitment.
Zyrtec-D
dear Crack house restorer, if you’re reading and want new friends (at least virtual), I’m in! I’m restoring an old house no one would even enter when it went up for sale. post a burner email and I’ll reach out. I think you’d get a few others too : )
This weekend I will set up a burner email and possibly an Instagram (that seems like the best option for photos). I’ll post them both when I’m done!
Yes, please! Daniel Kanter of Manhattan Nest has never been more captivating since he bought his most recent house. It’s an Instagram highlight for me and I would love to see yours
What years were/have you been dating, and what were your expectations for what was a normal dating relationship? I think the text/ghost thread earlier was interesting and maybe exposed how quickly standards have changed w/r/t dating. (Also, in White Lotus, Portia’s expectations seemed very different.)
Me: mostly dating 2003-08, my mid-20s, major metro city. Didn’t date much earlier because people seemed to couple up and get serious right away. In 03 onwards my expectation was that we weren’t exclusive or really dating until we had a Talk. Friday/Saturday nights weren’t a given until exclusive, maybe even beyond that. (I always made plans with girlfriends if the guy hadn’t set something up by Wednesday, as per The Rules.) 2-5 days between communication was good and playing it cool, maybe more if person had good reason. I slept with one guy on the first date, but some first dates also had no kissing. I still considered sex to be pretty serious. Some people just hooked up but usually not while also dating.
Dated 1995 (high school – 2006 (exclusive with DH). Never assumed anything was exclusive unless an express conversation. Didn’t follow any ‘rules’ re emails/IM/calling frequency. Never online dated.
A fair number of friends had FWB arrangements in their 20s/30s because who wants to go weeks without gardening? Some guys are great in bed but losers as partners. I was surprised at the reactions that it’s shady for the dude to say he doesn’t want a relationship but still possibly be reaching out re FWB. FWB at out of town industry events seems convenient. Close girlfriends are all married/partnered early 40s olds now so I guess stuff has changed a lot.
I never “dated” in the sense of actually meeting people for actual dates or online dating. I was in college ’03-07 and it was all hookups, which would either be one night, a FWB situation or eventually become a relationship. I had a college boyfriend I dated for three years, we broke up, and met my husband through a mutual friend less than six months later. I’ve only slept with those two guys; waited about 6 weeks with the college BF (and we were officially “in a relationship” by then) and slept with my now husband the second time we hung out alone before we had the define the relationship talk.
Along these lines but dating years were 1997-2002 (college plus after till i met my husband)
I dated from 1999 to 2018, and learned this morning that I don’t understand dating.
Expectations (often were not met): be a decent human being and not someone who screws around with people’s emotions. If it was not working, I used my words and ended it, in person. I was upfront about any particular issues I had (e.g., not looking for something serious, only looking for something serious, gardening expectations that were outside of the norm).
I got cheated on (on two separate occasions, with my friends the guys met through me), dumped via text, ghosted, dumped for not gardening (they found out I was serious about my stance). Later, I had more functional relationships and am still friends with some of the men I dated.
dated in college and law school (1998-2005) in college towns & nearby areas, though it was mostly hookups with a few longer (few months) relationship until I met DH. Lots of drinking was involved, and generally “dates” (when they happened) were after you’ve met through friends/at a party/sometimes even hooked up already/etc. Texting & social media weren’t a significant factor until the very end of that window. Never really online dated – halfheartedly set up a Match profile ~2001, went on one date from it, I think? Met now-husband at a bar and went exclusive soon after.
I dated 2012 to 2019 (from divorcing my first husband to meeting my second). I was on all the apps, and dated in two different cities. IDK about “standards” – I didn’t have any in the abstract; it was just about whether I liked the guy and felt a connection. Many women here seem to have kind of an adversarial view of male/female relationships, and I really didn’t – most guys I met were nice but not right for me, and I didn’t encounter much bad behavior. Honestly, I wasn’t emotionally available a lot of that time – was still getting over a rough divorce. I ultimately married a longtime friend a few years after his own divorce, and we’ve been very happy.
I do agree with your comment that “Many women here seem to have kind of an adversarial view of male/female relationships”
based on some of the threads here, it makes me wonder if many women here have platonic male friends or good relationships with brothers or make cousins?
Yeah, I have observed a degree of men as the enemy in dating , the workplace, even marriage – that just really isn’t what I see in offline life. Like, the number of women here who describe their husbands as incompetent man babies, the advice on dating that seems to impute to individual men every sin of the patriarchy…I just don’t think that’sa super functional worldview, and it’s hard to imagine people talking that way if they have close platonic or familial relationships with men.
There comes across an element of smug, like other women are obviously doing it wrong kind of smug. I don’t think that’s intended, but it’s there.
This might be one of those things that truly comes from experience, like young men who have sisters often come across as more emotionally intelligent – because they actually know how to interact with women respectfully. It’s not odd if women who have normal men relatives have higher expectations and experiences from men than women who have questionable men relatives. Don’t blame women for not having great experiences.
Agreed! There is often this view of relationships and marriage as a business arrangement – and not a very friendly one. As if the costs/benefit analysis must stay balanced at all times and in all ways. I often wonder how many of the posters have actually been married – much less married to the same person for more than a decade.
The level of contempt is often something I find disturbing.
I’m still catching up on posts this week.
to dream job with dental issues: we use those pouches of purees for an adult in our hh.
we like Noka poches and happy baby brands.
Wishing you good luck!
suggestions for a deep magenta red lipstick? I feel like glammimg up a bit in the new year…..
I’m pale with pink undertones but only wear a dark lip when wearing lipstick (naturally dark lip color).
Cruella or damned NARS lip crayon thing?
As a pale + pink person I’ve liked the Maybelline Made For All lipstick. The pink, red and ruby shades all look pretty good, and they have a plum color that I haven’t tried. Readily available at Target, drugstores, etc.
https://www.maybelline.com/lip-makeup/lipstick/color-sensational-made-for-all-lipstick/red-for-me
thank you both!
PSA to those of you with Bumble accounts – put it on pause before you visit your hometown for the holidays, unless you want Tradwick and his cousin Travis from high school to hit you up. Ask me how I know ha I had TWO tragic encounters last year. Bumble is location based so it will show your profile to those on Bumble in your physical area.
Hinge doesn’t do this as it is based on the zip code you’ve entered. Not sure about other apps.
Absolutely does it with Tinder.
Where did Tradwick come from? I’ve seen it a couple times today and never before.
A recent thread, the OP gave a stereotypical mansplaining bro coworker the mock name Tradwick as a play on the kind of old-boys-club names those dudes tend to have.
The Tinder location switch may or may not have led to one of my favorite marriages :)
I recall good threads about opaque tights and another one about an antique jewelry repair/ watch repair but can’t find them.
is anyone better at searching than me? I get great posts but never the ones I’m looking for….
DKNY tights!
To Notinstafamous: glad you are doing well! Best wishes to you no matter how things work out in the marriage.
Regarding the women on here who seem very defensive of mediocre men, what do you think the rationale is? Why are they so defensive of Tradwicks and wanting to protect them from criticism?
Someone suggested they’re married to men like that or have sons like that and it’s a way of coping. That seems like one very possible explanation.
Do you mean short/bald guys or the finance bro in the sweater vest?
Finance bro in the sweater vest! Or the guy who texted that he didn’t want anything serious after pursuing aggressively. Not bald or short :)
Why does pursuing aggressively mean you want something serious?
Eh, I don’t have a son or brother and my husband is great but the text guy doesn’t seem that bad to me. I totally understand why OP was crushed, I would have been too. It’s hard when you fall for someone fast and they don’t want the same thing. But I think it’s just a case of mismatched expectations and neither party is objectively “in the wrong” here. Texting that he’s not looking for anything serious after one good date seems kinder than leading her on, sleeping with her, etc and then springing that info on her. He may not have realized where his head was at until after the date. Women do the same thing too.
I have no use for Tradwick bros though.
co-sign all this. I haven’t commented on either thread about texty guy, but I’d probably just reply that I’m not interested in what’s he offering and move on. He led the OP on for one date, but also came clean after one day so I don’t see him as evil (if this conversation happened several dates in, much much worse.
Not sure if I’m now guilty of defending mediocre guys, or just being pragmatic.
He did not come clean after one day, he came clean after almost 2 weeks after the date with daily flirty texts. Source: I’m that OP.
But two weeks with no follow up date is already a pretty clear sign. Guys text for fun, if they want to see you they make plans.
This, 100%. I don’t have sons and my husband is extremely considerate and communicative (my female friends and gay male friends have commented multiple times how much they love him – he is not a Tradwick or a bro of any sort). This idea that if someone doesn’t agree with you, you can stereotype and minimize them is harmful no matter where it comes from. I am a feminist, I know the patriarchy exists…but from what was shared it literally just sounded like mismatched expectations. I saw no nefarious behavior of any kind. However, I would wholeheartedly agree that there are generally more mediocre men in the dating pool compared to highly eligible women, and that sucks. I just don’t think that this guy did something that awful. That doesn’t make me a Tradwick defender trying to defend sh!tty men from criticism. It just means I don’t agree with you in this specific instance.
This. I get that it’s crushing.
I’m not sure what the Chadwick schtick is but people are allowed to lose interest after a few dates or a few weeks. I’m not thinking of men when I say these things but of myself. More than once in my dating career I kind of lost interest in dudes that were super into me early on. Like at first it seemed like a match and chatting and flirting was fun but then I’d just be over him really fast. Easy come, Easy go. Thats dating. It was never some evil plot to lead men on and I didn’t feel there was some big obligation to keep dating them or come up with the perfect explanation. I was just over them. I actually thought it was super gross if a guy suggested I had “led him on” and he deserved more from me. So that’s where I’m coming from.
Saying that you lost interest after a few weeks is completely different than what this guy did. You must not have read the other posts. He led OP on and then instead of saying he was no longer interested, he pulls out “actually, I’m not looking for a serious relationship, but want to still go on dates and see each other?” after saying serious relationship stuff to her. I mean what does that even mean. THAT was the cruelty.
To the Anonymous at 4:28, if you had read my other posts, you would know that we DID have plans for another date but I had to reschedule due to external circumstances. I’m honestly so sick of defending this whole situation on this board, I’ll be checking out of here for a while.
Except I’m pretty sure “not looking for something serious” means he’s lost interest in her as anything but maybe an occasional hook up. Which is tough but normal in dating. I felt similarly about men that I’d considered for more serous relationships.
I haven’t followed closely, but in many things, I think that more people are bumbling fools vs outright manipulators (but those definitely exist). IDK that that is defending though.
I also don’t know that it changes the answer. The initial consensus among commenters was for the Starbucks OP to ghost the guy, and then a second wave of people stepped in to raise the possibility that he just got it wrong and messed up. Even if we accept that as the outcome, does it cause OP to owe him a reply? My opinion is no.
(Not disagreeing with you, 3:10; your post was a good jumping-off point for a thought I’d had while watching the discussion develop.)
She doesn’t owe him anything. She would be doing it for herself, either because it would make her feel better to get it off her chest or because it would leave the door open for something to develop in the future if he gets himself together.
I guess my perspective is that no one is perfect. Perhaps my standards for my husband are too low; I don’t know how to judge that, but that’s up to me to decide. I definitely do a lot of crappy things to him without realizing what I am doing. I don’t always understand my motivations. I don’t always anticipate the impact of my actions. And I would hate for him to judge me as swiftly and as harshly as some posters here do. But it is different when you have committed to someone and you’ve known them for 10+ years – it makes sense to give them the benefit of the doubt, which is not necessarily true with someone you just met. Maybe that is the difference.
+1 maybe my standards are too low for my husband but that would also mean his standards are too low for me.
Or perhaps a better explanation is that we are both imperfect human beings who love each other, use our words the best we can, apologize when we make mistakes, forgive each other and try to do better.
By the standards thrown out on this board sometimes, my husband should have dropped me like a hot potato like 100 times. And I should have dropped him like 75 times.
+1 to Anon 3:34
Sometimes women put up with too much and sometimes something is a deal breaker for one person but not another. Would I like DH to be more stylish and dress up more? – yes. Does he bring me coffee in bed every morning – also yes so IDGAF if he b!tches when he has to wear a suit. I’m sure I do stuff that annoys him. No one is perfect – capable independent adulting and kindness are key but everything else is preference.
Women in the US and other places are taught from a very, very young age that men are emotionally immature, can’t do housework correctly, etc. Women are also taught that they need to bend over backward to “protect” or manage other people’s emotions. All of this leads to being okay with and excusing bad to mediocre behavior by men.
In other words, the patriarchy has led us here.
And when women have standards above the floor, they are excoriated for being too picky. I’m not necessarily saying on here, but just in general by family/ popular culture/ etc.
+1 don’t settle for Tradwick when you deserve Stanley Tucci.
Stanley Tucci left his wife for Edie Falco at one point. You deserve better than Stanley!
Yes Stanley Tucci is a scumbag! Cheated and then left his wife, and the wife had cancer at the time too. He’s not deserving of the hero worship he gets.
I was just making a joke re the short bald guy thread above :)
Also he is currently married to somebody young enough to be his daughter. Very disappointing.
Women in many subcultures here in the U.S. are also taught that without a man, a woman is nothing; that all men are dogs/will cheat, or drink too much or have trouble holding down a job, so you might as well settle for the best bad option you can find; and that single women (especially without children) are sad, pathetic creatures deserving of pity.
Many, many religions still teach that the primary role of women in society is to keep the home and have/raise children, and that women who never marry and/or do not have children are worthless and useless, or are objects to be pitied. Almost all fundamentalist religions (including Christianity, Judaism and Islam) teach that concept and also attempt to rigorously enforce it through shaming people, or enforcing behavioral controls. Even women who do marry and have children are taught they should be subordinate to men (including their husband, their father and their husband’s father) and that even a “righteous” woman is not worth as much as a mediocre man. Not surprising that there is so much internalized misogyny, even from people who have left those religions and feel they are “liberated” now. It’s very difficult to overcome programming from birth that you have little to no value. No wonder so many women put such low prices on their time, effort, love, energy, etc.
I don’t think you know the meaning of “fundamentalist.” There are fundamentalist and normal modern versions of all three religions you list.
I’ll come out in defense of people in general. Most people I know, men and women, are good people and doing their best in a difficult world. I’m a lot happier when I assume the best of people than when I make fun of caricature versions of people. My husband, my dad, my brothers, my male friends and many of my male coworkers are lovely people. I know that it’s not always the case and sometimes people really are lousy, including some men I work with, but it’s just not that helpful to always focus on the worst parts of people. We’re all human and make mistakes sometimes. If everyone you spend time with is really so awful that you don’t want to deal with their occasional flaws, find some new friends!
This. Starbucks dude is getting raked over the coals for a few flirty texts, going on a date and then texting that he didn’t want a relationship. We tell women on here that it is fine to do that all the time.
Some guys are jerks who DNGAF and some guys are just awkward about telling someone they don’t want to date them.
More like OP is now getting raked that you are referring to her situation as one date and a “few” flirty texts. Go to hell.
Except that’s what it was?
There were a few people who were unkind to OP by suggesting she was to blame. That’s not cool.
But people pointing out that this dude isn’t some evil person isn’t raking her over the coals.
Dating sucks. Sometimes it doesn’t work out. The other person doesn’t have to be an awful person for someone to be hurt when things end. I think that’s the point many of the defenders were making. I feel really bad for OP, it sucks to be in that situation. But I don’t think the dude is some evil villain. I personally would have responded to the text because I think ghosting isn’t cool but I also think OP is totally justified in not responding to a guy who hurt her feelings.
You’re wrong, anon at 6:12. Learn to read all posts. Reading is fundamental.
I posted above that I empathize tremendously with OP. I don’t think she did anything wrong and I’ve been in her shoes and understand why she’s sad (and fully endorse the screaming of Taylor Swift lyrics at the concert!) But I also don’t think the guy did anything wrong. That’s not “raking OP over the coals,” that’s being an adult and recognizing that sometimes there can be a sad, hurtful situation that isn’t anyone’s fault.
My reading comprehension is fine. They went on one date. He texted her for two weeks. One of the texts mentioned maybe they should go to another state. How is that not one date and a few flirty texts?
I mostly co-sign everything at 617 except, I really think the op not so much “at fault” but extremely silly for getting this into a guy after a date or two. If you’re mid thirties and want to have a serious long term relationship you don’t let the guy get all romantic and text all day after a date or two. You have him pick a date then say you’re looking forward to it, can’t talk, so busy! You keep him at arm’s length while you try to figure out if he’s a good dude. I have a ton of compassion for her because I’m sure she’s known the rules since she was 19 and she was probably really lonely and vulnerable and forgot. But this is why our mothers taught us this stuff, not to play games but to protect ourselves.
I fail to see how anyone is raking the op across the coals. The most I’ve seen is a gentle suggestion things don’t always work out and maybe don’t get your hope this high after a date or two. Thats honest dating advice. If she’s interested in continuing to date people she can’t get this attached to someone this quickly. It rarely works out well.
This. I was one of the so-called defenders. I’m surrounded by good men who are trying really hard and don’t always get it right. I try for grace with everyone I meet and in turn I usually get intimacy with people that’s seems pretty real. This isn’t about excusing bad behavior; it’s about letting people be a little human and not castigating a whole group over small missteps.
This! Assuming good intentions is a much better way to go through life. It doesn’t mean being a doormat but assuming good intentions and believing people are capable of learning and growing makes for a much pleasanter existence in my experience. Occasionally that means I let some negative people stick around too long but I’m ok with that since it means I get to keep a lot more amazing people in my life by not writing them off quickly
+1000
Assume good intentions and extend grace and remember we’re all in this together
This. Men are people. On the whole, I know just as many women as men who behave badly in marriages, dating, and the workplace. Most people are just trying to do the best they can in This Thing Called Life.
This. The Tradwick trope bugs me because I hate reductionist stereotypes. I think it’s lazy and not accurate. I also didn’t think Starbucks guy was a jerk. He did what you want people to do, break it off when you know it’s not working.Dating isn’t charity. I also very much feel for the OP. I went out with a lot of Starbucks dudes and I was Starbucks dude too. I hope she gets a happy ending. And to bring it all back to the earlier threads, after too many years of dating, I met and married a shorter guy who looks exactly like a Stanley Tucci and is a wonderful, kind, amazing person who puts up with a lot from me.
I love this!
Because some women behave badly and do not want criticism of that behaviour, even if it is directed at men. They have so often defended themselves when they ghosted men, messed around with their emotions, lead them on, etc., that it is kind if automatic at this point.
Or they are married to men who aren’t all that great and do not want to acknowledge that it was a choice they made. As someone who didn’t marry until almost-40, my sympathies and heart will always lie with women who struggle to find a healthy relationship. This isn’t dissing anyone who has not met The One, met The One late, or decided that having kids with an okay-enough man beat the alternatives. But the women defending Tradwick types often are not really facing up to the choice they made in marrying one.
I think sometimes when we’re evaluating our Imaginary Internet Responses that people go more extreme than they do IRL, when even if someone is being kind of an a$$ there’s a way to respond that is more neutral or de-escalating vs. being the Perfect Sassy Put Him In His Place Retort.
Also this. My enthusiasm this morning was mostly about the idea of screaming “Karma is my boyfriend” as catharsis. I don’t think OP posted this morning with the intent of soliciting advice – she seemed to have her mind made up – and we all gave it anyway.
Same! haha
You are getting boring.
I’m curious as to who you think I am / how I am getting boring?
I do make more than you and your husband combined. Don’t have to ration my manicures or post snarky name-calling online :)
Wow, okay, this is targeted and uncalled for.
Eh, don’t be mean to strangers without cause if you don’t want anyone to be mean to you.
OP here – you’re right. I’m just tired of people throwing out snarky comments so casually without any real reason. The ones directed at Dr. The Original this morning made me so sad and I don’t understand why folks feel comfortable throwing that kind of toxicity out unprompted. Not justification for joining in though so I definitely apologize for Trish.
Nah Anon at 4:06 is outta line. Not exactly convincing us they’re not a tr0ll.
Thanks, 4:34; I appreciate your owning that and moving the needle towards kindness here.
But can your dad beat up my dad in a fight?
(kidding, obviously, but what is going on with the grade school level taunts?)
Seriously. I guess even “successful” women can still have the emotional intelligence of an 8th grader.
I feel like it’s super unlikely you make more than her if you have enough time to be posting here lots and remember info about random posters.
Lol that this is a flex. Some of the smartest and best people I know are teachers who make less than $40k a year. The most miserable, unhappy, and toxic people I know all happen to be in the higher income brackets. Congrats on joining them. Feel sorry for your husband though.
Yeah waves high from academia. My husband is the smartest person I know and barely makes six figures. And he’s doing well for a prof.
Huh?
Lots to unpack here, but for starters, wealth doesn’t make a person interesting or their opinions more valid.
Right! Seems like this is 406’s go to response to criticism.
Just…wow.
Tour whole post was boring AND snarky. What kind of woman needs to start a thread attacking other women who don’t think Starbucks guy is some kind of abuser? Oh, and I DARE you to use a regular handle. Or better yet, post your actual Linkedin. “Regarding the women on here who seem very defensive of mediocre men, what do you think the rationale is? Why are they so defensive of Tradwicks and wanting to protect them from criticism?
Someone suggested they’re married to men like that or have sons like that and it’s a way of coping. That seems like one very possible explanation.”
*Your.
Sorry you can’t afford your manicures, Trish :(
To be clear, starting yet a third thread about mediocre men and inviting mean comments about others on here is boring. Complaining about men should not be the biggest topic on a site for professional woman.
I don’t see how saying someone is able to say at least they live within their means is that out of bounds after being called boring….
Yeah, saying “I make more than you and your husband combined” is a very mature and normal response. Huh?
What’s a tradwick?
In case you meant this literally and check back: Dr. the Orig posted recently about not hearing back from a job interview, and, as a means to feel better about potentially not getting the job, asked people to post examples of a bad co-worker that she would have had to deal with had she taken it. Hence: Tradwick, the dudebro faux co-worker of our nightmares was born. In the perfect storm of timing, Starbucks Dude’s text came right on the heels of Tradwick becoming basically corporette shorthand for an *******.
True story: when I told my mom that my husband said he wanted to leave me (though I’d done nothing wrong), she advised me to make him a nice dinner. In this case yes, it reflected the extremely low standards she had for men, including my dad and my brother. Every time we have debated expectations in dating, her argument comes down to the fact that if we really didn’t take any BS, then we might be permanently single. (I say so be it, but she disagrees.)
I do notice, both here and in my regular life, that almost any behavior by a man will be excused or even defended by a woman who doesn’t even know him, supposedly in the name of fairness, but it sure does sound like the Cool Girl/Pick Me routine.
My mom’s standard for men is on the floor because her own dad was so uninvolved and her ex-H (my father) was mostly absent and not helpful at all. I’m in the process of separating from my H and she does not understand why because “he’s such a good father”. Yes, he may be, but he’s also a hostile stonewalling guy who will not treat his depression and will not contribute to household bills or costs despite having a job, and he has a drinking problem. But according to her I’m the problem here, because he’s helpful around the house and wants to be around his kids. Sigh.
But maybe I should make him a nice dinner, and things will magically get better?
I think a lot of the commenters who rush to defend Tradwick are really insecure about their own Tradwicks whether they be their husbands, brothers, children etc. It’s a psychological defense mechanism because reflecting on internalized misogyny and maybe realizing the men in your life are crummy is a really hard thing to do. Becoming defensive protects the commenter from those difficult realities.
Yes, that’s definitely it. I’m secretly insecure about my crummy husband who’s currently cooking dinner and who happily took our dog for a walk today when there was a windchill below zero and who managed everything with the cleaners who came this afternoon. And definitely insecure about my dad who was a stay at home father for several years of my life, including doing almost all of the cooking and cleaning. The only reason I can possibly disagree with previous takes that Starbucks guy was evil is definitely due to my own insecurities about the sh!t men in my life and not because I have a different – yet perfectly valid and rational – perspective. You nailed it!
Hahaha yes.
Seriously. I’m willing to bet most people who defended the way the guy handled this to some degree actually have pretty good relationships with men because they see them as human.
Is it your impression that most attorneys are unhappy even if successful? I’m not talking about the ones that are struggling to make ends meet while sitting on a lot of law school debt, I’m talking about the ones that make it to biglaw partner or mid law regional firm partner or in house at a decent company or a mid to high position government job, so finances are not a huge issue and they are likely in a job that many strived for.
If yes – you think lawyers are unhappy, can you put a finger on WHY and do you think it’s less happy that comparable client service professions say accounting or consulting other than MBB? Just trying to figure out my own feelings here and I’d curious what others think. I’m seventeen years out of law school, have done biglaw and currently in government.
Yes. I’ve never met a really happy attorney. Some JDs in law-related jobs like law professor, but not anyone actually practicing law at a firm or in-house. (and fwiw my father, who was a government lawyer, told me this and I still went to law school!)
I think yes. We instill a lot of perfectionism in law students and junior lawyers, so if you don’t arrive with anxiety, some will be provided to you. Work more to get paid more is often required for most legal jobs, so to do well you may have to give up your non-work time. You’re typically dealing with people at tough times in their life, so client contact can also be draining.
I say that and then realize that a lot of those things may be true for accounting and consulting, but maybe it’s seen as more of a rite of passage that passes once you’ve been around for a bit in those roles? Or maybe not and I’m just hoping other professions are happier.
I do have friends who continue to be lawyers and are happy. I also did a ton of informational interviewing around five years ago when I was considering leaving my law practice and, I kid you not, I did at least 14 informational interviews and all but one person sounded miserable. Based on that data with my own experience, I did leave the practice. People I know who remain happy tend to be doing mission driven law (state government, employment law or civil rights law) and have a very supportive home partner or spouse with a lower stress job.
I’ll bite. I’m actually happy but I seem to be an outlier. Many of my law school classmates and peers are unhappy. A common thread for the unhappy ones are folks who went to law school because someone told them they’d be a good lawyer/they should go to law school. They all were high achievers who got good grades and lots of gold stars growing up, in college and law school. Then out of school there isn’t really an equivalent to good grades to give that dopamine hit other than maybe cash or “prestige”. But neither of those things actually make someone happy. When your job takes up the amount of time/mental energy that being a lawyer does, I think it’s really difficult to be happy if you don’t actually like anything about your job other than the money or prestige. Add to that the fact that so many other lawyers are unhappy and don’t like their jobs and the workplace can become a total pity party that just makes you feel worse. Especially if your social circle also has lots of lawyers.
I’m happy but I actually like a lot (but not everything) about my job. I also am not married to a lawyer and the majority of my friends are not lawyers. I also didn’t grow up with money so the money seems to be more meaningful to me than my peers. It still delights me that I can afford to treat myself to Starbucks even though I’m a partner.
I think it has to do more with the people law attracts than the field of law. How many people are lawyers because it was the next logical progression for an honors student? People who never thought about what they wanted out of life, just that they were good students and liked school, so naturally more school on the way to a respectable career was the answer. They’re just type A kids who, I think, would be uptight and unhappy no matter the career…because if it weren’t law, it would have been medicine or engineering or some other “prestigious” career.
(I say this as a recovering Type A honors student happily enjoying her generous daily dose of antidepressants and JD-preferred job.)
This made me chuckle, as a Type A honors student who also likes her daily dose of antidepressants and works normal-ish hours that allow posting on this s!te.
Looks like you’re defining “successful” as “financially successful.” I think those who treat being an ATTORNEY (TM) as their identity and personality are bound to be unhappy, especially because it seems like they are too wrapped up in the perceived prestige of it all. They think they are indispensable, but literally no one else cares and it doesn’t make you better than anyone else because you are willing to sacrifice a personal life for more money beyond financial security. Honestly, it can be pretty sad.
I am also a government attorney, and my friends at work are the attorneys and judges who realize that this is quite literally just a job and have myriad interests outside of the office. I mean, yeah, we’ll discuss the cases before us here and there, but you’ll more likely find us trading salsa recipes and talking about weekend or travel plans instead of hotly debating the Supreme Court docket. Before you snark at ‘typical government workers,’ we tend to be the highest producers and SMEs. We work hard, we just don’t define ourselves by, or seek external validation for, what we get paid to do from 9-5, and I think that’s the key to our happiness and success.
My government job is SO not 9–5, and I am offended by the stereotype. I know there are governmental jobs that fit that description, but so many of us work more and are on call for whatever emergency arises. And there are plenty of those!
The role itself is demanding.
Lawyers are also risk averse, so the people who hate it continue to do it for years and years instead of just doing something else. I know so many people who deeply hate their jobs and their firms, but even going in-house with a six figure salary seems wild and risky to them.
I’m one of the ones who went to law school who actually wanted to go. I had a finance degree, could and did get good job offers on Wall Street right out of undergrad so it wasn’t a matter of – I test well and have no career in hand. And given my Wall Street interests, I wanted to do biglaw. I’ll say being about the same level as you the thing that makes me unhappy about law is OTHER LAWYERS. The profession is littered with people who just don’t want to be there and aren’t interested in the work but it pays the bills – often in golden handcuff kinds of ways. These people are often partners whose only joy in life appears to be – haha I’m a partner and you’re not so I’ll take it out on out, or I’m a senior partner and you’re not so I’ll take it out on you and be overly critical just because I can be. TBH I’ve seen this in government too – it’s not as extreme because people there do have and want to have lives, yet there is a bit of – I hate this boring government job, but I’m management and you won’t be for decades more because you don’t have seniority so here let me give you unimportant non substantive edits to turn because MANAGEMENT.
Honestly I am considering leaving the profession because I have made money and I can’t see myself doing this for two more decades.
You know there are a lot of attorneys out there who don’t work in Big or Mid Law or in house, right? I know plenty of attorneys who are happy, but they don’t fit in the roles that most commonly are talked about here.
The comment this morning to “Dr. The Original…” was really awful. While I think this is a great place to discuss and debate, it was horrible to tell her to stop commenting or posting because she says too much and sounds self important, that she comments too often, and they wish they could collapse her responses. I know this is an open forum but there are real people behind these names and I think we should at least agree to not attack an individual. It’s hurtful to the person and it is hurtful for those who care about a person to watch it happen.
Between this and yesterday’s antisemitism, I really see the reason so many great people leave or go anonymous.
+ I agree. I love her posts so, so much and have always been amazed that such a compassionate and insightful person exists. And that she takes the time to give such great wisdom to people she doesn’t know. Would be heartbroken if she stopped posting, and I want her to know it’s the same snarky, name-calling mean girls who’ve attacked all of us on here at some point. Those are a couple of women – they are not the overall group. I think she is one of the most loved posters here and hope she knows that.
I agree
+1 and somebody just went after Trish above based on her previous posts. Can we be kinder to each other around here?
eta: that person apologized. Credit where it’s due!
+1, there seems to be an ebb/flow of attacking the ‘named’ posters (and a few have been driven off after being attacked en masse) which is unfortunate. I find Dr. The Original kind and thoughtful and if you don’t, that’s the beauty of being able to scroll right on by!
I also find Dr. The Original kind and thoughtful, I always enjoy reading her comments and wish I was her friend.
+ 1,000,000. I always have thought I’d love so much to be her friend in real life.
+1
Agree. That was one of the most hurtful comments to a poster I have ever seen.
+1 and so weird this is coming out around the holidays too. If there’s a time to be kind to others…isn’t it this time of year?!
That kind of thing is why a lot of regulars just use Anon now. No one would be able to call out an Anon for posting on too many threads, for instance.
I do not understand why supposedly well-educated, successful women need to get their jollies by being Mean Girls on an anonymous internet forum, but honestly, it’s pathetic and falls very well into the Get A Life category.
I was a named commenter for years and went anon after I realized someone was following posts here enough to figure out who I was IRL, and intensely disliked me. After that person posted a very creepy comment using my real first name, I never posted under my handle again.
Similarly, someone figured out who I am IRL and emailed me! Creepy.
Ugh. If either of you is Sloan Sabbith, I miss you.
I miss Sloan too. Hope she’s OK.
Also happened to me, I got an email and a LinkedIn message. Even after I went anonymous, I got a LinkedIn message a year later with quotes from comments (that I actually had not posted) and a message of “I know this is you,” etc. The LinkedIn profile name, photo and email address were fake. I reported to LinkedIn, but I don’t know if they ever took the profile down because I blocked it.
Misthreaded my other reply, but she is active on Goodreads; so I presume she’s OK in some sense at least.
I miss Sloan, too. And K…in transition
I miss Sloan too! I follow her on Goodreads and I don’t think I ever emailed her without being invited to, or posted her real name, but if I did, that was wholly unintentional and not meant to be targeted, and I hope nothing bad came of it.
+1.
I’ve recognized a couple people from comments here. I didn’t call them out by real name or anything, which I agree is weird, but I don’t think it’s inherently creepy to recognize someone. People share enough about their lives and sometimes it happens unintentionally.
Yikes – this is the first time I’m hearing of this creepy behavior unless I missed an email.I’ve known people were worried about being outed but not about the actual emails and Linked In messages. Please feel free to reach out to me with details; I’m not sure how much I could do but if that person is commenting here I could at least blacklist them.
(I honestly am surprised they could determine who you are without an email address – is it possibly a tech thing I should shore up on my end?)
I don’t think people mean that someone literally got their email off of the comments, just that they were identifiable *enough* that someone contacted them directly. Like if you work at a firm, your work contact info is publicly available to anyone who can g–gle.
I’m an Anon because my feelings are hurt easily, and I respect and love the screen name posters here. It takes guts and Vicky Austin in particular always comments on my threads and is so supportive. I like to think she’s my internet friend! Also enjoy Dr The Original and used to love Rainbow Hair when she posted way back when.
Oh and can’t forget Senior Attorney!
I formalize our Internet Friendship! <3
oh man I liked Rainbow Hair. Nutella too.
+1 I’m the Starbucks guy poster and no way would I ever use a handle after many of the comments directed toward me today.
Unless I missed it, I don’t think anyone bashed you? Some just said they understood the other guy’s position, the situation really sucks but it’s no one’s fault, and either respond or don’t respond to the text. Some posters may have questioned the seriousness of the relationship, but it sounds to me that it was mismatched expectations on both sides, which again really sucks, but doesn’t automatically vilify either one of you.
Thank you for saying this, OP. Dr. The Original, you’re a beautiful and thoughtful human, and we want you here.
I don’t use a handle because it would be really really easy to figure out who I am IRL. I’m the person who works in UN conventions (which thousands of others do too!) but with additional details about my life, you could narrow down the list easily.
I missed that this morning but it makes me angry. I appreciate you Dr. The Original! I feel like we have made a special community here and part of it is that we have been posting with handles and getting to know each other for years (heck decades now!). Even if I don’t know you IRL, you are still my friend. I wish we could collapse people’s harmful comments!
Absolutely not the case with Dr. The Original, but I think some of the more “famous” posters have said things worthy of pushback or critique and then people jump all over that saying we shouldn’t pick on them and that really rubs me the wrong way. I bet Senior Attorney could come here and say she murdered puppies or something and people would jump all over themselves to defend her.
I don’t like the callout to Senior Attorney specifically (who publicly apologized after saying something harsh to me), but yes I generally agree about there being a weird vibe here with the more “famous” regulars being immune to criticism. It does feel very cliquey in that way.
Use a screen name other than Anon, then.
I used to.
Heh it only feel like posters with names are immune to criticism until you are a poster with a name.
And Dr. The Original, please don’t stop posting! You are the best!!
My excellent pcp recommended seeing a therapist. I’ve never seen one before. The person she recommended only does video appointments. I’m a people person who tends to connect better with people in person, but don’t have experience with therapy. Do I go with her recommendation or find someone doing in person?
Make an appointment with her recommendation while also trying to find other recommendations. It will be easier to pick if you have choices!
+1
Since you call your PCP “excellent” and I therefore assume you trust her judgement, I would definitely try her suggestion first. Since you’ve never had therapy before, how do you know this might now work well for you? In fact, many people find therapy remotely more comfortable/safe when they start remotely.
And it is so, so, so hard to find a good therapist locally, especially that would take your insurance that shoot…. if you don’t want to try the therapist your PCP recommended, post that therapist on here so we can go see them!
If she gave you a name, I’d reach out and just meet them. You may find that you really click with them and you keep at it, but you may also not. I was doing therapy pre-pandemic with a therapist and then we moved to virtual and it was just fine, not great. I started a new therapist last summer and we’ve only met virtually and she is AMAZING. We have a great relationship and it’s really starting to become clear to me how much I’ve improved working with her.
I know it can be said a lot, but finding a good therapist can be a lot like dating. You just have to keep looking for one until the right person clicks and sometimes you’re surprised by who does.
Start with the recommended therapist and be upfront that you prefer someone in person. She may have contacts she can put you in touch with (and often good therapists are ostensibly not taking new clients but will if you are referred by a friend/respected colleague). Even if you prefer not to tell her why, it’s very normal to shop around therapists until you find a right fit and they do not get offended if you politely indicate after a few appointments that you’re going to look for someone else. Good luck!
I bought a jersey maxi dress with a neutral/animal-like but not quite pattern from Boden that I’ve worn to work a few times and I absolutely adore the look.
Any recs for where I can find other similar dresses? Any filters I use at Nordstrom or otherwise are failing me. Doesn’t have to be jersey, but these dresses are perfect for the winter on non-client facing days. TIA.
no specifics but try finding one you like on zappos as their suggestions engine is good.
If there’s one thing several of this morning’s threads taught me is that I have a very different approach to interpersonal relationships than many others here. Which, as frustrating as it can be at times, is a reminder that it takes all kinds of kinds
Dumb question but how do you ensure you consume enough water when it gets super cold like it is in most of the country now?
I usually drink from the tap but tap water is so freezing cold. I don’t want to turn to the tap to warm though as that water comes out of the hot water heater – maybe I’d be ok with that if I had a tankless heater but I don’t. Any solution here? I find myself barely drinking three glasses of water per day and a cup of coffee but it doesn’t feel like enough and I feel better when I consume more water all day.
I fill a water bottle at night and let it sit at room temp.
I actually keep my Brita filtered water pitcher in my kitchen on the counter. I haven’t died yet. I do replace the filter regularly though.
Do you like tea? Seems like a good solution here.
This. I pretty much only drink tea in the winter (decaf so consuming 6-8 cups a day isn’t an issue).
Leave a pitcher of water on the kitchen counter during the winter months. It will at least warm up to room temperature for you.
get yourself an electric kettle to make hot water. then can dilute hot water with cold to make it warm or lukewarm temp to your preferences.
I drink warm water out of my Nalgene. I love it!
Is water from your hot water heater not potable?
Leave the water to get to room temperature. There is nothing special about “straight from the tap” water that means you cannot drink “hour old” water.
Jet fuel sickness.
Yesterday I posted too late for the question from the person who get sick from jet fuel, I wanted to say look up Environmental Illness and multiple chemical sensitivity
I’m really sensitive to diesel fumes and each exposure worsened the sensitivity so my adevice is to avoid as much as possible instead of masking the smell with fragrances.
There’s masks for blocking fumes – look for ones that say they filter organic vapours.