ByElizabeth Hours Updated
Comments 303 Comments

Frugal Friday’s Workwear Report: Sleeveless Ruffle-Neck Top

A woman wearing a light-green top, white pants, and hoop earrings

Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.

This turquoise top from J.Crew Factory looks so bright and summery that I’m tempted to run outside for a picnic immediately. The clip dot texture and the slight ruffle at the neck provide a little bit of visual interest, and the length is perfect for tucking into a skirt or a pair of pants.

If you’re looking for more neutral colors, this top also comes in ivory and navy. If you really want to pop, it comes in an orangey “bohemian red.”

The top is $47.50 at J.Crew Factory and comes in sizes XXS-3X.

Sales of note for 12.5

303 Comments

  1. I am looking for a good basic digital clock with a simple alarm function that is easy to reset when needed and also a very simple quartz digital watch. It is to help with a person of limited dexterity and faculties (will be overseen by me, with bad eyes) to help them keep oriented in time and wake for meds and daily activities more independently than being woken up by a carer. The array of options is overwhelming. I just need a Jitterbug version of alarm clocks and watches.

    1. With the 90s being trendy again…Search timex digital watch on google; pick the one you remember the person having circa 1994. Same for the digital alarm clock – sharp digital alarm clock will get you close to what they remember (and know how to use).

    2. I went to amazon and typed in “digital clock for elderly,” and lots of good options came up. You might also check sites that give resources for people with dementia.

    3. I ordered a “RCA Digital Alarm Clock with Large 1.4″ Display” from Amazon in 2018 and I’ve been using it every single day since then. Very simple, very clear, reliably wakes up when things like phone alarms were getting too fiddly.

  2. Do you max out your 401k and Roth IRA even at the expense of normal savings?
    To max out a 401k you need to put in $1875 / month. It’s before tax at least, which helps.
    I could do that, but then I would have about $500 for “normal” savings, to be used for anything non-retirement.
    That feels like saving for retirement but not saving for anything else I might want to do before then (wedding, house, car, big trip, medical bills, etc).

    Or I could do say $1200 / month for the 401k and then probably save $1000 for life stuff.

    1. Once I had an emergency fund, then I maxed out the 401. You can do that now/early/when you are young to get the money in there and compounding. If you later find saving that much every month is a hardship, you can contribute less each month, but you’ve already got the ball started.

      1. I agree with Anon, if you can front load your 401K in your 20s and 30s, the power of compound interest will give you much more flexibility later on. My company allowed for up to 75% of my bonus to go to my 401k, so I did that every year in addition to contributing 15%. It took a number of years into my career before I was able to max it out, but everything I did at 21, 22, etc really helped. Now in my early thirties, I could stop contributing entirely to my 401k, not a single dime, and still retire a multimillionaire.

        1. Oh that’s interesting. I’ve been consistently doing 15% and then maybe 30% of my 401k.

          I do already have a full emergency fund. I meant more just saving for things I might want later in life, but prior to retirement age.

          I do like this idea though – front load things now, and then later on I could reduce 401k contributions if I wanted to spend that money on something else.

        2. And I made the opposite (and much dumber) choice. I had a very ordinary 50k-ish a year job in my early and mid twenties while I was considering and thinking about law school. I decided because my company at the time didn’t match, because I knew I wasn’t staying long-term (although I ended up staying for 5 years) and because I knew I couldn’t max, not to put anything in my 401k. Now a decade later I have maxed my 401k for 5 years in a row BUT I can’t get that time back and I missed out on all of that compound interest.

        3. This is wildly out of touch. When I graduated from college I had an entry-level job with no bonus. Maxing my 403b would have cost more than 50% of my before-tax salary. I had to take a second job tutoring just to make ends meet. I could not contribute to retirement at all until I got married and we were living on two incomes.

          1. Well, we’re all different. When I graduate college, I lived with 4 roommates in an old 3 bedroom apartment, and I did contribute some to a ROTH IRA every year. It wasn’t a lot some years, but my parents taught me about ROTHs young and I am so grateful for it. It’s shocking how much that $$ has grown.

            Yes, income in your 20s can vary wildly. But it’s great to get in the saving mindset early.

    2. Do you have a plan for the life stuff you want to do? E.g., do you know how much a wedding would cost, how much downpayment you want for a house, what a car costs, how much you’d spend on a car? Make a literal list of life stuff, and put numbers next to it, and a timeline on it (when would you need that car? When would you like to buy a house? When is the next trip?). This will help you understand how much you’d like on hand for cash savings and when you’d need access to it. My take: plan for normal life needs now AND for retirement. No sense in having a huge retirement fund but no money for a down payment on a house or no money for a car. (Or no emergency fund.)

      1. This is the conclusion I came to with my financial advisor. We assumed I need to buy and furnish a house for $X within five years, contribute $Y to a wedding in three years, then worked backwards to see how much cash I need on top of my current short term savings. If I max out my 401K then I can’t afford a decent house in my area. I’m only willing to sacrifice so much for Future Me. I contribute more than what my employer will match so it’s not like I’m contributing the bare minimum.

    3. If you don’t have a comfortable regular savings cushion, I would go with your second suggestion until you get a solid emergency amount built up, then move to max out your retirement accounts.

      If you do a Roth IRA, once it has been open for five years you can withdraw your contributions (not earnings, just contributions) at any time, so that may give you some comfort of having accessible funds in case of emergency. Not a great practice to withdraw from there for non-emergency stuff in lieu of using a regular savings account, though.

      1. +1 I would definitely have a balance between nearer term savings like a down payment and retirement savings. The strategy that worked well for me was to find a level I was comfortable with and then automatically increase each year when I got a raise. So if I got a 4% raise, I would immediately increase my retirement percentage by 2% – that way I still felt like I was bringing home a little more money but my retirement savings went up too. It only took a few years until I was saving the max and I never felt deprived.

    4. Q2 – I have both a 401k and a Roth IRA. I can’t really afford to max both out. Should I just forget about the Roth IRA for now? I make low 6 figures now but do think my salary will go up over my career.

      1. Personally, because the amount that can go into the IRA is more limited, I would max out the Roth IRA and then put the remainder of the retirement savings into the 401(k). All of the reasons to frontload the 401(k) while you are young apply with greater impact to the Roth IRA. Having earnings compound on which you will never owe future taxes is the answer!

      2. I always max out my Roth and then put what I can in my 403b (I also make mandatory contributions to a 401a). I figure it’s good to have a balance of pretax and post tax, plus you can always withdraw Roth contributions with no penalty.

      3. I met with a financial advisor a while back that strongly encouraged Roth IRA investments as top priority. He said it makes a big difference for people in retirement to have non-taxable assets they can tap into. He had seen that money get used on things like replacing cars, purchasing 2nd homes, big stuff you wouldn’t want to be taxed on.
        Ever since then I always make sure to max out my Roth IRA.

      4. ALWAYS contribute to your 401K first, up to any company match. Or else you are throwing away money.

        Then max out your Roth IRA.

        Then add as much as you can to the 401K.

        1. Yes!

          I would aim to get your full 401k match first if that’s available to you, then build up your emergency savings, then hit your Roth IRA max, then go for the remaining 401k max.

        2. Not all companies match. I never had any employer contributions at all when I was in Big Law, and now I’m in higher ed and the university contributes X% regardless of what I contribute so it’s not really a “match.”

          1. Well, then of course if you don’t have a match so you don’t contribute that first. Obvi yes?

            ???

    5. If you don’t have any emergency savings, make sure to do that in parallel.

      I made $27k/year living in Boston when I first got out of college in 2006 and the idea that I could save anything was hilarious. But I made a goal of $100/month to savings and hitting the employer match for my 402k (which was actually a 403b with an insane match- they matched 200% up to 5%). I ended up putting something like $3k in it before I left that today is worth like 35k.

      Similarly, I when I was making $55k maxing my Roth IRA seemed crazy on top of my 401k. But my then boyfriend (now husband) said “you won’t always qualify for it!” I didn’t believe him but he was right and I’m so glad I stuffed all that cash away. I now have like $250k in post tax retirement funds in addition to my pretax.

    6. I don’t have any “normal” savings other than a small emergency fund. It all goes in retirement. But I own a house, if you’re trying to save for a down payment then I can see cutting back on retirement.

    7. I think we’re the same age. I highly recommend having a separate savings account for going to other people’s weddings. I put in $100/month and it definitely doesn’t cover everything I spend on going to weddings but it’s a nice cushion.

      1. Ugh seriously. It gets so expensive! I put $100/month into a “short term savings” for trips/replacing electronics/other smaller costs that don’t really come out of a monthly budget. Guess it will be used for this.

    8. We do not max out our 401ks for this reason. We had been putting as much money as possible into retirement and our kid’s college fund, and then in 2018, when we went to buy a new house and sell our old one, we had to tap our emergency fund to make necessary repairs on the old house so we could sell it. And then we needed to do a major repair after the home inspection so we tapped the fund again. The money (about $20k) was out of the account for about 5 months while we waited for the house to sell so we could replenish from equity after the sale; we couldn’t replenish it from cash flow because we were paying two mortgages at the time. We realized at that point we had done a great job of saving for emergencies, retirement and college but we needed different pot of money we could tap for non-emergency expenses related to house repairs, vacations, etc.

      I know some people will quibble on this point, but to me, emergency means emergency: someone has lost a job; we have had a major medical emergency, the roof has blown off the house in a storm, etc. I am not comfortable with our emergency money getting below a certain number, even temporarily. To me, the emergency fund is the fence (or bridge, maybe) between us and financial disaster when the chips are REALLY, really down, and there needs to be X amount of money in that fund so that if things really go south, we’re covered. If we tap it for something that’s not really an emergency, and then an emergency happens, I would feel like – OMG, we’re screwed. That is my stuff, 100% and I think about money differently than a lot of people – it’s definitely a scarcity mentality/too much is never enough, etc. and I own that.

      So, we decreased the amount we were putting in retirement and created a separate “sinking fund,” in an investment account (it’s currently all invested in an index fund), that’s our “non-emergency fund,” that we can feel free drawing from and putting money back into for things I don’t consider emergencies. So far, that’s been things like: car down payments; a specialty sports camp for our son that was $$; nice-to-have-but-not-necessary home improvement projects, etc. Not everyone chooses to do this and that’s fine. But I realized I was fundamentally uncomfortable having so much of our money tied up in retirement accounts that we’d be penalized for drawing from if we drew before retirement age. I will also say that I am 46 and my husband is 52, and the amount we’re saving is going to get us where we need to be for retirement. We are almost maxed in our 401ks and we also have HSAs we’re contributing to, so we’ll be fine. Having that extra pot of money we can access for whatever brought me peace of mind, which is more important to me than doing what other people say you “should” do.

      1. I’m the same way, my emergency fund is for emergencies like losing my job or a major medical expense. I have 10 sinking funds for other things: travel, tuition (I’m in grad school part time), car repairs electronics replacements, attending weddings, health expenses, moving (trying to get enough for a deposit on an apartment next time I move, but also for furniture if I need it), Invisalign, the “future” (a wedding or a down payment or whatever, tuition was previously here too), a splurge fund (I have expensive hobbies and champagne tastes on a beer budget).

        None of these are as high as I like them to be (see: graf school); the vast majority of my net worth is in my retirement accounts (current job 401k, rollover from previous jobs, and a Roth IRA). I also have two small non-retirement investment accounts (one I invest in on my own and one that’s for my employer’s employee stock purchase program).

    9. Yes. We are planning jointly for retirement and we prioritize retirement savings. Husband had to go into catch up mode because he started his career at 30 (prior military) and we have saved for retirement aggressively. We save 25% of after tax income for retirement and I have a true pension on top of that.

      We also have a short term savings account (used for things like vacations, unexpected house repairs, etc.), a medium term savings account (which is currently depleted and slightly stressing me out) which we have used to put in a new patio, new windows, and buy a car, and then an emergency fund that has about $15-20K in it which is truly just our ‘in case everything goes south’ account. Kids’ college isn’t funded as well as it should be, that’s our weak point, but there’s a plan there.

      FWIW – my parents were broke and didn’t figure out their careers until they were around 40. I grew up knowing that we didn’t have enough money and it stressed me out so prioritizing savings has actually been a tool to help my anxiety.

    10. You’re getting some good advice. I will say I bucked the conventional wisdom about putting as much into the 401(k) as early as possible, and it still worked out for me. I prioritized saving for a house over funding the 401(k) and bought in summer 2020. That $120k down has tripled into $360k of equity over the past three years, a return I couldn’t possibly get in the market. Did I get lucky? Majorly so. But don’t feel bad if you come up with a plan and think it makes sense, but it doesn’t match what everyone else is doing.

    11. For a good rule of thumb, I always take a look at Reddit’s financial flowchart: https://i.imgur.com/u0ocDRI.png

      My husband and I are both government employees with pensions, so our retirement contributions do not include maxing out 401ks or Roths. However, we still contribute enough so that our estimated income replacement value is around 90% per the retirement calculators. By the time we retire, our mortgage will be paid off. If all the doomsday predictions come to fruition and there will be no Social Security or pensions by the time we retire, there will be hundreds of thousands of people in the same boat so at that point it will be a larger societal issue that we have no control over.

    12. My calculation is that saving 20% of my take home pay is what I NEED to save for retirement (started in late 20s due to grad school so will be saving 20% for 40 years). After that I focus on my other savings goals.

  3. One side effect of the pandemic for me is that I now think of workout clothes as clothes. I started caring about how they look (vs what they do) and how an outfit should be put together. Ugh. I know it’s a choice at a certain level but it creates friction in my zen now when I just try to throw in and go. In 2019, I just cared about workwear looks. Now, every item of clothes passes at workwear, so there is no escape.

    FWIW at work I routinely see nap dresses, strap it sundresses, spendy sneakers, rufflepuff dresses, and belly buttons.

    1. ?? I’m not sure what the main thing is here that is troubling you. Are you saying that since you wear workout clothes to WFH, you now think of them as workwear and can’t just throw them on? If so, you can (as you suggested) choose to stop caring about this and go back to how you were doing things before the pandemic.

    2. All of my workout leggings and running shorts are black, and then tops are colors (usually muted, but that’s my style). It’s more my style to have mostly black bottoms but I guess an unintended benefit is that everything matches and I can throw on and go.

      1. I am like that but in the summer I cannot be like that for leisure. Too hot but also I have discovered that I am a bit of a magpie when it comes to non-work clothes. I want all of the fun colors and joyful patterns. I can be a goth for the cold times but not in the summer when off the clock.

      2. Funnily enough, I do the opposite! Colorful leggings and shorts are usually what’s left on final sale, so I buy those and then stock up on cheap black tops from Old Navy etc. to pair with them. I find that the expensive leggings look better on me but can’t bring myself to buy them full price.

        But yes, throw on and go is key.

        1. I spent years trying to dress myself from the clearance rack and I had way, way more clothes than I would haven needed if I’d just been willing to pay full price for items I really wanted, because none of the clearance items really went with anything or didn’t fit right or whatever. It’s on clearance because no one else wanted it. A lesson I learned the hard way.

    3. This is a daily lament around here! If you want to put more effort into how you look no one is stopping you.

      1. +1 just because most people changed their standards with the pandemic doesn’t mean you have to too! Or if you did, there’s no reason why you can’t go back to what you did pre pandemic.

        I workout a ton, but on wfh days I only throw in workout clothes if I’m planning a lunch workout. If I did a morning workout or if I’m working out after work then I wear a t shirt dress or something else that is comfy, casual, but also presentable during the day.

        I also only wfh once a week and still have to be relatively dressed for work so it’s never an issue there.

        Another thing that “helps” is that I pretty much only have enough seasonally appropriate workout attire for the number of workouts I do a week. So I don’t have extras to wear when I’m not working out.

      2. Seriously. Also all those things mentioned – trendy sneakers, nap dresses, etc. aren’t sloppy, just current. Many of us are happy with an expanded range of options for what to wear to work. I personally love that my closet isn’t segregated into work and non-work items anymore.

    4. It’s a choice at every level? Buy some great jeans or linen pants or a casual dress that you would never wear for working out and start wearing that kind of stuff to work. I work in a casual workplace at a high enough level that I can get away with pretty much anything I want and I don’t wear workout clothes at work. I’m a yoga teacher too, so it’s not that I have a lack of workout clothes options.

    5. “i know it’s a choice at a certain level…” no, it’s a choice on all levels.
      You decide what you wear every day, and just because other people wear certain things doesn’t mean you have to.

  4. Are inflatable paddle boards any good? My mom is recently retired and wants to get out to paddle on her local pond. She has a small car without a roof rack so a kayak is out, and I don’t think a regular paddle board would fit either. She’s worried an inflatable would be such a pain to blow up and deflate that she would never use it, but it is the only option coming to mind. I’m hoping to get this for her as a gift – the transition to retirement has been a little rocky.

    1. I do! Bought last year from aldi for $200 (in stock now-go!), came with board, pump (i upgraded to car one later), carry bag, repair kit, paddle, & ankle strap. I bought a life vest from them for another $15. Best purchase ever!!

      1. Oops, I forgot to add that I love it, fits easily in my trunk. My partner has a very $$ fancy one & is impressed.
        The pump was from Amaz*on for another $50, well spent for sure.

    2. We have an inflatable paddle board — it is kind of a pain to inflate with the hand pump that comes with it, but doable. Does she have an inverter in the car so that she could use an electric pump? My friend has an origami kayak, which she loves and has no issues with. Maybe you could look into something like that?

    3. We have two. We love them. Very stable.

      The hand pump we have is fine but a little tiring to use but you can get an electric pump too, I’m sure

    4. Yes! We have three and they are great. I do recommend an electric air pump she can run off her car’s 12V lighter outlet. Also, I was worried that our paddles might sink if we dropped them in the water. So I chopped up a pool noodle and shoved the pieces down the hollow handle poles and now the paddles float.

      We see lots of other inflatable SUPs when we are out on our own, too, and they all seen just fine.

    5. I despise inflatable paddleboards. I find them much more difficult to maneuver than a hard board. I don’t have a roof rack or room in my garage for a hard board so I rent.

    6. I have one, and I’m happy with it! Regular paddle boards are enormous and heavy, and I just couldn’t see how I’d make it work. Mine came with a manual pump, and it’s super easy to use.

  5. Hi – I’m a gen-xer/elder millennial who has never nailed the dress with sneakers look but want to! For reasons unrelated to fashion I want my next sneakers to be hokas and I’m at a total loss looking at all of their colorways as to what would look good with dresses and seem current and stylish. Any very specific suggestions? Like exact links? TIA!

    1. Hokas are the worst looking sneakers to pair with a dress! Get Hokas for running and long walks. Get Vejas for wearing with dresses.

      2. +2 I love my Hoka Mach 5’s but would never pair them with a dress. I think Adidas Stan Smith’s or Vejas are the standard for that look.

      3. +1 but in case Vejas don’t work on your feet (they gave me terrible blisters!) I’d look at the Nike Dbreaks. I think they’re a pretty good dupe for the super spendy Loewe sneakers I’ve been coveting.

    2. I recommend trying on Hokas at REI or the like. For me, the comfort level is really different from model to model. Some have a harder sole.

    3. I did this once out of foot pain desperation. Hokas do not work with long rufflepuff dresses — I may read sister prairie wide. With something short and sporty, it is more “I drive the drink cart around at the golf course” and is IMO a better look.

    4. I don’t think this is a loom that can look cute. To the extent a supermodel will sometimes wear similar shoes it only works – to the extent it does – because she is a supermodel.

    5. “Wear with dress sneakers” and athletic sneakers are very different types of sneakers. Honda are squarely in the athletic category.

      1. This. I have my ASICS for running and hiking and my white simple addidas for wearing with dresses.

      2. +1. Workout shoes and casual sneakers are different. For work, I wear simple shoes canvas sneakers, Rothy’s sneakers, and and allbirds sneakers – typically in only 1-2 muted colors, sole is somewhat thinner than normal sneakers (so hokas are kind of the opposite), and you don’t look at them and say “did she just get back from a run?” Workout sneakers are totally different for me (except on business travel I might use my work shoes for quick workouts rather than bringing a whole different pair).

    7. It seems dresses are paired with either simple sleek sneakers like Vejas Tretorn or with chunky dad sneakers like Fila Disruptor. The latter offers more cushion if that’s what you’re looking for?

    8. I know you said you want Hokas for specific reasons but I looked at them and agree that they’ll look odd with dresses. I think you need a less bulky sneaker. Are Keds an option? I wear blue and white striped keds with solid color dresses and it’s actually a really cute look. They’re low cut enough that they don’t cut off my already short legs, which I think is key, plus they’re not so bulky that they look like I forgot to bring shoes to change in after the gym.

    10. +100 to Hokas not being the shoe to pair with dresses. You certainly can, but it’s not going to be stylish or look good with dresses.

    11. If you can consider a non-Hoka shoe, Supergas are great for this purpose (unless you have very very tiny feet).

    13. Get the white or cream or light pastel clifton or bondi.

      Choose a pair where the logo is in white and cream blending in rather than an athletic color.

    14. I hear you loud and clear — thank you!!! Will skip trying to buy ones that work with dresses.

  6. Do we think that after yesterday HYP etc will get rid of legacy preferences? If these schools are committed to keeping their size very small, they don’t need to let in Thurston Howell V — that slot can go to someone who got his or her accomplishments the hard way — overcrowded classes taught by the greenest teachers (or even without teachers like many schools do in our city with substitutes by the day who are supposed to teach algebra and do biology dissections). Yesterday’s decision just pits poor people against (maybe, depending on how you slice it) less poor people. I see the outrage but preferences for those who need them least are still alive and well. It’s just a free-for-all for the remaining slots.

    2. No, it would p1ss off their alumni too much and they rely on alumni for $$. I don’t see legacy admissions going anywhere.

      1. $$ and engagement. Legacy preferences do help universities build community over time, because the level of commitment you get from an alum increases when that alum in turn has kids at the school. So you get not just donations, but the kind of emotional attachment that means an alum will do other stuff that increases the school’s perceived value (e.g. offering internships at your office/firm/company to current students, participating in mentorship and networking events, doing mock interviews for the school career center, etc.) and makes the community look more attractive (coming to games and cultural events, participating in homecoming, even putting a sticker on your car).

        1. Unless the younger generation starts making those things a social liability. For example, I don’t think it’s crazy that being a grad of one of these schools could come with a implicit assumption in the future that you are part of the problem and a beneficiary of a system that was designed to put you ahead without merit at best or on a more extreme level a view that any affiliation with these schools is evidence of your support of systemic racism and the patriarchy

          2. I would have said it would never happen a few years ago but the questions interviewees are asking with a straight face makes me question if the younger generation will actually be change makers. They seem to care about these issues even if it means foregoing higher salaries or prestige in a way I have never seen before.

          3. I would have laughed at you before I got on TikTok. Now I think you’re on to something.

          4. Can someone post a TikTok that’s proof of this because it just sounds ridiculous.

          5. This is such a white-woke-progressive take. My hardworking Asian kids who are already termed as less likeable or less likely to be leaders would gladly take any legit route to HYP.

      1. I agree – everyone knows this is the real problem with any DEI goals but the business model is completely dependent on this being the system.

    4. If legacy admissions are what allows them to give free tuition for families that make less than $85k, are they justifiable?

      1. Maybe in theory but in practice the number of people who receive free tuition doesn’t come close to the number of people who get in as legacies. It’s like saying “well it’s fine that we do X, because we’ll invite 2 poor kids to also come participate”

        2. I don’t think that’s true actually. At the elite private colleges with legacy admissions, the vast majority of students get significant aid. You don’t have to be “poor.” There are colleges that are free for families making under $150k (we make that in a LCOL area and feel straight up rich, though of course we’d be on a much tighter budget in a city like NYC) and families with income in the $200s or even $300s often get some aid, if not a full ride.

          1. +1 my parents had modest incomes but saved a ton and paid full freight at my Ivy, but almost everyone I met there had some form of financial aid. And that was 15 years ago, there’s a lot more aid for the middle class now.

        3. IDK — they ought to require legacies then to pay full tuition and then some )like give a building or at least a wing). Otherwise, plenty of people can pay or borrow and it’s not like the endowment will run out of funds before the planet overheats and blows up.

          1. I think you have a pretty skewed view of who Ivy League legacies are. In the vast majority of cases, they don’t have “give a building” money (or even “put a kid through college at full sticker price without loans” money).

          2. Really? My roommate at Yale was a 3 time legacy on financial aid. She 100% deserved to be at the school and couldn’t afford to pay full freight. To paraphrase Means Girls: did you even go to HYP?

          3. In that case, losing those donors is NBD and they should not get legacy preferences. Plenty of people can write a check also and it would be more democratic to let those people enjoy an ivy for a change. It not a hereditary caste system here except that it is once the people who show up dont look exactly like you or have the family privileges that legacies have.

          4. The vast majority of Ivy alumni aren’t big donors but the school doesn’t want to lose them because 1) small donations add up and 2) having an active engaged alumni community is good for recruiting.

      2. That isn’t what is enabling HYP, which have the largest endowments in the country, to offer full rides for lower income students. The endowments do.

        But keeping additional donations flowing to the endowments matters, and that’s where legacies and whiny alumni matter.

      3. According to Harvard, 22% of students pay nothing and 25-35% of students are legacies, depending on how you define it. But they’re not all getting admission preferences. Most of them benefit just by being the children of Harvard grads to begin with and mostly growing up somewhere between reasonably well off and extremely wealthy and having lots of social connections and the ability to navigate the admissions process. And then they also get a thumb on the scale when comparing equal candidates. I doubt there are very many truly unqualified students admitted (like Jared Kushner, though he wasn’t actually a legacy).

        1. I don’t think anyone is suggesting most legacies are wildly unqualified. The Kushner donate-a-building situations are rare, as you note. But being taken over a non-legacy kid with similar stats IS a huge advantage. Most kids who apply to Harvard are qualified and the vast majority don’t get in, so even a small edge over other kids can make a big difference.

        2. There is no way of knowing if a legacy admit is getting an admission preference. I would say 100% of them are, because there are multiple, high-achieving applicants for every admission spot. The legacies get in. In my mind, that is an admission preference regardless of whether they are “qualified.”

          1. I agree — several trachea of non-legacy rejects are otherwise fungible with the admits. It’s the deciding thumb on the scale.

        3. Anon at 10:46 again, and I agree that they do get some advantage, but my real question is whether we think that thumb on the scale is worth it if it also means that they subsidize less well off students. I’m genuinely unsure about my answer to that, as I feel like it’s already such a joke to say that admissions are just about merit when privilege clearly plays such a role even outside of the legacy admissions issue, and if that’s what gets these schools to admit more “poor” students, I’m not necessarily convinced it’s wrong, even if it seems unfair on its face.

          However, I mostly think we should put much less emphasis on Ivies in general and devote more resources to the schools where most students actually attend! Stop caring so much whether someone went to Harvard. (I say this as someone who went to an Ivy, not as a legacy, and has no kids, so I have no personal stake in the matter).

          2. Super agree with your last paragraph, as someone who attended an elite college and elite-ish law school (not T14 but right underneath). One of the best associates I ever had attended a small denominational college and an unremarkable local law school. One of the worst went to very, very elite institutions (and has flopped around plenty before and after).

            FWIW, there is plenty of elitism alive and well in the LA area, but there are also plenty of successful people (at least in my field) with nonelite credentials. It’s one of the things I quite like about California.

          3. The attorney at my AmLaw firm who was the snobbiest about recruiting only from T14 law schools, both when he was an associate and when he was a partner, had transferred into his T14 school from a local-to-us fourth (on a good day) tier law school that was accredited, but just.

    6. Back up. Schools use legacies differently. Harvard has incredibly strong legacy preferences, and the effect is to take less qualified rich white kids instead of brilliant middle class/working class white kids. MIT had no or almost no legacy preferences. Some do much more of a thumb on the scale – in the tsunami of applications, legacies get in when equally qualified middle class kids to not.

      As mentioned above, legacies are often a way to keep alumni donors happy. HYP are terrible examples of this, having endowments that are literally the GDP of many small countries; however, schools with smaller endowments really do need those donations to keep their doors open and offer financial aid to kids of limited means.

      At most schools, there simply aren’t a lot of kids who got in from legacy admissions (who were not strong candidates in their own right). If a school normally enrolls about 1,500 kids, the admission of five progeny of the super rich is quite literally a rounding error in their enrollments.

      1. Sorry, posted before wrapping up my thoughts: to the extent that this changes legacy admissions, I think the effect will be on the more marginal cases: children of alumni who aren’t super wealthy, or children of alumni who aren’t very strong candidates in their own right.

        I will also note that nothing stops a university from giving legacy preferences to minority applicants. The kids applying now have parents who attended college in the 1990s, and many top schools were diverse by that time. Ironically, as time goes on, legacy preferences – at least for minorities – could be a way around the SFFA ruling.

        1. Is it though? Upper Middle class alumni kids vs Kids of people who can pay tuition and still donate on top of that. Versus people who can donate a building (own a chain of Car dealerships and colleges court your kids even if you barely finished high school.). Schools absolutely track sub segments of alumni and their $.

        3. Yeah, I mean – the idea that all Ivy League legacies are Thurston Howell the XIV is really out of touch at this point. My husband is 55, so while our kids are young (got married very late), his peers have kids applying to college now and there are Ivy League legacies among them, including several who are Black and Asian. They are professionals (doctors and lawyers), so they have money (although a fair number of them only finished paying off their student loans in the last 10 years…) but it’s not name-on-a-building money (or even donates at a level that moves the needle money). Most of them had middle class parents, and their kids are your standard “five APs, seriously plays an instrument, runs varsity track” highly anxious overachiever types, not stereotypical feckless rich bros. Do they have advantages, even aside from their legacy status? Of course they do. Are they rampantly unqualified? No.

          1. No one is saying they are unqualified, just that legacy admissions means they may not be the best qualified, and there is a perpetuation of an elite class that rankles many (including me, and I am in that elite class).

          2. I think “best qualified” varies a lot by university. When 60,000 kids apply for 2,000 acceptances, “best qualified” is so, so subjective. There is just a tidal wave of “best qualified” applicants and they choose who makes for an interesting class. It’s not like a tier below, where they can’t fill their class five times over with kids so talented as to be virtually indistinguishable.

          3. When 60K kids apply for 2K spots, maybe these schools should think about expanding to 4K slots? It will hardly dilute the brand or dry up the endowment.

          4. Anon at 12:47, are you at all involved in your alma mater at a substantive level? I am at the “attend trustee meetings” level and there are a whole host of operational reasons why doubling the incoming class is not going to happen.

      2. I worked for about ten years in elite higher ed admissions at a top 20 non-Ivy private school. I’m not sure how many schools disclose this info, but our yield on legacy applicants was about 50%, for many of the reasons you name: these kids had parents who went to an elite school, ended up going to a top high school with the means to navigate college admissions, and they had the pick of the litter when it comes to their final college choice (“Dad, I know you loved your time at Duke, but I can’t wait to live in New Hampshire at Dartmouth”). I’m not happy with yesterday’s ruling but affirmative action was an imperfect solution, so I do look forward to admissions offices having to be a lot more intentional about who they admit and their rationale for doing so.

      3. Yeah, my alma mater considers legacy preference but says it’s not determinative (even if your alum mom is on the board of trustees). I’m skeptical but I think it’s a bigger deal at some places than at other places.

    8. Every recent Supreme Court decision is a step back in time. How did HYS look pre-affirmative action? That’s what you can expect post. Maybe not in the first year, but that’s the long term goal.

      1. CalTech does not use affirmative action and enrolls a relatively diverse student body.

        1. CalTech is diverse because it is a STEM school that draws many Asian applicants. Look at the number of black students, particularly domestic students who are black, and the numbers are awful.

          3. Caltech is so diverse it does not have an equivalent to a Minority Student Union group. Their soccer and cricket teams are excellent, though.

      2. The population of the US looks very, very different than it did pre-affirmative action. Affirmative action has been banned in California since 1996, but the UC system is extremely diverse.

        1. Keep hope alive but the UCs and California in general are very different than private colleges with legacy admissions.

        2. The UC system is not extremely diverse. The UC system invests significant resources into diversifying recruiting without relying on affirmative action. Yet, the student population is not reflective of the population of high school graduates, especially with Latino/Latina students, which made up 52% of 2019 high school graduates, but only 25% of UC first years. The most selective schools, UCB and UCLA, are even less diverse than the rest of the system.
          Dropping SAT requirements is a more recent development that may yet yield results.
          https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/affirmative-action-california-18148817.php

          1. According to this, the UC freshmen are now 33% Hispanic and white students are also significantly underrepresented compared to high school grads (19% vs 28%): https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Record-number-of-Black-and-Hispanic-students-are-16969458.php

            I think this might be a bit misleading, though, as UCs are around 1/3 transfer students, and those students include more Hispanic students compared to freshmen admits, but I didn’t easily find those numbers for the system as a whole. Either way, you certainly can’t say that a system that’s 19% white, 41% first generation college students, and 33% eligible for Pell grants is just like the 1950s. There’s certainly room to improve, but I think we should be looking to the UCs as models of social mobility, not the Ivies.

          2. Agreed that it’s not all bad! When affirmative action was banned in CA, diversity in the student body did backslide pretty immediately. The current efforts (accepting the top few % of graduates for each school, targeting first generation and low income students, and, recently, dropping SAT requirements) seem to work to some extent, and are the approaches that I imagine other schools will now look at.

      3. Back when the Ivies discriminated against Jews or black people or just women? Ain’t no good point in time to rewind to.

    9. No. Why would they? Legacy admissions are not unconstitutional. Affirmative Action to make admissions based on race is unconstitutional, according to this week’s ruling. The actual ruling isn’t about the merits of different admissions policies, it’s about discrimination based on race is unconstitutional. It’s really that simple.

    10. There are going to be a lot of mediocre white people whose kids still can’t get into elite schools and now can’t blame AA. Wonder what the new boogeyman will be.

      1. Are they not going to sue alleging that admissions illegally preferred a non-white applicant?

      2. Actually the problem is that mediocre rich white people are getting into elite schools and more qualified Asian and middle-class white applicants are not.

      3. Won’t that be a good thing? The response is simple: work harder or stop whining.

      4. I don’t think they will stop blaming AA. They blame it frequently in California, where it is not practiced at all. Some people are great at blaming made up reasons for their unhappiness, they don’t care if it’s true or not.

        1. +1 from a white kid in California who heard this a lot in the college admission process/in college. The mediocre and decidedly below average white people will blame affirmative action even when it doesn’t exist

  7. I saw someone in what was basically pajamas but looked outside appropriate: loose fit cotton (or cotton seeming?) pants and matching loose fit tank top with wide straps. It looked very neat and even chic, not sloppy. Dark sea foam green, if that matters. I wish I asked where it was from. Any ideas for something similar?

    3. I hope you get good responses because I’ve seen these outfits in the wild and it fits my vibe very well.

    6. I’ve been staring at the Gap satin PJ set in the checkered brown color. Wonder if I could get away with wearing it around town…

      1. I am really digging these matching-set looks because they kind of have a jumpsuit/romper vibe without the attenuated issues that rompers and jumpsuits have, of you basically have to get undressed to go to the bathroom. I’m here for it.

        1. Agree.

          The column of color is also very chic.

          But if the design is too frilly/ornate/matchy…. it loses that.

        2. I can vouch for the shorts set that I linked. It is very cute in person. SO much easier than a romper.

    10. The matching set is all the rage in the sewing community this summer. Maybe she made it.

      1. +1

        This is how my primary care doctor dresses every day. It looks simple, comfortable, yet is clearly well made I I assumed… expensive… in great colors. I assumed it was Eileen Fisher or the like.

        She is middle aged, and freely admits that she is going through perimenopause and has terrible hot flashes. She dresses to live. I aspire to it!

    12. I have spent decades wishing something like 1920’s beach pajamas would come into fashion. Maybe I’ll get my wish??

  8. I love the look of this top, but my issue is needing to layer up at work. I feel like wearing a blazer or cardigan is hard over these ruffle sleeves. Any suggestions??

    1. I wear the J Crew sweater jackets with these. The Juliette is what I have but there are some similar items from others. Outside, I can finally wear just my arms. Hooray!

    2. If you’re layering up for warmth, I really like wraps. If you’re layering up for formality, could you do a less structured blazer or an intentionally oversized one?

  9. Anyone read this in the NYT today? Oof. Sr. Associate/Jr. Associate Romance Goes Bad, 20 Years In:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/30/style/modern-love-married-to-a-stranger.html?unlocked_article_code=v7eBmrjpuJyiiQQUP8heaIDr63sDLab4UxZfY-aozpIK7IQIhTxF9EfMCMwUmWvop5InGBLJLA3XDjk3UNySCUREgTwkKAWQLuTmO81j7SS5joxEGqkau6zUwpQ3h4hHE09jYsUJ7QyXvQSRnqJ22XaKr1dCkzdxw4qbS0UXmv5jG8LPLuZyiFjvS95yQtxkAxms821AqMkYlOkzsUrbdCEV9-ur_SU0Rhw_NyoOUSumlJs1YeTiwWX6bXxEqWkZ8r2R4XLIADYPFNqj6DpFOVO9XBHatc6Z5GVKTmFNRL2G5q8LBjysvnE_SShyuaMFExj5B1r2I835Kg46j2jVI1krAHjkz0m7GQ&smid=url-share

    1. This is my worst nightmare and one of the many reasons I refuse to birth children.

        3. Being summarily left without explanation is one of the cruelest things a partner can do. There is no amount of financial security that soothes that kind of pain. But hopefully this beautiful revenge piece is the salve that heals.

          1. I think financial security would soothe a lot of other single moms’ problems, to be honest.

          2. Two different issues. You can suffer from one even if not the other. Pretending that the emotional pain from this is irrelevant if you are rich or that the wealthy are immune to it is unkind and shows a lack of empathy. The writer explicitly acknowledges her financial security and spends not one word of her essay complaining about the lack of spousal income. Another woman might have another story to tell where that is a theme.

        4. this is one of the cruelest things I have ever read here and I’ve been here for years

    4. Those poor kids. And the wife too, obviously, but to be totally tossed aside like that by a parent would be devastating.

      1. Always needs to be said.

        Don’t want to hijack too much… I’m alway sad to see women on the local moms group who post anonymously. Husband treats her badly, she’s a SAHM, money is tight and they have no savings, and sometimes, she has no insight into their finances. With no job experience, she’s SOL. I don’t send my kid to daycare because I am a bad person; I do it so I can keep a career and earning potential because Life Happens.

        1. Amen. When I left my first husband, SO MANY of the SAHMs sidled up to me in the first-grade parking lot and whispered “if I could support myself and my kids, I’d be doing what you’re doing!”

      2. For sure, and that’s also why I tell my daughter the stories of my great-grandmother and great aunts who had spouses die young and/or deadbeat spouses. Women need to make their own money and have their own money.

        1. One of my great-grandmothers started a boarding house and saloon in the 1930s when my great-grandfather was seriously injured in a farm accident – he lost a leg, and his torso was basically crushed, and he spent years recovering. They lost the farm; he couldn’t work. She had to do what she had to do to support herself, him and their five kids, and opened the business. It supported the family for many years, until they sold it and retired, and she did 80% of the work in the business – including tending bar – because my great-grandfather was disabled. Almost 100 years later, things haven’t changed and women still need, as you say, to be able to make and have their own money.

          1. My great-grandmother started a boarding house too! The family lost the store when my great-grandfather died, so she rented out rooms and her teenage daughters taught school so they could help the family and put one another through college.

            My grandma (the baby) was the only one who wound up a “traditional” 50s housewife, but she pushed her daughters *hard* to have their own careers. One great aunt never married, the other great aunt married a jerk who made her pay the mortgage and all the household expenses (which she could as a schoolteacher).

          1. She also has big family money independent of her husband. Her family is related to Vanderbilts.

          2. Ok that is this particular woman, but do you think this story only happens to Vanderbilts?

          3. There have been so many generations “inheriting” the Vanderbilt millions that there’s really not as much left as people think. Gloria V was broke more than once.

        3. Looks like she had a LinkedIn page she took down, but the headline on Google is still there and says “Pro Bono Attorney.” Does that mean she was just doing volunteer work?

          Also looks like at one point she and the husband had a nonprofit foundation.

          1. She may have been volunteering because of her immense family wealth, but “pro bono attorney” isn’t inherently a volunteer position. It just means the clients don’t have to pay because the organization is a non-profit that operates on charitable donations. Legal Aid organizations pay their staff attorneys, and it looks like she worked for that type of org.

      4. Yes, but she is also Babe Paley’s granddaughter and a Vanderbilt. She will be ok financially, I reckon.

        1. That is not the point. This situation doesn’t only happen to independently wealthy women, you know.

          3. Did you even read the story? Seriously, is she not allowed to be devastated because she comes from money? F off.

          4. I don’t think Monte was saying she isn’t allowed to be devastated about the abandonment, just that she’ll be ok financially. The post she’s replying to is about how the author should have kept her job, and the point is that she doesn’t need a job. Doesn’t mean she can’t have feelings about the situation.

          5. Compromise position: since she would have been even worse off without family money, ladies, keep your careers. You don’t need to be facing destitution on top of this cruelty.

      5. I work in the criminal justice system and see way too many domestic violence victims who think they have no alternative but to stay with their abuser because they can’t take care of themselves. I have equal amounts of sympathy and frustration with women who never set themselves up through education and/or training and/or work experience to be able to keep a roof over their head and food on their table. It’s very sad and it’s very preventable. Yes, we have shelters available, but I’m seeing too many who refuse that because it’s a first step towards independence and independence is too scary to them.

      6. Isn’t this the oldest stereotype in the book? Woman spends 10-20 years taking care of the kids and home while the husband climbs the career ladder and makes $$$ only to replace her with a younger model and leave her with nothing? I don’t think I could ever be a SAHM.

    6. I didn’t really focus on the associate dynamic. It was so long ago. But I cannot fathom not wanting any custody or significant parenting time. You divorce your spouse, not your kids. That man is depraved! I was easily able to look him up. I hope this embarrasses him into some self reflection.

      1. Somehow I feel like if he were to ‘change’ it would only be for appearances as to benefit himself and not because he realized he was a complete dumpster of a human.

        1. My BIL did but not technically. Technically he had 50% custody so he didn’t have to pay child support, but he never took them when it was his turn. Then when child support ended as they aged out, he and his new wife moved away without telling his kids. They found out on social media.

          Yes of course he has a bunch of new kids.

      3. I think that in 99% of divorce scenarios everyone, including the kids, would be better off if the dad just disappeared and paid child support.

        1. This is how I feel. I have observed children who were younger at the time of the split sometimes romanticize the absent dad in this scenario though (I guess because no one older who remembers things wants to disillusion them).

        2. Nooooo, not true. I’m a divorced mother of two. Couldn’t be happier to have their father in my children’s life. There’s a percentage, sure, but nowhere near 99%. Guys like this are not normal.

          1. Yeah nowhere near 99%. Many divorces are fairly amicable and dads are still a positive influence on kids.

        3. Wow. As a kid whose father eventually all but disappeared but paid child support, I really disagree. I cried in my room listening to the lyrics of breakup songs that I applied to my relationship with my father for years. And for a very long time I suffered from a deep fear of abandonment that was not good for my romantic relationships. Dismissing the role of fathers is not helpful to reaching a goal of improving fathers’ behavior.

        4. I didn’t mean that it’s just okay or that father’s role can be dismissed — only that there are far too many men whose presence is even more harmful than their absence.

    7. Here’s their NYT wedding announcement for those who are curious: https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/06/style/belle-burden-and-henry-davis.html?unlocked_article_code=YD5zYUmW7uSRg-oXdVnIPWMKnEzI8kl9T1wGRh5zY0ol9WgFAyVmeJkkqyWFbYeeAIKor5EWITASiX_BkrjuEQ2Kci7t0jVBYgqgQwtFE8mASIh0L9onQaHf8v_Z3k9pn9WI4Ob2J6RSv3MzaEsf7xpE4Y6LCIvuJn-DfB8BqEOcSUOoSD2VvIpCs4PW2Jgct5X4mhlNgimzinhQzbIzrcK8wcQy4JtYKm07gndS0nO5Rw7AOyijSp5uWtb-mg3ewoXeB4-R7_QtL01_dgV9BA1ZF20YwuctijyQ-Wd3j7EE4MRFzV_oOpHh-qxAHoP9Lsjedl7WBsY0N5MVIYcAVZX6hy4&smid=url-share

        1. Totally. But I am delighted by the ‘revenge is served cold’ aspect of publishing this in the NYT where it will very, very publicly shame the dad and his family (I would also bet she ran this past the kids first for their approval and that they were on board).

          1. Wait her mother is also a Mortimer as in Tinsley Mortimer? NY high society is so interconnected!

        3. I totally though Belle Burden was a pen name and not a real name… like she was a “burden” to him or something. So then I was like “how are they all finding out who the real person is?” But good for her for writing in her real name and putting him on blast!

      2. After reading their wedding announcement I think this article was BRILLIANT way to hit both the ex and the ex’s parents exactly where it hurts – in their pride and very publicly. These are all super duper high end society types and the airing of this dirty laundry clearly casts the husband AND the parents in such a hideous light. It simultaenously leans into the ‘wronged wife bravely finding my strength and sharing my truth narrative’ so honestly what defense do they have? Sure, I’m sure the husband/his family don’t feel any shame but I sure as heck hope they’re socially embarrased by it! (and for extra zing you just KNOW this is going to be all the talk in their circles as people go to their summer homes and catch up on all the good gossip).

        2. That man deserves to be shamed and the way she went about it with surgical precision is a thing of beauty

        3. I hope his new woman is lying low today. I can imagine some holes might be punched in some walls…

        5. I had such a different reaction, but that’s in part because I’m the second wife of someone who’s first wife’s favorite hobby is telling people in our social circle, our kids’ friends, and even randos she meets at church and the country club the my husband is essentially a cross between Jeffrey Dahmer and Attila the Hun. Namely, that all divorces are complicated and I expect that his version of events would look differently than hers…and that the short term pleasure of airing your marital disputes in public is generally outweighed by the longterm damage.

          She says he abandoned her out of the blue, she says he didn’t want their children…she says. Maybe he’d agree, but this is her perspective, and only hers.

          1. Also, in terms of being the talk of their social circles: I’m sure it already has been. No way the author of that piece hasn’t been talking about this to anyone who would listen for the last three years.

          3. Meh. Whether he wanted the kids or not, he’s a scum bag for abandoning them, no matter what she said or did. I’m all for publicly shaming dead beat dads.

          4. Eh, it depends.

            My general rule is to not drag other people into these disputes unless you are very certain that your actions were exemplary (or at least unable to be subject to reasonable criticism) and there is a need to drag them in.

            If one side genuinely acted horribly, be concise and clear about what they did that was wrong; keep the editorials to a minimum. Show, don’t tell – “he’s horrible” gets old and tiresome, while “he threw me against furniture when he as mad at me and also cheated on me” gets the point across quite clearly. Don’t repeat; people get it or they don’t.

            People figure out what is up. Eventually, they get both sides of the story and the complaining ends, because it gets embarrassing for the person doing it when their own faults get aired.

          6. I believe her. She’s not going to risk a defamation claim. Plus, doesn’t the NYT fact check?

          7. I agree, I don’t think she’d risk the defamation suit by saying provably false things in print in the NYT. Gossip at the country club isn’t quite the same. Do I believe the guy has a different version of events that makes him look somewhat more sympathetic? Sure. Do I think he cheated? 100%.

          8. I hear you, and I don’t jump to the assumption that you were the “affair partner” or whatever snotty things people are saying, yours is a valid reaction. My own take is it’s more likely this guy is a horrible cruel man, and I hope every woman avoids experiencing this.

    8. I am thinking on both sides for undergrad: possible legacy admits even though they are likely accomplished enough to be in the first 10 layers of rejected applicants. I’m assuming that law school is competitive within T5 unless you are Hunter Biden (Yale 96).

      2. In the 1990s, NYU was not a T5 school, so if that’s where she ended up going it’s very likely she needed a serious thumb on the scale to get into Harvard undergrad.

        (I speak as an NYU Law alum – no shade to my alma mater, but its elite status came later.)

    9. “When he walked into my office, shut the door and kissed me, I was done for. He was intent on marrying me within weeks of that kiss, pledging to take care of me, to step into my dead father’s role as my protector. And we did marry, within the year” This made my spidey senses tingle. You ambush someone you supervise and you do this within the office where you both work, love bomb them, lead a whirlwind romance to marriage in less than one year. I realize this is easy to criticize in hindsight. And maybe I’m old and cynical. But this is some rom com crap that is no good in real life.

      1. Lovebombing at work by a superior. What could go wrong?

        I feel really bad for the kids.

      2. I guess I would let this go if it had all turned out well, but I did have the same thought. I think this was probably written with some hindsight!

      3. Yeah that was creepy. I don’t think associate-associate romances are inherently bad, even if they’re a few class years apart, but the way she described it made him sound like a predator!

      4. This is … shockingly similar to something I had happen as a junior associate in 2015. Except that I didn’t marry him. The more things change, the more they stay the same?

      5. Completely agree. My husband and I were those gooey, obnoxious people who KNEW on the first date that it was it. We got engaged a year later and married ten months after that, no whirlwind rom-com bs needed.

        (Okay, I leaned this the hard way – first ever boyfriend love bombed me, discussed marriage a month in, blah blah blah. I could do an entire podcast series on what went wrong within six months.)

        2. Eh, that’s absolutely no guarantee. She was married to the guy for 20 years, wouldn’t have made a difference if they waited a couple of years to get married or not.

          1. Exactly! As someone whose husband pulled something similar to the one in the article after a 13-year marriage, I really hate the attitude that people have that they did things differently so it can never happen to them. Not true. My ex and I dated for many years. I never ever thought he’d cheat on me, and neither did any of our friends (truly!).

            The love bombing in this situation also put my spidey sense on edge, but after 20 years and multiple children, that didn’t really lead in a straight line to the divorce. And after 20 years, I don’t think she should have seen it coming or whatever.

      6. O yeah, I read this part and I thought of all the red flags she missed. She saw the life she wanted with that guy and she went after it. I would bet his side of the story is interesting.

          1. I don’t mean money. I mean some kind of stability that it doesn’t seem she had in her own life.

    10. My ex left me in a similar way, although thankfully we did not have children as he probably would’ve abandoned them too. We had just bought a house and gotten a puppy. The weekend before it happened, we had been out on a date night together Saturday and cooked dinner together Sunday with no sign of problems.

      Monday when I got home from work he told me he wanted a divorce, that was it, his decision was final, no reason, no discussion, no therapy, etc. He moved out the next day.

      I still have no idea what happened although I suspected an affair. As you can imagine the abruptness and cruelty was such a shock it took forever to get over. I know there are few good ways to end a marriage but that was particularly awful.

  10. My gas convection oven broke, I just smell gas when I turn on the oven. I’ve only ever cooked on gas but we think we want to switch to induction. We don’t want another gas because of the byproducts of burning gas in the kitchen.

    Anyone have one they love? Any suggestions for picking one out? What to look for and what to avoid? What brand?

    This will be my first time buying a stove.

    Thanks in advance!

    1. We just switched out our electric to an induction because our old one broke. We started using an electric stove about 2 years ago, and we just hated it although we did eventually get used to it. But the switch to induction has been amazing for us. It’s much much better than our old electric stove. It heats incredibly fast, cools down much faster, and is easier to clean because stuff won’t bake/solidify on the burners as much. It feels much closer to the heat sensitivity of cooking with gas. We did have to replace almost all of our pots and pans, some of which were newer, so that’s another big cost to keep in mind when shopping. We got the whirlpool one with buttons on the back panel and the air fryer capability, but we haven’t really used the air fryer yet, so no comment on that.

      Oh, one other thing to keep in mind. We were already wired for electric with a three prong outlet but inductions are normally geared for four. I believe you can grandfather it in (that’s what my electrician husband told me, lol) but if you’re doing new wiring, you’ll likely need to have it set up for four prongs.

    2. Take a look at Wirecutter for recs, and then Costco. Costco’s sales/extended warranty/savings with their credit card are so great.

      We bought our electric range at Costco last year. The #1 pick on Wirecutter was on sale! It has been great. It has regular oven/convection oven/air-fryer oven options. And I love the electric flat glassy top. I use the oven as extra “counter” space (in careful ways), when I am not cooking. The convenience is great for my smaller kitchen.

    3. We just bought a Miele induction stove. There is definitely a learning curve associated with it!

      If I were doing it again, I would look for a stovetop that had physical controls, not a touchpad. The only technical issue I had with the stove so far was with the sensors in the controls.

      1. Miele is a bit out of my personal price range, but they are know for longevity and super good quality!

    4. It sounds like your pilot is out. I wouldn’t be so quick to throw the thing away.

      1. Actually, good point.

        I would try calling the gas company to come out, asking a handy neighbor for advice, or hiring your local large appliance repair guy to take a look.

  11. Those of you that regularly get your nails done, what is your cadence? I like having nicely done manicures and pedicures, but was always a DIYer to save money. I finally decided I’d rather save time and just go to the professionals. What do you have done and how often do you do it?

    1. I get a monthly gel pedicure in the summer (or if I have a wedding or a vacation in the winter). Otherwise I’m DIY.

    3. Monthly pedicure. They usually last but I take my own polish to touch up at home in between if necessary.
      No manicures. My hands are terrible.

    4. DIY or professional, I can’t get a mani to last more than a week because my nails grow too fast. I can go two weeks on a pedi.

    5. I wear acrylic on my fingernails so I go in every 3 weeks for a fill-in and every 6 weeks for a pedicure (so every other manicure appointment). If I’m going on vacation or have an event I will go in early for both.

    6. I do a mani-pedi maybe once a month in the summer. I do regular polish on my toes and “buff shiny” with no polish on my fingers.

    7. Gel mani every three weeks.

      One pedicure once a year in the spring, that reminds me I actually hate pedicures.

    8. In spring or summer months, I get a salon pedicure once a month. In fall or winter months, I leave my toenails bare (unless I have a function with open toed shoes)

      I do my manicures myself, weekly, on Thursday evenings while watching TV.

  12. I’m planning on buying an off brand nuface, does anyone have a serum they recommend that doesn’t break the bank?

    2. Aloe gel from the drugstore works well for nuface. Just used this morning

  13. What do you tip for Botox? I normally go to a dermatologist, so I don’t tip. Today I went to a med spa.

    3. Could I just threadjack this slightly? I’ve had my brows microbladed twice, the second time too late for it to be on “touchup” pricing and it was very expensive — I can’t remember now, but several hundred dollars. It was done by the owner of the salon–to me, already a non-tipping situation–and I was asked by the receptionist if I’d “like to add a gratuity”, something that I dislike very much when done aloud and in public. So this gratuity was also well over one hundred dollars, being 20%. (Again, I’m fuzzy on the exact amounts.) It’s just so awkward, especially when done in advance of the procedure.

      My Botox is a similar situation–I see the owner, it’s about the same number of staff, and it’s not a chain. The payment situation is very discreet. I’m going to ask her if she’s considered providing microblading. I’m glad you brought this up today!

      2. OMG just say “not at this time” if you’re asked to tip and don’t want to. I try to always tip in cash so I say “not at this time” when asked if I want to add a tip when I’m paying for the service. It’s actually pretty easy and straightforward.

  14. I need to replace my aging laptop home computer. Current model is a Lenovo and I have a MS office suite on it. What is a good 2023 equivalent? And IIRC, I need to rebuy the MS office licenses? I don’t think that I want a Chromebook (but can’t articulate a reason why). Also, good second monitor / docking station recommendations? I am in a volunteer board position for a nonprofit where I do fundraising and help with some sensitive areas and where I must keep everything on a separate computer and use a lot of spreadsheets, Word documents, and make presentations and .pdfs sometimes. Thanks!

    1. When I was in this situation I just went to Wirecutter and bought what they recommended and it’s worked out fine.

      1. +1

        Same. Or what’s on sale in my price range at Costco.

        My last 2 Lenovo’s are from Costco.

  15. I am the poster from a while ago who went on a road trip with her best friend and boyfriend, and it turned out they wanted a threesome on the trip (either with me, with a female friend I didn’t know who they’d asked to stay with us at my parent’s house for the last leg of the trip, or on apps [though this seemed least likely]). They hadn’t told me, but I figured it out through a combination of the fact that the boyfriend was putting down a lot of vibes and that on the third day they had a huge two hour argument about it and I couldn’t find it.

    I miss this best friend with all of my heart, and we haven’t talked for a year in a half just since the feelings were so complicated. I had gotten really upset about it and spent a day of the trip sobbing uncontrollably, and said some uncharitable things about the situation and the boyfriend. She really seemed to feel a lot of shame and the sense that I disliked her boyfriend, which was hard for her to move past.

    Fast forward, we’ve been talking for a few days and it’s been so nice! I missed her so so much. But today after a series of really nice messages, she included the below paragraph. I would love your advice on how to respond, since I feel like I just want to communicate that all I ever wanted was recognition as to why the situation hurt me.

    As a note, I don’t think that while they were dating that I ever said she should break up with him or that she was too good for him. I remember saying it once but only once, and then dropping it. I definitely expressed a lot of judgment in talking about the trip experience though.

    Message from friend:

    “But overall with all the time passing and being able to truly think, kinda just getting to the root here, I kept coming back to the same conclusion on why we weren’t talking anymore.

    [Boyfriend] is my person for life, I love him. And you were my very best friend so I shared the most personal (good or bad!) things with you throughout our friendship. I remember you telling me I can “do better” countless times and he “doesn’t treat me right” and it always hurt and didn’t feel like you were coming from a “supportive” place but rather from a “I know better than you” place. [Boyfriend] at his core is such a special human, and what you may see as faults from the outside, are things I may see as positives. We grew up in totally different worlds so we have different values especially when it comes to significant other.

    Anyway, I just wanted to say my peace to be totally honest because it’s a real feeling for me.”

    1. Move on from this friend, sorry. Doesn’t sound like she’s breaking up with this guy any time soon and you won’t be able to be friends while she’s dating him (and I don’t blame you for that – the trip situation sounded extremely creepy).

    2. Eh, I don’t love her message because I think it doesn’t leave you a lot of room for a response that won’t come off as argumentative, no matter how rationally and calmly it’s framed. If it were me I’d probably just say that I’m sorry that we’ve been on the outs, that while I appreciate knowing her thoughts I’m not going to make a point by point response because that feels argumentative to me, and I’m so glad we are talking again. If a point by point conversation needs to happen to fully get on a good footing again, I’d do it in person over coffee or something. There’s too much room for misunderstanding tone and intent in a text or email conversation.

    3. “I feel like I just want to communicate that all I ever wanted was recognition as to why the situation hurt me.”

      You’re not going to get this from her, unfortunately. I would send her a short message and wish her well and try to leave things open for future reconnection if that’s something you’d want.

    4. She’s still dating this creep? Yeah you should walk away and wait until they break up before rekindling your friendship

    5. You can’t be her friend! “I’m sorry you feel that way. You and your boyfriend propositioned me and made me uncomfortable. We can’t continue any sort of relationship. Good bye.”

    6. I would let the friendship go at this point.

      I have actually been in a similar situation — broke up with a person I thought was my BFF, then we reconciled and it felt amazing for a short while, then the irreconcilable differences reared their ugly heads again and it became clear that there was no way forward. I still miss her and mourn the friendship, but I also see quite clearly that it was not salvageable.

    7. Treasure the good memories from this friendship, but let her go. Some people are in your life for just a chapter, and that is okay.

    8. So, I’ve been the friend who was asked for the apology/acknowledgement that I had screwed up, and bottom line: one was not, and is not, forthcoming.

      In my case, I had (in the most gentle way I could think of, using a lot of reinforcing language and emphasis on my love for my friend, and offering help) confronted one of my oldest, closest friends about her combining prescription drugs (gabapentin and Xanax) with alcohol (like – a bottle of wine, not a glass), and that I was significantly concerned about her. She got furious, cut off all contact, and has not been in contact since, other than to say she would be willing to try to patch up the friendship if I apologized and basically “took back” my concern.

      And – I can’t do that. I was concerned, I’m still concerned, and that’s not changing. And while I see it as reasonable from my side, my friend doesn’t feel that way. She thinks I was being mean and intrusive; I think she is in denial that her substance consumption could have some really serious consequences. So, we’re at an impasse that does not seem surmountable.

      I still love my friend, but I’m letting the friendship go, because I just do not see a path forward. I don’t think there’s one for you here either. Especially since your friend is still super-attached to her creepy boyfriend.

    9. I think you need to let this friendship go. I know it’s hard, but she’s positioning this like you are some sort of”know-it-all” who unfairly has it out for her boyfriend. That’s not someone who is ready to move past things and be the sort of friend you can trust. She needs to fix herself before she can be a good friend. Even if the boyfriend were to move out of the picture, I would still worry about your friendship. She seems to be misdirecting a lot of anger and issues toward you. She can’t have it both ways–expecting some sort of deep atonement from you for not likely the guy without acknowledging anything about how uncomfortable the two of them made you feel.

Comments are closed.