Liking these posts? Follow Corporette on Twitter — this is the edited version of what we’re reading! (We also Tweet if we hear about a good sale.)
- Have you voted for Corporette yet for best quirky blog? We’d be much obliged if you would! [ABA Journal]
- A bargain-hunter’s guide to the galaxy. (We agree with everything Ms. Binkley has to say!) [WSJ]
- The NRDC has some great holiday guides (and gift suggestions) for environmentalists. [NRDC]
- Oooh, handy: a round-up of holiday shipping deadlines for various online stores. [SheFinds]
- If you haven’t checked in with The Simple Dollar’s series, reading and reviewing “the best investing book ever written” — Benjamin Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor” — check it out. [The Simple Dollar]
- Finally, for the lawyers out there, what do you guys think of this post? We’re somewhat conflicted about how to feel about it — is he against women? introverts? Are we just being too sensitive? We’d love your thoughts.
On the post on which you asked for feedback: The author was doing fine treading the line — aspersions on gender and personality type were under the radar at worst — until this: “Mindy – for a smart gal — is behaving dumb dumb dumb. Perhaps finding a rich hubby is her game plan.”
While the author claimed this post could just as easily have been about male associates, I doubt the zinger conclusion on a male Mindy would have ended “Matt — for a smart boy — is behaving dumb dumb dumb. Perhaps finding a sugar mama is his game plan.” We don’t assume men go into challenging, all-consuming jobs which require seven years of post-secondary education TO FIND A SPOUSE. Why on earth would it be okay to assume women do just because their social group at work is limited to close colleagues?
Re: HP blog — As a law student this post demonstrates exactly why I never want to work in a firm. I don’t know if the post necessarily reflects a lot of gender bias on the specific part of the writer (other than that gold-digger jab) but perhaps just the gender bias of the field as a whole. I do think it does a great job of showing the attitude that you have to be Suzy Sorority to be successful at a firm, and if that’s true I want none of it. I’ll take lower pay (and better hours) in government or in-house, because this type of work atmosphere would seriously contribute to not enjoying my work and thus poor quality of life in the long run.
Wow–I wasn’t sure what about the HP blog bothered you until I got to the “rich husband” line. That definitely crossed the line. Brittany is spot-on that HP never would have made that quip about men.
Vanessa, if you think gender bias only exists in the private sector, you’re going to have a rude awakening. And do you really think that government, non-profits, and in-house jobs don’t expect you to participate in the job fully in order to succeed and advance?
Hmm…the HP blogger definitely crossed the line with the “rich hubby” comment. I also don’t like the way he portrays “Mindy” as a second-class lawyer simply because she doesn’t schmooze all the time. I’m a law student right now and I know that networking and client development are important, but being a little introverted shouldn’t be seen as a problem. I chose the firm where I will be working largely because having an outside life is seen as a really good thing that affects work product in a positive way.
Ugh, HP’s blog is ridiculous. This kind of “I’m not biased!” song and dance followed by a ridiculously biased statement such as “This just isn’t a good field for women” is EXACTLY why I left my last (top-tier biglaw) firm. The hard part about being a female attorney is that many male attorneys swear, and perhaps actually believe, they aren’t biased and that they don’t feel differently about female colleagues but the truth is most of them think just like HP.
AHHHH, HP’s post is horrible. I’ve posted about it here: http://ms-jd.org/false-dicotomy-husbandshopping-vs-serious-professional.
Thanks for the tip.