Tuesday’s Workwear Report: Tweed Contrast-Trim Lady Jacket
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.
Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.
As a long-torsoed lady, I tend to shy away from cropped anything, but this blazer from J.Crew is really calling to me. While the logical part of my brain knows that it’s going to be way too short on me, the less logical part is really loving the striped trim details and wondering if there’s a way we can pull it off.
While I sort this out, I hope someone else snaps it up and pairs it with some high-waisted navy trousers for a gorgeous business casual outfit.
The blazer is $298 at J. Crew and comes in sizes 00-24. It also comes in a really lovely “faded mint” color that's on sale for $248.
Sales of note for 2/6:
- Nordstrom – End of Season Sale — winter styles up to 50% off!
- Ann Taylor – End of season sale, up to 70% off original prices — plus extra 25% off your $175+ purchase.
- Banana Republic Factory – Up to 50% off + extra 15% off
- Brooks Brothers – Clearance up to 70% off
- Elie Tahari – Great sale, up to 60% off! This reader-favorite sleeveless silk blouse is down to $50 from $198
- Express – $40 off $120, $75 off $200 (online only).
- J.Crew – Up to 40% off winter classics, + extra 30% off sale styles with code
- J.Crew Factory – Up to 60% off everything + extra 50% off clearance
- Lo & Sons – Valentine's sale, up to 50% off — reader favorites include this laptop tote, this backpack, and this crossbody
- M.M.LaFleur – Save up to 70% off, dozens of styles now on clearance. Try code CORPORETTE15 for 15% off
- Neiman Marcus – New sale arrivals, up to 40% off. You can also earn a $35-$700 gift card with purchase of $250-$3000.
- Talbots – Free shipping on $150+, and members earn 3X style points.
Fellow long torso’d woman here and I love cropped tops/jackets, I feel like when I combine them with a high waisted bottom it creates more balance. That long tank top + low rise jean era made my already long torso look completely out of proportion.
what do you wear underneath? something that fit close to the skin and is tucked in? even high waisted bottoms are not that high on me and i always feel like i’m futzing with my clothes.
Either something tucked in or occasionally a body suit.
My problem is I’m so incredibly long waisted that even high rise pants aren’t high enough for a cropped jacket like this!
Me, too! The only way I feel comfortable wearing a cropped jacket is over high rise pants with fitted, tucked-in tops.
This style also doesn’t work for me as an hourglass shape. Cute for someone else!
This is so cute, but I know it’s not going to work for me. Also have a long torso and the cropped moment continues to drive me insane. On some of us, it doesn’t look stylish; it just looks like our clothes don’t fit!
NPR marketplace had a segment on this probably close to a year ago. A woman who worked with retailers said retailers are going to continue the crop trend because it saves them money on fabric. Ugh. A literal example of shrinkflation.
Does anyone have a dress from the fold? How is the length and waist placement if you are 5-4? Also, if my waist and hips are a US size 10, do I need a 10 or larger in anything fitted at and below the waist or a larger size? Often, I go for nothing fitted below the waist but things in that shape are so rufflepuff at the moment (or the skirts are floor length) that I’d like something that is clearly workwear for my closet. Prior stuff doesn’t fit right in this year’s menopause shape-shifting.
My experience was about 5 years ago and prior to kids. I am 5’4″ and at the time I would have said I was a size 6 in US mall brand clothing. I got a Fold 10 and it was a little tight in the waist. I was able to get back into it after my first kid, but by my second my ribs had expanded too much. The dress I got was very similar to the current style Andria – not tight through hips but tailored at the true waist. Lovely dress though.
by The Fold 10 do you mean a UK 10, which is in theory the equivalent of a US 6?
Or did you size up to a US 10, meaning the Fold runs more like designer sizing than mall sizing?
I believe it was a UK 10, aligned with my US size 6 at the time. I had tried it on in person in London, but ordered online when I was home. Even though it aligned to my size on the size chart and by size conversion, it fit noticeably tighter than US clothing did where there were darts / seams etc – like very little give in a way I wasn’t really used to in my American clothes that always seem to have a bit of stretch even for non-stretchy tailored items.
I don’t think The Fold is the solution if you have curves. MM La Fleur has some pieces labeled curve friendly. Talbots has good quality ponte knit dresses with A lines that are great work dresses if you have curves.
So who can wear a Fold US 10 or 12? I’m pretty flat but have hips. I’m not Sofia Vergara curvy at all
Just accept that some brands are cut in a way that will fit you, and others aren’t. And look for options that will actually work for you. If you aren’t short waisted and narrow these dresses won’t work.
I thought that the problems were more that they were too long-waisted (so if you are short, the narrowest part of a dress would be closer to your hips (widest part)).
I am extremely curvy and wear a Fold 8/10 and it looks phenomenal. I think it works on a variety of shapes.
I never had luck with their pieces. I’m 5’2″ and size 10 (American, therefore size 14 in British brands- British sizing is entirely different). The waist on the dress I am now donating was really low on me. It was worse in their Belleville top. Even sizing up I could not get the pieces to look great. The bustlines gapped because the waistband was pushed too high. Tailoring would have been very complicated. I don’t recommend unfortunately.
what is your shape?
I’d say rectangle leaning toward apple (menopause).
I gave up on the Fold a few years back.
I’m 5f 6, so taller than you, and the dresses I tried on were awkwardly long on me.
Arms were also too long, and the waist too low for my short-waisted hourglass shape.
I have a jersey knit dress from them that is beautiful and curve friendly. I’m 5’3”. The dress is a bit higher than mid-calf. I got it ages ago so I’m not sure if their sizing has changed. I think their website lists the skirt length fyi.
i work at a non profit where i dress pretty casually (like i don’t wear jeans or sneakers). I have recently been asked to act as the secretary to the board which means there will be about 6 days a year when i want to look more corporate. I have two non descript seasonless pants suits (black and khacki) but it is currently freezing in NY and our offices tend to be cold. Have an event next week and was thinking i might like a dress but want something sufficiently non descript that i can wear it in front of the same people again…. i’m 50, probably an 8 or a 10…. anyone seen anything?
M M La Fleur
The black and navy dress on here last week that was the me & em knockoff would be perfect.
Not an answer to your question but the khaki suit sounds questionable for the board meetings I attend. I have a similar wardrobe situation, although more board meetings. It is not easy to need corporate dress clothes but only maybe 15-20 times per year and spanning 4 seasons.
Depending on the khaki, I might reserve that one for summer.
Same, did we learn nothing from 2014 Obama?
+1 – it’s a no unless you’re leading Troop Beverly Hills
I’m a fan of simple black or navy A-line dresses with 3/4 sleeves for versatility, and they need to work with the blazers/jackets/jardigans I already have. MMLF has a few good ones of varying hem-length and fabric type. Boden’s Ottoman dresses are great for travel, but they may be too casual. RL has a lot of classic tie-waist options (you can remove the tie waist and add a belt to change them up). For this, you might also request a virtual style board from Nordstrom for inspiration. It takes a couple of minutes to put in a request and stylists typically respond within a day. Happy shopping!
FWIW, as someone who sits on a number of nonprofit boards, I don’t expect the staff to dress corporate for board meetings. Yes, please dress “nicely” for the meetings, but within the context of your existing type of outfits. (I mean if you like to wear suits, wear suits, but the board members won’t be expecting that of you.)
This depends on the board. The ones I work with absolutely expect corporate board room attire of all staff attending the meetings, save for a facilities/IT person who might step in to assist with room or technical issues.
+1 I’ve attended nonprofit Board meetings for 15+ years, as a staff member (development) and a member. Very few people, staff and Board, dress in suits. Clothes are noticably more casual post-COVID.
TJ Maxx came through for me in a similar situation. I bought a black dress and a couple blazers and wear that to everything.
A dress in a cold environment is probably not the way to go.
As off as Quince is compared to the things they’re knocking off, I’d get their version of Veronica Beard jackets and a couple of pairs of pants. You’ll blend in without spending a ton.
Interested in any thoughts or suggestions on this shopping question: I got a bonus from work and I’m thinking of getting a new tote. I like the look of Goyard and the idea of coated canvas, but it seems like the style has been around for a bit. Is there something more current? I’m in a casual office, and it would be for days I’m carrying extra stuff like gym clothes. (I’m not a CEO bringing the bag to meetings.) Any ideas?
You’d use this like a gym bag??
Yeah, I wouldn’t stuff a Goyard into a locker. OP, I’ve wanted a LV Neverfull in their classic brown and tan pattern for years and always talked myself out of it because logos, someone’s snotty comment, etc. but I’ll get one with my next bonus. Personally, in that category, I think LV is more classic but I still see Goyards everywhere.
The solid colored versions are beautiful. The checked pattern or brown logos are unattractive IMHO and harder to match with your outfit.
The heart wants what it wants!
I’m the OP and yeah, fair point about not stuffing it into a locker. I’d use it for whatever I’m toting around, which could be gym clothes, or my lunch or whatever. I don’t need to carry a laptop and don’t need it to look a particular way.
I would not put stanky gym clothes in anything but a washable bag.
Voice of dissent – It’s fine to stuff in your gym locker. I do it all the time. The material is fairly durable, and not at all precious.
Coated canvas cracks over time. If you’re going to spend that much, I’d go for something actual leather and pebbled if you plan to be extra harsh. A gym locker is likely to create scratches over time.
To me Goyard screams “SMU student whose daddy is loaded.”
a goyard specifically or a tote style generally is a classic. that said, agreed, i wouldn’t leave it in a gym locker. I wouldn’t buy a new bag for this. This seems like the kind of thing i have something or my kids have something that would work.
The girls are carrying Longchamp again so I’ve happily dusted mine off and thrown it back into the active rotation. Those things wear like iron so I have zero compunction about using mine as a gym bag, beach bag, travel bag, etc.
+1. Longchamp tote is the way. Durable and timeless.
Check out Lo & Sons
My personal answer would be to buy a Boat n Tote and a vacation, but I’m not someone who would spend four figures on a purse (not meant to be judgmental– I’d just rather spend that money on a very nice hotel).
Repost from yesterday- thanks to the person who responded!
Will be heading to St. Martin for a wedding in a few weeks, and staying on a few extra days (in a villa in Les Terres Basses, near La Samanna) to explore. Will have a rental car. We’ve stayed on Grand Case for a few days years ago, but rusty! Would appreciate recs for a 40-something couple – chill beach days and good, but not $$$, French dining.
Also, given how close we are to SXM airport – is a day trip to SBH worth it? Have heard horror stories about the ferry crossing; no fear of small planes. (We know and love Anguilla so aren’t interested in day-tripping there.)
My BF and I are tossing around the idea of going to an all inclusive resort for his birthday over the summer. Any recs that aren’t outrageously expensive? I think we would want to keep the hotel under $1000 for the trip because flights have gotten so pricey. We don’t have any preference as to where, we just know we want a beach, maybe some beachy activities, and adults-only. Maybe 4 days total?
summer is ‘low season’ so a lot of resorts are less expensive. Not sure as to pricing in summer, but check out Le Blanc in Cancun or Cabo, or Beloved Playa Mujeres
I would def not recommend the Mexico coast in summer. It is awash in sargassum.
*east coast.
I would try looking on Cheap Caribbean or Costco for deals. You can definitely find things at that price range, but you will be looking for a deal, and most of the resorts recommended on this board are more than that.
As a warning though– all-inclusives are very much a “you get what you pay for.” You are asking for lodging +activities + food/drinks/alcohol for two people for $250 per night. I stayed out a resort in this price range about 10 years ago for spring break… and about half of our group got food poisoning.
That is really low for a good quality experience – tbh would not really trust the food somewhere under $500 per night for a double room.
You mean $1000 for the hotel for the entire trip? I basically don’t think you can do all-inclusive at this rate ($250-$333/night, depending on whether 4 days means 3 nights or 4). For example, one of the resorts suggested below (Le Blanc) is closer to $1000 *per night*. You could do something like Paradisus in Cabo for $450-500 a night. I wouldn’t go much lower.
Use Apple Vacations to book a resort. My friends and I did a Cancun all-inclusive vacation for $1400 each, including flights. Summer is bad for Mexico because of the seaweed situation so I don’t have any specific recommendations for you.
If it’s summer, could you go somewhere in the US/closer to where you are that isn’t as expensive to fly (and thereby free up more hotel budget)? Also, remember about hurricanes, depending on when in summer you are going.
With all due respect, I think your hotel budget is too low to get a pleasant vacation experience at an all inclusive. Is there some reason you are pricing air and hotel separately? What is the air budget?
The better deals are a package. A good travel agent who specializes in AI’s will be able to get the best deal for you. Let me know if you want contact info for the one I have used many times.
Travel advisor here who books a lot of Caribbean all-inclusives — $250/night for 2 people is unfortunately a very low budget for all-inclusive. The places in that price range usually have pretty awful food and cater to a crowd that just wants to get drunk on cheap alcohol. Generally you want a budget of $400/night to have a decent all-inclusive experience. If you can bump your budget up to the $400 per night range, some of the cheaper Excellence resorts will be in budget, and those are very nice, adults only, good food and not a party crowd. If there’s no flexibility on hotel budget, you’d be better off staying at a regular hotel and eating at local restaurants, which will be delicious and cheap.
Sargassum is going to be an issue most places in the summer and unfortunately this is supposed to be a very bad year for it. If this is a major issue for you (it’s not for me personally) I’d look at a winter trip. It peaks from May to October. That’s also hurricane season in the Caribbean, which can disrupt plans. Mexico is less likely to be affected by hurricanes than the Caribbean islands, and the ABC islands (Aruba, Bonaire, Curacao) way down south are out of the hurricane belt, but generally pricier than Mexico/Jamaica/DR and not really known for all-inclusives.
This Savannah Guthrie story is so, so sad.
And frightening.
It is really scary. I’m still hoping for the best
Ugh, so bummed about Lindsey Vonn. One of the greatest comeback stories in the making and now a torn ACL – she may still ski but man, that’s going to be a risk.
I’m feeling really disgusted about Epstein’s many links to Harvard. Did all these academics really not know anything was off? I’m an alumna. The school was sued shortly after I left due to downplaying SA. It all makes me feel so gross, especially the email from professor Martin Nowark that mentions torture.
Oh, I think they totally knew. How could they not? Rumors abound about certain men who are WAY less predatory than Epstein was – there’s no way there wasn’t tons going around about him.
I’m rolling my eyes at everyone who thinks that the Epstein files are going to be the thing that turns the MAGA base against Trump. They don’t care at all.
Some of the academics I’ve known somehow manage to possess the worst judgment I’ve ever seen outside of a “reality” TV show. And not just yelling at the help or being condescending to members of “lesser” professions like law – making profoundly bad strategic decisions that relate to their area of expertise.
I have an extremely cynical take. Harvard’s endowment is crazy – 25% higher than the next largest university endowment (Yale), and four times as large as the tenth-largest endowment (Johns Hopkins).
That only tends to happen when the university engages in a truly relentless cash grab, appeasing every large donor and keeping its eyes on the prize.
It’s rather unfortunate, because Harvard could easily afford to have actual principles and say that it doesn’t need the money.
This.
100
There’s always been a very active whisper network in academia about the men who take advantage of being too powerful and connected for accountability.
Agreed. I knew about Epstein, at least after the Florida case. There were rumors that he was a big finance player, but no one ever had dealt with him in that capacity. I live in a flyover state (but work remotely, in finance). That plus the felony swept-ish under the rug raised some flags, but who wants to listen to a mom driving a minivan who questions things like this?
I think Julie Brown’s Miami Herald reporting about the cover up was pretty well known nationally (I’m sure I’ve never read anything else at the Miami Herald!).
People in the Virgin Islands were creeped out ages ago too.
What is amazing to me was the orbit of people who have had no come-uppance. I’d put money on this being why Bill Gates found himself divorced and yet he seems to have skated past taking any heat. He was never a financier. My guess was always that he blackmailed Leslie Wexner initially for a lot of his money and then realized what a golden goose it would be. If you are young, poor, and female, you have to work, and then wind up in some questionable environments (drive around drink cart at a country club, etc.) vs working the register at a grocery store where you are largely in view of people and relatively safe.
I did a sailing trip in the USVIs a few years back and we anchored off the island, which is physically beautiful. The boat captain said everyone there knew for a long time.
The hyperfixation some of you have on Epstein, seemingly at the expense of thinking about the run of the mill issues that affect women across the age and income spectrum, is just so weird to me. The man has been dead for over five years. This horse has been thoroughly beaten.
OP here – seriously? It’s not just Epstein, but the network of abusers who are very much alive and need to be held accountable. Does their criminal bad behavior just go poof because the ringleader is dead?
Exactly. I’m on the same page as you, OP. His death should mean what, we just stop talking about the harm done to these children, now grown adults who live with that trauma? This person’s take is nuts.
OP again – pressed enter too soon. I can be concerned about several issues at once – holding powerful abusers accountable, and isues that affect women across age and income spectrums. I’m from a low income family, raised by a single mom, and we are used to the powerful not facing consequences. Hopeful that the sheer scale of this rampant abuse results in a different outcome this time.
Well he got arrested and died so good news, different outcome secured.
Has there been a different outcome for the many other abusers? Have they also lost their prestigious positions, been arrested, and died? Huh, guess I missed that.
His death was the opposite of justice served; allowing it to happen was almost certainly part of the cover up. You’re siding with some really terrible people in wishing this would all just go away.
This is not new information. It’s been discussed ad naseum for more than six years. You are adding nothing new to the conversation, and it is sooooo boring for the rest of us at this point.
Are you the wife of one of the accused men or just a garden-variety sh1tposter?
Neither. Just someone who finds these comments beyond boring nearly a decade into them. I was not annoyed by them for the first, oh, thousand times they happened.
Oh, then I’m so sorry someone put a gun to your head and forced you to read this thread! How frightening for you.
You can comment what you want, and I can comment what I want. Amazing how that works!
I’m so sorry discussion of absolutely horrific SA of children is “boring” for you. JFC, this is a disgusting take.
Soooo boring? Really? At a minimum we are talking of an untold number of events of child rape, statutory rape, and human trafficking. Boring? You are one seriously heartless human being. Do better, or at least fake having a minimally normal amount of human empathy please.
Well, why aren’t you still talking about Jerry Sandusky if that’s your logic? Or the Catholic priests who raped way more children and covered it up? Because everything not boring that can be said about those has been said. At a certain point, a news story has run its course, and this one has run its course.
A lot was said about both of those stories for a long time! This story is not over and implicates a lot of still living, still powerful people.
Nope, not getting on board with this hot take. We can be focused on the legions of children Epstein SA-d and trafficked while we are similarly focused on the “run of the mill issues that affect women across the age and income spectrum.” The reality is, he scope and size of his trafficking ring demands this level of attention. Also, a horse-beating analogy is probably a tasteless choice when discussing the violent SA of children.
No, it doesn’t “demand this level of attention.” You’re choosing to give attention to it because it involves young women and rich people. It’s the glamorous version of human trafficking; that’s the only reason it’s still in the news.
Right, definitely has nothing to do with the failure to prosecute the wealthy and politically connected who believe they can get away with whatever they want, and apparently are able to get away with whatever they want. That’s not anything anyone cares about, either with respect to Epstein or otherwise.
These aren’t just run of the mill “rich people”, these are some of the most powerful people on the planet.
Okay first of all, NOT YOUNG WOMEN — YOU MEAN CHILDREN. Your comment literally embodies the exactly problems that encourage us to give more attention to this issue. Please, please tell me you understand the children between women and children.
Human trafficking is never in the news as much as it needs to be.
Also, are you missing all the stuff in the emails about funding and organizing political movements hostile to all women?
Way to ignore the victims who have been fighting for years to shed light on this
Oh yes I forgot that this is the first time anyone has ever discussed Epstein. This definitely hasn’t been a major story for almost a decade now.
Yawn. Over it. So boring.
Weird to say holding SAers accountable is boring and yawn inducing.
“Yawn. Over it. So boring.”
It’s disgusting to treat any women or girl’s victimization this way. You are not a good person.
If people were still on here multiple times a week talking about Harvey Weinstein, my take would be the same. It’s been discussed. It’s boring now.
Perhaps the lady would prefer to partake of the more scintillating and of-the-moment Goyard gym bag or all-inclusive resort talk instead?
I just scroll on by when I find a discussion boring. Something about this thread must be bothering you if you’re contributing so many comments to it.
“The children are always ours, every single one of them, all over the globe; and I am beginning to suspect that whoever is incapable of recognizing this may be incapable of morality.” ― James Baldwin
I don’t think we’re going to get “bored”/yawner on our side. She appears to be one of those incapable of morality, unfortunately.
Yet you seem way into it, given how often you’re commenting to make sure people know just how bored you are.
Oh, you’re just a troll. Got it. Intense to troll about child SA, but hey, do you, I guess.
Well, making you guys whine about how this is actually SUPER important isn’t boring!
Now that you’ve admitted to tr0lling, care to just go back to reddit or 4chan and let the adults talk?
Maybe a hobby could help with the boredom? Volunteering to support victims of SA through art therapy is an option.
This is my art therapy :)
There is literally new information no one had until now. I wonder who you are trying to cover for in your own life.
Feels like you should get back to your job, family, mental wellbeing, or your fun hobby of drawing demonic mustaches on missing children posters.
“There is literally new information no one had until now.” About Harvard? New? Please. Dershowitz was one of the first names reported in connection with Epstein. You have to be actively ignorant to think that this is news.
I’m all for talking about Harvey Weinstein more too. not enough people know.
Prime republicans whataboutism. This is a pathetic take.
Imagine knowing so little about the issue and yet showing up with this hot take – this is not about the actions of one man.
Imagine not realizing that the so many of the “run of the mill issues that affect women across the age and income spectrum” and the s*xual abuse of women and girls (and subsequent cover up!) have roots in the same putrid soil.
I know plenty about this issue because so many of you have such a weird fixation on it.
It’s a lot weirder to be determined to accept this as normal, unremarkable, and pointless to care about or do anything about.
You obviously don’t, per what I said above, which you failed to address. This issue is barely discussed in any detail here, but you are clearly not here in good faith. Shame anyone is bothering with you. There are lots of places you can pester people on the internet, go there.
Sometimes I wish people had to wear their most recent online comments out in public on a sandwich board.
Oh, no, to be clear, it was remarkable! It just has now been thoroughly remarked on. At this point, people are just rererererereremarking, and that is what is annoying.
They know. Dinosaurs gonna dinosaur. Donors need to demand better. What a bunch of scumbags
They all knew.
I’m an academic. This is a very, very closed-off, elitist, self-protective group. (And there are subgroups, particularly business profs and and a few others, which are particularly self-protective.) And they tend to assume they are smarter than everyone else, which means they often take risks and make cavalier choices based on the (usually correct) assumption that they will be protected by the group.
Pair that with money and reputation, and the idea of morals, ethics, and responsibility fall very far down the list of priorities.
Doesn’t he have links to most prestigious universities? I went to MIT and there’s a lot coming out about his relationship with MIT too.
I am going to tell you something you will not want to hear.
In a past life, I defended a lot of organizations being sued for molestation claims: Churches, schools (public and private), sports teams, scouts, etc. It is not a part of my professional life that I miss. What is universal among all of them is that people do not see what their brains do not want to see. It is not limited to wealthy or powerful people. It is not limited to men. It is actually more common in my experience among perfectly nice people because their brains just refuse to comprehend that level of evil. Everyone thinks that they would obviously never do business with a person accused of bad things; everyone thinks that they would obviously contact law enforcement; everyone thinks they would be better. It is just like everyone thinks they would not have been a Nazi in 1930s Germany. And 90% of you would be Nazis and would not be better (and I am including myself in that).
A lot of people associated with Epstein because he was rich and charming. Even if they knew about his singular criminal conviction, that was easy to explain away. Even if they thought the women he associated with were “too young for him”, it was easy to believe they were legal, particularly given the variation in age of consent laws.
And in case there is any doubt about my position: He was a monster. Many of the people who associated with him were monsters. How he managed that sweetheart plea deal and who else might be criminally complicit deserves to be investigated. But just “appearing in the “Epstein files” is not an indicator of misconduct.
I see part of your point. But I grew up in those churches and schools. Things do not have to be this way and haven’t always been this way. Toxic positivity, philosophical nominalism, just world theory, etc. are not just human nature. I think you’re going easy on the nice people who don’t want to rock the boat for the sake of someone more vulnerable.
We’re making an offer on a place today (the opportunity came up faster than we realized). We haven’t had as much time as we thought we would to do some research on how the process works and one question we have is about the “home warranty” plans that apparently get included in the contract. The internet seems mixed on those and I’m seeing reports that they’re scammy. Should we drop it from our contract?
Yes, I would not buy a place if it required a home warranty. It adds another layer of bureaucracy to home repairs and charges you for that experience!
They’re usually just for appliances. Toss ins to close a deal. Not reflective of the place.
In some markets it is standard for the seller to include a warranty. I would not read anything into it.
You don’t have to use a warranty for repairs even if you have one and it’s not required for any sale, the seller includes it as a perk.
If the seller is paying for it and you won’t win some other concession by dropping it, why not keep it?
+1 I’ve actually made claims on those warranties and if you can get one at somebody else’s expense, why not?
I got one when I bought my place and have kept it. Paid for itself the first year.
i had one when i first moved it. Not sure if this true of all such warranties but mine only covered repairs and not replacement. This meant that three different times i had to stay home for a day so they could come fix my dryer only for it not to work again. there wasn’t a mechanism for them to just get me a new one which would clearly have been more practical so i let it lapse.
The seller paid for the first year of a home warranty for our house and I should’ve seen it for the yellow flag it was. Basically every appliance was old and some were already broken-ish* when we bought the house. Just be aware going into it that you might have to replace stuff even if it didn’t come up on the inspection report.
*Not too broken to flag on inspection but broken enough that someone who used them would’ve known. Like the oven turned on but couldn’t heat to over 250. The dishwasher only ran on the quick cycle. The dryer turned on but didn’t get warm so clothes didn’t actually dry.
I was so glad I had a home warranty when I bought a property with old appliances. In the first year, they repaired my stove and dishwasher and bought me a new fridge, washer, and hot water heater. I only had to pay a small copay ($125? $150?) I didn’t buy one with my most recent property purchase because everything was newer.
I got one when the sellers – local real estate agents and casual friends whom I trust – included it in the transaction. We knew, e.g., that the AC was aging, and in fact the husband of the couple said I should use it as much as possible in the first year in the hopes of getting it to finally die while the warranty was in effect.
I ended up getting a new AC unit, then a new hot water heater and a new furnace, in the first few years, which I kept the warranty at my own expense. Very much worth it.
I recently inherited some money and while most will go to savings/retirement, I want to do something splurge-y with some of it, that I can have on a semi-regular basis. Currently my splurge is having twice a month cleaners (I’m single and live alone). I’m thinking of trying to set up a recurring massage appointment. Other than that, I’m a little stumped but feel like I’m probably not thinking of things I’d enjoy. Anyone have a great suggestion? My only other thought was upgrading to first class on some flights, though that may not be that frequent.
A weekly flower delivery to your home or office?
My suggestion? Don’t fish for things to splurge on. You’ll know when you eventually think of the idea that’s a true splurge for you, but if you don’t have anything in mind now, don’t force it or borrow someone else’s idea. It feels like a waste of money otherwise.
Agree with this— it will hit you, like a bucket list trip, or regular trips to a beach house/cabin/getaway
Totally agree. I would hold off on spending until you’re really excited about something.
Yes! Wait until something comes up organically.
I’m way less frugal than the majority of this board and even I agree with this advice. Save it for something later and then don’t be afraid to spend it.
I would not upgrade your services. Those are short term and feel good in the moment.
If you’re going to upgrade, I would go with *things* that are far more durable, rather than services, even if they are deprecating assets. Think, SpeedQueen washers and dryers, classic wool coats, a nicer car that you relentlessly keep in good repair, jewelry, etc.
Don’t upgrade your lifestyle with a recurring expense. Either spend it on a memorable experience you couldn’t afford otherwise (like an international trip) or buy something that will last for years: furniture, jewelry, art, hobby equipment like a bike. The money isn’t going anywhere so wait to spend it until you’re truly excited about the purchase.
Throw the money into a brokerage account. No luxury is better than being able to afford to completely rearrange your life while your favorite relative or friend is dying to spend time with them, and money gives you that chance.
Oh there will be plenty for that as well (and I’m pretty well set normally already)—my issue is more that I totally COULD afford regular massages (and enjoy/benefit from them) but I tend to be very frugal and sometimes avoid spending money when I totally could/should. The cleaners are the notable exception in my spending patterns. But I figure I can take 5-10% of the money and do something nice for myself and justify it for this in a way I wouldn’t on my normal salary even though I probably could.
Private lessons for a hobby I have is probably a good idea (and possibly going to a few more out of town hobby events than I otherwise would have)
The Sun magazine is my (inexpensive) monthly treat and the subscription allows digital access to their archives which is great for vacation reading, etc. If the content isn’t your preference, maybe another subscription would be for something regular/recurring.
I actively try to avoid what you’re suggesting (building in increased fixed lifestyle costs) so ymmv, but I’d earmark it for the times you think “ooooooh I really want X but it feels ridiculous to spend that much money on it” rather than trying to invent something.
That could be paying outright for business class long-haul flights (vs. trying to get lucky with an upgrade), it could be going to that giraffe hotel in Africa that costs some crazy amount per night, it could be a piece of art…
Is there an upgraded gym experience, a fitness class that you otherwise would not take, a top-notch trainer who can help you be your healthy best physically?
Yeah, agree with others about not looking to spend it but investing in your health is always wise
I agree with all of the above comments, especially the part about being able to drop everything and help when a loved one needs you–either before they die, or after their own loved one dies (god forbid). I also agree that it’s not a truly necessary luxury if you have to talk yourself into it, and that if you don’t know how to spend the money, put it in the bank and enjoy knowing that your future self will be able to do something you haven’t yet imagined.
Agree with the advice to wait until you’re excited about something
But if you’re just looking for inspiration, a class/lessons/1:1 coaching in a hobby (or an intro class for a possible new hobby!) is a great splurge in my book! It also has ongoing benefits, without ongoing costs, so it can a good way to splurge with a 1-time amount of money (it seems like there’s more risk of lifestyle creep using 1-time money to ‘upgrade’ something like cleaning services with ongoing costs)
thoughts on the verdict in the malpractice case regarding the tr*ns teen
About time. I still remember when a poster here accused me of lying when I pointed out a study from Dr. Olsen-Kennedy, butcher extraordinaire, detailing her performance of double mastectomies on young girls. It was in her own study!
This is the dam breaking.
I think it will make things a lot harder for trans folks going forward which is a real shame. Access to care will be even more difficult
What verdict? Do you have a link? This isn’t anywhere on the NYT main page or the Health section.
You know, it would’ve taken you less time to google this than it did to write this comment.
And it would’ve taken the OP an extra 10 seconds to provide a one-sentence recap. It’s annoying to post a “thoughts on X” question without even the briefest of explanation about what X is.
This is such a boomer complaint. No one under 40 finds this annoying.
You know boomers are like 70 now right? Lots of millennials are over 40. All of Gen X is over 40.
Ha, the NYT’s incredibly biased and shoddy reporting on this issue was one reason I canceled my subscription several years ago.
Okay but the majority of the articles about this seems to be from the New York Post or similar.
You can look up the actual docket if you find the secondary sources concerning. Or you can question why the NYT is not covering this.
That tells you how politicized it has gotten. This is cover a story, with a pillow, until it stops moving.
Radical feminist blogs have been sounding the alarm since about 2012. Later, conservative media picked it up (and yes, those writers will try to take the credit for raising concern). There have been very occasional pieces in the Atlantic or the NYT or Washington Post but the coverage is extremely slim for how significant the story actually is.
I googled it, per one poster’s urging. As of now, it’s not been reported on by many credible news orgs, at least that I saw, except the Free Press (which has issues but isn’t a complete rag a la NY Post).
I have a lot of issues with NYT, but they are typically slower to pick up on stories like this and I assume it’ll be covered shortly enough. Most of the sources I reviewed were obviously very biased and frothing at the mouth with glee over this verdict and its potential broader implications.
I disagree that this is a cover story, with a pillow, until it stops moving (eww, gross, you are not edgy). Med mal cases are so fact and patient specific – this was a jury finding in one case. This isn’t a cover story, and it’s certainly not one that anyone is interested in smothering.
Good. No one should be performing cosmetic surgeries of any sort on teens. And this was a cosmetic surgery.
Teens need cosmetic surgery all the time; what on earth.
No, they do not.
You never got a nose job for your 16th?
I was ignoring this but ok I’ll play. Survivors of terrible accidents or violent acts often need cosmetic surgery to do things like put their face back together so it looks vaguely face-like again. I hate to tell you this, hut getting in car accidents and house fires and getting attacked by dogs and violent men are not things that only happen to adults. Are you suggesting that a child dog attack victim whose nose and ears are ripped off should not have cosmetic surgery? They should just grow up with half a face?
And before you say – clearly that’s not what I meant – no friend, that IS what you meant. Someone pushed back and you doubled down. And this is exactly why we shouldn’t have legislation about medical issues – because too many people are short sighted and myopic just like you.
You clearly know nothing about human health or medicine at baseline. You’d ask every human being to wait until 20+ to address any developmental abnormality or disfigurement whose correction could be regarded as cosmetic?
These are reconstructive surgeries, which are different and are covered by insurance (generally, generally). Cosmetic surgery (new nose because I don’t like my current nose) are optional and not covered by insurance no matter how much it bothers you that it’s there.
Exactly @2:07. What you are describing is not cosmetic surgery. This was cosmetic surgery.
I guess what I’m really saying is don’t chop tits off children.
So if your AMAB & cis son needed this exact surgery, you’d tell him to wait till he was twenty? I do not believe you.
You pay out of pocket for cosmetic surgery. If that were the case, my guess is that none of these surgeries would be happening, especially on minors.
Good. I have been saying fie a while that med mal suits will be what finally puts an end to this insanity.
A NY jury awarded $2 million to a 22-year-old who had a double mastectomy as a minor. I am surprised at how little coverage it received considering how much news coverage this issue usually gets.
Full disclosure that I was not involved in this case at all and have no insider information. I was actually surprised at how low the verdict was but not even a tiny bit surprised at the result for the psychologist. I thought the surgeon had a better argument that he relied on another specialist. If anyone sees any coverage about the pre-trial offers/demand, I would be interested.
And if the Trump rules about treatment for minors was not already going to put the brakes on these types of procedures for minors, these types of verdicts definitely will. I would guess that within a few years, no doctor will be able to get malpractice coverage for non-reversible gender transitions for minors.
Agreed – many of us who have followed this issue for years have been predicting the same. Once it becomes unprofitable and high-risk for hospitals to do this, they will stop. That’s happening now. Young kids, especially those with autism or mental health comorbidities, will benefit.
Amen. I hope this is the beginning of a huge wave that scares sense into people. My worry is that websites were once very candid about who did what and now this is all driven underground but still exists.
The plaintiff was 16 at the time of the surgery. I’m curious about the drawbacks of waiting until someone is 18. Any thoughts?
I hope that gives people pause if the kid is neurodiverse or has other psychological issues that are not adequately being treated. Doubly so if both are true. I wish insurance didn’t cover and the many instances of using dubious billing codes were prosecuted as fraud.
Literally no drawbacks.
I don’t think that 18 year olds can fully appreciate this type of radical, life-changing (in a bad at) surgery.
Except they’ll probably still go ahead when it’s an infant!
I think medical decisions are best left between a doctor, the patient, and the patient’s legal guardian for minors. The court system is much better equipped to deal with problems that arise in that relationship, albeit on an after-the-fact basis, because courts can analyze the circumstances of a specific course of treatment. I don’t think this is a place for legislation.
I think it’s an important case for people to know about. Before reading about it, I would’ve erred on the side of trusting a 16 year old to make decisions about their body. I think that highlights why it’s so important for issues like this to be addressed case-by-case and not with the broad brush of legislation. I worry, though, that some will think this is an example of why the law should intervene.
But doctors threaten parents all the time with “do you want a dead daughter or a living son.” That makes it unlike anything else medical that I have ever seen. It doesn’t even seem legitimately medical, to be honest. Just dogma, that has been repeated until it has a veneer of truthiness to it. Scratch the surface though and it just seems like snake oil.
It’s totally snake oil. The original “Dutch protocol” has been thoroughly twisted and misshapen beyond belief. Even the original authors of that study have expressed their concerns and they’re the ones who started it!
Eh I think there are a lot of ways that doctors push interventions by bending the truth (persuading patients that SSRIs just fix a chemical imbalance by supplying missing neurotransmitters, or pushing oral contraception for indications like acne knowing that the risk/reward ratio was measured against the risks of pregnancy, are some of the most common since those are so commonly prescribed).
I do think since “time passing” also reduces the risk of adolescent suicide, it’s really hard to control for any particular intervention being effective in this age cohort. School being out of session reduces K12 suicide, and I never see doctors advocating for less time in school. Instead we get “it gets better” campaigns encouraging kids to just wait it out because no adult is going to offer them anything better, and doctors offering medical interventions aimed at tolerating a school environment that everyone knows is part of the problem.
Surgical interventions in general are hard to study, and people frequently regret surgeries. You’re saying this is unlike anything else medical that you have ever seen, but to me it seems kind of typical if we’re talking about dogma, shady sales lines, and a less than 100% success rate.
I have absolutely experienced “do you want a dead child” as medical advice in maternity care — in weighing the risks of early induction (because of my age) I was told “he can’t be stillborn if he’s born.” That’s not informed consent, that’s emotional blackmail. I’m still angry about it. So believe me, I’m no stranger to the downsides of medical advice.
But if that’s the kind of nonsense I get from a medical expert I sure don’t want to hear what I would get from a bunch of legislators. Legislation is like taking a sledgehammer to a problem that requires a scalpel.
+1
I can’t get my 16YO a tattoo in my state, no matter how many waivers a sign. This is way more than a tattoo.
i agree with this take. 16 isnt that far away from 18. what if this had been one day before the person’s 18th bday? i think as a society we are very hypocritical about who should be allowed to make choices about their own body
Boy, I dare you to make the “16 is basically 18” argument in the Epstein thread.
You really don’t understand the difference between why I do to my body vs what other people do to my body?
THIS.
God the comments today show the veneer of progressive thought hiding some ugliness.
It was a HUGE mistake for progressives to market this as the great civil rights issue of our time. It’s not. Performing sterilizing and extreme experimental surgeries on troubled minors is so self-evidently a terrible idea! I’ll repost this oldie but goodie:
Conservatives: You must change your personality to match your sex!”
“Progressives”: You must change your sex to match your personality!
Radical feminists: You’re fine just the way you are.
Amen.
Agreed. I see the potential for so much irreversible harm, which is what this lawsuit showed.
“So much” is where you’ve lost me. Irreversible harm, unsuccessful interventions, and regret happen all the time in medicine. I thought this was still really, really low regret rate. I have to wonder if you’re just as worked up about hysterectomy regret among cisgender women.
You cannot compare adults and children.
Exactly. I’m talking about literal children, not adults.
Okay, I hope you are advocating on behalf of infants too then.
❤️❤️❤️❤️
And I am a conservative who has long believed that the sexes are not a monolith.
There is no ugliness, only preventing harm to teens with serious co-morbidities and parents who encounter and trust the wrong “professionals.” I wonder if they’d affirm an eating disorder or someone wanting to remove a healthy limb.
If you are actually interested in how eating disorders are (mis)managed in healthcare (including entirely other conditions that have misdiagnosed as eating disorder), there’s a lot to learn there.
I guess it’s happened, I am now an old lady in Corporate America.
I thought of myself as young, progressive, and open minded, but apparently I’m now a laced-up Stuffy Muffy. Last night I stumbled across an argument on TikTok as to whether it was okay to wear house slippers to work, and a lot of people were saying it’s unfair and stupid that they can’t. My flabbers were thoroughly gasted.
I just . . . I’m not picky about footwear for the most part, but house slippers?? Nope, I draw the line, I can’t think of a single workplace where that would be appropriate or a good idea. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.
Yeah, age and irrelevance come for us all. Let the youth chatter about work slippers while you go about your regular-shoed business.
Two of my coworkers wear house slippers all the time at their desks! We are very casual though, they never interact with anyone external, and most internal meetings are on zoom since we are spread across many offices. I thought it was weird at first coming from a much more formal environment, but when our job is literally done sitting in front of the computer all day, who cares?
So as always, know your office.
OK, but TikTok is a really low bar. There are a number of young professionals in my office who dress well and appropriately. I can’t imagine them grumbling about not wearing house slippers at work.
Are you talking about those Ugg shoes that look like slippers? Or are you talking about literal house slippers?
Uggs aren’t slippers. I agree with you that I wouldn’t wear them to work, but some of the staff in my white shoe law firm have been wearing the slipper-looking-shoes into work in this weather.
My daughter wears knockoff Ugg slippers every single day to work. But she’s a teacher. :)
I think I’d take work slippers over visible toes.
I was literally the last one to keep wearing heels to my office, but times do change.
Omg we’re not going to debate “toe cleavage” again are we??
Kid-friendly Vienna and/or Budapest recs? We will do the major touristy stuff – but any other recs appreciated!
From our Vienna trip with 8, 6, and 3 year olds:
– Schönbrunn Palace, we only did the grounds and it was lovely.
-butterfly garden (Schmetterlinghaus)
-Prater amusement park, I didn’t love this but my oldest still requests to go back two years later… they had a blast. Would save for rend of your trip so you’re not inundated with requests to return!
-natural history museum, plus it had an artsy mini golf course out front when we were there (not sure if it was special exhibit or permanent)
We added time in Salzburg and Hallstatt.
–
If you do go to Salzburg, the automata museum is a total blast.
Looking for some summer vacation ideas for 2 adults and 2 teens/tweens. Three of us love nature-centered trips. One does not, but will be game if there are other things to do, too. We’re coming from the middle of the country, which means everything is either a very long drive or involves multiple flights and/or a rental car. Have kicked around the idea of Maine or Michigan (still a long drive; would probably fly to Chicago and drive the rest of the way). Haven’t been to Yellowstone yet, either. I would personally love a beach vacation but know our oldest, who is neurodivergent, would be miserable. We’ve been to Colorado, South Dakota, and the Smoky Mountains in recent years.
Beach vacation can be Brunswick Island GA, Folly Beach, or South Beach — they are all different! My ND teen loves the first two and hasn’t yet been to South Beach. Rehoboth Beach DE also is something that worked for us.
Folly Beach is next to Charleston, which has a great aquarium and tons of history and nature adventures available. It’s a good walking town (both Folly and Charleston) if your kid needs to live around a lot vs just swim and lounge.
Do you have passports? Costa Rica is popular for a mix of adventure and beach downtime.
I know I’m late but another vote for Costa Rica. I’ve been there and really enjoyed it. DD went on a school trip in HS and still talks about how much she loves it.
Your local airport might have some surprising direct flights
Yellowstone is fantastic!
Florida Keys? If your kids are in Scouts, Sea Base has a program for ND scouts focusing on nature mainly on land (vs sailing on the high seas). If not Scouts, there are a lot of other chill places to visit.
Very interested in the Keys!
I love the Bar Harbor/Acadia area. I’m biased because I grew up visiting grandparents there and still go back every summer even though the grandparents are gone, but I really think it’s one of the best family vacation destinations in the US. You would need a rental car but if you can fly into Bangor (there are direct flights from ORD) it’s not a bad drive (~1 hour).
costa rica, banff/lake louise, yosemite, park city
You could split the trip beach and city. Philly + Jersey Shore, Boston + the Cape, DC/Baltimore and DE/MD beaches. Williamsburg + VA Beach.
Traverse City+Leelanau Peninsula+Sleeping Bear Dunes
Based on what you’ve seen with your older relatives, what is the oldest you’d try to live at home in a 2-story house where all of the full bathrooms and bedrooms are upstairs? That is my house and an older in-law / relative’s house. Older relative is suspected of living just downstairs, but due to hoarding is reluctant to let people in or discuss. So: limited clothes, sleeping on a couch with no bedding, bathing via a sink. You could in theory put in a stair lift, but I think relative is worried about being removed from the house because it is unsafe. It’s a sad situation (but one I now see myself facing and never considered with where I live now). 80? Younger than that?
This is so individual. My in-laws are in the mid-80s, and I wish they would move out of their two-story house, because they struggle on the stairs and it’s getting worrisome. My parents are the exact same age and much more mobile.
I’m sorry about your older relative. That sounds very difficult.
Wow – you are so lucky to have two living sets of parents in their mid-80s. Your kids are going to have great genes!
Longevity is highly heritable.
It varies wildly depending on the person. My father would not have been safe in a house with stairs at 70 (back issues and diabetic neuropathy). My grandmother was just fine at 90.
+1. My 76-year-old has had a lift in her house since she moved in at age 70. My 76-year-old dad is making multiple trips up and down the stairs every day. It depends so much on the person and their mobility, with the understanding that it can change really quickly.
Should’ve said 76-year-old MIL … who really shouldn’t be living at home anymore, IMHO.
This is where the ‘age is just a number’ sentiment really applies. My mom and dad, for instance, each had vastly different abilities at 70. There is no way to know what age this becomes an issue for you.
My mother lived in a 2 story home until she passed away at 93. She went up and down the stairs 50 times a day as part of her “exercise routine.” My mil lives in a 2 story home and is 90, the stairs don’t seem to bother her. It’s very individual. My sil insisted on putting in a stair lift for mil, and mil does nothing but complain about it to my dh.
Similar anecdote, but my grandma lived in a two story home until she was 92. She repurposed the stair lift imposed on her in her mid-80s into a dumbwaiter with her laundry basket on the chair to send stuff up and down. Towards the end, she did start to use it for it’s intended purpose.
Your grandma was smart! Carrying things up the stairs like a laundry basket when you are elderly is a great way to fall.
I’m in my 40s and think about this too, as my house as has the same layout, and the stairs are steep and slippery even for someone my age. To some extent, I think you always need to be prepared, as anyone can end up with an injury or illness that makes navigating stairs difficult. A friend my age died of cancer recently, and spent most of the last year of her life pretty much trapped in her apartment because she couldn’t handle stairs. It was a difficult situation, but I also wouldn’t suggest that everyone in their 40s move into single floor houses or first floor apartments in case something happens, just be aware that this can be a problem and have some plan to deal with it. Living on the first floor of a two story house doesn’t seem inherently all that bad (it’s what I’d do if I had some sort of injury), though this particular person may have issues beyond that and it’s probably not sustainable indefinitely.
Another vote for it depends on the person. Our neighbors are 85 and everything except a powder room is on the second floor, and they seem fine; they are about to put in an elevator for the day that they do have a reason they cannot get upstairs under their own power, which I think is wise. My grandmother alone lived in a two story house built on top of her garage until she was 95, and she was up and down the stairs between her car, main floor, and upstairs that whole time.
My mom could not do stairs after about age 68 because of huge health problems.
Best case scenario, I’d like to have a full bath on the first floor by my mid-70s. My parents (pushing 80) live in a two-story house BUT there is a full bath and bedroom on the first floor.
It’s variable as everyone has said BUT if you want to control your destiny, move before you have to.
Honestly not very old. Even my younger, fitter relatives have had to quit stairs for long periods of time due to injuries, which is a huge hassle. And the stairs themselves are an injury risk even if it’s just the one time somebody had the flu and was woozy.
I bought my house from a woman in her 60s (!) who was living in the walk-out basement with only a half bathroom and no fridge because it was the only level of the house where she could walk outside with zero stairs.
My mom is over 80 and goes up and down stairs, including with laundry, every day. She’s considering renovating her house so there’s a downstairs master. Could that be an option for your relative?
So individual. I’ve known 62 year olds that struggled with stairs, and went backpacking with a 79 year old. Know thyself. But if they’re a hoarder they probably aren’t equipped to make good decisions regarding their living situation.
Agree that this is individual. MIL has friends that moved to one-level homes in their 60s after they had falls or injuries. MIL is 70 and in excellent shape.
My grandmother did not have any mobility issues but started living on only one floor of her house and stopped caring for the second floor. Granted, it was a really large house for one person, but she let her dog use the second floor carpet as a bathroom, and the roof was about to cave in by the time she moved out. Grandmother was in her 70s during all of this– we aren’t sure how long she had given up on that portion of the house.
Depends on the individual. Will say that this could be the case for someone who has had surgery or had a disability of a limited period
This, exactly this