Day of FIRSTY McFIRSTERSON

Breaking news: white Jewish men are not succeeding in the NBA.

Ha. Suck it, 2. Today is my day not yours.

-1

Funny how nobody mentions the possibility that clients, not law firms, are responsible. After all, it's the clients who ultimately determine who the "rainmakers" will be.

duh. gabbing and possibly being attractive doesn't work in a downturn.

5 - wtf. that is exactly what a rainmaker is - i.e. one that brings in the business

a titillating post that captured my interest, but how does it affect my chances of landing a coveted offer from the GENDERED INCOME DISTRIBUTION practice group at WILDMAN HARROLD?

In addition to 5's comment: What about the fact that maybe women don't want to/don't have time to participate in said "rainmaking activities"? As discussed previously on this blog, many women CHOOSE not to dedicate outside time to their jobs [and thus forgo partner positions and rainmaking opportunities] to raise families and have lives outside of the firm. Most women know what it takes to get to the top in their careers, de facto discrimination and all, and many simply find fulfillment elsewhere.

That picture above is an awesome new sexual position. I only regret that this is an Elie post and not a Kash post.

If any female partners out there are concerned with their business generation abilities, there several industry leaders in "makin' it rain" that are now available for consultation. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fkWgycqC0o

With generous maternity policies at many firms, women are lactating more than ever. The are producing calcium fortified rain.

Partner Emeritus - I surmise that the above listed firms are "non-peer" firms. Nevertheless, if you wouldn't mind, could you post the definition of "peer firm?" Do you mean white-shoe, V20, etc?

Thank you in advance. As always, your comedic posts are always appreciated!

V50 Associate

Yawn.

With generous maternity policies at many firms, women are lactating more than ever. They are producing calcium fortified rain.

5, I was wondering the same thing. When that discussion does take place, it will probably go somethign like this:

"Women aren't rainmakers because all the clients are men, and want to deal with male attorneys."

"Yes, there is something fundamentally wrong with business in America, we need more female CEOs."

"America sucks at everything."

"I agree, America blows, and nothing is equal."

"Let's do a study about it."

Also, 3....nice.

Are there any data on women as general counsel? Do they steer work to men?

perhaps its that most women attorneys are a pain in the ass.

How many firms have an African American partner as a top rain maker?

The female GC at my Fortune 500 employer definitely does NOT steer work to men.

13, why are you posting the same questions to PE on multiple threads? I know that you go to Rutgers, and therefore you are most likely retarded, but please try to make an effort to improve on two things: your good post to bad post ratio, and your incontinence frequency.

The latter issue is obviously something that can only be resolved with medication or therapy, but the first issue could probably be addressed by you coming to the realization that you do not belong here. This board is for associates and partners of prestigious peer firms. It is not for Rutgers students who believe that negligence is a synonym for intent.

Nature is sexist. The rain should fall on everybody equally.

Maybe you women partners would REMAIN as rainmakers if YOU CHECKED YOU EMAILS

Question for Corporate/Transactional Attorneys: What do you expect your billables to be this year?

Has anyone considered that maybe guys, on the whole, make better attorneys. What is that I hear? Oh, that idea was considered and rejected? Well then, it must be that the men are oppressing women.

If more female attorneys demonstrated that position to clients, more female attorneys would be rainmakers.

I can't believe >20 posts have gone by and no one has said something along these lines yet.

Sigh. Do I really need to take a moment from my life of obscene wealth to remind aspiring female "partners" that they will never be preeminent or peer? Partner is a member of the Augusta National Golf Club as are his clients. Note that in spite of the best efforts of the insignificant Martha Burke, there are no female members of Augusta National. Ladies, high time you followed my lead. Attend a preeminent peer finishing school and enjoy a life of luxury.

8: you getting an offer? That would never happen at WILDMAN HARROLD.

Breaking News: Women don't need to be attorneys to get the money. Many figure this simple fact out, and then wisely leave this god-aweful profession.

Since most of the top lawyers are assholes, 25 may be on to something.

-- White male

Far be it from me to post a halfway serious comment on ATL, but in my time at biglaw, I noticed that an awful lot of the service partners (very competent lawyers with no clients of their own who do most of the lawyering) are female, whereas very few rainmakers are female.

A few reasons why...clients are still primarily male, and although clients certainly value competency, a lot of the rainmaking process is still backslapping and boozing. When women's lawyers groups talk about not "involving female partners in business development," I call bullshit. The rainmakers seemed to make extra effort to help with female partners engage in client development. The problem for leading rainmaking efforts is that all the skills that these women cultivated as high-strung hardworking students/associates are not only useless but significant liabilities for rainmaking.

“The results are astounding, even to those of us familiar with the dynamics of legal business development,”

-really???

In my experience, a lot of the informal client development tends to happen over golf, sports events, and dinners. Women sometimes are invited to the dinners.

I'm not sure it's deliberate exclusion. I think men assume that women just wouldn't be interested.

More walrus please

Retired partner here: In many of the large and larger law firms, the rainmakers in fact were created by the marketing department of the law firm. Attorneys are identified when mid to senior associates as having what it takes to market the firm. They are then positioned in the right organizations and given prominent roles in client pitches. After making partner, they are then declared to be national experts in a particular area, even though they might have little real experience in that area. If you speak at enough gatherings of in-house counsel, some of them start to believe that you might know what you're talking about. If you appear at enough dinners, same things. Anway, for better or worse, males more often than not are selected to be the rainmakers, and then they become rainmakers. Simple as that, folks.

Here in Texas, we do all our rainmaking in strip bars, whorehouses and men-only golf clubs. Deals are discussed at the urinal. Although wimmin partners can do their rainmaking at Tupperware parties, book clubs, or sewing circles, we'd rather them bring us coffee and make dinner.

31 - +1.

The women who make partner are generally high strung, crazy bitches, and this is not what it takes to make the rain. You need to be able to make the work happen AND be personable and let go. Seems very few women can do both. (Of course, it's not like this is a huge group of men either, but significantly larger than the female group.)

"Data" is plural. So, "the raw data doesn't" should be "the raw data don't"

i hope i can make it rain when i start at my firm!

*nervously hands out business cards at the business school*

-nervous T-10 2L

From the hiring side:

Biglaw is a commodity service. The difference between A and B firm work product is usually insignificant so where do the differences come from; that's right relationships.

The lawyer that can get in a round of golf, take me to a game, or have a few adult beverages at the club build the personal relationship that get them the business because they are just as good as the lawyer who doesn't (NB if a specialist is needed instead of grunt lawerying this obviously does not apply).

Generally speaking the women I know (female lawyers included) don't partake in all three of those things while the majority of males do. The business comes not from competency but from relationships built.

What my observations mean to the study I leave to you, but those are the facts as I see them.

Female partners cannot become successful rainmakers unless they are 100% committed to retaining and nurturing client relationships. Many years ago I had an early dinner with a client and a junior female partner at club 21. After one drink the junior female partner excused herself and said "Excuse me, I have to attend my son Joey's soccer game." Needless to say neither the client nor I were amused. Yet women are supposed to get a pass because they don't have to carry a penis and testicles. in my next lifetime I hope to come back as a female or a memberof a designated minority so that I can work a fraction of what I have in my present life and still achieve partnership.

I am glad that someone is finally addressing this gross inequality. For too long (potential) clients have been allowed to choose who they work with. This has obviously led to sexism and consequently they should no longer be allowed this choice. I believe that female partners and senior associates should annually be given their choice of clients that the "firm" brings in. Perhaps also a league table should be set up by a leading law school to identify the firms that instigate this practice the best.

Secondly, and unrelated, No. 3 above makes an excellent point. A quota system should be introduced to address the antisemitism that is preventing white jews from playing in the NBA. Perhaps a leading law school could set up a league table of the NBA teams that abide by this quota system.

*gets popcorn*

17, 20 -

Lots of women hate working with/for other women, especially other powerful women.

The is room for only one estrogen infused body in a room high-strung people.

20 - proof your woman GC is not a lesbian.

In Boston, female partners make it rain by continually sharting everywhere.

Well said, PE. You can't expect to work less and, yet, acheive more. Rules for women and minorities can only get you so far. At some point, you're going to have to put in the effort. That being said, it's likely already too late for many of you to even try.

How can it be "the fault of the firm" that partners are not making it rain? Partners are the firm.

41 = Closet Homosexual

At my platform-shoe firm, we do not require our women attorneys to make rain. We only ask that from time to time they smell the glove.

47

Don't confuse the issue with facts and logic

41, don't forget you had to sell me your soul.

David Saint Hubbins = Worst ATL Character.

A prerequisite for a successful firm in the long-term is an appropriate spread of lawyers categorized as finders, minders, and grinders.

At the risk of sounding sexist, women are generally more detail-oriented, more focused, and more efficient. That being said, women are naturally put into positions of grinding out the actual legal work, and minding files to maintain deadlines and communication.

Men are better at ass-grabbing and identifying with ass-grabbing clients, therefore men are naturally more inclined to make rain.

No male rainmakers=no female lawyers period. How hard is that to understand?

BTW, this is the first year that a native born Israeli has made an NBA regualr season roster.

Partner Emeritus,

I definitely agree with your post at 41. Oppressed minorities enjoy access to significantly more opportunities than WASPs at peer law firms. That is why peer law firms are among the most diverse institutions in the United States-veritable melting pots, certainly. What do you think should be done to remedy this problem and assist more overprivileged legacies?

38 -

The grammar Gestapo does not want the likes of you. "Data" can be used as both a mass-singular noun and a count-plural noun. In this case, Elie was not wrong.

Off to the Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger with you...

40: very true. That being said, that kind of networking is often perceived as flirtatious if done by a woman with a potential male client.

Women find work in govt and solo practice is better suited for their needs. My fellow women attys in these roles are are very happy. Life isn't fair, just find another way to be happy.

31 - Your post, while fitting well into feminist stereotypes, doesn't comport with reality. The clients aren't all male. If anything, GC positions at large public companies are disproportionately filled by females. The question then is, why aren't these women GCs steering their work to female lawyers?

As for rainmaking being about backslapping and boozing, maybe it's just my firm, but none of the top rainmakers are the backslapping and boozing type. Nearly all of them are men, and among those men, the strong majority are men you would describe as bookish or brainy. They're all personable, but (assuming they're not working) you're much more likely to find any of them in a museum on a random Saturday than on the golf course. Ironically, the one I can think of that likes golf and might be described as a backslapper gets most of his work from a female GC.

I posted this before, but it needs to be said again: Reasons why women (and pretty much everyone) fail to become big rainmakers.

1. Conflicts. So, you have a friend from undergrad who created a widget that clearly doesn't infringe Apple/Microsoft/IBM/Insert Big Tech Company's patent but is sued for infringement. She wants your help and you realize that there might even be standing to pursue attorneys' fees but duh. Conflicts will never, ever clear. So absent you quitting (which a few do) you are stuck working for clients who have relationship partners attached to them.

2. Hours. It's difficult to spend time on business development when you bill 2400 hours a years to other partners' clients. Factor in marriage, kids, and a life and you barely have time to sleep, let alone schmooze.

3. Specialization. Big firms focus on telling associates and junior partners what they can't do and many times go out of their way to limit their skill set in order to (a) get more efficient billing time and (b) prevent the associate/young partner from competing with older partners.

4. On that related note, if you do somehow become a competent attorney, partners will go out of their way to maintain their relationships with clients by, duh, undermining you. Fun ways to accomplish this: (a) prevent skilled attorney from access to client; (b) trash skilled attorney behind his or her back, (c) my favorite, fired skilled attorney and replace with less skilled younger/cheaper attorney; and (d) require a significant cut from any business skilled attorney lands with your client independently.

That said, the only rainmaker I witnessed was this fucker who basically teamed up with hardworking alpha female and took cases as a team when they were associates.

Although it looked like they shared the work equally, she did 80 percent of the work; he provided marginal added value but was very quick to more than his share of credit to the woman's successes. This basically garnered him a rep as a "competent" attorney, though he didn't do much law practicing when I worked with him.

But he did network like a fiend and land small clients that cleared conflicts. Those small clients grew into bigger one's. And well, he's a share partner. She was laid off eight months ago.

This is why you're doomed, ladies.

This report fails basic statistical analysis. In order to determine whether women are underrepresented, you cannot just look at the raw numbers. Those who are at the rainmaking level went to law school, probably in the late 70s to early 80s. During that time there was probably significantly less women than men graduating form law school. An honest, and statistically rigorous analysis would take that into account.

58,

I don't know where you golf or watch games, but I would hardly call that being flirtatious, expecially since I have never gone to anything like that one on one (ie a man date).

The drinks one is the only one that could fall into that category, but again that is solved by bringing an associate along or inviting more than just me for the booze. If it happens at a club that we are both memebers of then that's just two members having a drink which is no more flirtatious then me having a drink with one of my friends wives since she's there and I know her.

-40

62, it's almost as if the liberal arts majors at the National Association of Women Lawyers have some sort of agenda to pursue.

56,

What oppressed minorities? No one owes anyone a job, except based on criteria of his choosing. Diversity is a dubious moral aspiration.

64 FTW

To piggyback on 65 : could someone, anyone, show some empirical evidence that a diverse workforce is a better workforce? Feel free to use your own criteria to define "better."

62 - You fail. I don't need to do a statistically rigorous analysis" to know that, if 78% of large law firms have 1 or fewer women on their top 10 rainmaker lists, women are underrepresented. I don't know what percentage of law grads in 1980 were women, but I'm pretty sure it's higher than 5%.

By the way, there are a lot of rainmakers that went to law school in the late 80s or early 90s.

The reason they're making less rain is because they shouldn't have been made partner. The rush to promote women partners required law firms to make women and minority partners even if their books of business were beneath the typical threshhold. So now you have a bunch of underperforming partners, not because they're bad lawyers or bad at generating business, but because you asked too much of them before they were ready. It's not the women attorneys fault they're underperforming, and they're not underperforming because they're women, they're underperforming because you can't make a 7th year with a 200k book of business a partner at Cravath and expect them to generate 10M. Some of them are two soon, but some of them never should have made partner in the first place, ever.

Has anyone seriously considered the implications of women lawyers becoming major rainmakers at all of these firms?? They would start hanging out together, their cycles would start to coincide, and eventually the plumbing would suffer.

68 = liberal arts major from the National Association of Women Lawyers

All you trolls with your sexist comments are the reasons there aren't more women rainmakers. You couldn't get girlfriends in high school so you have to spend your legal careers trying to buy the affections of women. And because your female colleagues don't need your money and aren't impressed by your "I'm a hotshot lawyer" b.s. you have to degrade and belittle them. Here's a theory. There aren't as many female rainmakers because after a certain amount of years in the profession around you trolls, women say f-this, life is too short to be putting up with these aholes. So rainmake away, chumps. You are just working hard so your wife can take half your money when she divorces you. And good luck buying a second wife when your fat gut is hanging over your middleaged, saggy sack.

This post is addressed to commentor no. 48:

I am most assuredly not homosexual. My obscene wealth relaxes the moral and sexual standards by which I am held, and I can engage in activity that lower classes might consider homosexual, and not feel the repercussions. The oppurtunity to behave in the manner that I do is open to anyone...provided they can obtain the requisite obscene wealth.

72 -

You sound just like the chick I took home from Gansevoort last Friday. If it was you, two words of advice: Gillette Venus.

Hey PE, what's club 21 ? ( you pathetic law student )

72

I beg to differ with your characterization which I feel is more sexist than any other comment on here (excluding the obvious trolls). I have dated many different women from lawyers and doctors to girls that didn't have graduate degrees. I don't feel the need to purchase their affection and I don't think they felt I was but I do think that men can perform some taskes better than women and vice versa.

The comments you think belittle and degrade women may perhaps be true. Has that thought crossed your mind?

Is it possible that men and women are different and egads may by chance be better at certain tasks than the other sex?

Why are you so bitter and such a man hater?

65 FTW

PE is just on the down low. As for female rainmakers, the fact is that most women partners are true bitches, who can't handle their emotions in a professional setting. This is why female GCs rarely want to have a female partner as their number one attorney.

anyone who has spent meaningful time in BIGLAW knows that women are almost exclusively the source of tension and complications; they should be ousted from BIGLAW altogether; not to say some women aren't good BIGLAW attorneys; but vast majority still grappling with body/anxiety issues and taking it out on everyone else in the office

I think 72 is right. Women are unrepresented in rainmaker category by so choosing to be and because they know better. Still though, I think law firms should not allow this to continue. Firms should annually divide their clients (and the related bonuses) 50:50 between the male and female attorneys in the firm. Merit, effort and hard work should not be the prerequisites for success. AA for all!!!!

42

Wow 76. "The comments you think belittle and degrade women may perhaps be true. Has that thought crossed your mind?"

What a winner you must be! You so proved the point. Troll.

PS. There's a difference between being a man hater and a law troll hater. Has that thought crossed your mind?

79, agreed

@ 79 - do we work in the same office?

LOL at the shrill insecurity of 72. Go cry to your women law students group about what a victim you are.

I make it rain every night at Rick's Cabaret, baby. Unless Partner Emeritus is there, that cheap bastard.

If there is such a thing as an asslobster, is there then such a thing as an asswalrus?

yes, 79, quite difficult for many women to accept that their ivy degrees and marquee BIGLAW jobs amount to nil when surrounded by secretaries and support staff with fine bods

Couldn't disagree with 79 more. Without exception, in 15 plus years of law practice the men were always the abusive attorneys in the office and the source of problems. Women lawyers were easier to work with and for than the men.

-- White male

Hey Roxy! OMG, I totally know what you're saying! He tried taking me home the other night after only tipping me a dollar!

84 - hopefully your bonus will keep you in viagra for many years to come. Though that won't stop your children from hating you.

Hey Roxy! OMG, I totally know what you're saying! He tried taking me home the other night after only tipping me a dollar!

79.

Ha, yeah he said he wanted to dress me up as his "black Catwoman" and take me out for halloween. Not gonna happen.

Ewww! Talk about a scary Haloween! LOL!

72: you just made my point. 18

88 - your firm is an exception. women at my firm are the _sole_ source of bs, coming to the office trying to make friends, using seniority to buy influence because they can't garner it otherwise

for all their many years of hardwork, still gotta look good to get respect

ok FUGLY women should be ousted from BIGLAW

anyone second the nomination?

72

It is funny that you accuse attys of not being able to get girlfriends when most have actually been able to get multiple wives. Perhaps your bullshit view of the world is what hampers your sucess. Anger will never replace accuracy.

72, there aren't many women rainmakers because they bring in so much complication to the office that they can't get the job effectively done HTH

74 - your Friday night (partial night) girl here. One word for you: Viagra. Maybe next time we hang for more than a few minutes.

72, dear, sorry to hear that you're FUGLY and your "pretigious" credentials aren't getting you the attention you expected/hoped

i recommend jenny craig

I'm certainly experienced discrimination when it comes to who is selected and mentored for client development. The men at my old firm got chosen to accompany partners to events far far more often than the women, including myself. This was before I even had kids and had plenty of time to participate. I went to a few lunches, but every time I asked to participate in a golf outing, or sporting event, I was told there was no room. Gee, I wonder why I didn't make partner, but so many men did.

67,

I would be happy to comply with your request for empirical evidence:

1. More non-white males
2. ?
3. ?
4. Profit!

This is common knowledge - our professors and politicians tell us so.

45 - I almost spit out my coffee. lol

In my experience, many female GC do not send work to women attorneys simply because they are on some kind of bizarre power trip. They spent 3-5 years working for a male a-hole and, rather than rewarding an equally competent female attorney with the company's legal work, they get off on having "power" over the male attorney. They know that the tables are turned when they are the client so the male attorney has to bend over backwards (similar to the stock photo) to ensure that he keeps the work. The female GC enjoys the power trip.

I know this doesn't apply in every situation. I'm just saying that I've seen it happen more than a few times so I think it certainly should be considered a contributing factor.

101 stfu you didn't get asked because you're likely a pain in the ass, along with most other women in BIGLAW

99 - You clearly went home with a different fellow. I show more bone than a natural history museum.

- 74

women attorneys in big firms are invariably sad & angry, especially the balding fat ones

i second 96's nomination

question for the single-fugly ladies in BIGLAW - what goes through your mind when looking in the mirror? you have it "made" and yet no one shags you

106 if by that you mean old and decrepit, then it was DEFINITELY you last week. If not, then you must be referring to the dead and otherwise action-less nature of your love making abilities, which once again confirms it was you who stole 6 precious minutes of my life. I'd like those back please.

- 99

109, i think they just eat

I recommend 2 eye-opening books: 101 Mistakes Women Make in Business and Hardball for Women.

Men and women are different. Is this such a hard concept?

96 -- 88 here. I guess it comes down to what one considers to be the problems of BigLaw. I tend to think those are lack of work/life balance, abusive partners who inflict verbal/psychological damage on subordinates, lack of civility with opposing counsel, and overemphasis on getting every last dollar. To me those are problems overwhelmingly created and perpetuated by men in positions of power. I'm a guy and like to look at pretty women just as much as the next guy, but I don't think that makes a good law firm.

shout out to BIGLAW women with gay husbands

that's some funny shit

thank you for the laugh

110/99 -

Though still unconvinced it was you who wore my necklace last week, I feel terrible about your negative experience, whoever its author. I would therefore be happy to give "back" to you the six minutes you consider lost. If you groom yourself appropriately, I might be open to making it 12 minutes.

All in all this is turning into a great thread

88, 96 here. abusive partners who inflict verbal/psychological damage on subordinates. ever work with a FUGLY women senior associate?

115 - u forgot gay boyfriends, also amusing

38 & 61 are pretty accurate to the extent any real "rainmaking" occurs. In very large firms, true rainmaking is largely a myth, because the large firms have institutional client relationships that are to a large degree simply inherited by chosen successors, mostly men, who are then dubbed rainmakers because they inherited a book.

Change is underway as corporate clients mandate diversity and purposely designate women and minority attorneys in firms as "relationship partners." Corporate client diversity policies understand the myth of rainmaking and are beginning to emphasize the importance of designating women and minority relationship partners. Sophisticated law firms are getting with the program. The ones that don't, including some on the AmLaw 100, are getting dumped by many of the Fortune 100.

I think it's appalling that 30+ years after putting women's college athletics on equal footing, not a single woman has run a sub 10 second 100m, set a gender-neutral swimming record, or failed to look ridiculous at basketball. I'm not sure who is more to blame: is it the male athletes or the spectating public?

38 & 61 are pretty accurate to the extent any real "rainmaking" occurs. In very large firms, true rainmaking is largely a myth, because the large firms have institutional client relationships that are to a large degree simply inherited by chosen successors, mostly men, who are then dubbed rainmakers because they inherited a book.

Change is underway as corporate clients mandate diversity and purposely designate women and minority attorneys in firms as "relationship partners." Corporate client diversity policies understand the myth of rainmaking and are beginning to emphasize the importance of designating women and minority relationship partners. Sophisticated law firms are getting with the program. The ones that don't, including some on the AmLaw 100, are getting dumped by many of the Fortune 100.

2 things.

1.) I've had a lot of male partner bosses that were decent if hardworking people. Many were the type of guy everyone gets along with. No female partners I've worked for have had this quality. Not one. I think in the past some of the qualities that made women succeed when it was even more of a boys club are qualities that are negatively correlated with being sociable and reasonable. Hopefully, this changes, but anecdotally women partners (who are often insecure and unbearable to everyone) are even worse to women associates. They think they need to put the new women through the same hoops they jumped through? They don't want to seem weaker or be perceived as going easy on the girls? Who knows.

2.) Women leave more often at the mid and sr associate level to pursue other things (often family). From a business perspective I understand why firms often don't want to prep women for business development or hold them out to build relationships with institutional clients during those year; they already have one foot out the door. Lots of women want to beat me when I say this, but they mistakenly think I'm saying women are inferior. I'm not. I'm only saying they're different.

Life isn't fair.

~a former v50 woman now in house

72 is partly right. women have more choices today, and they do a lot more dumping / divorcing than they used to. is this a good thing? more importantly, can they be trusted as far as continuity of species is concerned? discuss.

122

WTF is a relationship partner? Is it because they can't hack the actual job but the firms still need diversity partners?

FYI the clients don't like to be assigned someone to have a relationship, they bring the business to the partner they have the relationship with.

119

you forget the many manly women with womenly men

the ones with the body of a dude with ultra-feminine "boyfriends"

Female attorneys are like female boxers. Not sexy.

72 hit it out of the park

lol @ 122

That may be the way it happens in promotional materials, but that's certainly not how business is done. You think a GC is giving business to a firm because he was assigned a black play buddy "relationship partner?" Not a chance in hell. Clients go to the people they like.

You sound like a law student that's read 3 too many diversity promotional packets. Get back to me in 10 years.

123 - "anecdotally women partners (who are often insecure and unbearable to everyone) are even worse to women associates"

amen

in my experience at a V10 firm the women are as if not more insecure than in law school

and it shows

especially for those witout curves

Just keep telling yourselves when you make your girlfriend's car payment that she really likes you for you, and thinks you are strong and powerful. Then keep your fingers crossed that the hot guy who went to business school isn't bending her over while you're working late. But, no, that couldn't possibly happen. Women really DO like short, bald, and fat men - not hot guys.

128 -

Maybe, but the park is tiny, the ball is huge and the pitching is slow.

Sorry, what?

It's only the next morning that I even remember why I called my little brother in the first place. I need about $25,000 to get my ketch, Strumpet, out of drydock. This sad vessel probably couldn't make it onto a trailer at the moment, much less withstand the stresses involved in actually setting sail. But Adrienne has been weaving fantasies about going to Tahiti for the last year and a half, and it's starting to seem like the choices are sailing or marriage. So sailing.

But first I need the money. Jake is strange about these things. He can be reached, he can be prevailed upon, because it resonates with the hollow spots in his ego to be the prosperous one who can dole out favors. Why else live the way he does, tethered to the bland scrivener's fate of firm existence, if he can't rub money in somebody's face? And what better way to revel in his materialism than by bestowing favors on his older brother, the artsy fartsy one who never amounted to anything? So I call him up and tell him the story, and I steel myself to tolerate his personality. There are worse ways of getting ready cash.

"Adrienne is nothing but a whore," Jake tells me, sounding affronted. "How can you stand to associate with that class of individual?"

This is another of Jake's characteristic preoccupations: the division of the world into categories, the hierarchical arrangement of humanity and its foibles. It’s all so much labor in the service of understanding and reifying received wisdom. It’s a sort of compensation for his lack of any genuine enthusiasm or any actual taste. Jake can’t even figure out whether he likes a plate of steak frites until he knows how the Michelin guide reviewed the restaurant.

“I’ll pay you back,” I say. “With interest.”

“You’ve never paid back a dime that you owe me,” Jake complains. “You’re a complete deadbeat.”

“In any case, I’ve already reserved a berth in Papeete. Just write a check. You’ll never even notice it.”

He hangs up on me. I'm not entirely surprised, after what I remember of last night's conversation. But now I’m not sure what I’m going to do about Adrienne.

This post would be a lot better without Elie's baseless speculation and guessing. Elie you have no experience in the legal world that would give your opinion any value whatsoever. Just stick to reporting the facts, without typos.

121 -

The Aussie Women's basketball team doesn't look ridiculous. They are quite attractive in their trim uniforms; unlike many of the women BB players in the U.S.

http://www.basketballbeijing2008.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/womens-basketball-team-of-australia.jpg

122, so what hope do women have to make an imprint on the 99% of the legal field that is not about v100 firms and f100 clients?

131 - Does it make you feel better to think that guys writing unpleasant things on this board are unattractive? I'm sure that some are. Would it be really upsetting to you if you knew that some of us are hot and secure, and we still feel like this?

131 i don't know where you work but the women at my office are much uglier than the men

they are short
they have no curves
they dress like men
they are manly
they don't know the first thing about make up
some flat out dress as if they're in boarding school wtf is that about

Anytime somebody questions the qualifications of women lawyers, somebody like 72 responds with "you're criticizing women because you can't get laid."
It's never responsive to the facts. It never wins the argument. And it only escalates the sexist language in retaliation, which is always a worse outcome for women.

137, lmao... and correct.

i am secure and hot

and think women don't belong in BIGLAW

put them someplace where insecurities and innuendos don't affect dealwork and they might do fine

i say we keep the sexy ones, but that's like 2 out of 1,000

All the threads like this dealing with women's issues should be required reading for firm management/executive committees to clue them into the still-pervasive misogyny in law firms, even among young associates.

Now, now 137. You should view your superpower to turn women gay not as a commentary on your looks, prowess or charm. It's a valuable service you are providing to create diversity in the workplace.

72 best comment.

141 more pervasive is the insanity of women lawyers and their insecurities which inevitably color their work-product HTH

138. I know lawyers don't get out much. BUT, if they are short, dress like men, are manly, have no curves, and take their wang out in the john next to you...they are actually men. It's totally ok. Don't be embarrassed. It's hard to remember what women look like when you're in your office all day. Good rule of thumb...no junk in front = female.

It's clearly time for a public option when it comes to law firms to promote competition and fix this broken system.

In a firm or on the court, they're just a bunch of nappy-headed hoes!

- IMUS

145, funny, but no come to my firm and you'll see

129--You're an idiot. I have personally seen one of the 5 largest corporations in the world hand pick women and minorities to become relationship partners at an AmLaw 100 firm in a move that took business away from the glanhanding male relationship at other AmLaw 100 firms. Corporations like this require detailed diversity information (with questionnaires developed by the client) in the RFP process. If the firm makes the cut, the corporation does indeed hand pick the relationship partners giving diversity factors great weight. Your ignorance of this process shows only that you are not in the big leagues of client development, That you would cast aspersions from a position of utter ignorance is pathetic.

I women attorneys would just wear strap-ons when they go to work, they likely would be treated like the men they always wanted to be.

116 - Don't make promises you can't keep. And you it was you who wore your necklace, remember? You ducked into the bathroom after I started laughing at your o-face - 6 minutes in.

what about if women weren't allowed to be attorneys

what's left: how paras and secs

problem solbed

There are no girls with good personalities.

151-

It's all fun and games until we actually set up throw-away email addresses and meet up for a hate-bang.

what percentage of women attorneys in BIGLAW are fat? fugly?

IT'S HILARIOUS how seriously some people take the comments on this site. People get so offended so easily over some stupid thing someone typed.

I'm not sure if 42 is being facetious or not - in both of his posts. But if he's being sarcastic, he's dead on. If there is a disparity in female rainmakers, it's their own fault. Clients should never be required to work with someone they don't want to, so all partners, regardless of sex, should strive to be the person the client wants to work with.

Most women partners are partners in name only, hence why most firms have moved to a tiered partnership status. You will find remarkably few women who have achieved the status of "equity partner" in most major firms. Why? Because most women partners are lousy at business development.

146 = best comment on ATL in months.

72 is right. Most, not all, BigLaw male attorneys are completely unattractive and rarely have even minimal social graces (e.g., chewing food with their mouths open, making snorting sounds). Yet most do manage to earn enough money to purchase younger, more attractive wives. Again, not all, perhaps 90%. But I'm certainly not buying what you're trying to sell -- that reasonably hot young women "fall in love" with ugly, surly cretins. On the other hand, if this delusion is what you need to make it through law school or to miss seeing the dollar signs in the eyes of your "wives/girlfriends," (or what used to be called "prostitutes"), carry on.

Are ugly, socially inept men drawn to law school for some reason other than the dream of making enough money so that they can purchase an animate creature for sex?

-- Not 72, but also not a liar like most of you guys.

160.

you say men go to law firms to be able to purchase women

ok, so why do women go to law firms?

fear of not wanting to be purchased in the first place.

stfu and go lose some weight.

I honestly had no idea that women in large firms are hateful, jealous cunts. I mean - I knew you were catty and irrational - but I didn't know you hated your male colleagues so much. Must be rough to go through life like that. You must really envy the women who don't feel like you.

Most of the men who post on this site are sexist. They don't know what it's like to be a real man, on stage in tight trousers hammering out tunes while adoring young women worship your frighteningly large armadillo. So, to compensate, they go into BigLaw. Get over it blokes.

I think it's hard for female lawyers to be rain makers because so many of the decision makers are still men... male decision makers may not be comfortable making deals with women. I think this is reinforced by the fact that male partners do not invite women lawyers to client dinners. The result is that women lawyers are not going for drinks with the male partners after work (in part bc this may be awkward and in part bc male partners may not want women to be in attendance-The environment is definitely different between men when you add a woman to the mix). I am the biggest womens' rights supporter out there, but I have to wonder whether the inclusion of women in these environments is just unnatural. How do we break it down?

154 not in your wildest.

161, I'd offer to purchase YOU but (1) it's not my style and (2) I seriously doubt you're up to my standards. Besides, unlike you, I don't have to pay to get laid.

--160

Ugh. Another thread on ATL that has the potential for thoughtful commentary but digresses into such angry, hateful rhetoric that I feel embarrassed to be a biglaw associate.

I love you, Nigel.

This is why so many people in Lat's country kill their female offspring. Men are clearly the only people capable of getting shit done.

Female anger is the weathervane of truth.
Dick Masterson

157, 42/80 here.

Merit is not the standard by which the economic pie should be apportioned. That is a myth perpetuated by commies and white males. Financial reward and status should attained by firstly recognizing one's weaknesses, secondly, identifying others who also have said weakness(es), thirdly identifying some other shared characteristic of said group and lastly claiming that this impediment to success was actually imposed by white males in an attempt to keep "us" down. This tactic should achieve some kind of dispensation for the inadequacy/weakness and prevent the group from having to work as hard/address the problem but still get ahead. The setting of objective standards should be avoided at all costs. What of those who don't or can't reach said standard? Surely this is what Orwell was criticizing when he said "some animals are more equal than others".

IMO, the way in which white males strive to better themselves through hard work and intelligence is no more than a thinly veiled attack on minorities and women- especially minority females!- and frankly it is upsetting the level playing field that AA has given us. If you ask me, it's time to march!!

Women on this tread are wasting their time with this name calling. The reality is that most people in BigLaw are naturally ugly, over-weight and balding. Women and all non-rainmakers alike could be using their time more efficiently by finding ways to get a piece of the "rainmaking pie" without actually developing the skills necessary to attract a client. Only then can they can they hope to be equal in the eyes of serious media comment and various tables- which is what matters. In my experience, claiming discrimination is the key that opens most locks.

166,

even uglies in nyc get laid without getting paid don't be so proud

you're in your mid-20s, a woman, at a law firm, that speaks volumes about your curves and bod

maybe you are one of the skinny but still ugly-as-shit ones. bet $20 that's the case

HTH

When Elie doesn't have a race-baiting story in the queue, he goes for gender baiting. In Elie's world, everyone is part of a group.

125-- relationship partner is just a generic term used to identify the partner who is responsible for the relationship with a specific client. For example, if the client ACME Corp. at Biglaw is primarily managed by Partner Jane Doe, then Jane Doe is the "relationship partner" for ACME. Whether Jane got this responsibility by playing golf with the GC for ACME who was her best friend in elementary school or by a diversity selection process in an RFP, she is the relationship partner. She's the one dealing with ACME to clear or waive a conflict, to negotiate firm rates, etc. In some cases of very large corporations working with a very large firm in different practice areas, there can be multiple relationship partners for a single client. It is not the same thing as being a service partner or just being window dressing. For any given decent client, a partner generally wants to be the relationship partner, and the jockeying for resultig compensation credit, etc., can be a source of internal conflict at major firms and if probably a significant reason, right up there along with ethical conflicts, that partners make lateral moves.

It's hard to be a female rainmaker when you're bent over a table and being fucked in the ass by a male rainmaker. Clients take a dim view of getting fucked in the ass, preferring to be the ones doing the fucking. That's why males get all the good representations, and females get the dick.

I'm looking at you Kathy...

Seriously, is 42/170 being facetious? 'Cause his arguments are either stealthily laid or completely asinine. I'm usually good at pointing out sarcasm, but this one has me tied.

This responds to #'s 27, 85, 89, 91, 93 and 94.

I am Partner Emeritus' wife, Wilhemina. I acknowledge that Wilfred has had a wandering eye and hand over the years and have overlooked his dalliances with trollops and strumpets of all races and genders. For informational purposes, Wilfred has very little money of his own. All his money derives from his marriage to me. I control the money and dole out a reasonable allowance to Wilfred each week.

Please pay no attention to Wilfred's prattle about being a rich and famous law partner at a peer firm -- he has worked all his life at my father's firm as a "special" counsel. Despite his failure as a lawyer he has been allowed to retain his position to protect our family from disgrace.

I say this so you know that although you may get some share of WIlfred's allowance each week, there will never be any more than a pittance. The old dog is tightly leashed.

Regards

Wilhemina Emeritus

175 - i spilled coffee laughing

A+

firms would be much happier places to work if BIGLAW booted all the anxious, insecure, crazy, psychotic, unbearable and ugly women who day in and day out repeatedly bring personal and social problems to work

if you doubt this, you've never worked in BIGLAW

136--it's true smaller and mid-size firms aren't scrutinized for diversity from F100 companies and thus aren't directly pressured to improve diversity by their client bases the same way. However, small and mid-size firms sometimes want to be marketable as potential acquisitions for larger firms, and poor diversity will make that more difficult for firms in the big leagues. In small and mid-sized firms, diversity issues are not as transparent. Some are excellent places for women to advance and become true rainmakers, others remain an old-boys club with a difficult to break glass ceiling.

Bagging a hot wife was one of my motivations for going to law school. But from what I've observed at my firms, few lawyers (partners included) actually have hot or "trophy" wives. And I practice in Texas, where such shameless prostituting/gold-digging is supposed to be the norm. The lawyers with hot wives are generally good looking guys who probably could have scored a hot wife if they were selling insurance. Bottom line is that a Biglaw job cannot compensate for the complete lack of game that afflicts most lawyers.

One criticism made my women is that a lot of rain-making/relationship building occurs outside office hours (if such a thing exists in biglaw), that it involves drinking or sports like golf and that fundamentally these are not activities that women are generally good at or in which they have much interest. Clearly this is discriminatory. Women should not be expected to change their behavior or attitudes and develop skills outside those listed in the job-spec. They probably want to do other things like bring up a family- things that just dont interest those beer-guzzling brutes enjoying another night at a strip club. This is Biglaw, not the army, you shouldn't have to do things you don't want to.

42/170/171

Does it ever occur to the men making these sexist comments that the things they say are really just self-fulfilling prophecies? In part, the bitterness of many women is because of attitudes like the ones on this thread. No wonder so many women want to get out of biglaw, as if the hours aren't bad enough. Women who do the same amount of work should be treated just as well as comparable men. Comments about weight and looks are counterproductive, mean, and irrelevant. There are plenty of ugly men in biglaw, but no one comments on that if they do good work. Why should women be any different? (Please, be sure to follow up with comments about how fat and ugly I must be, because all pretty people love to be judged solely on their looks).

And to women, why stab each other in the back? Treating one another like crap only reinforces the attitudes that these misogynist men are perpetuating.

Sounds like a lot of people need to grow up and quit acting like they're in middle school.

Serious question. Why is it that most male associates are balding prematurely? Is it the stress, or something else? I feel so sorry for the 20-somethings with slightly more hair than the average newborn.

184 - comments about appearances matter when they influence women associates to behave like children at work

men are stating the truth

the sooner you come to terms with that the sooner you'll do well at your V200 firm

female partners at quinn make peepee on jbq all the time. it is no big deal.

quinn stud (and golden shower aficionado)

Yes of course, it's all mens' fault, the system's fault, the glass ceiling, Al Gore's fault and on and on.
The fact is women are crappy employees, emotionally unbalanced by forces of nature and are out the door if little Britney falls off the swing at school. Their priorities NEVER include their career, despite their delusions that they can "have it all". Gabbing, long lunches, shoe shopping and mudslinging just don't cut it. And God forbid one of them doesn't like something any guy says, it's SEXUAL HARASSMENT time.
Face it, we only make most women partners in order to avoid discrimination suits. Or so was my experience in 40 years dealing with them in the workplace.

after reading all the comments i feel like there isnt a point in me going to school at all, you know being a female and all. why? so i can get a job? but im just an emotional shoe-obsessed incompitent pmsing bitch.
my only worth is my fuckibility. what is the point of living then??

so much hate from men!

do you men really dispise and disrespect women as much as you say you do in your annonymous comments?

hope you can just tell your daughters not to strive to be anything but a fuckhole.

138,

Newsflash: We are not dressing to please you. We don't give a damn if you don't like how we look or dress because you do not matter. I could crush you like a bug.

Female equity partner with a 7 figure book.

189 = john quinn

167, agreed. This thread is disgusting.

192, Don't fret. Some guys cower like babies when they are in the presence of a successful, confident woman. They need to make trashy comments on this site to cure their impotence in real life. The great thing is we don't have to marry, date or otherwise pay them any mind. Shut them down as you encounter them and do all you can to support the many great guys that are not afraid of competence or competition.

190,

Let me guess. You are unmarried, married to a WIMP, or a fat butch lesbian.

194. let me guess, you are an idiot?

ps so if she isnt married, or in fact, is a butch lesbian, what of it?? does it bother you?

she then must be a failure at life! not everything in woman's life revolves around a man. being humans, you know, we have all sorts of other ambitions and interests. oh wait, i forget, women arent human! my bad then.

I've heard women are not invited to some of these client dinners because they are afraid rumors would start that they are cheating on their wives. Back when I was in law school I went to lunch with a family friend/mentor who was a partner at a local firm. He said hi to many a business person as we walked to lunch, dined, and walked back. He later told me people called him to find out who I was. They thought he was back on the market or "moving up." He said he never expected that kind of attention for taking out a "nice young girl." Since then we have only dined w/ other colleagues.

Many people, especially in the south, are worried about "appearances."

i love it how so many male commenters on this site always bring looks into the debate. this coming from laywers!! hahahaha. its like a grade 5 argument:
WHATEVER YOU'RE UGLY!!!!! ALALALALALA

always trying to take women down a peg by reducing them to their sexuality. shocking.

c'mon bring some other arguments to the table, this is getting so fucking old!!

* munch munch munch *

As a walrus with gigantic moobs, I have first-hand experience dealing with misogynistic, anatomical jokes.

Ladies, it's not your fault. It's not your fault. It's not your fault.

* sniff sniff *

164 - you're close but asking the wrong question. Men need to get over whatever weirdness they have about hanging out with women. Just bring quality people with you, women you have something in common with, lots of women drink and watch football and practice law. Some of it is gender, some age - old men aren't comfortable at a bar with a 30 year old woman. They have to get over that shit and stop being so silly.

183: "This is Biglaw, . . .you shouldn't have to do things you don't want to. " Precious, simply precious. Because being a Biglaw associate is all about getting to do what YOU want to do...

i have a perfect solution!

men - continue as you are! hate women, talk shit about them, see them only as good for one thing.

women- get even angrier, bitchier, butchier, ugly-pant-suit-wearing-er, ball-busting-er...you get the idea.

all this name calling and finger pointing is going to encouge more hate from women, even the 'hot' ones. good job men!

i am an attractive woman, and im not exactly suffering from the lack of male attention, but i must say -
i am indeed an angry bitch feminist because men just ennerve me with their dumb women hating views.
fuck you very much patriachy!

202 -

In all seriousness, your post serves only as confirmation to men that there are a lot of women lawyers who are bitches.

Contrary to what you might think, most men do not hate women.

While you may be physically attractive, would you want to be married to a woman like you if you were a man?

Sure, there are a lot of men who are jerks, but most are not.

A woman can be both strong and feminine. You might want to Read Dr. Laura's "The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands." Don't be misled by the title; it has lots of good info for women who want to be happy. I might also suggest that you read her, "Bad Childhood, Good Life."

If you want to remain alone and lonely for the rest of your life, go ahead and ignore my suggestions.

It's obvious you are not a happy woman and you deceive yourself if you think it it isn't obvious to those around you.

I wish you well.

It’s a little disingenuous for the women here to carp on the men for focusing so excessively on a women’s looks (albeit in what is supposed to be a professional, academic environment). The simple truth is that women do it to each other all the time.

Not as a basis for assessing whether someone is a good attorney, should be hired, promoted or allowed to come to work at all.

190 is my hero (or heroine).

Crush them all like bugs, and listen to their screams. Impotent little wankers, each and every one!

203, true. many man dont hate women. but they dont see them as equal human beings either. and your smug condesceding post just proves it. what makes you think this woman is straight first of all? or sinlge?

203, you must be joking! please read all of this thread carefully...does it scream "men respect women'?? didnt think so.

207 and 208,

I read the thread and earlier posted that there are men who are jerks.

207, she said that she was not lacking in male attention, but that does not mean she is straight, but I doubt she would have made that comment if she was a lesbian.

As for whether she is married (at least to a man), I doubt any woman of character would mention that she is not lacking in male attention.

It may come as a surprise to some of you women that men don't expect or want omen to act like men. Trying do act like a man doesn't help.

And, 202 did refer to herself as an angry bitch feminist. Probably, and I realy do not mean this as criticism, has some issues with a non-attentive/distant relationship issues with her dad. Pretty typical of women who describe themselves in that manner, which is similar to lesbians.
Never met a lesbian who had a good relationship with their father, who may not have protected her from an abusive mother.

"For the women that want to become business generation leaders...."

I wish the writers of this blog -- and all legal writers -- would get their that vs. who distinction straight. "Women who," not "women that." This is a bright line rule.

194:

Go ahead and make fun. I have what you want but likely will never achieve.

Now go back and finish my assignment while I enjoy my family.

190

209. the "angry b" here - im not a lawyer actually. just came to this site to research something and couldnt help but comment. anyway, peace.

I am a former lawyer, current investment banker, and I have some input into who our group hires for deals. A few observations:

1. Elie is largely correct, we mostly hire the "tried and true" and if the (male) billing partner is 50 years old, he probably started getting our business 12-15 years ago when there were fewer female partners relative to today.

2. [Warning: this won't be a popular comment] There is definitely a belief on our side that all of corporate America, law firms included, has been so aggressive with respect to hiring and promotion practices that favor women and minorities, that you can't help but to wonder whether a female or minority partner would have still made partner absent this preferential treatment. That's not to say that anyone isn't qualified, it's just to say that we don't know, and it creates an additional small risk with respect to those people.