New partner track role--need to dress "rich"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

[Anonymous]

The queen of Spain loves a cape blazer

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7782261/amp/Queen-Letizia-Spain-looks-smart-black-cape-climate-change-conference-Madrid.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For this area I agree with St John, Tory Burch, J McLaughlin. Maybe even Kate Spade. Shoes and purses are what the other women will notice.

I also agree re the package look - hair, nails, SHOES, and bags (handbags as well as carryalls). I would think about a personal shopper at Neimans or Saks or someplace similar for a few good separate sets. You want separates that can be mixed and matched, with accessories. Then some dresses from J McLaughlin.

Definitely NOT these brands.

Agree - TB, KS are juvenile and kitschy.

Go with some non-flashy Ferragamo, COS, Eileen Fisher pants/shells with nice jackets on top. Try Betsy Fisher if you are in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

[Anonymous]

What is "c-suite marketing in BigLaw?"

Not being snarky, just curiosity from a non-lawyer.

[Anonymous]

"In a city where being a grind is better than being a glamourpuss, suspicion falls on those who are too modish or too toned. Are they spending more hours cross-training than studying the Law of the Sea Treaty?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/opinion/cheney-stays-in-the-picture.html

Wow, that column is quite a trip down memory lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"In a city where being a grind is better than being a glamourpuss, suspicion falls on those who are too modish or too toned. Are they spending more hours cross-training than studying the Law of the Sea Treaty?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/opinion/cheney-stays-in-the-picture.html

Wow, that column is quite a trip down memory lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

Thanks, explainers! That was educational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The queen of Spain loves a cape blazer

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7782261/amp/Queen-Letizia-Spain-looks-smart-black-cape-climate-change-conference-Madrid.html

I love a cape blazer. I need one!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"In a city where being a grind is better than being a glamourpuss, suspicion falls on those who are too modish or too toned. Are they spending more hours cross-training than studying the Law of the Sea Treaty?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/opinion/cheney-stays-in-the-picture.html

Wow, that column is quite a trip down memory lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

Thanks, explainers! That was educational.

Oh man is this true of academia. Not just here but pretty much everywhere. I am jealous of women in fields where dressing nicely is accepted and not judged. When I was a PhD and postdoc I was very aware that I would not be taken seriously as a young woman if I were too dressed up or put together. The goal was to look like you’re too busy in the lab to keep up with fashion trends, work out, or get your hair/nails done. Now that I’m a bit older I don’t care much about projecting that image, but as a mom I actually am too busy for most of that other than working out anyway. ????

[Anonymous]

None of this matters in DC. At all.

[Anonymous]

So basically look perfect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of this matters in DC. At all.

What???

[Anonymous]

I've had good luck with Tahari (not the marked down brand label). Their clothes are nicely tailored and the fabrics are good. I've worn some items regularly for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"In a city where being a grind is better than being a glamourpuss, suspicion falls on those who are too modish or too toned. Are they spending more hours cross-training than studying the Law of the Sea Treaty?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/opinion/cheney-stays-in-the-picture.html

Wow, that column is quite a trip down memory lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

Thanks, explainers! That was educational.

Oh man is this true of academia. Not just here but pretty much everywhere. I am jealous of women in fields where dressing nicely is accepted and not judged. When I was a PhD and postdoc I was very aware that I would not be taken seriously as a young woman if I were too dressed up or put together. The goal was to look like you’re too busy in the lab to keep up with fashion trends, work out, or get your hair/nails done. Now that I’m a bit older I don’t care much about projecting that image, but as a mom I actually am too busy for most of that other than working out anyway. ????

It is not that you are too busy. It is that you don't want anything ever to distract from the work you are presenting. A frame shouldn't overshadow the picture. If people are wondering where you bought your clothes, they aren't listening to your words

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"In a city where being a grind is better than being a glamourpuss, suspicion falls on those who are too modish or too toned. Are they spending more hours cross-training than studying the Law of the Sea Treaty?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/opinion/cheney-stays-in-the-picture.html

Wow, that column is quite a trip down memory lane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 2 cents, as c-suite marketing in BigLaw:

From when you hit the "partner-eligible" ranks to about 2 years out from actual promotion -- kill it. Go sleek, bad-ass, aspirational. Reiss and MaxMara are great baselines, but you can get affordable dupes at Banana, Zara et al if you look and know what you're looking for. Nice shoes and bag, but not labeled, as others have said.

BUT when you are seriously under consideration, go 20% dowdy. Maybe this will take no effort - 10 postpartum lbs that killed your Black Halo sheaths, whatever. But there is an old Maureen Dowd quote to the effect of "if you're too attractive in DC you have not spent enough time considering the Treaties of the Sea," and it STILL HOLDS.

This is zero fair. Completely misognynistic. But just sharing what I've seen after having a seat at the table and what seems to play out, without ever being able to influence the situation. Take it FWIW.

Interesting advice, but “treaties of the sea”? Huh? (I know what maritime treaties are, but not sure what the saying means or why it refers to them.)

What the quote means is that if you look to stylish or groomed in DC, you aren't spending enough time doing "serious work", hence you aren't a "serious person". You see this a lot in more academic, wonky, and government-type environments here in DC. Especially in government or government-adjacent industries, you really don't want to look "rich". You want to look professional, but non-descript. Slightly dowdy. Applies to both men and women.

Thanks, explainers! That was educational.

Oh man is this true of academia. Not just here but pretty much everywhere. I am jealous of women in fields where dressing nicely is accepted and not judged. When I was a PhD and postdoc I was very aware that I would not be taken seriously as a young woman if I were too dressed up or put together. The goal was to look like you’re too busy in the lab to keep up with fashion trends, work out, or get your hair/nails done. Now that I’m a bit older I don’t care much about projecting that image, but as a mom I actually am too busy for most of that other than working out anyway. ????

It is not that you are too busy. It is that you don't want anything ever to distract from the work you are presenting. A frame shouldn't overshadow the picture. If people are wondering where you bought your clothes, they aren't listening to your words

Exactly this.