This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support!
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Workwear sales of note for 3.24.23:
- Ann Taylor – 40% off everything
- Athleta – 20% off shorts, swim, linen & more
- Banana Republic Factory – 40% off everything; extra 15% off purchase
- Boden – Up to 50% off
- Brooks Brothers – Clearance styles to 70% off. Some pretty serious markdowns!
- Express – 40% off dresses & tops
- J.Crew – 25% off your purchase; up to 50% off special-occasion styles
- J.Crew Factory – Up to 50% off everything; extra 15% off 3 styles; extra 20% off 4 styles; extra 50% off clearance
- Sephora – Up to 50% off select beauty
- Talbots – 25% off select styles; 25% off markdowns
Some of our latest posts here at Corporette…
And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!
- What are your favorite parts of a typical day?
- At what point in your life (age, income level, whatever) were you able to take an annual vacation?
- What shoes can I keep at the office to go for mid-day walks (that go with everything)?
- How do you release stress or trauma that’s stored in the body?
- What are the best “networking for women events” you’ve ever been to?
- I feel like we’re burning through any savings we acquire…
- I hate my job and make 30% of what DH makes – should I quit?
- What do you keep in your office?
Cute! But where in the world is Ellen Barshefsky?
Maybe in perma moderation, to the happiness or at least “huh, didn’t even notice she was gone” of about 2/3 of us here?
She commented yesterday on the flip flop post.
Good riddance to Ellen!
I am here! Why do you NOT like me? What have I EVER done to you? You do NOT even have a name, and are Anonymous? FOOEY!
Ok you all had very good points about why I don’t want Bill Clinton to be my boyfriend but srsly Tim Kaine though pls!
I dare not dream so high. Last nights guy was a terrible kisser and actually said “I’m terrible at kissing.” At this point “settling” for the guy in dad jeans sounds so good.
Lady you are hilarious.
yes – OMG that picture of Kaine when he was young? SWOON!
I don’t know who you are, anonymous poster, but I like your commentary.
No boyfriend appeal there to me at all, but he seems like the most awesome dad ever.
Yes! The whole “believe me” impression was such a dad thing to do.
Need to vent…Got in a stupid, pre-coffee fight with my husband this morning and am feeling bad. I posted here a few weeks ago about how he (attorney) isn’t doing well at work, is being verbally abused by partners, and fears the worst. He’s been applying to jobs like mad. Earlier this week he mentioned he had an interview scheduled for next week, for a litigator position at a “sketchy sounding” firm.
This morning I noticed he was dressed a little sloppy – his shirt was really wrinkled – but didn’t think more of it. Until he mentioned his interview is today! He was wearing casual gray pants and a white shirt (usual work uniform on non-court days). No tie. I escalated really quickly, like WTF why aren’t you wearing a suit? He responded in this really nonchalant way, “whatever, I’ll just tell them this is how I dress for work.” I got upset, told him he won’t even be considered dressed like that, that it was a waste of time to interview if he cared so little. He’s a 38-year-old litigator. He knows to wear a suit.
In the meantime it turned out the firm wasn’t “sketchy,” but an established small firm in midtown Manhattan.
I discouraged him and feel bad for berating him. I could have been a lot more gentle. But why am I having to mommy my husband and tell him what to wear? Is he some teenager interviewing for an internship? Should I have said nothing? He complains about wanting a new job, but is putting in so little effort. This impacts my life too. I guess I just feel annoyed and needing to vent.
I think you need to have a serious talk with him. Is he depressed? Is he anxious? What’s the problem here? He’s not doing good work and he’s not making a minimum acceptable job seeking effort. It’s ok to say that is unacceptable to your partnership.
Yep. He is totally sabotaging himself by dressing that way for an interview, and I think you are more than entitled to call him on it.
He sounds depressed.
Something’s not right. Depression/anxiety are super talented at keeping a person from presenting their best side and caring about it. It’s also not a stretch to suggest that while your husband *knows* that he’s in a really bad place, he’s also in denial/downplaying the situation to protect his emotions. When you’re feeling overwhelmed and hopeless, and having your self-worth targeted every day by the people you work with, it’s easy just to shut down. Understandable impulse, but ultimately potentially self-defeating. FWIF, I’m a litigator who has gone through some serious job drama.
So sorry, that is really frustrating. It seems like he is self-sabotaging if he isn’t doing his best to give a good first impression at the interview – is there something else going on, like he is questioning his whole career path as a lawyer? Did he end up wearing a suit after you talked, or did he still go in that outfit?
Yes, you need to stop mothering him.
Sometime when he’s not heading out to an interview and you’ve had your morning coffee, you guys should sit down together and talk and you should ask him as non-judgmentally as possible if he really wants to be interviewing, and if says yes you can tell them from your perspective he’s not putting any effort into it and hopefully that will start a dialogue about why he’s going about this so haphazardly. But I don’t think parenting him on a daily basis the way you’re doing now is helping anyone. I got the vibe from your previous post that he didn’t seem nearly enthusiastic as you about interviewing at law firms. Maybe he doesn’t want a new job right now or maybe he wants to look outside the law. If so, you need to be supportive of that.
Also FYI, just because the firm is “established” doesn’t mean it’s not sketchy. The terms are not mutually exclusive. Law is a small community and I’d give him the benefit of the doubt that he heard something about this firm that put him off. I’d agree with you that if he really doesn’t want to work there, it’s a waste of time to be interviewing but I’m also curious why you don’t seem to be giving your husband the benefit of the doubt. You love him and hopefully trust him. If he thinks it’s sketchy, why are you automatically assuming that’s not true? You seem really eager to catch him in lies and lazy behavior and I’m not sure why. I think you need some examination of that, as well as why your husband is behaving the way he is.
I don’t think you seem “really eager to catch him in lies and lazy behavior.” I think you are concerned about why he told you the firm was “sketchy” because it seems like he said that so you (and he) won’t be disappointed if they don’t hire him. And it’s not “mothering” someone to tell them they are not dressed acceptably for a law firm interview. What were you supposed to do? Not say anything? You did the best you could do. But you two definitely have to talk about what’s bothering him, and it’s probably going to be uncomfortable.
I just think that if my unemployed husband told me he didn’t want to apply somewhere because it was sketchy my reaction would be “Ok.” (and maybe “Why?” but that would be out of curiosity more than anything else). I’m not sure how I would come to my own conclusion that the employer isn’t actually sketchy, let alone hold that against him. I agree OP’s husband has some big issues and it does sound like he’s depressed but I also think she needs to examine her own behavior and step back from micromanaging his job search.
It’s not micromanaging to tell someone you love that they shouldn’t be wrinkled and underdressed for a job interview.
Is he depressed? It sounds like his confidence is rocked, and he’s feeling like interviewing is a waste of time because he thinks there’s no way he’ll be considered.
I would forget this particular incident and sit down and talk with him and see what’s going on. Does he feel helpless? Like he’s failing you and doesn’t know how to fix it? Is his ego shot? On a scale of 1-10, 10 being deliriously happy and 1 suicidal, where is he? How often does he feel hopeless?
He could benefit from therapy to see what’s going on.
Killer Kitten Heels
Well, first of all, you don’t “have to” mommy him – as you point out, he knows what he’s supposed to do, for some reason he was choosing not to do it, and acting like a mom scolding a teenager is hardly the way to address whatever was going on with his wardrobe choice this morning. With that said, your frustration is understandable, and I can see how you reacted the way you did, given that he clearly took you by surprise with this behavior. I’m not sure I would’ve behaved any better in the moment, although the “ideal” reaction probably would’ve been some combo of little-to-no-reaction + a thoughtful, open question about his wardrobe choice.
Going forward, I think you need to figure out how to put your annoyance aside and have a real, calm, non-judgmental conversation with him about *why* he’s doing this. Is it that he doesn’t actually want a new job? Is he stuck in some kind of weird brain loop where he doesn’t feel qualified for the jobs he’s interviewing for, so he’s intentionally blowing it as a way of rejecting the job before the job can reject him? Does he not want to be a litigator at all anymore, so he’s hoping/trying to get “thrown out” of the profession as a way of giving him an excuse to do something else? Is he waiting on/hoping for some “dream job” to come through and worried that if he lands a “good enough” job in the meantime you’ll pressure him to take it and he won’t be available for “dream job”? I mean, I don’t know how you can approach this with him in a collaborative/productive way if you and he can’t talk about what’s really going on here, because obviously something off is happening.
I would strongly suggest relationship counseling for the two of you. There are serious things you need to communicate on and some outside help could help facilitate those conversations.
You mentioned before that he was depressed. A common sign of depression is lack of care with personal appearance. There seems to be a component of that happening but I don’t think that’s the only thing. It sounds like he is engaging in self-sabotage as a way to avoid rejection/deal with fear of rejection. He knows he needs to wear a suit to an interview as a lawyer but if he doesn’t then that can become the reason they didn’t hire him as opposed to because they didn’t like him/his work.
His depression needs to be treated and you both need to engage in self care. Spend time outdoors, engage in physical activity etc.
Ding ding ding.
Sorry I don’t remember from your earlier posts, but can you afford for him to quit outright before he finds something else? If he’s depressed and getting berated by his employer on a day-to-day basis, perhaps a couple of months of not getting berated, good sleep/good diet/exercise and an anti-depressant will perk him up and restore his outlook and confidence and he’ll be ready to suit up and put his best face forward again.
Yes, or if he’s already on the way out at the firm, take vacation time or short-term disability, even if he knows it won’t be popular.
I’d be really hesitant to do this if he’s depressed. Having nothing to do all day, for some people, is worse than working in a negative environment. At least now he’s applying for jobs and going to an interview (albeit unprepared). If he was sitting at home all day would he even be doing this much?
I should have added in my initial reply that this course of action worked for me personally. Not being berated every day helped eliminated 70% of the depression, and an antidepressant helped with the last bit. Obviously if the depression goes deeper this scenario might not work, but getting abused every day at the office can’t be helping.
This (not working and feeling I have nothing to push off from to head towards applying) is the situation I’m in now. I completely agree with anon at 11:26. Perhaps if there is a project, with measurable goals and a clear routine, that he could do, then time off might make sense. But just hanging out til things somehow get better on their own feels miserable. It hasn’t raised my level of self-confidence at all, and why should it, if I’m not doing anything?
No advice, but I would’ve reacted the same way (or worse).
My husband did this several years ago. He wore a suit, but it was sloppy and HE DIDN’T SHAVE. He also stayed up the night before playing video games and stumbled into his interview late, lethargic, and hadn’t brushed his teeth.
He was depressed, stuck in a toxic workplace and hated his career and field. He convinced himself that it didn’t matter where he went because it would suck–but that interview actually turned out to be for a good position and he lost out to one of his coworkers! He got to watch another guy escape hell office and move on and be happy.
Lesson learned for him.
I was really angry over it and reamed him out. I think, as spouses, it’s our job to hold up a mirror and show our partner how they are coming across. Sometimes we do that in a supportive way, pointing out how awesome they are, and other times we’re pointing out their screw ups.
You do not “have” to mommy your husband. Please don’t look at it that way. It’s very condescending, and your husband will feel that in your tone. Give yourself time to breathe and take a beat. Try to look at things from his perspective and muster up some compassion. I know it’s alarming and frustrating, but maybe he’s going through a really hard time and he might not bounce out of it immediately. He might not handle it as well as you hope. He might not shine in every instance. He might drop the ball sometimes. You might too if you were in his shoes.
I completely don’t understand this pant length. Too short for those heels, probably too long for flats. My guess: the model is tall with a long inseam, and the stylists just let it slide with the standard length pants.
Yeah-at first I thought they were trying for ankle pants, but they’re too wide cut and not slim enough for that to work.
Maybe that is how they fall for models? They can’t unhem, but if this is shown on someone 5-8, I’d probably be OK with then, length-wise.
Don’t they photoshop the clothes on the model half the time, rather than take actual pictures? I’ve been noticing it a lot more lately (with other retailers, I don’t know Nordstrom’s policy), and its really frustrating to order what is shown as a sleeveless V-neck blouse only to end up with a short sleeve crew neck blouse. If I’m ordering pants online, I really need to see the actual pants and how they fit/hang/etc. I’m guessing the photoshop artist here doesn’t know what length pants should be.
Yeah, those pants are only 32.5″. So they’ll be too short for models (and me), but find on a regular height or short person. Story of my life.
I have the pants and wouldn’t wear them with that high of heels. I’m 5’6″ and they’re a perfect length for flats or low heels.
Definitely too short for heels.
I almost posted yesterday to specifically ask how the heck you style narrow/straight leg pants like this with shoes/heels.
You see lengths all over the place these days, and even the “experts” on some blogs who “tell” you where they should go, show pix that are not flattering to my eye.
I think that the ideal length depends so much on the style of pant, whether they are totally straight or a touch of taper or a touch of flare, your body shape, the style/vamp/heel height of shoe, and even the color of pant/shoe can make a difference.
Meaning I think a lot of things can work. And somehow, a lot of the time things look…. off…
I have gotten similar Camuto pants in the past, and had trouble with the diaper butt developing over the day. They stretched out quite a bit and were less flattering. Can anyone comment on this phenomenon with these pants?
This problem is why I don’t wear pants to work anymore. First, I ALWAYS have to hem pants, which, yes, it’s a cheap and simple alteration, but I still have to go to the trouble of making the trip to the tailor. Second, it’s too much work to keep up with which pants can go with which shoes. And I love shoes; I’m not going to restrict myself to only buying certain heel heights.
I totally agree with you, Kat. They’re about an inch too short to be wearing with those heels. I think that hem width is problematic in general. Too wide to be a slim/skinny pant; too narrow to wear as a trouser. I agree with others that these particular pants are probably best with flats.
I asked yesterday about how equal pay would be legislated, and the only response I got was a bill that allowed for a cause of action against employers. I really have a hard time with that. It said the only allowable reasons to compensate people differently were training, experience, and education. But we all know those are not the only things that distinguish one employee from another. What if one is a way better writer? What if it is a sales position and one is much friendlier or better at sales? What if one negotiates more, which makes the employer think that he or she would be more forceful in his job? I could think of more. I mean, let’s say a woman applies for a job and asks for $75,000. Does the employer have to go back and search its files to determine whether it really should insist on paying her $90,000, even if she didn’t ask for it? Maybe that’s ideal practices, but I just don’t like the idea of the employer being sued for that.
And all of those are issues defense counsel would get to raise. But the threat of actually having to sit down under oath and explain those reasons, and the liability issues, would likely prompt companies to take a harder look at whether they really are paying women appropriately as compared to men.
This is not an answer to your question, but I saw a clip where a young girl asked Hillary Clinton if she would be paid the same as male Presidents and Hillary said “Yes. It’s one of those jobs where they have to pay you the same.” I wonder if more employers adopted a policy of not negotiating salaries if that would help close the pay gap. I’m sure there are still differences in promotion and in the starting salaries offered, but I do think it would help and I wonder if in the future more companies will move to a no negotiation policy.
It’s not unheard of. Ellen Pao did this at Reddit to reduce the gender pay gap and I’ve heard of a few other companies adopting “no negotiation” policies for the same reason.
Large law firms have this to an extent — lock step generally helps. A pay gap still exists though, because of how many get promotions/opportunities/etc.
Not in any way suggesting this isn’t a good idea or a good start, just that it doesn’t get you all the way there.
And bonuses. I would have LOVED to have known what % of bonus money was awarded to male associates at my ex-firm. I would guess it was at least 75% even though the associates were only 50% male.
+1000! One of my favorite things about BigLaw is lockstep compensation and bonuses
Anon at 11:33am; I was also going to respond and say this is why I love biglaw — even if women aren’t sponsored or seen as partner material, at least for 8 years we still get equal pay.
Killer Kitten Heels
You’re making it sound like its some kind of huge burden on the employer to make sure they’re paying similarly-situated employees similarly, but my H does a lot of hiring in his department, and it’s really not that hard. He knows what he pays, for example, copywriters with X years of experience, so, rather than putting the onus on the interviewee to “name a number” first, he’ll start a salary negotiation with a number he thinks is fair based on the past salary information for the position. There’s usually some upward wiggle room on his end for the candidate to negotiate that number, but he’ll generally only go up if the person on the other end can point to a specific reason for him to do it (generally along the lines of pointing out past experience that would make the person more valuable than a typical candidate with X years of professional experience, or pointing to awards or publications that would indicate the person is particularly remarkable, both of which would presumably be categorized under training/experience).
Basically, the scenarios you’re pointing out – better writer, better at sales – would be considered “experience” sufficient to justify increased pay. And the negotiation thing, frankly, would be a jerk move on the employer’s part, since it’s well documented that women and minorities are at a professional and social disadvantage in that area – if you’re a good employer, you should WANT to pay people what they’re worth, and shouldn’t turn their ability to “talk you into” paying them correctly for the role into some sort of weird test of their “determination” or “forcefulness,” particularly given how incredibly likely a stupid test of that sort is to discriminate against women and non-white candidates.
Recently, one of the associates at my firm realized that she was being paid the same as someone 2-3 years junior to her. She raised it with the partners and they increased everyone’s salary so it’s not just those people who negotiated who get higher salaries. It’s not that hard to do and is important for morale
Your husband sounds like a great manager!
Killer Kitten Heels
When he first took over his department, there were some strange disparities in pay, and he couldn’t figure out what was going on, so I pointed him in the direction of research/information on how different groups negotiate (or don’t) as a function of gender/race/class/etc. He realized the guy who had been doing the hiring was of the “lowball them, and the best candidates will just aggressively negotiate” school of thought, which explained the numbers. After he realized what had happened (and that the salaries weren’t a reflection of the employees themselves) he basically spent his first year in the position fighting for raises to make everyone even, and overhauled the hiring process as described.
It’s amazing how much work it took for him to convince higher-ups (who were exclusively male and white, shocking, I know) that they had a real problem that needed to be addressed, but I think it just goes to show how little the average person knows/understands about how privilege works. No one in his company was an intentionally bad person, they just didn’t know what they didn’t know, if that makes any sense.
Way to go in giving your husband this valuable information, so that he could make a real impact at his company.
You are AWESOME.
And so is he!
It is incredibly hard to overcome that prejudice (for lack of a better word). I know I make less than my male colleague who has less experience than me, I have had multiple people tell me I am underpaid (who know both of our salaries, and this group includes my boss) and recently found out that my boss has been trying to get me both a raise and a promotion for A YEAR. I found this out when I went in and asked for these things, he agreed I deserved both, and told me (even though he probably shouldn’t have) that he had been fighting for me for a year. He asked me to be patient, and I will be because I like my job, but it’s incredibly frustrating that management won’t allow this to happen.
I think it gets hard in less-fungible areas. But transparency helps. Just post what people make (or have it avaiable for inspection in HR). And be willing to talk about WHY things are the way they are.
In my city, govt salaries are public and regularly published in the newspaper (FOIA, y’all). I don’t see why private companies couldn’t also do this.
So I know that the science and math HS teachers make more money than history. Which I’m OK with.
Yep. I work for a university and all our salaries are printed in the newspaper every year. Total transparency.
(A public university obviously)
Transparency is only the first step in equality though. I’m sure if you looked through the salaries you would notice that the traditionally female professions (teaching/nursing/social work) had lower salaries vs those teaching the traditionally male professions (engineering/sciences/medicine).
Ehh but does equal pay really mean social workers have to be paid the same as engineers? I’m a liberal and a feminist but I think it’s totally legit to pay an engineer or a scientist more. Those professions are harder, and there are fewer people on the planet who can succeed in them, so higher pay makes sense to me. To me, the really big problem is that male engineers are paid more than female engineers, not that male-dominated professions pay more than female-dominated professions.
That doesn’t bother me — I think you have to pay more to get a math person to teach vs to do another math job. I don’t think that that’s gender inequity, I think that that’s just what those jobs pay.
I think that if I were to be a plumber vs a hairdresser, I’d just want to be paid on par with plumbers or hairdressers and not paid as if I were one when I am the other. Or if I were a mechanic.
If I were a teacher of plumbing, you’d have to pay me enough not to be a plumber. If I were a teacher of social work, you’d have to pay me enough not to be a social worker. I think that there is a difference in what you have to pay to get people in the door. I don’t think that the plumber will teach plumbing if you pay that person what you pay a teacher of social work.
If you think it’s easier to be a social worker than a scientist you have never practiced in the area of child protection law.
And I say that as someone married to a man with a Phd (Biology) and a strong research record
I didn’t mean “easier” in the sense that the day-to-day work is more pleasant. I meant “easier” in that a larger group of people have the minimal capabilities required to succeed in the job. And the end of the day, it’s supply and demand. There are simply more people who can learn what is minimally necessary to be a social worker than can learn what is minimally necessary to be an engineer. I’m not saying all engineers could be GREAT social workers – far from it, as I’m sure that requires a lot of people skills that many engineers don’t have. But all engineers have the intelligence to, with sufficient training, do the day-to-day tasks of pretty much any profession in a bare minimum way. Most people do not have the intelligence to do the tasks of an engineer no matter how much training you give them. It makes sense to me that the professions that fewer people are qualified to enter pay a lot more.
No, equal pay doesn’t mean you have to pay every single person on earth the exact same amount no matter what job they do.
No one is saying it’s easier. People are saying that seems to be what you have to pay to fill a job.
One way is to require transparency in pay. Then if you know what a comparable man is making, you can demand it. And if the employer refuses, he needs to justify the discrepancy.
absolutely. Research shows that people systematically assess applicants as more competent when the otherwise identical CV has a male name instead of a female one on top of the page. The hypothetical male applicant is then also offered a higher salary or salary band.
A salary band named in the job ad would at least prevent the latter.
I’m just going to name my children something ambiguous, regardless of gender.
In Canada this has also been addressed by ensuring that traditionally female jobs are paid the same as traditionally female jobs. So if two jobs both require a 4 year degree then the legislation ensures that the traditionally female job is not underpaid (e.g. nursing laboratory instructors and chemistry laboratory instructors at a university). There’s a lot of case law on this in Canada if you’re interested in reading about examples.
In private sector jobs such as sales jobs, this is obviously more challenging. It is also much more challenging in a country like the United States where many traditionally female jobs (nurses/social workers) are more likely to be privatized.
Nurses are fairly well-paid here. And it is an in-demand field, so disparities sort themselves out.
Social workers are generally govt /nonprofit, but there are benchmarks so you know if things are high/low.
How a lawfirm values a service partner vs a rainmaker is different. Or a partner who plays a lot of golf or someone who is BFF with the comp committee.
In that sense legislation would provide the same function that Title VII does. Discrimination (taking any adverse employment action) is prohibited on the basis of certain protected characteristics- s3x, national origin, race, religion, disability, age. It gives people a cause of action- they still have to prove that the adverse employment action was based on their membership in a protected class, and the employer can raise all kinds of defenses (she was late to work, bad attitude, documented history of issues, other person was more qualified, etc). Each case is different, and yes, it requires wading through facts and making decisions. But that’s why we have the EEOC and the courts. Title VII isn’t a magic bullet, but it certainly incentivies employers to think about their decisions and why they’re making them, and to be above board.
The pay gap is a complex problem that has a number of causes and a number of potential solutions. I think that legislation would be one piece, but certainly not wholly effective in reducing the gap. We need a cultural shift in thinking, and also policies that support that shift. For example, when you’ve got a society that thinks that childbearing and childrearing is a burden that should be placed solely on an individual woman’s shoulders (heaven forbid her precious all-mighty Job Creating ™ employer should be prevented from firing her because she had a baby), there will never be workplace equality. Rather than attempt to come up with a solution that recognizes that childbearing and childrearing are huge acts t of labor that benefit individuals (including men) and society, and which places a value on that labor, America is content with accepting the benefits of women having kids while forcing them to bear the entire burden.
Greetings from Massachusetts!
If you've gotten Botox -
If you’ve gotten Botox – could you please tell me what areas of your face you started with, and about how many units the Dr used? I feel like I’m ready to pull the trigger and like a Dr I met with yesterday — was just wondering how other people started. Also, which is more typical – for the Dr to charge by unit or by area? Thank you!
I’ve only gone once, so I’m a relative newby too, but my group of girlfriends go regularly and my experience falls within the norm.
I started with the 11s between my eyes. I have such a deep crease that it’s noticeable even when I’m making no expression. She used 20 cc, which sounds like it’s her standard starting place. I saw a difference in about a week that’s lasted a few months. I’m going back today actually. She charged by unit.
I don’t want to get rid of all wrinkles or ability to make facial expressions, so I’m sticking with the forehead and not touching my crows feet (at least for now. Never say never, I guess).
This is what I do, too.
How old are you guys/were you when you started doing this? I’m thinking about it myself.
I’ve never heard of a doc charging by area, they all do it by units AFAIK. I started with and plan to stick with the area between my eyebrows – I think this is called the elevens. We started with 20 units, but that wasn’t enough to sustain me for more than three months and I didn’t want to shell out that kind of cash so frequently. Ibumped up to 30 units several months ago and am much happier with the longevity. The longevity of the injections grows over time if you are consistent about it.
Good tip! I’m going to ask about bumping it up.
Around 15 units for horizontal lines on the forehead – I asked them to go lightly. Charged by the unit.
What did that cost? (What city are you in? Who did it? Did you like it?) TY!
If you've gotten Botox -
Thank you for the replies — now I wish I’d asked these questions too — how much did your Doctor charge by unit, and any chance any of you are in the DC area? If so, who do you use ? Thanks again!
Central PA – $15/unit which is on the higher side. I’ve seen as low as $12/unit, but I wanted mine done by a plastic surgeon, so I am willing to pay a little more per unit.
Same here on all accounts! Are you in northern central or south (harrisburg area) central? I wonder if we go to the same doc!
HBG baby! I go to the Face Doc that you see on billboards around town :)
Chicago is usually around $12/unit, though there are almost always specials for $10/unit. So its usually $200-$220 for 20 units, which is what I get (in fact, going tonight)
Huge fan of Botox and I go every 4-5 months (I’m an athlete and excessive sweating causes it to dissipate quicker). I like a little movement in my eyebrows so I get $20 units. It’s approximately $300. Many doctors have Botox Clubs. For example, you pay $100 a year to be in the club but get a $75 discount each session. For someone like myself, it pays for itself quickly.
FYI, I’ve also used Dysport. Half the price and exact same effect.
NAS Update: Got both of my Leith sheath dresses and they’re amazing! I could see myself living in them this fall. I do need to go a size up, I convinced myself that my normal size would be OK, but I think I need a little more room so it’s not so fitted across the hips. I think the rouching is supposed to hide this, but I still would feel comfortable with a bit more room. The Navy color is stunning–it’s navy marled with black, so it looks very casual chic. The backside is only 1 layer of fabric, but it’s thicker so no VPL with seamless underwear. Small is available on the site now and I’m hoping to find 2 mediums for weekend/casual wear.
Here’s my NAS update:
1. Madwell skinny jeans (#5139477) – I really like the olive color, but I worry that these could stretch out and be too big. I’m between sizes and the smaller size is crazy tight, the bigger size is fine now but I know that skinny jeans often stretch out. Anyone have feedback on Madewell denim, do they stretch out?
2. Paige verdugo ankle jeans, in aubergine — very pretty color, great for fall. I think these jeans could give me a little muffin top though, I wish they were higher.
3. Tahari v-neck woven sheath dress in grape — (#1109433) – very conservative, well made and pretty color. But the color didn’t pop on me and I don’t love it enough to keep it.
4. Louis et cie black ballet flats (#5154088) — I love this brand normally but these flats didn’t have enough cushion/support and were not comfortable
5. Louise et cie black leather tote — I’m looking for a bag to take to court and this is roomy enough for files/papers. I ordered a few other black totes and will need to compare once I see all of them.
My Madewell denim doesn’t stretch very much at all, but I’ve never bought their colored denim. Don’t think it would make a difference though (or if anything would make it less likely to stretch).
Very helpful, thanks! Do you like your Madewell jeans? Have they lasted?
I own many pairs of Madewell skinnies. They have held their shape perfectly. (Can’t say the same for myself. They are currently “on break” in the back of my closet. Even with regular use they last for years.
I was looking at that tote for the same purpose. After my Lodis tote bit the dust, I’m having trouble finding another court bag. Does it stand up by itself or does it fall over if it isn’t resting against something?
anon a mouse
Which dress is this? I don’t see a ruched Leith dress on the site. It sounds great!
It’s the Leith V-Neck Ruched Dress, it’s now showing as totally sold out, but if you check back on the page, sizes/colors will periodically pop back in stock. I’m also live chatting with a representative to see if any of the stores still have them. It’s definitely a casual dress, but I think it’ll be so comfy and cute in the fall. They also have another version of the dress in more colors but with a high neckline (regular price). http://shop.nordstrom.com/s/leith-v-neck-ruched-dress/4263844
Oh, I love that. And the Large just popped back in stock– just snapped it up!
OK also can someone slap some sense into me and tell me not to get the Guess envelope coat in baby pink? I’m super pale and that kind of powder-pink looks AMAZING on me. But it’s so rare to see that color on a winter coat. I also already have a barbour coat that I love, so this would be more dressy and girly and fun. Or I could get it in wine since that’s a bit less “look at me”
Ummmm that coat is gorgeous so I say go for it.
Also, I am also super pale and now I want it too. Darn you.
OK so if that’s the case, stay far far away from Erin Busbee’s blog/videos. She’s pale and blonde and seeing her in the coat got me hooked on it. She said it runs big FYI.
Thankfully, I have frighteningly pale skin and pitch black hair, so hopefully it won’t suit me :)
Do it, do it, do it!!! I too am now contemplating it. . . because already having 6 winter coats is not enough.
I caved! I’ll post an update when I get it. Hopefully it’ll be as amazing in person!
Tell you not to buy it? Why? It would look amazing, it’s not a duplicate of something you already own and you would love it and be happy in it – if you can afford it, do it. I am normally an all-black-coats-all-the-time person but last year I bought a vivid red topcoat and I love it so much. It looks great with my coloring and I feel happy every time I put it on.
I’m now a corporate attorney who will be wearing a pink coat…..
Wow, I feel like an idiot. So update on the Leith dress-I tried them on again and the sizing might actually be OK. I originally pulled the dress all the way down, but I realized on the second go that you can pull it up a bit so it’s lower-mid thigh, and that lets the fabric really ruche and hide the hips/tummy area. I’ll still grab the next size up just to check and see if I’ll be more comfortable in it, but I’m going to keep the ones I got if they’re not available.
What is the best website to order photo prints? Priority on cost and speed of shipping (not concerned with them being the highest quality).
MPix is great.
anon a mouse
I’ve heard really good things about them, but the shipping prices seem high. Do they run specials?
I recently used the FreePics app on my phone and was happy with the results – the prints are all free at the 4×6 size I believe.
For me they’ve all been roughly the same. Which is more important, cost or speed? Because those aren’t really compatible. You can order online and have them sent to a Walgreens and pick them up that day, or you can order online and have them sent to you, which is a longer wait but a lower per-print cost. If I have a ton of photos, I usually have them mailed, but if I only need a few, it’s usually worth the more expensive in-store option to get them immediately.
+1. This is what I do as well. I order through Shutterfly and then pick up at Walgreens if it is just a few pictures. Or have Shutterfly mail to me if it is a bunch.
Same experience here – Walgreens is fastest for in store pickup and not too expensive, for other s!tes you can get a cheaper per photo cost but unless you have a coupon code or are ordering a ton you will either have to pay a chunk of change for shipping or rush processing, or wait weeks for the pictures.
I use Shutterfly. 4×6 prints are about 15 cents I think? They come pretty quickly.
I’m planning a trip that includes a few days of hiking (max 8 miles) then some time hiking and exploring beach areas. Initially I was going to get a pair of hiking boots, but now I’m thinking maybe hiking sandals would be better. Especially Keens or Chacos. Does anyone have any experience or recommendations?
How technical are these hikes? Are you a regular hiker (aka are your ankles strong)? What will the weather be like?
I run/hike pretty technical trails in my train running shoes, so if you don’t feel like you will need the ankle support that a boot provides you, you’ll likely be fine without it. Personally, I wouldn’t want to hike in sandals because I get eaten alive by bugs so the less skin area exposed the better. I also hate bits in my shoes and I don’t know how that plays out in sandals, but I would expect more bits find their way in than say a pair of running shoes or even a pair of running shoes and some gaiters. I don’t have any personal experience to back this however!
Not very technical, warm weather, most people in the group will also be wearing some type of hiking sandal. So really I’m just trying to figure out which type is best to purchase.
I’d go with something other than a boot in that case. Can you go try on the sandals or do you have time to order a few pairs and ship some back before your trip!?
I know lots of people who are huge Keen fans, FWIW.
Thank you! I do have a few weeks so I might order some different types and see what works!
I have done many a hike in my Chacos! Of course you want any shoe to be broken in and all the kinks worked out before you go out on a hike like this, but short of very occasionally needing to sweep pebbles out from under my arches I think the work well for this kind of hiking. Plus if you end up at a rocky beach you can wade right in with your sandals on, and they’re super grippy so I never slip on wet or slimy rocks. I swear I’m not a paid spokesman for Chacos! Your feet will definitely get dirty though.
I know people LOVE chacos, but I bought a pair and hated them. It was like walking on a hard brick that did not fit my foot at all. By the end of the first day my feet were burning in pain. I bought them for a vacation, didn’t really give them a trial run before I left (stupid), and ended up walking around Italy and the Greek islands in my pretty Cole Haan sandals that were not hiking/walking sandals at all, but were at least more comfortable than chacos.
Thanks for the insight. I will def do a trial run of any shoes I purchase before the trip!
I love my Chacos and probably wear them nonstop from May-October. But there is definitely an acclimation period. I got my first pair because I was in a job where I was both hiking and in the water every day and they were recommended. I felt like the soles of my feet were tingly/prickly the first few days. Then, they magically became the most comfortable shoes ever. And I could easily walk 10-15 miles a day and my feet were not “tired.” Now when I bring them out, it seems like the “burn/prickle” feeling is gone after the first day. I’ve gone through three pair in the last 15 years. For a shoe I wear every day for 1/3 the year, that’s an amazing value.
My flip flops and my hiking boots are both Chaco and I looooove them. The multi-strap sandals don’t work for my feet unfortunately, but I’ve had good luck with Merrells for strappy outdoor sandals.
Ditto. Also my experience with Chaco’s. They are on the way to Goodwill.
What kinds of trails/where will you be hiking? The brand of shoe that will work best for you will depend on the type of foot you have. I like Keens, but they are usually cut wider than other brands and if you do not have a wider foot you probably won’t like them as much.
It will be primarily in Lake Tahoe area, which I’m not familiar with. I don’t have a particularly wide foot, but definitely want to try on both types.
If you are going to Tahoe, it’s going to be very dry on trails and the soil will be very hot and dusty. I would definitely wear at least running shoes, not sandals. I say this as someone that’s hiked in Tahoe a fair bit. Have fun.
Also, if you don’t know how cold Tahoe is…it’s REEEEEEEEAAAAAL cold, even by lake standards. So just prepare yourself for that. Unless you are at one of the more shallow bays or beaches that get sun exposure, it’s take your breath away cold. A bunch of my friends just did the trans-Tahoe relay, and granted, they were in for thirty or ten minute shifts, but lots of pictures of blue lips. And they are highly experienced swimmer. BRRRR Tahoe.
Killer Kitten Heels
I’ve done moderate hiking in Keen sandals without issue (think, an entire day hiking the easy-to-medium difficulty trails at Volcano Nat’l Park, a half-day at Red Rock), so, as CountC said above, unless you’re going to need serious ankle support, sandals should be fine.
With that said, we were in Acadia a little over a month ago, and I wore trail runners + high socks, because ticks/bugs/poison ivy/etc.. So take into consideration the terrain and climate as well – you may want the coverage of a sneaker or boot + sock combo over sandals, depending on where you’re headed.
Thanks. I’m not sure what the terrain is like, it’s Lake Tahoe area in the summer. Will definitely keep this in mind.
Hiking sandals would not be great for Tahoe in the summer – the trails can be rocky & full of gravel. It’s so annoying to get a piece of gravel stuck under your instep. I’d suggest trail runners or hiking shoes.
In my recollection, Lake Tahoe beaches are not sand, they’re pebbles. I would go with something closed — trail running shoe or hiking shoe. Not sandals.
I am headed to Acadia in September! I plan to go out in my running shoes and my calf compression sleeves, which I use mainly for the reasons you have stated above (although I am not allergic to poison ivy, thank goodness). I am so excited!
Killer Kitten Heels
It was sooooooo gorgeous, you’re going to love it! (Also if you have a pup, consider bringing him/her – it was hands down the most dog-friendly place I’ve ever been, and I was so happy we’d brought our little guy along for the adventure.)
I love Acadia! I’ve never had a problem with poison ivy. I’m not saying don’t be vigilant, but I hike in shorts and sneakers all the time and have never gotten any rash. And yes, it’s a SUPER dog-friendly place as KKH said. Dogs are allowed in almost all trails in Acadia, plus Bar Harbor has tons of dog-friendly restaurants and parks.
I was very much considering bringing my tiny pooch, but I am combining this trip with a wedding in CT and a customer visit on the way home, so he’s going to be staying at grandma and grandpa’s. Great to know for next time though!! :)
I would not wear sandals hiking. If you’re trying to limit space and the hikes are not too strenous, I’d go with trail sneakers or hiking shoes.
I would not recommend hiking in sandals. In my experience you will like the sandals for a few hours at the beach and the rest of the time will be stopping to dump dirt/gravel/sand out of your sandals. I use my hiking boots and change to lightweight water shoes when I’m at the beach.
I did Italy for 16 days in keens. on the one hand, they’re heavy (or were in 2008) …. on the other hand, they’ve got the support and cushioning you may need for 30,000+ steps a day (we started everyday around 830/9am and kept sightseeing/walking/hiking until at least 5 or 6pm each day. I would check out the keens but also consider a variety (city flats + water shoes if you’re hiking around beach areas)
Keens, Merrells, Solomons, or something similar, low ankle, closed toe –
In other words, not boots but something with a sturdy sole. That’s my go-to for hikes like you’re describing.
I’d wear hiking boots and toss a pair of flip flops in my hiking bag for the beach parts.
I absolutely love Keens for hiking. They are some of the most comfortable shoes I’ve ever worn. I do have a wide foot, so YMMV. I would wear Keens in the city if they weren’t so ugly!
Get the kind that actually enclose your foot, but have holes and don’t require socks. Then you might have fewer sticks and rocks in your shoes. if you’re set on hiking sandals though, I can also recommend Jack Wolfskin (on sale at Sierra Trading Post–just bought some). Bought them for kayaking and they’re good for a little trail walking, but not 8 miles. Seriously, you don’t want to be on an 8 mile hike with rocks in your shoes and sore ankles.
Gail the Goldfish
Related question: Going to Yosemite next month. I don’t own any hiking shoes. Are regular running shoes fine for easy-to-moderate trails?
Depends – how far do you plan to hike? What’s your idea of moderate? How are your ankles? Will you cross any water? If you are mostly planning to ‘stroll in the wilderness’ vs truly hiking I think you’d be ok. but any more than that and you’ll want more traction on the soles and likely a lot more foot support. I have terrible feet so default to hiking boots for nearly all non-pavement walking/hiking. I’m on my second pair of Ahnu Sugarpine boots (they make a hiking shoe as well) because they are very light, have tons of ankle support, and are waterproof.
I vote hiking boots in Yosemite for all trails except the ones that are paved and wheelchair accessible. For anything like the mist trail, boots are going to be your friend.
You would probably be fine, but having done lots of hikes in Yosemite, I would recommend hiking shoes. I have the Salomon Ellipse GTX W and they really provide a lot of cushion and support.
Your feet would probably hurt after doing hikes in normal gym shoes – the soles on hiking shoes are thicker and you don’t feel the rocks/terrain as much. They also have more grip, which is helpful if you are climbing on any granite (which there is a lot of in Yosemite).
I’m so jealous – have fun! Yosemite is gorgeous and one of my favorite places :)
+1 on the Salomon Ellipse hiking shoes.
For sandals I have these Teva’s, which I much prefer to Chaco’s cause they’re more lightweight. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005672X84/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I mostly wear them to walk my dog for an hour on flat pavement, and I don’t think I would hike more than a mile or two in them.
I have found that once debris gets inside Keens, it’s nearly impossible to get it out without taking the sandals off and dumping it out. Chacos are more open so stuff doesn’t get trapped inside as much.
What ever you buy test it out like others have said. I love Chacos but not the break in period. One pr of flip flops got remedied by tape around the post. One pr of sandals went back to REI because my big toe was being rubbed raw. I like Keens but they too have issue, their new light line does not have enough support for longer hikes and ditto the pebbles that get underfoot. Salomon Tech Amphibian might be a solution for you. I put arch supports in them and I wear them everywhere!
Is Houston a good place for a weekend getaway? Any recommendations for things to do and places to eat?
Also- would you recommend staying downtown or in the Galleria area?
I have been to downtown Houston for work a few times and there is not much going on there. I think you would find it boring unless you plan to relax inside the hotel. It seems to mostly be office buildings and parking garages and I don’t think people actually live there. I have not found any restaurants there that I could recommend, but maybe I just haven’t found the right places.
Agree with others about staying in the Museum District. Lots to do around there. If you want to stay in the Galleria area then try the Houstonian. As far as restaurants in the Galleria area I would recommend Truluck’s. Liberty Kitchen River Oaks and the Karbach Brewery are also relatively close. If you enjoy fajitas then try one of the El Tiempo Cantinas around town for their filet fajitas.
In September- Labor day weekend
It depends on what your other options are, to be honest. Also the time of year. Also, what you’re interested in.
There are a lot of great restaurants, a good theatre district, good availability of sporting events, nice grouping of breweries. Very few “tourist” attractions. No matter where you stay you’ll need a car as public transit is minimal. I’d recommend the Galleria area as downtown is pretty empty and shut down on weekends.
I recently wrote up a rec list for an older couple visiting Houston for a week, if you leave an email I’ll send it to you.
I wouldn’t recommend either downtown or the Galleria to be honest — the former has some night-life but not much to do during the day, and the latter is a Place To Which I Do Not Go because it’s about the 9th level of traffic hell at all times. If you can find a B&B in the museum district (as a Houston native I have no idea what the affordability of such a thing would be but I imagine there are some) that would be my recommendation.
Things to do for a weekend: museum district, maybe a musical or play, hit up the trails along one of the bayous, memorial park, food food food, brewery.
And yes, you will definitely need a car.
Agree about museum district being a great location if you want to visit museums, venture into downtown a little bit, and see a prettier part of town. You should also check out Miller Outdoor Theater to see if they have anything fun going on.
Right around the Galleria is traffic hell, but there’s a lot nearby that is fun and isn’t so bad. If you’re looking for an upscale hotel, the Houstonian and Hotel Granduca are great and not in the worst of the Galleria-area traffic. I’d look for hotels that say they’re in “uptown” more than the Galleria – but it’s all right next to each other.
If you’re set on downtown, market square is the most lively area on a weekend, but it’s still not what I would consider big city nightlife.
Warning – I love this city but Labor Day in Houston is going to be hot and miserable. I’d save Houston trips for November-March unless you’re coming here to shop and eat in the a/c.
Same. Unless you want to go out to bars at night and then maybe stay downtown, but you will still need a car to get to any restaurants or attractions. The ZaZa is super nice if you want to spring for a good hotel and is walking distance from all the Museums except for the Menil. Also I know they have cars that they use for guests, but I don’t know if there are any restrictions on them. I would definitely say it is a good weekend spot. Go to the museums one day and the next take the drive to NASA for a half day and finish off in Galveston (if you aren’t from an area near the ocean)
I live in Houston and wouldn’t recommend it, honestly, especially at that time of year. It is going to be hot, humid and miserable. It’s also during hurricane season, if you are risk averse. If you want to do anything outside, try to time it before 10 am or after 6 pm. Otherwise it will be 90+ degrees but feel like 100+.
If you do decide to come, I am partial to the museum district area. I second the recommendation for Hotel Zaza. But the Museum District is not at all far from downtown – we are talking less than a ten minute drive – so a hotel in either location would probably be fine. There are some great bars in downtown.. Unless you really want to shop at the Galleria, I would not stay there. Traffic is miserable and there isn’t much to do other than shop.
Ideas for things to do: Zoo, Museum of Natural Science, Hermann Park, Museum of Fine Arts, the Menil, Eleanor Tinsley Park and the trails around Buffalo Bayou, Rice University, Discovery Green, the Galleria, NASA space center, Galveston, Kemah Boardwalk. Spa day at the Houstonian. Check the symphony, ballet, opera, theater and Miller Outdoor schedules to see if anything interesting will be here while you’re in town.
Houston has an amazing, diverse restaurant scene. Check out the Houston Eater blog if you are interested.
Also live in Houston, and to answer your question- No. Not a great city to visit (especially in summer). I’d go down to Galveston and enjoy the history and architecture and water for a weekend in a heartbeat though.
My face is looking drab and uneven. Does it make sense to see a dermatologist or someone in the skincare/makeup industry? I would like products that will clear up my pores and even out my tone. Is this what facials are for?
Try a Vitamin C serum first. They are available for around $20. (Some cost a great deal more, but I’m not convinced it’s worth it.) Check out reviews on Amazon. It’s made a huge difference in my overall redness. AHAs and BHAs did nothing for me. YMMV
Which Vitamin C serum do you use? AHAs do a lot for my skin texture/brightening, but my skin has always had a lot of redness that I’d love to lessen if possible.
I LOVE the mad hippie vitamin c serum – ordered off amazon prime and its less than $30 for a several month supply. My sister tried it before her wedding to work out some dry patches and raved about it as well. I use that in the am under moisturizer and a Vitamin A serum from the same company at night. Started the regimen about 6 months ago and seriously the best my skin has ever looked.
+1 for a Vitamin C serum. Also, regular exfoliation (2-3x per week) will also do wonders for brightening up your skin and helping to clear your pores.
For Vitamin C serums, I like the Anthony Vitamin C High Performance Facial Serum or the First Aid Beauty Facial Radiance Serum. For exfoliation, I use the Murad Skin Smoothing Polish in the shower 2-3x per week. I’ll also occasionally use the First Aid Beauty Facial Radiance Pads as well.
Facials are nice for an immediate short-term result, but you’re going to get the best long-term results with consistent, daily application of good skincare products.
What kind of skin do you have? Oily, combination, normal, dry? If oily with larger pores, I’d start with a BHA chemical exfoliant. Paula’s Choice has some great products at very reasonable prices, and you can send back the product for free if it doesn’t work for you (same return policy as Sephora). If you have dry skin and smaller pores, use an AHA exfoliant (this is what I do).
Use the BHA or AHA every other night and on the other nights you will want to use retinol. I use Paula’s Choice 1% retinol treatment and it works very well for me. I know I sound like I’m shilling for Paula’s Choice, but I’ve tried many skincare products at Sephora and have found the Paula’s Choice products to be as or more effective for about half the price.
Lastly, make sure you have a good daily moisturizer with sunscreen. I’d just start with those three things and you should see results pretty quickly — BHA/AHA exfoliant or retinol at night, moisturizer with sunscreen during the day.
I recently started using a pricey skincare line per my derm’s recommendation and almost immediately started breaking out, after using Paula’s Choice for 8 years with no problems whatsoever. I now have some acne scars and am annoyed that I switched over in the first place. Paula’s Choice is really fantastic, I recommend it to everyone.
I went to a “beauty” dermatologist (think, salon type environment with botox, restylane etc as opposed to a more medical/clinical oriented place) and got a laser facial (and something else – can’t remember. Some version of a “photo facial”). It really evened out my skin and made it look really nice for a while. It was expensive though.
I use the brightening serum from Andalou Naturals (you can get it at Whole Foods). Good price (maybe like $24?) and does wonders for me.
Canada (applies to all fed reg. industries)
This is the system Canada has had since 1986:
“Is pay equity the same thing as equal pay for equal work?
No. The concept of equal pay for equal work means that people who perform the same job, or similar work, must be paid the same wage, regardless of their gender. For example, a female janitor and a male janitor in the same establishment should receive the same wages for performing the same work.
Pay equity refers to the concept of equal pay for work of equal value. It adds a new dimension to the concept of equal pay for equal work by requiring that jobs within an establishment be compared on the basis of their value to the employer. […] pay equity does not limit comparisons to similar work but requires the comparison of very different jobs, such as a female clerical job with a male janitor, or female lab technician job with a male carpenter.”
“Accurate, gender-neutral job descriptions or questionnaires are critical. Certain aspects of jobs historically occupied by women are frequently overlooked, for example, responsibility for protecting confidentiality, prolonged standing, or stress from multiple demands.”
“four factors be taken into account when measuring the value of work. These factors are skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions.[…] Differences in wages between men and women performing work of equal value within the same establishment are permitted if they are due to one of the “reasonable factors” set out in section 16 of the Equal Wages Guidelines, 1986. These factors include: differences in performance ratings; seniority; red-circling for re-evaluation, reclassification, downgrading of a position or demotion; rehabilitation or temporary training assignments; internal labour shortages; or regional rates of pay. The onus is on the employer to demonstrate that a factor is applied consistently and equitably.”
Second day in a row that I’ve had to leave work for 20 min. to go “rescue” my husband after he locked he keys inside his work building (we own this business, small building, he’s the only one who works there). I feel like I have to constantly be “mothering” him and making sure he doesn’t forget his appointments, his wallet, his keys, etc. We have a calendar to mark things down, and yet he doesn’t pay enough attention to it. We don’t have kids yet, but I imagine it only getting worse as time goes on.
Okay, vent over.
So….stop? Only rescue him if it’s a true emergency. If he’s locked himself out he can call a locksmith. He’s never going to improve his behavior if you keep bailing him out.
Killer Kitten Heels
Yeah, this. My H and I have partially merged finances (we’re joint for the big stuff, with personal accounts for fun money and certain personal expenses), so one round of “paying the locksmith out of this month’s fun money” was more than enough for my H to develop a new system to remember his keys.
Ooooh, sidebar, but can you tell me more about your partially merged finances? Recently married and we need to figure out what to do on that front – we’ll probably end up with “partially merged” so I’m curious as to how you decided what is joint and what is personal?
Not KKH but we have partially merged finances. We both contribute a set amount automatically to a joint account and use it to pay most of our bills. Mortgage, utilities, dining out together, groceries, vacation, gifts for family, etc., all come out of the joint account. The personal accounts are for truly individual expenses, e.g. lunch, happy hour with work friends, clothing, personal electronics.
Killer Kitten Heels
Joint = anything we both need/benefit from (mortgage, groceries, utility bills, cell phone plan, shared credit cards, shared vacation fund, retirement, savings, socializing together with friends)
Personal = anything that only one of us benefits from (my riding lessons, his personal trainer, our respective grooming/personal care expenses, socializing separately with our friends, personal credit cards, etc.)
Our student loans and car payments are also treated as “personal,” since those are financial decisions we made before meeting/getting married, although if one of us were to go back to school now or when we start replacing the cars, those bills would be considered “joint.”
Once we had the breakdown, we came up with a proportional split of the joint expenses that leaves us both with enough to pay personal bills + a roughly equal amount of personal fun money. It was a little complicated up-front, and it’s a little bit of a pain to recalculate when one of us gets a significant raise or a new job or something, but the one-time pain of figuring it out has been worth putting an end to what was previously a never-ending and exhausting expense-by-expense negotiation.
Question – do you make ballpark the same amount, or vastly different amounts? I make 5x what my husband makes. I will have my student loans paid off my the end of this year; he is a recent graduate and has about 160K in SLs (which I am more than happy to help repay – I see us as a Team). Did that influence your decisions on joint vs separate vs combination at all?
We each have personal checking/savings/investment accounts, and joint checking/savings/investment accounts. As of now we make about the same so we decide on the budget for big/joint things together and split down the middle. Paychecks go to our individual checking accounts and we move the appropriate amount of money to the joint each month. Mortgage, utilities, and other recurring expenses are auto-deducted from joint checking. We also have a joint credit card that we put the groceries and joint bills on and each pay 50% of each month. We each have personal credit cards that we use for our own expenses and fun money. Savings and investments are decided upon jointly but we contribute differentially. My husband has student loan payments and I don’t, so he puts as much as he can toward those, and I put as much as I can toward joint savings/investments. Works well for us though does take some careful accounting each month. I do like that it forces us to communicate a lot about money without having to nickel and dime each other for personal fun purchases.
Killer Kitten Heels
@ Anon @12:14 – once student loans are factored out (I have a bunch, he has almost none), we make approximately equal amounts, so that does make the math a little bit easier. With that said though, the system would still work if our incomes were wildly disparate – it’d just mean that one of us would be contributing *a lot* more to the joint than the other, to keep our “fun money” per month roughly equal. Basically, our goal is to make sure that no matter who makes what, our individual standards of living are roughly equal (if I get to have enough disposable income to go out for $15 martinis on the regular, so does he, and vice-versa!).
If this is a repeated issue, get him a key box.
Oh no no no. If this is a repeated issue, stop fixing it for him and let him figure out a solution.
Eh. I see nothing wrong with helping find DH a solution for a recurring problem. Marriage is a partnership afer all …
Yes, I agree with this. Ask him what he would have done if you hadn’t been available to rescue him, and between the 2 of you determine whether it makes sense to have him call a locksmith next time, or whether the cost of installing some kind of keypad lock, etc would be worth it compared to the cost of more than one locksmith call. Or maybe he can come up with another solution (perhaps a retired friend would be willing to hold a spare key, put the keys on a retractable chain and carabiner so it’s physically clipped to his waistband, spare key in his wallet, etc?)
The fact that it’s the second time in 2 days also makes me think you should ask him what’s going on and if there is something unusual distracting him?
But you have my sympathies – I’m the one who is always losing my phone, wallet, keys or glasses somewhere in my house if I don’t put them back in the exact spot they go in, and my husband is the one who I can not convince to write on or look at a calendar that ends up double booking himself or forgetting appointments. For me, that means I make heavy use of wheresmycellphone dot com and will probably get Tile soon, for my husband that means he has to put up with me nagging him or else I log into his gmail account and put appointments on his calendar that pop up on his phone for things he truly can’t forget.
We both acknowledge that it’s part of the package of putting up with the other, but if one of us is starting to drive the other crazy, we call them on it. As in “I’m tired of stressing out about whether you’ll remember to go appointments after your forgot XYZ, so what can we do about it?” or “I’m tired of searching the house every damn morning for your keys/phone/wallet because you are running late and can’t find them, it’s really getting old.”
I can sympathize with the husband. I swear I try really really hard to stay together and keep everything in order, but inevitably I lose something every day. I’ve come up with all kinds of complex rituals and checklists to try and keep me on track, but I still slip up. Thankfully, my husband understands that I’m honestly not trying to careless deliberately.
For instance, I lose my keys all. the. time. I really don’t know how.
He took it upon himself to get me a little tiny bird house that attaches to the front door and has two slots for a little bird that attaches to my keyring. When I am home, my keys and my bird go into the little home. If my husband happens to notice that I’m there and the bird is NOT in his home, chances are I’ve lost them without realizing it, and he’ll tell me so we can search together before it becomes an OMG IM LATE emergency.
If someone is willing to think for me, I let them. When my husband reminds me of things over and over, I free up brain space for other things knowing he’ll remind me again before I need to remember it on my own. It’s actually harder for me to remember what I need to do when he’s reminds me about things over and over.
Try letting him forget a couple appointments or his wallet or his keys and let him deal with the consequences. If you fix every problem or keep him from making mistakes, he doesn’t connect his inattention to the consequences of that inattention.
I hear your vent and I’m just going to have this perspective.
I have a husband that I have to similarly “mother” in a lot of ways. I find that the general tone of commentary on this site finds that to be a problem and that everyone should be fully responsible for themselves, etc. But my husband can’t do those things. He’s brilliant, he’s the hardest-working person I’ve ever met, and I respect him a lot. But before we got married (and as it would be if something happened to me), on his own he forgets to pay the mortgage, the insurance, will have to go to the store every.single.day in order to have the components of a meal for that day, will forget doctor’s, dentists appointments, etc. – and in work and in his life, but for some “guidance”, he also can’t seem to discern between what needs to get done today and what is also important and could be put off until next week, so there are constant emergencies. Yet he can do in his head all the calculations that others in his profession need tools and equipment for, and I’m sure today, ten years later, could pass the bar exam simply from what he remembers from helping me study.
Yes, on one hand, I’d love it if I could ask for advice on how to “help” him in a way that’s less frustrating to me. What tips, tricks, organizational tools, etc could work best. And yes, there’s no doubt in my mind that he’s got some kind of brain circuitry that causes this – he’s not trying to be this way and he’s often frustrated at himself.
But for me it’s not a deal-breaker. There are a lot of things I love and respect about him. This sort of organization is a strength of mine and we can complement each other. I get more frustrated when I do look to others for advice and they become judgmental on how I shouldn’t “mother” him and let him just fail. But no, letting the car break down or letting the electric get turned off is not okay. And I have been with him enough years to know that it wouldn’t result in the next month’s bill getting paid any earlier, etc.
It is what it is. I wish someone would suggest apps, programs, etc to help relieve his frustration and my level of management. But I don’t wish that he’d fundamentally become someone else. It is fundamentally who he is, and kids did make it worse. Very young baby/toddlers put a big strain on our marriage until I chose to outsource almost all of our domestic work, so that I was only “responsible” for schedule and logistics.
As a side note I gave him spare keys and keyholders to all of our buildings, vehicles, etc and installed them one year as a gift to him (no – to me!)
+1 I do stupid, annoying things too and my husband doesn’t say “your problem, deal” and I don’t either. We help each other out. Price of being in a relationship.
I understand that your husband is scatterbrained, which some find endearing, but every single human on earth has to perform basic tasks to keep themselves alive, fed, and sheltered. Paying the mortgage once a month is not an “oh, I can’t do that, I’m so forgetful” task. It is a task that must be done. Period. You’re right, letting the car break down or letting the electric get turned off is not okay. “Letting” your wife handle every single life task is not okay, either.
Right. Like I was saying, I can describe a situation and say that I’m okay with it every day for the rest of my life, but people on this site will be sure to drop comments that judge and disapprove my own situation that I’m perfectly fine with.
My husband is fairly scatterbrained too — and has the ADD diagnosis to go with it — and he would completely forget to pay the bills if I hadn’t taken them over. But I need someone to remind me to stop and smell the roses and that it’s ok to spend money on myself, both of which he does. He’s also great with projects, whether it’s researching a major purchase or detail-oriented home improvements. I agree that this site sometimes has a tendency to be unforgiving to imperfections in good partners.
+ 1 (also have a husband with an ADHD diagnosis and I take care of lots of the “adult responsibilities”)
anon: Thanks for your post; this is on my mind as well, as I have a very brilliant, very impractical spouse.
It’s taken me some time to realize that just because very difficult things come easily to him doesn’t mean that everyday things do. When he has been forced to focus on things like scheduling, organization, recurring tasks, etc.–and not make a mess of it–it’s genuinely taken a lot out of him.
I have come across a lot of tips, tricks, and organizational tools (sometimes called “scaffolding”) from the world of education and academic coaching, but it’s not uncommon that you can find a corporate management strategy that is literally the same thing.
I also just pay attention to what works. At his job, they started using a calendar/alert system that has successfully keeps him from missing appointments. So now I’ll just add things to his calendar if it’s an important event or deadline, and I see that he hasn’t added it yet. I am okay with this because (a) I’m the one worrying about it, and my worrying is my problem, (b) nagging him to do this himself so he develops some kind of character skill would actually be much more like “mothering,” (c) I’d rather he expended his energy playing to his strengths.
I don’t have this figured out, but I’m definitely happier when I just take action myself towards whatever my goal is (whether it’s helping him, or not caring when he makes a predictable mistake).
I’ve found that calendar reminders on his phone helped a little. It got even better when he got a GPS-enabled heart rate monitor that syncs with his phone. He’ll ignore or “accidentally” dismiss the reminders on his phone when he’s looking at emails or whatever. He actually pays attention to alerts that pop up on his wrist.
anon a mouse
His problem: make him walk to you to get your keys.
I agree with letting him deal with the consequences and he will figure it out. But if this is a new problem for him, I would also show him a little compassion. For a couple weeks in a row, I kept locking my keys in the car and my husband came and bailed me out (after he got off work.). I had never done that in the 10 years we have been married and maybe only did it a couple of times as a new teenage driver many years ago. For me, it was a result of being distracted in the morning because of something specific. Once we dealt with that issue, I haven’t locked my keys in the car since.
From the other side – when we first got married my husband had to come “rescue” me a couple of times in similar ways. (Left something important at work, or lost car key and needed spare car key). I was a bit scatterbrained. I got better with time. I really, really, appreciated having him there to lean on and it was one of the best things about him that he never complained and was always there for me. (I paid back in other ways – cooking him stuff he loves, for example – or getting him little gifts). But if he’s good in other ways, I’d let it go for a bit.
full of ideas
get a keypad lock!
So, for years my favorite book has been Gone With the Wind. Scarlett’s ruthlessness and strength is fascinating to me, and there’s a lot more nuance to the characters that they had to cut out of the movies. There are parts to it that I find incredibly inspiring and reminds me to hustle if I want something.
But I’m also very aware of how the book minimizes the slavery issue. The slaves in the book are treated well, adore the family, are often protected by Scarlett–but that’s not what slavery is and the book is still very clear to emphasize blacks as primitive and less capable. It completely makes emancipation look like a bad thing and the KKK is made to be a thing of honor. I understand how deeply wrong these parts of it are.
But the the reasons I love the book are for Scarlett herself, the examination of how circumstances can completely change a person, the different approaches to hardship and how some people just aren’t able to weather the storm.
I’ve always been very open about GWTW being my favorite book, but with race such a poignant issue, it gives me pause. If someone told you it was their favorite book, what would your reaction be? (How about any other controversial work of literature?)
It’s a great book and I think part of the point of that story is that Scarlett is a complete and utter sociopath and all around awful person. I think people who have read it would understand your love, but people who haven’t or who have only seen the movie and think it’s a romance novel would not get it at all.
See I don’t think she’s COMPLETELY awful. She does utterly horrible things, but if she didn’t, she and her family would have starved, she would have lost the home her father adored and she probably would have been killed when the soldier came to Tara (I’m such a dork).
I think how she becomes so awful is because she’s the only one who acts; everyone else is just dead weight.
My take from reading it is that at the beginning she seems like just a spoiled, jealous brat, who is on the path to becoming a better human, but as the story progresses there are things thrown in that majorly stick out, like how she doesn’t love her own children and how she ends up running a slave labor camp after the war where she literally works even white people to death which is shocking to even some pretty horrible people. Part of it may just be the lens through which the story is told, but it seems to me that the author chose to paint her so horribly for a reason. It redeems the story for me because I feel as if we’re meant to be critical of her and of the era.
She’s definitely not a positive character and she is pretty much a monster. And I think that’s what makes her so fascinating.
Like when she hires the convicts and finds out the overseer is starving them, she’s outraged and horrified and gets them food and decides to fire him. But then she thinks she’ll lose money, so she changes her mind and tries not to think about it.
I think she still does have a conscience and knows right from wrong, she’s just so focused on her goals she’s able to squash it. Of course, it gets easier and easier for her to do so, which is what makes her so gosh darned awful.
And it makes her so interesting to talk about! I can’t really think of any fiction books I find truly interesting which are not problematic in some way. But yeah, maybe don’t bring it up as your favorite in most situations. :)
Lesson learned :)
I read somewhere (sorry, can’t cite) that Margaret Mitchell based Scarlett on Becky Sharp from Vanity Fair. Mitchell was surprised that so many women liked Scarlett because she worked to make her unlikable!
I think Scarlett’s decision to put her profits ahead of human lives at her lumber mill was the final hardening of her character, and was supposed to turn readers off. She lacks a conscious and will ALWAYS put herself first. Her “happy ending” marriage to Rhett isn’t happy because she’s so selfish, grasping and demanding. She’s ruins it. We never know if she really loved Rhett, or if he just became the next shiny object out of her reach. She doesn’t even know; in her typical fashion, she stops analyzing herself and just focuses on the challenge of winning her prize.
GWTW is one of my all-time favorite books. I read it at 11 and reread it every year until 28 or so. (Yeah, I finally shelved it.) As a teen, I thought Scarlett was a strong woman to look up to because she broke cultural mores and didn’t care what anyone thought. She was a survivor! I hated that her marriage to Rhett was rushed through and tacked on because I wanted to see her finally rewarded–but as I aged, I realized that Mitchell created a character that wasn’t strong, but was fatally flawed and incapable of a happy ending. The story is actually incredibly depressing, and Scarlett’s problems mostly come from Scarlett’s own warped and greedy character.
This book was written in the aftermath of Birth of a Nation (a cringe-worthy silent movie about the KKK as heroes) and it absorbed a lot of that mindset. If I were at a party, I wouldn’t tell the room that GWTW is my favorite novel because I don’t know where people are going to go with that. They can think, “Ew, romance!” or “Ew, slavery!” or worse, “Ew, racism!”
I actually have a new favorite novel: Revolutionary Road. If you like Scarlett’s relational struggles and character flaws, you’ll adore the Wheelers.
Thanks for the recommendation! I’ll add it to my list
Also (after reading the rest of this thread) I applaud you for throwing the question out there and being brave enough to say that GWTW is your favorite book.
About 10 years ago I started to feel that GWTW was becoming…embarrassing? Hated? I can’t find the right word. I just know that it went from being something quirky (“Oh, you like that old movie? Here’s a Hallmark ornament for your Christmas tree!!!!”) to something that I cringe over and want to hide in a box along with my yearbooks and 90’s CDs.
I’m dorky enough to have a Franklin Mint doll of Scarlett in her iconic BBQ dress. She’s hidden in my bedroom and not on display for people to see and wonder at. She reminds me of being a preteen diving into literature and old movies on AMC and being in love with stories and other worlds. And my husband bought it for me because he knew I loved GWTW like he loves Star Wars. It’s a fantasy and a memory for me–not a sign that I really wish slavery never ended or that the Old South would rise again. But since it is tied up in that, it’s not something I feel comfortable having as a favorite anymore.
I also dropped Anne of Green Gables, but that’s because it seemed to become such a twee, overused thing. Like, every white woman in Starbucks wearing an eternity scarf and sipping a pumpkin spice drink thinks Anne is her own kindred spirit. I looked around and went, “Well, that ruined Anne for me.”
Anyway, thanks for starting this discussion! I loved reading everyone’s thoughts!
I think you explain it well. I truly enjoyed Go Set A Watchmen even though the world recoiled in horror. In a lot of ways it is hard for me to understand, in todays’ world, how people could hold the views about race that they held 50 and 60 years ago and I found the book to provide me with a level of depth and nuance of that time that I had not been exposed to previously.
I’m saying I don’t think you’re a racist or anything for enjoying GWTW. The transformation of Scarlett is the central narrative of the book – and it is inspirational in a lot of ways. I’d have a lot of pause if you said that Uncle Tom’s Cabin was your favorite book. Or Uncle Remus.
I found Get Set a Watchmen really interesting too and I thought it was actually pretty realistic in how most viewed the world during that time
But it’s not controversial, it’s racist as all h*ll. My favourite book is Voltaire’s Candide, that is controversial.
Not in the least disagreeing with it being a racially awful book. What makes it controversial in my mind is that, in terms of pure literary merit, it is a fantastic book. I think there are plenty of books with a lot of racist, s*xist or homophobic premises that still have literary merit and are worth studying, as long as you understand the issues at hand.
Controversy though is a going against the grain, something like denouncing capitalism, or encouraging nomadic lifestyles, or exposing the horrors of neo-liberalism. GWTW isn’t controversial, it’s straight up offensive, and sure there is *some* merit in the technical writing and a bit of character development but there are so many books that don’t have such giant moral and ethical gaps. Calling it your favourite books makes it look like you are either poorly read or agree with the social issues, both of which aren’t reflections I would want.
Well, I have a Master’s in literature, pursuing my PhD and am published in several academic journals for my analysis with literary theories, so I usually get a pass on the poorly read assumption (I don’t mean that to be a snarky response–I mean literally in discussions with people that they normally give me a little leeway and ask for further clarity, rather than jumping to the assumption that my reading list is Twilight and GWTW).
And one of the biggest things to me, in terms of social issues…I first read GWTW when I was 15. My understanding of the Civil War and race issues was the simplistic view in textbooks. Reading GWTW and seeing it made out to be not so bad caused me to really question things, and I ended up doing a lot of my own research on slavery, the Civil War, Reconstruction and racial tensions through the Jim Crow era. While UTTERLY WRONG AND AWFUL in its depiction of slavery, it at least was the catalyst for me to dig deeper.
I don’t think it was seen as offensive when it was published in early 1930s. I think the history of the criticism of GWTW would be interesting to learn more about (similar to the history of the causes of the Civil War – was it to preserve the Union or to abolish slavery and how what was said at what time says more about historians and their contemporary times than about the actual causes of the Civil War)
Controversy is just disagreement and contention—it’s not necessarily an uprising in a positive direction.
I just meant as many people who think it’s the paragon of literature (I do love the book, but I’m not in that camp), there are just as many people who think all copies should be burned.
So? Lots of things aren’t seen as offensive at the time but in retrospect are. It being socially acceptable at the time has no relevance to it’s social acceptability today. Appealing to tradition is not just a bad argument but a logical fallacy.
I don’t think she was saying it was acceptable because of the time it was written, but that’s interesting to look at in terms of how it reflected attitudes of the time. Like a time capsule, it gives insights into the mindsets of a very particular audience is a very particular and problematic portion of time.
I used to really like you KT, especially your posts about animals. But the way you are relentlessly defending such an awful piece of writing is really frightening.
…I wasn’t defending. I was having a genuine discussion. People have raised really excellent points that I really need to think about and reflect on.
I do think the book has literary merit, but it is deeply racist.
And for anonny, I’m sorry to let you down and frighten you, seriously. But I would ask that people try not to eviscerate me too much (yet).
I am truly trying to have a real discussion and learn–listening to people who disagree with me, debating areas…that how opinions are changed. By hearing different perspectives, reflecting on different experiences, acknowledging privilege, that’s how we mature and grow.
If people could do that more without the fear of being immediately labeled as evil, racist, bigoted, etc, I think the world would be a better place.
But psychology shows that’s not how opinions are changed. Most humans become extremely uncomfortable when their ideals are challenged and immediately go into defense mode, as you are here…
Anonny, I’m with you. KT, I don’t know what to say. A lot of your reasoning has struck me as really privileged and immature. I’m shocked you are working towards a Phd in literature with some of your arguments here. And also surprised that you can genuinely stand up for this book and felt like that was so ok that you’d post about it here.
Of course it’s uncomfortable. Finding out that something you believed for X years is completely horrid is going to hurt (and it should). But having a true conversation, rather than saying “you frighten me for your beliefs” is an important step.
I apologize if I’m being defensive. I really am trying to learn, absorb other people’s point of view, explain where I’m coming from so people can poke holes in it and then I can reflect on it.
I do not disagree Anon 2:19–it’s absolutely a privileged and immature point of view. I guess it’s a carry-over…I loved the book when I was 15 so I have some kind of nostalgic attachment to it.
People’s comments here have been really insightful and are making me rethink some things. As I said, I do really need to take some time and reflect, read some more and work on it.
I am–obviously–thoroughly flawed. While I would like to believe I’m this educated, open-minded, modern person, I clearly have things I need to work on. It’s quite clear that my privilege as a white woman influences my mindset and that’s something I need fix in myself.
And I posted here as a safe space to have a real discussion…I knew there’d be folks who would very honestly say “You’re a privileged, immature doofus” rather than friends who would just nod and say everything was okay. I think we all need to hear outside perspective beyond our own little niche every now and again.
Alanna of Trebond
I’ll defend you KT. I am a WOC (albeit, not black), and I love GWTW, both the book and movie. I like the movie more.
My feeling on GwtW is that it’s a fantastic book about the end of a society and a way of life–we can recognize that it needed to end and that it was devastating for the people who lived it at the same time; and we can recognize that the book has literary merit while also being super racist as well.
Agreed with all of this.
I was born in the deep south, and have lived here for almost all of my life. I haven’t read the book, so what I know comes from the movie. When people tell me their favorite movie is GWTW, I think they probably have simplistic views of history and are in love with a fantasy version of the south that never actually existed/might be kinda racist/probably debbed at the blue and gray ball.
I generally think the movie version of Scarlett is enraging. I can’t stand her and think her behavior is awful. I also want to slap Melanie for being such a doormat. But at the same time, I completely identify with Scarlett’s “with god as my witness, I’ll never go hungry again” attitude. There have been times in my life where I clearly understand how after surviving hardship, you become a bit harder yourself and you vow to take care of yourself, screw everyone else. It’s a very interesting movie but not one of my favorites, mostly because I get so angry at almost all of the characters. Rhett is the only one I like because he has the good sense to leave that shit show.
I also unfairly judge people who say Catcher in the Rye is their favorite and assume they are privileged and immature. But I also wanted to slap Holden Caulfield the entire time I was reading that book.
I admit I do an eyeroll when people say their favorites include Catcher in the Rye, American Psycho or Fight Club. Just really?
Thank you. I really wanted to hit Holden Caulfield too. Couldn’t stand that book.
Killer Kitten Heels
I’m bookish, and I’ve read GWTW, and I’d probably raise an eyebrow if you named it as your “all time favorite” book in conversation. I can definitely see all of the points you’re raising about its arguable literary merit, but the problematic parts are very deeply problematic, and I’d be at least curious about whether you understand/care about the problematic parts if it’s you’re “favorite.”
To me, “favorite” is different from “most interesting” – I’m deeply interested in, say, Heart of Darkness (talk about problematic), but I reserve the “favorite” label for things I feel able to love unequivocally, so I’d be hearing your “GWTW is my favorite” as “I unequivocally love a deeply problematic and racist book” – it’s clear from your further explanation that that’s not what you mean, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people are taking it that way, and you might, to some people at least, be saying something different about yourself than you intend to.
+1, right down to the Heart of Darkness example.
+1 – favorite, to me, denotes a comfort read or a world I want to escape into. KT’s description of GWTW is more along the lines of “fascinating exploration of human pysche.”
My favorite comfort read is, ridiculously, Harry Potter. GWTW is for when those moments when I want to reflect, study, and get myself in hustle mode.
No shame on Harry Potter! – that’s my comfort read too. I re-read probably every 18 months or so. I pretty much grew up with Harry Potter (was basically the same age as him as each book was released), so I think this has a lot to do with it.
Anon for this
I have very mixed feelings on this subject. I don’t think we can or should erase history. Part of me thinks it’s important to read books like this to understand “woah, this is how it was. That’s awful. Let’s never do that again.” Another part of me thinks, what would it be like to be a POC in middle school reading a book where people of my race were treated abysmally. Does it make that student’s classmates think less of him or her? Are we perpetuating history’s problems by relieving them through literature?
I know this debate often comes up when historical literature is assigned in schools. I don’t have the answer.
Killer Kitten Heels
Personally, I think that the best way to present these kinds of books in school is probably side-by-side with non-fiction discussing the problematic issues. For example, I might pair GWTW with Michelle Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow” or Ta-Nehisi Coates’ “Between the World and Me” – basically, using the non-fiction as a lens through which to meaningfully critique the fiction, instead of just reading the fiction and doing some vague “wow, weren’t the old days bad?!?!” sort of head-shaking.
full of ideas
I think is really smart.
+10000000 to this. Literature and fiction are just that. What is more important in the context of education is to understand exactly what happened and how to not repeat it. I have to say I have loved GWTW over the years (both the book and the movie) but 1) I know it is fiction 2) that it harbors horrible sentiments and elevates a society that was terrible and 3) that it was written in a very different time. I am incredibly well read, but there is a reason that story stands up and is still talked about today. But I am also a white woman who has marched in many “black lives matter” protests and who works to get get immigrant unaccompanied children green cards in this country.
Two things can be equally true at the same time. You can enjoy the book for the “story” it is – and condemn it for the horrible, ugly racist society it portrays.
KT- I applaud you for asking the question and inviting a reasoned discussion.
Having been one of the only black kids in the room in school, I think reading these types of things are very important and can actually help in the way people understand their own culture and how they treat each other. Provided that the instructor puts it in context and provides a space for students to examine the books critically from a social standpoint. Otherwise you’re still glossing over the unsavory and very important parts. It takes a good instructor and real commitment to critical thinking though.
Anon for this
Thanks for your perspective.
Thank you for sharing, I appreciate it.
It’s interesting to look at the Amer. Library Assoc.’s list of the 100 most challenged books (GWTW is on it) and see how many books are on there that are taught in ms/hs/college literature courses. We can’t ignore the past and just pretend that none of the ugly parts never happened. People need to read sometimes painful books and be able to talk about them and think critically about the issues.
I think that’s all fine, but it’s a different issue than “GWTW is my all-time favorite book.”
+1. It’s kind of like the difference between saying that you think it is important that German students (all students, really) learn about WWII and the Holocaust, and saying that you think this diary of an SS Officer’s party-line wife is your favorite book.
Yes, but GWTW is an imagined history. It’s fiction and was published in 1936. It’s merit as a historical teaching tool are limited, unless you want to use it as a tool to see how some whites felt about the Civil War in the 1930s.
I’m anon at 12:08. My response was actually talking more to “anon for this” general question about how do we teach various books. I agree that GWTW isn’t that much of a literary standout in my mind. There are plenty of other books that are much better written and are better tools.
Anon for this
Yeah, I took us on a tangent but it’s something I think about a lot.
One of the really interesting reads is “The Wind Done Gone,” which is a GWTW parody, written from a slave’s point of view. It really examines how horrible the original was and explores the characters in a way that is more realistic of the awfulness of slave-owners (Gerald raped Mammy and produced the main character) and how stupid and ignorant everyone is for thinking the slaves really love them. It’s a really fascinating companion read to the original.
I think GWTW (book and movie) has reached the tipping point where it’s no longer acceptable in polite company. Yes, it includes a fascinating character in Scarlett O’Hara, but the context in which it is set (the portrayal of the slaves, the featuring of the KKK as heroic, etc) is just. not. okay. any more.
I’m assuming you’re white (I am too, FWIW), and this is an example of white privilege — the ability to overlook the “racially awful” parts because they don’t really resonate with you and focus on the parts you find fascinating and engaging.
I loved the book and movie when I was younger, but now the whole thing just makes me cringe.
Yes and yes. But I don’t want a rewrite where Scarlet is awful but then acts like a 21st century do-gooder (emancipates everyone before the war AND gives them the vote AND equal pay for men and women). That sort of book happens and is reliably an awful read (but a good message).
I mean, I read the Bible (KJV only). I don’t *like* the parts on advice on selling your daughters into slavery. I try to focus on the NT.
And yes, rewriting it to make Scarlett a faux liberator is ridiculous. They did that with Rhett Butler’s People, the “official sequal”…he became a secret abolitionist and ran the underground railroad
And your point on the Bible is really interesting–I’m an atheist but find the study of religions to be fascinating, and it really intrigues me that people can denounce works of literature like Catcher in the Rye or GWTW, but still embrace the Bible and dismiss the parts of slavery, rape, misogyny, oppressions, etc. (I don’t mean people HERE, I mean in general).
I absolutely agree with white privilege; I totally recognize that my very different upbringing makes it possible for me to focus so much on Scarlett’s narrative.
As mentioned below, the parody of GWTW is really interesting and I think a good rebuttal/companion to reading GWTW.
I will admit to loving GWTW. I love how MM dives into characters’ flaws and motivations. There’s a fierce, ruthless streak in me that matches Scarlett’s very well — which I am proud of and scared of at the same time, KWIM?
Obviously there’s an issue if you can’t read the book and appreciate it while knowing that it paints a VERY UNREALISTIC happy and harmonious picture of plantation life… but I don’t think that’s any reason to call it “not acceptable in polite company”!
And… that’s exactly the privilege issue I was discussing above.
You are not being fair, Senior Attorney. I like you a lot, but you’re not being fair here.
I think an important element to consider is that Maragaret Mitchell had the book published in 1936. It’s not as though it was a product from the Civil War era– it was very much an ode to the (mostly imagined) “glory days” of the Old South. It has ZERO historical merit as a documentation of what it was like to live through the Civil War, but it’s a pretty darn good barometer of how many whites felt about the Antebellum South.. in 1936.
It’s an interesting novel. Scarlett is a compelling character, and the film is a classic for a lot of reasons. But I don’t think it deserves the attention it’s received, and I imagine its prominence will die away in the next 50 years or so. Margaret Mitchell won’t live on in the way Hemingway or Bradbury or Margaret Atwood will.
+1. I grew up in Atl. and everyone pretty much rolled their eyes when visitors wanted to see plantations and talk about GWTW glitz. Sure, go tour Mitchell’s house, but please realize that the city was burned to the ground during the actual war.
+1 – plus a lot of the lore of GWTW is because of the movie – the insane expense of making it, the advancements in cinematography it took to make it, the swearing on screen, the burning of Tara. But I feel like people who are that kind of classic movie buff to care about those kind of things are sort of a dying breed, too.
Agreed-I don’t think GWTW will stand the test of time as a great work of literature because it cannot transcend time and be relevant.
I also really really cringe at plantation tours, southern belle themed parties and antebellum-themed magazines (like Blake Lively’s website had)
I agree with every word out of Aunt Jamesina’s mouth.
I think the fact that you can put aside all of the massive racist problems and just focus on Scarlett is a really really privileged view point. Personally, I enjoyed the book- it’s problematic, and also compelling. But it’s not my favorite, and if it really truly were I would pick a runner up to mention in public.
I completely agree it’s a very privileged point of view and I completely acknowledge that. It is impossible for me to comprehend the horrors of that era and truly understand the current state of affairs and fear regarding race.
I’m a white woman, comfortably employed, but who grew up in extreme poverty and had to hustle and be harder than I would have liked to be to succeed-that’s the part of me that focuses on Scarlett. That certainly doesn’t make it okay to gloss over the parts that make it god awful, though.
I think if I understood your POV earlier — though you aren’t Scarlett, until after the Yankees come to Tara, because she was wealthy and wants to preserve it — I would have made different points? Interesting.
Yeah, I probably need some therapy since she resonates with me especially when she’s desperately trying to hold onto her home and feed her family
Killer Kitten Heels
Hey, fellow white-poor-person-who-hustled-to-financial-comfort here, and I don’t want to sound preachy or whatever, but I think people in our position need to be *especially* careful about acknowledging our race privilege, because we don’t necessarily feel “privileged” in the traditional sense of the word. Like, there can be this knee-jerk tendency to fall into the “you have no idea how HARD I worked to get here” space when confronted with our current place in the social hierarchy, but just because we had it hard in a number of ways growing up (class privilege is also a thing, and a thing we did not have), doesn’t mean our lives haven’t been fundamentally easier by virtue of our whiteness.
I get why you identify with Scarlett, but you may want to give more thought to why, for you, that identification seems to be trumping some very real concerns about what the book has to say about race.
No I hear you. I recognize that despite being poor as a child, I still come from a place of remarkable privilege. I truly do understand that as a white woman, my path up was a lot easier than it could have been for others.
And it’s not exactly that my identification with Scarlett trumps the racial issues; part of the reason I do like the book is because it’s so bat crazy in how it addresses those issues. My reading of it is what inspired me in high school to do a lot of research into the era/Reconstruction/segregation and forced me to educate myself on the truth of the matter.
I think it’s so fascinating to me because it has literary merit, but is absolutely terrible, and while it was not intended when it was written, certainly inspires a lot of debate and strong reactions.
(That came off kind of rambling, but my love of the book is complicated and at odds with my hatred of the racial aspects).
This is such an important comment.
My BIL is a white cis gendered male but he is completely unable to acknowledge that he may have any privilege because he came from a economically poor background and “pulled himself up by his bootstraps” to an upper middle class financial situation. Family gatherings can be so infuriating when he starts in on politics.
I prefer to think that a hungry person is a hungry person. I wasn’t any less hungry because I’m white.
Killer Kitten Heels
No, but you get advantages from being white that non-white people don’t get. By way of personal example: I dropped my regional accent, took some etiquette courses, got a fancy degree, bought some nice suits, and now I can “pass” at the kinds of social functions I didn’t even know existed as a kid. No one assumes anything about me from my outward appearance, other than that I belong exactly where I am. Non-white people don’t ever get to “pass” in that way, even if an individual non-white person happened to have a more-affluent/”better” upbringing than I did, because they literally wear their difference on their skin.
Privilege isn’t about your personal merit – it’s about the fact that your personal merit will carry you further with less work than a person who lacks that particular privilege. No one is saying you weren’t “hungry,” just that there are plenty of “hungry” people who lack white privilege who don’t get to reap the same rewards as you do on the same amount of work/drive.
Killer Kitten Heels
Edit: I read “hungry” as “hunger to succeed/excel,” but I just realized you could’ve literally meant hungry, in which case, please ignore my last sentence, as it obviously doesn’t apply to actual hunger for food/nutrition.
To continue the analogy, you may not be less hungry because you’re white, but I’d argue you have more access to food (literal and metaphorical) because you’re white.
(Side note…thank you all for a genuinely interesting discussion on this. I truly appreciate your different viewpoints and thoughtfulness, and I also am grateful it didn’t devolve into “OMG YOU RACIST MORON, WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU’. You raise really great points about privilege and limitations that I need to noodle on.
I think the reason why that tends to be the default response is that most people aren’t really capable of seeing their own viewpoints critically and aren’t really able to learn/see something from a different perspective. Unfortunately, it takes a special person to be able to learn and grow from these kinds of conversations, and I’m really glad you’re that kind of person.
Thank you for your kindness. This has been a really productive and eye-opening discussion for me and I really appreciate it.
Haven’t contributed to this discussion at all, but reading through the responses I felt you have been very mature and honest and open to all the feedback here in ways most people never are, KT. Kudos to you.
As a mom… (I hate starting convos like that)… I found an edited abridged version of Tom Sawyer and read it with my son. We are a White Caucasian family, of minority religions. We’ve had a LOT of race talks, but hadn’t talked about The N Word yet. He’s 6 as I read it to him… very grateful I wouldn’t have THAT conversation with him yet….
Then we read about “Indian Joe” where “Indian” is mispronounced in what is today known as a racial slur. And that’s his name. I’d forgotten that he appears and reappears throughout the whole book. So, I had to have The Talk with my son, anyway, about how this is how people talked and thought but the book is still okay and a work of art and there’s this other word, see, and there is no excuse to ever use these words, ever. And I can see (with my kid) have this kind of discussion.
It’d be harder to have it with an adult about GWTW. Does the historic racism of the GWTW novel get outweighed by the historic and artistic merit of the work? Maybe? sometimes? Sometimes not? Do you love the book because of it’s implausibility (this would be you being naive) or in spite of it (this would you willfully turning a blind eye to it) or on another, perhaps academic level, where you write your thesis about historic racism portrayed in romance novels?
In complete honesty, it’s probably the blind eye option. I love the book for the journey of Scarlett’s from innocent but selfish girl into hard and cold ruthless monster. My admiration for the book is very much in spite of all of the racial issues.
Since I am a literary dork, its history and how its been perceived over the past 80 years is fascinating to me.
Hey KT – your initial question was what people thought if you mentioned it socially and I think you have your answer. People don’t often feel inclined to get into such heavy, deep topics at a party to learn your intentions and complex feelings towards the book, so you might have to be ok with people just thinking you are racist, naive, or whatever without having this type of discussion. If I were you, I might examine my thoughts on the book with what everyone said here and find a new book to tell people socially.
Yes, clearly I’ve learned my lesson and won’t use GWTW as my icebreaker at any socials :)
To be clear–when I have mentioned it as my favorite, it has been with fellow researchers and literature enthusiasts where having in-depth discussions is what we do–it’s not like I have a GWTW calendar on my desk or dress up as Scarlett on Halloween.
I’ll have to stick to Pride & Prejudice for more general conversation :)
Pride & prejudice being your number two possibily makes me even sadder
Oh for goodness sake…
There are hundreds of books I adore. House of Leaves, Anna Karenina, The Sound and Fury and I think Paradise Regained is one of the most overlooked pieces of literature ever.
But I like Pride & Prejudice and GWTW. How that makes you sad that a complete stranger enjoys them is beyond me, but if you are determined to think less of me for my reading choices, knock yourself out.
There are deep parallels between the sexism and racism in GWTW, although I have no idea whether or not Mitchell intended them. But it’s said so many times how women are to act as if they are simple and in need of male protection, to look at a man’s face as if he’s God, how women’s brains can’t handle math or business. Then the same thing is said of slaves.
Scarlett never (because she’s Scarlett) extrapolated her own experiences of “doing things as well as a man” to the fairly obvious idea that maybe what she was taught about blacks was as much b.s. as what men were taught about women.
As I said, no idea whether or not Mitchell planned that, but I always kind of want to smack Scarlett upside the head, sometime around when she buys her mills, when she goes on (in her head) about blacks. I don’t think she even listens to herself.
That’s a really good point. Scarlett figures out pretty early on that everything she was taught about being a woman was stupid, but never makes the next connection regarding slavery and blacks. But Scarlett is pretty ignorant and dense, so it’s not entirely surprising.
That’s a really good point I hadn’t thought of before.
Her mother was a prominent suffragist so it seems likely that it was her intent, but who knows.
Re-pasting this in the right thread, since this is something that hasn’t been raised.
It’s my favorite book too, but I always took the tone and the apparent attitude towards the slavery issue as deeply tongue-in-cheek, similar to the understated social commentary of Jane Austen. It’s one of my favorite parts of the book, the darkly cynical, yet on the surface benign, tone of the whole thing. Definitely the literary version of saying “bless your heart.” I always thought that is the primary reason it won the Pulitzer, because it manages to comment on these issues just under the surface. What bridget says about the parallels between sexism and racism is exactly what I’m talking about. I also know that Margaret Mitchell was generally not welcomed into polite society in 1930s Atlanta (until after she was a famous author, natch) because of her anti-racist views and unwillingness to go along with Jim Crow in her personal life. So that may have informed the lens I read it through.
This conversation is why I love to read this site! GWTW was one of my favs as a teen, and upon watching the movie and re-reading it in recent years, I have seen it through a different lens. I love the comments, thanks KT for starting the discussion, as they will give me something to think about the next time I see the movie or pick up the book.
Chicago ‘rettes – can you give me insight into moving to the city? We’re looking at a move due to a new job, and one of us will be working in Hyde Park, the other downtown. Would love a short commute (10-30min) to Hyde Park, since that is where daycare will be. I’ve been told to look at HP, Kenwood, South Loop, Printer’s Row…and I think a few others, but would love it if anyone has more recs and/or specifics about which parts of those neighborhoods are best for a young family, as we know very very little about Chicago. We’ll be renting until we figure out our life (will we ever?), so would also appreciate insight into the rental market. I do realize it is the worst time of year to be moving into a university area (allofthestudents), so that is likely working against us. I keep hearing great things about Lincoln Park and Riverview (I think?) but those don’t seem like good options for getting to Hyde Park…yes, no? Thanks in advance!
I’d live in Hyde Park to start. Keep it simple. Get to know the new jobs, the commute, the city neighborhoods and then decide if you want to rent/buy etc… For reasons of schools, you may also want to look outside the city before you buy.
It’s quite hard to recommend where to live without knowing your budget, what you are looking for, your priorities in a living location etc… I would personally live as close to downtown/Hyde Park as possible to minimize the commute for both of you. But that’s me, not you.
Not really a hard time of year to rent because of the students, as most students don’t have your income/married/kid situation. You are looking for different things, no?
Chicago is shocking segregated and disturbs me quite a bit. It is an amazing city with a lot to offer. I have lived in Hyde Park, downtown/Streeterville, Andersonville and the nearby border suburb of Oak Park. All good, all very different.
Yeah, Lincoln Park, River North (probably what you mean by “Riverview”), and pretty much any North Side neighborhood is out if you need to reliably be able to reach HP within 10-30 minutes. You’re going to a be a southsider, dear. At least for now.
South Loop / Printer’s Row is good commute-wise, but you will likely be in a high rise and not families with little kids like that. Hyde Park itself will have more options for smaller buidlings so it will be easier for you to access outside. And it’s much easier to go the lake / beach (the Point!!!) and parks from HP than it is from the more downtown-y neighborhoods you list.
Okay thanks! This is helpful. We will focus on HP.
I’d suggest living on the east side of Hyde Park so you’re near the Metra (commuter train) and #6 bus (which goes into the loop). The green line (elevated train) is just outside of Hyde Park on the west side but the stop itself is in a fairly sketchy neighborhood and you have to walk through a (sometimes dark) park to get there.
I actually live in the South Loop/Printers Row area and think it would be fine. There are actually a ton of families in the area and it has a good elementary school and day cares. You are mainly going to be stuck with high rises or larger buildings, but there are a fair number of town houses (although must are not available for rent). It’s also an easy commute to Hyde Park either driving or taking the Metra/El..
I lived in Printers Row in a converted loft with heaps of families with kids. These are actually great apartments to be in with kids because the walls are so sturdy that unless your kid had a nutty outside my front door, no concerns with noise disturbing neighbours. Also close to the park. Negatives are less likely to have in unit laundry.
Are you thinking of a driving commute or a transit commute to HP?
It’s my favorite book too, but I always took the tone and the apparent attitude towards the slavery issue as deeply tongue-in-cheek, similar to the understated social commentary of Jane Austen. It’s one of my favorite parts of the book, the darkly cynical, yet on the surface benign, tone of the whole thing. Definitely the literary version of saying “bless your heart.” I always thought that is the primary reason it won the Pulitzer, because it manages to comment on these issues just under the surface.
^I’m guessing this goes to GWTW…I’ve sometimes thought that too…particularly with Mammy, (in the book), she’s even more shrewd and practical than Scarlett and that nuance is lost in the movie…the book version where she helps Scarlett snag Frank in order to get the money is a pretty major moment
Exactly. The movie has zero of the subtle social commentary that I see as rampant throughout the book. IMHO, its primary literary achievement was managing to comment so thoroughly and well (again, just, just below the surface, in this incredibly wry, almost bitterly resigned tone) on racism and sexism. Book vs movie are night and day in this regard.
Anonymous BigLaw Associate
Sorry Kat, I usually like your picks, but these pants are a ticket to Frumptown. And I am fairly old based on your recent poll!
(I may have to repost on the afternoon thread.) I made a mistake and am trying to fix it. Needed to reserve airplane flight and didn’t which is bad for my kid. Now the price is $1000+ (normally $400) which I can’t afford and am trying to find other options. Priceline has a link that you click where you don’t know the exact time of the flight or airline for cheap – say $540. But I keep clicking and it says not available. How does priceline work? Are those cheap flights really available or is priceline just trying to get an airline to bid the route at the stated price?
Any other ideas for cheap prices? Do I just go down the list to orbitz, expedia? I am really having a hard time today. help me hike, Thanks
Have you run the search through kayak? It has options where you can simultaneously search the other deal sites.
definitely try kayak
try miles if you have them.
Try Spirit, Frontier and Southwest. Maybe worth the hassle if they are within driving distance to you.
The way priceline can “get” you is that you think any time will be ok, but you really cannot comprehend how awful they can be. You could get a flight that technically leaves that day, but leaves at 11:50 p.m. and has a 10 hour layover, or some weird combination where they promise only one lay over that is less than 6 hours, and sure there is only one lay over under 6 hours… but if you are flying (for example) from NY to Florida, the first flight is NY to Phoenix and after a 5 hour layover in Phoenix you end up in Florida 20 hours later than when you started. I might be exaggerating but not by much. You don’t get to see the flights before you agree to buy and they are cheap for a reason: because no one else wants them. Maybe it will work out great but clearly I’ve been burned.
Thanks. The priceline reservation explicitly says 1 stop max, max 3 hour layover and “arrives the same day” so maybe they’ve corrected that problem. But no matter, because all the “available” ones say “unavailable” after you click on them and register.
Got it, but it still can be worse than you ever imagined. Imagine this- the direct flight Boston area to DC would be abt an hour or two so even with a layover I figured how bad could it be? I booked Friday to Sunday round trip. Left early Friday morning and had to take a long flight way out of the way to Chicago, wait there a few hours to take another long flight to DC. Since the second flight got delayed due to weather (not their fault) I ended up getting to DC after midnight… even if it had gone according to plan I would have arrived in the evening. A whole day of travel for what was normally a 90 minute flight? And then the same thing coming back Sunday but the layover was in Atlanta. Wayyyy out of the way. Was in DC for abt 12 hours awake, totally ruined my trip. Not worth it.
full of ideas
CheapOAir sometimes works for me – but don’t reserve the first time you look. Close the app and wait 5 min, you’ll get a discount code!
bad mom no more
Thanks to everyone for hive help.
Well I’m no longer a bad mom. (Backstory is that it’s an event on Monday afternoon where had to be there so not flexible with time/date.) Got good $525 deal on hotwire. United Airlines. Arriving at 10:30pm both ways but that is expected whenever flying from one coast to another. One stop each way, less than two hour layovers, both legs with stop in the midwest. Assuming no flights cancelled because of mid-west thunderstorms (which affects every traveler every summer) timing should work.