Is Paul Weiss really the magnet firm for gays and lesbians? Or is it just that the firm is generally pretty liberal?

I thought Morrison & Foerster was the most welcoming firm for gays. They originated in San Francisco (MoFo, not the gays). And isn't their managing partner openly gay?

"Have you thought about Paul Weiss?" LOL!!! Now THAT is what I call a punchline.

It was probably even better in person. The flummoxed partner probably said it in this timid, "just trying to be helpful" tone of voice.

He would probably have been more comfortable interviewing a Martian than a lesbian.

Paul Weiss isn't a magnet for gays, but it is a great place to get f*cked in the ass no matter what your sexual orientation is.

4:40 PM: BEST COMMENT EVER.

lol

My god. That is awkward. Although since when is lesbianism and motherhood mutually exclusive?

Regarding birthing babies, Debevoise & Plimpton's a good firm for women who want children, I think. "Tons" ("tons" being a RELATIVE word) of female associates have young children there, so it's pretty accepting and flexible.

Anon 5:06PM: I guess she was saying she wouldn't "get married, have kids, and leave the firm" (which would be literally true).

But yeah, tons of lesbians have children. And cats, too.

Ok, let's get it over with. Will somebody please make the U-Haul joke.

That reminds me-- what are all your thoughts on the skirt suit vs pantsuit dilemma?

I personally think the pantsuit is the way to go, with some nice shoes and jewelry. I think it conveys confidence and allows the wearer to relax and mimic the body language of the interviewer.

I think it looks more professional, whereas a little skirt suit looks very "I'm 22 and this is my very first suit ever!! Gotta keep my legs crossed like a lady!!" I always think interviewees in pantsuits look more like they belong at the firm, while those in skirtsuits look like confused little one ls. Thoughts?

Skirt suits are way better. Pantsuits are vaguely mannish; Skirtsuits say "Not only can I kick your ass in court, I'm a woman too."

Of course, girls with bad legs or spider veins should definitely eschew skirt suits for the same reason that girls with round faces shouldn't have short hair -- there's no reason to show off your flaws, let alone accentuate them.

i don't know: skirt suits are so Amanda on Melrose Place circa 1992. They also can look very Dress Barn.

Whereas pantsuits are what most lawyers I know wear on a daily basis. I think they might look more classy / sophisticated.

And skirt suits involve the donning of nylons and heels--kind of a pain in the ass.

Women in pants look horrendous -- no two ways about it. Skirts send a quietly authoritative message if worn correctly and tastefully with a blazer and appropriate shirt, stockings and quality shoes. Nothing says I am a hick in the big city more than a young female associate/wannabe in a poly/pantsuit. Shudder.

That's it in a nutshell, folks: if you're feminine, you're "confused" and "unprofessional"; if you're professional, you're "mannish" and "horrendous". In sum, women can't win.

As if that weren't enough, when you're attractive, you can wear the most boring turtleneck/pantsuit combo in the world and STILL have to endure men making cheesy, demeaning remarks. In this category I include all those oh-so-witty "Legally Blonde" comparisons/references I somehow attract (Federalist Society meetings are the worst). The sick thing is most of these men don't seem to realize why anyone would find that insulting or offensive. Just "kidding around", right?

This spring, I finally broke down and watched the damn thing just to see what everyone was tittering about.
I kid you not: this summer, I dyed my hair a rich, chestnut brown. LOL!

Sorry to divert us from the pantsuit / skirt suit debate, but what's the U-Haul joke? (See 5:26 PM)

Q: What do lesbians bring on a second date?
A: A U-haul.

Q. What does a gay guy bring on a second date?
A. What second date?

Sorry, had to do it.

Skirts are SO Jeanine Pirro. And NOT in a good way.

Not only are skirt suits tacky and very 1988, but I also feel like it's unfair that female lawyers are expected to truss themselves up like turkeys in hose and heels, while men can slip into a suit and be ready to go in about ten minutes. A tailored suit without a skirt is the way to go.

Is it really THAT hard to put on hose and heels? It can't take any longer than men's need to eie a tie and tying dress shoes, once you get the hang of either.

Yeah, it may take less time than a pants suit, but in terms of what women do beyond business casual, the additional time is a lot less than it is for men.

in reality, there's not much difference between the white-shoe firm where the lady interviewed and Paul Weiss. Neither firm wants you to get married or have kids. LOVE the post above: "Paul Weiss isn't a magnet for gays, but it is a great place to get f*cked in the ass no matter what your sexual orientation is." Brilliant.