Dating Life in BIGLAW
| rusted potus voyeur | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Emerald toilet seat pozpig | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Emerald toilet seat pozpig | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Scarlet bateful faggot firefighter address | 12/17/17 | | slap-happy institution | 12/17/17 | | canary glittery fat ankles | 12/17/17 | | odious bistre market alpha | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | contagious legal warrant bbw | 12/17/17 | | Fluffy liquid oxygen theater stage | 12/17/17 | | Impressive Pistol | 12/17/17 | | aphrodisiac coral becky lay | 12/18/17 | | Marvelous flirting gas station dog poop | 12/17/17 | | shimmering friendly grandma coffee pot | 12/17/17 | | big rigor area | 12/18/17 | | slap-happy institution | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | 180 zombie-like goyim trust fund | 12/17/17 | | laughsome brindle turdskin | 12/18/17 | | Emerald toilet seat pozpig | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | Pale chad property | 12/17/17 | | indecent useless brakes | 12/17/17 | | Pungent red bawdyhouse | 12/17/17 | | canary glittery fat ankles | 12/17/17 | | Heady Forum | 12/17/17 | | curious greedy patrolman | 12/17/17 | | Pungent red bawdyhouse | 12/17/17 | | curious greedy patrolman | 12/17/17 | | canary glittery fat ankles | 12/17/17 | | Iridescent organic girlfriend | 12/17/17 | | shimmering friendly grandma coffee pot | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | irate citrine garrison | 12/17/17 | | Hilarious vivacious knife hall | 12/17/17 | | galvanic painfully honest theatre corn cake | 12/17/17 | | galvanic painfully honest theatre corn cake | 12/17/17 | | geriatric temple | 12/17/17 | | massive dilemma | 12/18/17 | | canary glittery fat ankles | 12/17/17 | | Zippy stag film | 12/17/17 | | electric kitchen | 12/17/17 | | Wild sexy pit regret | 12/17/17 | | Iridescent organic girlfriend | 12/17/17 | | Impressive Pistol | 12/17/17 | | silver histrionic principal's office | 12/17/17 | | swollen effete sound barrier | 12/17/17 | | crawly doobsian legend | 12/17/17 | | Soul-stirring persian digit ratio | 12/17/17 | | cyan fragrant theater | 12/17/17 | | crawly doobsian legend | 12/18/17 | | Narrow-minded electric furnace parlour | 12/18/17 | | cyan fragrant theater | 12/18/17 | | milky dingle berry school cafeteria | 12/18/17 | | Pale chad property | 12/18/17 | | milky dingle berry school cafeteria | 12/18/17 | | irate citrine garrison | 12/18/17 | | irate citrine garrison | 12/18/17 | | Narrow-minded electric furnace parlour | 12/18/17 | | cyan fragrant theater | 12/18/17 | | crawly doobsian legend | 12/18/17 | | aphrodisiac coral becky lay | 12/18/17 | | Multi-colored chrome prole shrine | 12/18/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 17th, 2017 10:12 AM Author: rusted potus voyeur
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=284280
"
Just wanted to second the calling out of this misogyny. As a female poster, the frequent, unchecked sexism on this board is very uncomfortable to me and has often made me consider whether it's worth posting here. While not directly relevant to this particular instance of misogyny, I also wanted to note that as a female senior associate, the assumption that many posters make that if we're discussing a "partner" or "senior associate," the person must be male, is equally misogynist and unwelcome. I would not be surprised to learn that the sexism on this board is one factor in making female members feel less welcome and less able to contribute. In this #metoo era - since this board appears to have a policy of not moderating sexist comments - I think the first step is for those of us (both male and female) who oppose bigotry to call out the offending comments and make clear they have no place here.
And to the OP's question, I'm posting from the office where I will be spending the rest of the weekend - including several hours that had been benchmarked for a seventh date tonight. Nor is this my first work-related cancellation as to this date. No word yet on whether they will be willing to overlook the latest. However, I am firmly committed to my career and am only willing to date someone who can accept that work-related cancellations are a relatively frequent fact of biglaw life; if this person can't, it's better that both of us figure that out now."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34940932) |
Date: December 17th, 2017 10:22 AM Author: slap-happy institution
Since the above poster called out definitional sexism and asked for allies to step up and call it out, at least three different people jumped in to attack her, and one person actually tried to mansplain sexism to her. Whoa. Lame and offensive.
Can't speak to dating in biglaw; 3L currently. But dating advice that applies to men also applies to women and vice versa. There's no biological reason why it shouldn't, and to argue otherwise probably comes off as pretty demeaning to many women. How about we discuss dating in general human terms? People date all kinds of people of all genders and for different reasons, and any gender based assumptions must end up being unhelpful anyways.
ETA: happy to be scooped by the immediately preceding guy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34940979) |
Date: December 17th, 2017 10:22 AM Author: Heady Forum
Since the above poster called out definitional sexism and asked for allies to step up and call it out, at least three different people jumped in to attack her, and one person actually tried to mansplain sexism to her. Whoa. Lame and offensive.
Can't speak to dating in biglaw; 3L currently. But dating advice that applies to men also applies to women and vice versa. There's no biological reason why it shouldn't, and to argue otherwise probably comes off as pretty demeaning to many women. How about we discuss dating in general human terms? People date all kinds of people of all genders and for different reasons, and any gender based assumptions must end up being unhelpful anyways.
ETA: happy to be scooped by the immediately preceding guy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34940982) |
Date: December 17th, 2017 11:32 AM Author: indecent useless brakes
In response to a post saying that women and men’s reproductive timelines are different:
“So to be clear, you're saying that when we're taking about dating generally in response to a "possible to date in biglaw?" thread, we're actually talking about menopause? Do you even hear yourself?
What a joke. Dating is dating. And to the idiotic "blah blah blah men paying for dates" guy who sounds about as thoughtful as Rob Moore's "you gotta swear on the Bible to get elected" dude, There are sexist social norms. We should be identifying them and working to fix them; not perpetuating them by pretending we need separate dating advice for men and women because of...what, ovaries was it?
jfc.
ETA: dudes telling women what sexism is = literally mansplaining.”
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34941296) |
Date: December 17th, 2017 11:35 AM Author: Pungent red bawdyhouse
To: Chad
From: Anxiety Filled Gassy Law Shrew, JD, Esq.
Subject: Date Tonight
Hello Chad,
I wanted to circle back re: our date tonight. I know we had benchmarked date seven tonight at or around 8 PM but, regrettably, I will be unable to attend due to a scheduling conflict with Project Banana. While I was hoping to enjoy your company this evening, the Project Banana representations and warranties have proved challenging. My duty to the client must not be taken lightly.
I am sorry for any inconvenience and do hope that we can reschedule this romantic encounter at a later time mutually agreeable to the parties. Thanks.
Thanks,
Anxiety Filled Gassy Law Shrew, JD, Esq.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34941312)
|
|
Date: December 17th, 2017 11:52 AM Author: Pungent red bawdyhouse
Chad,
Sorry, this time with attachments.
Thank,
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34941388)
|
Date: December 17th, 2017 11:01 PM Author: crawly doobsian legend
Plaintiff hereby submits the following reply in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment (the "Motion") against Defendant BigCorp Exec ("Defendant"):
Defendant's opposition should be disregarded in its entirety. Defendant's assertion that he did not harass Plaintiff is invalid because Defendant is a man. See generally Fed. R. Evid. 901 (explaining the rule against mansplaining).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831967&forum_id=2#34945847) |
|
|