ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 27 Comments

Weekly News Roundup

Liking these posts? Follow us on Twitter or like us on Facebook — this is the edited version of what we’re reading! (We also Tweet if we hear about a good sale through our CorporetteDeals Twitter feed.)

– I'm sure a lot of readers will be psyched about this: The Limited is launching a new store called Elonquii that will focus on plus-sized workwear. The initial pictures look great. Hat tip: Racked.

– The Careerist wonders if the jumper dress has replaced the power suit. (For my $.02: nope.)

– Above the Law reports on a conference panel where women — all general counsel to Fortune 500 companies — share their war stories. Meanwhile, Capitol Hill Style wonders whether D.C. is an especially tough place to be a working woman.

– Huffington Post wonders: Would you airbrush cleavage out of a work photo? A Canadian Parliament member did.

– The Washington Post takes a good look at women on television and finds bunnies, babies, and broads: Hmmn.

– The New York Times has another excuse to exercise: it strengthens your brain.

Did we miss anything? Add 'em here…

27 Comments

    1. And depending on your firm and location, partnership may not be all you were hoping for when and if you actually do get there….

  2. I dont know about the wash po article. Sure, pan am and playboy club look bad for women from the commercials. shows i can think of the top of my head where the women are no babies or bunnies however:

    the closer, the good wife, the women on criminal minds (actually on a lot of those crim shows, i havent watched it in a while but CSI the women were always good, svu has badass women, etc) game of thrones has the most ridiculously badass women I have seen in a while. there is a whole new slew of women cop shows, etc

    1. I think the Washington Post meant the new shoes coming out this season. They are generally a pretty pathetic depiction of women.

  5. Love the news about The Limited. Such a smart move. I don’t always shop plus, but do sometimes (I’m tall and borderline 14/16) and it has always amazed me that retailers think larger women don’t go to jobs. Are we assumed to be large because we sit on the couch eating bon bons all day?

    I recall hearing Trudy Sullivan, Talbots CEO, being interviewed on NPR. She was talking about Talbots doing really well in the plus sized sector. She said the plus customer is more likely to buy full price, more likely to buy multiple items, and less likely to return items. The interviewer said, “Sounds like an ideal customer.” And Trudy said, “We think so.”

    1. But aren’t all those things true precisely because there are such (relatively) limited offerings for good, reasonably priced professional wear in plus sizes?

      Nevertheless, I think this is great news. I’m in “regular” sizes now, but there was a period of time where I was close to sizing out of the regular stores and definitely sized out of most pants due to my ample derriere, and I remember being incredibly frustrated and thinking how much more difficult shopping is if you don’t fit what retailers have decided is their target range.

      1. That is exactly why I buy full price a lot. I can’t guarantee that what I like and look good in will be there in another week. I remember when I was “small” enough to wear straight sizes that there were three times as many smalls and XSs on a clearance rack as larges and XLs- I always commented how the stores would get more money if they ordered in just one more XL and one less XS.

        In other news, “Elonquii”? Really?

        1. Believe it or not, women at the small end of the spectrum have the same problem. I could never wait for a sale on a Petite 2 outfit (when “2” was the smallest size).

        2. My issue is that the clothes made in the “W” sizes tend to have all the tailoring details removed/ruined. I am a size 16 (regular) bordering on an 18. But a size 14W from any major retailer looks like a shapeless blobby flour sack. If they manage to do this line without outrageously generous (to a fault) sizing in the chest area of the garments, I will be very surprised.

          I have been determined to lose weight, just to fit into a standard size 14 again. 80% of plus sized clothing makes me look like a dowdy blob.

    2. I’m also thrilled about this news. Talbots is just a bit too conservative for me, especially for casual wear. I can do the 18s and XXLs at Ann Taylor and LOFT, but beyond that, I’m not left with much. I’ve never been a fan of Lane Bryant. When I wore a size 12, I loved the Limited. I’ve accepted I’m probably not going to be that size again, so I’m very glad to have them back in my life.

      1. Man, I hate Lane Bryant. For a while I was shopping there to buy their jeans in Tall ( and it was nice, kind of, because I was the smallest size) but when I would browse the rest of the store, everything was just gross – bad fabric, bad construction, and not at all a good deal price-wise!

  6. Jumpers – funny thing – I wore one last Friday. I have another one which is all set to go for a “business” day. I think the trick is to wear it with that tailored shirt or equivalent.

        1. Same. I think an actual jumper would be too much in the office. I also always try to do a suiting type fabric to keep the look as professional as possible.
          Also, hate to nitpick, but the article linked to hardly wondered if the jumper “replaced” the power suit. It pretty firmly rejected the idea and lamented the fact.

          1. That’s not nitpicking. The description should fairly describe the article linked to, especially if the blog author disagrees with the conclusion. That was something of a straw (wo)man.

      2. Older long things from Talbot’s which I have now shortened somewhat. Real jumpers, no waistline.

  7. Just finished reading “The Bunny Years” by Kathryn Lee Scott in anticipation of the new Playboy Club show. Perception is key. (And she was kind enough to sign it for me. ;) love her.)

  8. “Neat and trim (and so comfy-looking), it was the anti–power suit. Totally unintimidating.

    Call it the retro-librarian look. Indeed, you could easily imagine this lawyer helping Don Draper find a book at his suburban public library (assuming Draper ever checks out books). Anyway, I thought the jumper dress was rather charming. I admit, though, I have a soft spot for jumpers. (I still have the red wool jumper I wore when I was five years old.)”

    I will never cease to be amazed by the way people read clothes. They ascribe values I simply don’t see. I personally don’t think that women in power suits are all that intimidating as compared to women in jumpers. (When I type “jumpers,” I keep thinking of sweaters, which is the Anglo-English term.)

    I think that being comfortable allows people to concentrate on the things that matter. I see nothing wrong with a tailored jumper dress, although if I were going to a meeting, I’d probably wear a matching jacket.

    A jumper dress is not as “soft” as a flowing floral dress or skirt, although even those are acceptable in the right circumstances, paired with a jacket.

    Dress in court, especially before a jury, of course should remain conservative.

  9. – The New York Times has another excuse to exercise: it strengthens your brain.

    Not quite.

    “Of course, this experiment was conducted with animals, and “mouse brains are not human brains,” Dr. Davis says.

    Going to the gym now.

Comments are closed.