T14 Woman submits better pics of herself.
| nofapping dysfunction | 02/24/07 | | godawful telephone theatre | 02/24/07 | | nofapping dysfunction | 02/24/07 | | Mahogany house hissy fit | 02/24/07 | | Confused puppy | 02/24/07 | | Stimulating ticket booth queen of the night | 02/26/07 | | Confused puppy | 02/26/07 | | Domesticated brethren jap | 02/26/07 | | Bateful Stead | 02/24/07 | | Fuchsia tanning salon incel | 02/24/07 | | misanthropic fragrant stag film | 02/24/07 | | Confused puppy | 02/24/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/25/07 | | nofapping dysfunction | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | exhilarant cruise ship | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | exhilarant cruise ship | 02/26/07 | | Zippy Unhinged Base | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Exciting flirting property | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | Charismatic space quadroon | 02/26/07 | | Zippy Unhinged Base | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | mauve soggy becky menage | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | spectacular persian | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | bespoke topaz dilemma | 02/26/07 | | Gold provocative boiling water | 02/26/07 | | bespoke topaz dilemma | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Beady-eyed windowlicker | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Beady-eyed windowlicker | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Beady-eyed windowlicker | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | bespoke topaz dilemma | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea | 02/26/07 | | bespoke topaz dilemma | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea | 02/26/07 | | Amber Vigorous Digit Ratio Pit | 02/26/07 | | trip foreskin | 02/26/07 | | exhilarant cruise ship | 02/26/07 | | razzmatazz buff public bath | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | razzmatazz buff public bath | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | razzmatazz buff public bath | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/27/07 | | boyish native | 02/26/07 | | High-end talented gaping | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/24/07 | | Obsidian Sneaky Criminal Lay | 02/24/07 | | Confused puppy | 02/26/07 | | Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/24/07 | | nofapping dysfunction | 02/26/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/26/07 | | nofapping dysfunction | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Obsidian Sneaky Criminal Lay | 02/24/07 | | cordovan passionate boltzmann | 02/24/07 | | Obsidian Sneaky Criminal Lay | 02/24/07 | | cordovan passionate boltzmann | 02/24/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/26/07 | | Anal generalized bond masturbator | 02/26/07 | | Confused puppy | 02/26/07 | | Beady-eyed windowlicker | 02/26/07 | | Floppy sticky crotch home | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/24/07 | | cordovan passionate boltzmann | 02/24/07 | | Excitant Lake Mediation Kitty Cat | 02/24/07 | | nofapping dysfunction | 02/26/07 | | ocher vivacious set | 02/26/07 | | Exciting flirting property | 02/26/07 | | ocher vivacious set | 02/26/07 | | Drunken hospital azn | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | Drunken hospital azn | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | ocher vivacious set | 02/26/07 | | Drunken hospital azn | 02/26/07 | | Drunken hospital azn | 02/26/07 | | Motley jet psychic faggot firefighter | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | Motley jet psychic faggot firefighter | 02/26/07 | | charcoal selfie hall | 02/26/07 | | Glittery dopamine genital piercing | 02/26/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/26/07 | | brindle dragon | 02/27/07 | | Stirring Rose Rigor Whorehouse | 02/27/07 | | self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria | 02/27/07 | | Aromatic Beta Shrine | 02/27/07 | | Cerebral ladyboy | 07/15/08 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 24th, 2007 1:52 PM Author: nofapping dysfunction
Shoutout to M.L.
http://t14talent.googlepages.com/m.l.%2Cnyu%2708
See -- some people have a sense of humor.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7660861) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2007 2:11 PM Author: Confused puppy
SATAN BE GONE!!!
*throws holy water*
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7660940) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:41 PM Author: Domesticated brethren jap
Like that.
Except, for you, the ending is far more depressing.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674609) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2007 2:16 PM Author: Bateful Stead
haha seems like a fun personality :)
take that complainer chicks!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7660958) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 12:10 PM Author: exhilarant cruise ship
"As for the girl who submitted her own pics, that's a tacky and unprofessional act."
I disagree.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7671483) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 12:19 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
Men and women obviously feel differently. From a woman's perspective, this person is voluntarily sexualizing herself in front of future professional colleagues. This, to me, shows that this girl doesn't care to present herself in a professional light in a forum that will undoubtedly be seen by her peers and colleagues. Bad judgment.
If this girl's work was fine and she otherwise showed good judgment and maturity I wouldn't recommend a no-offer, but it's definitely not a good way to potentially introduce yourself to future colleagues.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7671514) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 1:00 PM Author: exhilarant cruise ship
"voluntarily sexualizing herself"
What does this mean?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7671663) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 5:38 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
If she did good work, I'd be happy to work with her, but otherwise I'd be afraid that she'd conduct herself too casually around clients or senior associates, especially when alcohol is involved, and represent the firm in a negative light.
EDIT: While she's clothed in the photos, the photos are presenting her in a rather sexualized way. I wouldn't feel comfortable having work colleagues see me in these kinds of outfits.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673152)
|
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 5:49 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
plus, why hire her when you could hire the girl (JF) who requested her picture be taken down... and also has a blog where she calls abortion "a moral good" and advocates for all sorts of immature and whacked-out looney liberal positions...
ya, i'd much rather hire the girl who cant handle a joke.
listen, that girl's pictures were ALREADY submitted to the site by someone else. realizing she'd be up there, she merely sent better ones of herself. that's all. and know what? people IRL respect that she can take a joke and can act normally when praised for being good looking.
compare that to tantrum-throwing agenda-pushing people like JF. i'd pick ML any day.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673225) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 5:58 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
Realizing she'd be up there, ML had 3 options: request that her pics be removed, keep silent or submit better pics of herself. I agree that I'd rather be around people who can take a joke, but she's taking this joke a bit too seriously in submitting better pictures. It's the "I'm hot, I'm proud, here are some better photos of me" narcissism that I'm not a fan of.
As for JF, it's also not a good idea to blog if your name's on it. I couldn't care less about blogging, but make sure you blog anonymously if your blog contains controversial or potentially offensive material. I consider her just as guilty of bad judgment if she doesn't blog anonymously or make an attempt to keep her blog identity a secret.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673281) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:14 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
she presumes to tell other women what is 'professional' and assumes that a women who isn't HIGHLY PROTECTIVE of her sexuality and looks is 'unprofessional'.
the reason women have a hard time is because men hate women like bellacat but bellacat & other nonattractive women also bring down the attractive, femininely appealing women
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673367) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:24 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
I know plenty of attractive female associates who have been hit on and asked out by male superiors. It even happened to me. I was working with a senior attorney who was giving me particularly positive feedback on my work as well as some good mentorship/advice. He asked me out for drinks one night after work and I figured it would be like a "night with the office boys" and a good opportunity for further mentorship/relationship building so I bit. He then proceeded to get obnoxiously drunk, ask me out numerous times (including via email when he got back to the office), and make lewd comments about my ass and my eyes. We no longer work together and to this day I don't know if his "mentorship" and positive feedback was because he genuinely liked my work or because he wanted to fuck me.
Other attractive female attorneys have had similar experiences with other male supervisors. Sometimes it's better to dress the part of the "ruthless professional" than of the "femininely appealing" woman to be taken seriously.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673434) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:28 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
i understand why YOU might not want to appear to be at all solicitous of male attention.
this doesnt explain why you'd begrudge other women from not being robotic "professionals" all the time. so what if they ocassionally play along with men or acknowledge their own attractiveness? maybe they're just ok and comfortable with it.
getting back to this contest--so what if this girl sent us some pictures. to be honest, the pics we have of her before just weren't very good. she improved her image by just working with us--she said she finds the contest "funny"--she never endorsed it.
point being, women second-guess other women all the time. you live like you want, but dont assume others are unprofessional if they dont want to be just like you
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673460) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:39 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
the act of submitting "better" photos - i.e. photos which show her in sexualized poses - is questionable, especially since she knows that this "Girls of the Top 14" website will be viewed by many law students and lawyers.
It's her choice, though. I can't tell her not to submit sexier poses if she was unsatisfied with those posted, but she had better be prepared to expose herself to criticism and prejudgment by male and female colleagues alike if they see these pictures.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673518) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:42 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
re-read my post.
she sent us LESS SEXUAL pictures than what we had been sent.
at the same time, she also looks BETTER in the ones she sent.
moreover, apparently what she sent us was just from her own facebook profile anyway... something that 90% of law students have (except nontrads) and which almost always have pictures.
she did nothing that makes me think she has poor judgment. poor judgment is running around crying about this for hours at a time & asking other ppl to flame xoxo saying that only ugly doods would ever look at pictures of beautiful girls on the interwebs
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673530) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:46 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
The only ones I've seen are the ones that are posted currently on the website linked in the original post. If she sent less sexual pictures of herself, good for her, since the ones already up are a bit on the suggestive side.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673553)
|
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:48 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
its sad, really, that the only times i've seen your moniker on xoxo are the times when you're knocking the t14 contest and girls who are OK with it as "unprofessional". you realize that women like you are the reason men are uncomfortable in many ways at law firms--and the reason that many women feel judged by other women.
when you do this, incidentally, it makes good, respectful men tentative but does NOTHING to deter powerful sr partners from still treating women a certain way. so youre just screwing your allies or at least ppl who would potentially support you.
good work.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673568) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 7:23 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
It's not just "on the internet", but on a website that many law students, lawyers, and possibly professors may visit. You never know who sees these photos. Some colleagues may be more likely to form a certain viewpoint of a summer associate or junior attorney after seeing their photo, along with a message saying "funny site, I'll submit better photos when I can".
It's not at all as bad as jumping into the Hudson River, but it could attract negative attention from the firm conservatives as well as the firm pervs.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673792) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 7:30 PM Author: charcoal selfie hall
How is it any worse than her putting the pictures up originally on Facebook?
The site itself isn't that offensive.
And lawyers and employers are going to be looking at Facebook.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673833) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 7:45 PM Author: charcoal selfie hall
If people would be savvy enough to find the t14 site, they would know about Facebook.
And the knowledge is spreading pretty rapidly. Employers (not every partner, but I would say most of the ones that do the hiring) will definitely be looking at it.
Flickr, probably not.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673910) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 8:32 PM Author: spectacular persian
"There are some old conservative douchebags in law firms who might unfairly judge an innocent action" seems to be a far cry from what you originally posted:
"If I knew that a summer associate voluntarily submitted pics of herself to this website, I'd definitely question her maturity. It's not a dingworthy act by itself and if she otherwise did good work, I wouldn't recommend a no-offer, but she'd have to do better work than the rest of her peers for me to recommend an offer."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674178) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:00 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
Not really. If there's the possibility of conservatives or pervs in a law firm who might negatively judge this girl's action, then it's immature and in bad judgment to undertake that action in the first place. I'm also not a fan of the girl's narcissism.
Maybe I'm just extremely cautious and "anal" about what pictures I allow of myself to be floating around on the internet; you never know who will see it and how it may hurt you.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674396) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:03 PM Author: spectacular persian
"Not really. If there's the possibility of conservatives or pervs in a law firm who might negatively judge this girl's action, then it's immature and in bad judgment to undertake that action in the first place. I'm also not a fan of the girl's narcissism."
This is such total horseshit. There are people all over the place who judge for all kinds of shit. It's not bad judgment to decide that those people are overly sensitive, that you don't care if they judge you, and that you'd rather face any possible negative consequences from their judgment than walk around on eggshells and avoid doing every innocent thing under the sun.
I don't understand why your own overcaution even enters the equation.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674413) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:11 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
"There are people all over the place who judge for all kinds of shit. It's not bad judgment to decide that those people are overly sensitive, that you don't care if they judge you, and that you'd rather face any possible negative consequences from their judgment than walk around on eggshells and avoid doing every innocent thing under the sun."
If these people are in a position to review your work, or are a superior of yours or a colleague of yours, a little prudence can't hurt. Prudence doesn't entail "walking on eggshells"; it's merely recognizing that one's personal and professional life are sometimes best kept separate. I would love to be that person who doesn't care if overly sensitive/conservative/perverted people form unsavory opinions of me, but I'd rather go with the flow when it comes to my professional life than adopt an "I don't give a shit" attitude.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674455) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:21 PM Author: spectacular persian
Prudence also doesn't entail wringing your hands about posting a fully-clothed picture of yourself. Moreover, you're missing the larger point -- it's possible that she values the ability to do minor things like this more than the extremely small risk that some hypothetical bizarre old coot partner at a firm she may hypothetically work at some day. Not everybody has the same priorities or same risk profile that you do.
Ultimately, you're not just arguing down the slippery slope, you're ignoring the existence of a slope. This is too far on the side of the "shouldn't matter" line that judgment just doesn't enter the equation. There may be some fundie christian partner at some hypothetical firm I may work at some day who would be offended by an article in a legal periodical about creationism in public schools. Wouldn't be enough of a risk to keep me from writing it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674507) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:24 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
"There may be some fundie christian partner at some hypothetical firm I may work at some day who would be offended by an article in a legal periodical about creationism in public schools. Wouldn't be enough of a risk to keep me from writing it."
Completely different story. For a girl, the worst thing you can be known as is a slut.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674518) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:46 PM Author: bespoke topaz dilemma
"From a woman's perspective"
No, from yours. Please never speak for me.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673558) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:29 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
Disgusted about what? A lot of women that I know think that what this girl did was rather immature, given the likelihood of lawyers and other law students frequenting the website. And a lot of other women think the entire idea of the contest is demeaning and offensive. Considering how a decent amount of women requested their pictures removed, this isn't exactly a fringe viewpoint.
It could be that the girl didn't know the estimated traffic of the site and that she's completely unfamiliar with XOXO, though.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674552) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:39 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
i had an IRL discussion about this with my GF. i showed her the emails those not-even-that-hot girls wrote and she was like 'i'd find it flattering... and i dont think MC from UVA should even be in the contest bc shes not that attractive'
what *is* pathetic is when women sit around and get catty about each other. it brings them all down. what a bunch of stoopids.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674601) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:40 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
I'm not the only one I know who frequents this board. I do have female friends who frequent the board and/or know about the Top 14 Girls contest. The legal community can be pretty small.
As for the "uptight bitch" comment, it's safer to be known as an uptight bitch than as a slut.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674606) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:47 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
there aren't really any pictures on our t14 site that you'd look at and go "SLUT!" unless you're VERY out of touch or are jealous. most of the pictures are pretty tame.
and, as far as the girl who sent in pictures, hers aren't slutty at all.
men aren't going to assume she's a slut. they're going to admire. only women are jumping to slutty conclusions. if anything, seeing this girl and seeing she does to [any t14 school] i'd assume she's pretty hard to get as a result of being well educated AND attractive.
usually sluts are NOT the most attractive
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674646) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:52 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
the double standard is a result of people like YOU convincing men that they're supposed to be super sensitive about this. and, therefore, that they should avoid/not hire a girl like this, lest they put their firm at risk bc OMG OMG someone might do/say something mildly inappropriate at some future time. maybe we should just hire robots instead of men & women and avoid any of these problems
you're outnumbered, outpointed, outclassed. give up.
wtf are you wasting time replying to about a dozen ppl who have pwned you so far this thread? you must be ugly.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674683) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:04 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
I have no problem expressing unpopular opinions. I'm a bit of a social conservative, so I'm used to it.
I didn't mean to say that a man shouldn't hire a girl who was cute, fun, flirty, and laid-back. My issue is with the idea of a girl posting "better" photos of herself on this website despite knowing that it could be frequented by many of her colleagues.
I've also seen many competent females' reputations ruined for being fun and flirty with their superiors in a work setting. In some work environments this would be a non-issue, but in more conservative work environments, this could be near dingworthy if she behaved like this with work colleagues.
And yep, I'm ugly.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674772) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:45 PM Author: bespoke topaz dilemma
A lot of people think what she did shows she's fun and laid back. The pictures she forwarded were not improper, from what I saw when I glanced at them.
You're just coming off as very uptight and upleasant, and the last thing I want is to be associated with that. If you had simply pointed out that some of the older, more conservative lawfirms may not like that, that would be different. I think you would have been correct in your assessment.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674636) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:11 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
From what I read, other women are taking issue with the Top 14 Girls contest, much more so than I am. Other women wanted their photos removed.
I have no doubt that she's attractive and secure, and handled the idea of the contest with much more humor and sense than some of the other women. If I were in her shoes I'd be flattered, and if I wasn't happy with the photos on the website I would kindly ask the website administrator to remove them. But volunteering "better" photos and having such a fact disclosed on the website is asking for trouble.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674820) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:42 PM Author: bespoke topaz dilemma
I'm pretty conservative as well. Though I have rarely heard a conservative use the phrase "woman's perspective," and "sexualized by men." To me, such phrases just scream feminist crap.
You judged her as a potential employee based on her relatively blameless actions here. I do not like that. And I don't blame other people for being pissed. What you did was not particualry fair and it certainly wasn't nice.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7675064) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 5:53 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
Some pretty inflammatory and offensive things are posted on this board. I worked with a summer associate last year who asked the entire room (of attorneys and summers) if they've ever posted on XOXO. I was shocked that he admitted that he posted. Some posters on here are decent but I couldn't help but wonder if some of the more misogynistic or otherwise offensive posts on this board were his. I understand that a lot of people post things for the shock value on here, but shock value comedy doesn't go over terribly well at my firm and XOXO posting isn't something that summers should voluntarily admit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673249)
|
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:08 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
you'd rather have them post and not admit it, i guess. just like men aren't going to tell you they read maxim or playboy... but plenty of men look at that stuff. its called an outlet.
xoxo is an outlet also.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673337) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 12:09 PM Author: exhilarant cruise ship
"If I knew that a summer associate voluntarily submitted pics of herself to this website, I'd definitely question her maturity."
Why?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7671478) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:00 PM Author: razzmatazz buff public bath
of course it has everything to do with pettiness and cattiness.
you are projecting all sorts of negative qualities that go with submitting some pics to a silly internet beauty contest, including sluttiness, letting her guard down around clients if she has too much alcohol, etc. if anything, it is unprofessional (and sexist) to assume that a girl who does this sort of thing might have these other qualities.
people like you are the reason why male lawyers dont take females laswyers seriously and think of them as irrational, catty, and emotional beings.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674738) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:02 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
you're female too, right?
btw, every woman i know IRL who is confident would agree with this. its the jealous uglies/fundies who are doing this to women.
i wouldn't want to work with this woman who keeps going on and on and on about this... i'd hire the t14 girl instead. bc she acts much more rationally. she handled a situation really well
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674753) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:20 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
I couldn't care less about how slutty a co-worker is, as long as it doesn't affect their performance or our client relations. However, I have seen female colleagues consume too much alcohol and act in an inappropriate way towards male clients, male recruits, male co-workers etc..., and it's pretty embarrassing. If I had 10 female summer associates standing in front of me, and I knew nothing about any of them except that this one submitted sexually suggestive pictures of herself to the Top 14 Girls website, I'd probably bet on her as the horse that would do something stupid when drunk, or have otherwise bad judgment.
Of course, she could easily prove me wrong by acting professionally and appropriately and if she did solid work I'd have no problem recommending an offer for her. But that doesn't mean I have to like her or consider her the kind of person I'd choose to associate with outside the office.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674894) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 11:33 PM Author: razzmatazz buff public bath
the point is that its immature, irrational, and catty to project qualities like sluttiness and bad judgment on someone based on submitting some pics to a harmless contest, esp. when someone else submitted photos in the first place.
dont worry, im sure she wouldnt want ot associate with you either.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7675581) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2007 10:40 AM Author: self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria
"However, I have seen female colleagues consume too much alcohol and act in an inappropriate way towards male clients, male recruits, male co-workers etc..., and it's pretty embarrassing."
And earlier you were talking about how the men do this to women because the women project themselves in a certain way.
So...when the women drunkenly hit on the men it'sbecause the women are acting unprofessional and when the men drunkenly hit on the women it's ALSO because the women are acting unprofessional. Boy is that a double standard.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7677244)
|
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:18 PM Author: High-end talented gaping
I wouldn't ding her because of the photos if she otherwise conducted herself competently. That would be stupid. But I wouldn't be completely inclined to recommend for her to get an offer if her work was mediocre and she demonstrated a lack of professionalism or maturity. I'd give the girl ample time to prove that she can conduct herself professionally but the fact that she posted these photos would give me a rather negative first impression of her that she'd have to overcome.
The photos she submitted of herself are also rather sexual-looking, even for "party pics". It's clear that this girl doesn't mind (and even enjoys) being seen as a sex object by her future colleagues in the legal profession.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673389) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:30 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
the pictures we had before were:
-more sexual
-not as favorable for her (she looks better in the new ones)
her pics were going to be up regardless. she improved her image by getting less sexual pictures that she looks better in
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673469) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:51 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
partners at V10 firms make ~$3Mil./yr.
show me all the surgeons who make $3Mil.
btw, i'm saying this as someone who aspires to be a surgeon one day. simply put, there arent tons of cool, attractive guys going to med school. when was the last time you were at a med school or teaching hospital? 50% of the men are nonwhite (maybe more), usually indian or asian. most are decidedly non-attractive.
at least with the law partner you're getting a well educated white dood who makes $3Mil. at a top firm.
be realistic--probably impossible given that you're some russian undergrad from staten island... LOL @ your TTT-ness
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674667) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:04 PM Author: Brilliant jet-lagged mental disorder marketing idea
lol. you a surgeon, i think you would be a rarity, you'd be a much better fit as a lawyer, most surgeons arent so insecure.
partners at V10 work in NYC, right? Doctors make 500k+ in any rural area. They can also take long vacations(they make their own schedule), while as a partner at a law firm you cannot. beyond 500k any worthy woman doesnt care about your income, especially in low col areas.
most lawyers are jews. you look like one too. doctors are >50% nonwhite only at certain schools. Many others are 70%+ white. many doctors are interested in sports. have you heard about a surgeon getting his hands amputated after climbing mt everest? many more serve in the military as officers, they fly jets and eat dinner with captains of aircraft carriers in the indian ocean. only a fag would compare a lawyer to a doctor.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674771) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:13 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
have fun at staten island community college....
how is living with your parents, btw?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674837) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 10:28 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
i'm not from staten island, although i drove through it once on my way to Crooklyn.
i'm also not a joo.
and i'm in @ a ttt post bac program that has 2 guaranteed med school linkages.
HTH
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674938) |
Date: February 24th, 2007 2:32 PM Author: brindle dragon
for the girls that you no longer have pictures for--post a tubgirl in its place
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7661046) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:41 PM Author: nofapping dysfunction
Shut up. Your other posts already prove that you are, in fact, the former DISH!
Just fess up.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673529) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:16 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
i dont understand this?
yes, someone else proposed working together, but early on i was the one who actually did the design for the site and solicited people to email in.
the real credit for making this happen goes to the people who have (so far) submitted 22 attractive girls, 1 Joe Pa, and 1 unidentified sugaryalien
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673378) |
Date: February 24th, 2007 4:39 PM Author: Obsidian Sneaky Criminal Lay
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7661602) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:25 PM Author: Anal generalized bond masturbator
She's right, though, that a lot of the women who claim they'd "never" have an abortion are unaware of the circumstances under which many abortions occur.
When someone says "I'll never have an abortion", she usually means that if she gets pregnant from a consensual sexual encounter, and if there's no pre-natal evidence of birth defects, and if the pregnancy doesn't endanger her health or her life, she'll carry the pregnancy to term-- a reasonable stance, but not one that merits the word "never".
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673443) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 12:54 PM Author: Floppy sticky crotch home
She has 4,000 pictures in her Flickr account. I'd guess more than half are of herself.
I don't think it's a secret anymore.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7671635) |
Date: February 24th, 2007 4:42 PM Author: charcoal selfie hall
She is obviously an American hero.
Congressional medal of honor?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7661610) |
Date: February 24th, 2007 6:16 PM Author: Excitant Lake Mediation Kitty Cat
NOT HOT
tell her to send pics of that perfect 10 she's with in pic #2 though
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7662176) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:00 PM Author: ocher vivacious set
JF is one of the worst bloggers on the planet; she makes Amanda Marcotte seem respectable.
However, I tend to agree with her that this "contest" is pretty stupid and juvenile, and that we'd be better off without it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673292) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:19 PM Author: ocher vivacious set
No, she's not. And I'm not some sort of touchy-feely uber-liberal douchebag either. It just rubs me the wrong way for whatever reason.
Plus, one of the Chicago girls they posted no longer goes to school here. Someone must have sent her in to be an asshole.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673394) |
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:23 PM Author: Drunken hospital azn
Link to said flickr account pls.
tyia.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673430) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 6:35 PM Author: Drunken hospital azn
ty ty.
Now the link.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673491) |
Date: February 26th, 2007 9:33 PM Author: Motley jet psychic faggot firefighter
http://tinyurl.com/2hng86
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7674572) |
Date: February 26th, 2007 11:22 PM Author: Glittery dopamine genital piercing
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7675461) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2007 11:26 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine
her emails to us were also just awful.
the thing about that girl, though, that strikes me the MOST is her rather interesting (to say the least) selection of boyfriends...
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7675503) |
Date: February 27th, 2007 9:59 AM Author: Stirring Rose Rigor Whorehouse
I don't see why everyone's being so hard on bellacat.
I think she's being a little extreme in saying she'd assume the girl is a slut, can't handle her liquor well, will be unprofessional, etc. I wouldn't assume negative things like that about a girl because she submitted pics to this site.
It doesn't seem like a particularly prudent thing to do though. Xoxo is seen as a really sketchy site, and those guys who run this contest might be in all sorts of trouble for posting pics of girls there against there will. I wouldn't want to cooperate with guys who run a site that stole girls' pics and refused to take them down when asked. Considering how most of the girls involved seem to feel about the contest, participating in it willingly might draw negative reactions from her peers.
It just seems like an odd thing to do - sending in additional pics, as though to make herself competitive in the contest. I don't really think badly of her for it, but it seems like something that most girls wouldn't want to have advertised about them.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7677153) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2007 10:42 AM Author: self-centered slate hunting ground school cafeteria
Date: February 26th, 2007 7:28 PM
Author: Product of your environment
Perhaps she's better than all of us and really doesn't know anything about xoxo and/or how many people read it and thought it was some random site. I've met quite a law students who have never heard of this site.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7673820)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7677258)
|
|
Date: February 27th, 2007 2:20 PM Author: Aromatic Beta Shrine Subject: the girls are split 50-50...
about half of the comments are pro- and half are anti- (from the girls themselves)
the ones who think its OK are cooler, IMO
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#7678494) |
Date: July 15th, 2008 4:00 PM Author: Cerebral ladyboy
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=585433&forum_id=2#9975655) |
|
|