The Amy Coney Barrett fashion thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But.. the dress isn't the handmaid's red color. It's a purply-pink.

I don't agree that she should have worn a suit. I think it's very appropriate and I don't think there is a need for any woman to wear a suit any more. It's an outdated idea that says suits - i.e. what men wear - are more appropriate for formal events. Women's formal wear can be different, and a formal dress is appropriate.

This. All the people mentioning the Handmaid's Tale are reaching so hard they're going to pull a muscle. Either that, or their monitors are distorting the color.

It's close enough that more than one of us saw it.

Look, I dislike her views as much as all of you but given that the dress she’s wearing is a completely different color to the handmaid’s dress, it feels like if she’d worn any block color you guys would have drawn this parallel. If she’d worn blue you would have said she’s channeling the wives. If she’d worn brown you’d have said she was being like Aunt Lydia, etc. It’s... just a purple dress.

I am the PP. I hate her views, and think she probably has integrity as a person, so I think it is unlikely that she did wear the dress to irk people. But the color is close enough that the iconic Handmaids costume comes to mind. It just does.

It will be wonderful, once we are out of this Trump-fueled hellscape, to be able to see a reddish/purplish dress and just see a reddish/purplish dress. We aren't there now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The black mask is severe. The dress is not as professional nor as serious as I would expect one to wear to a hearing.

Trump women have to have flash.

The mask is definitely a statement since her Rose Garden event is being pinpointed as a super spreader event.

Masks are required in the Senate.

[Anonymous]

She could have at least combed her hair and put on a jacket. This is a hearing for Supreme Court Justice, not Lane Bryant retail manager.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She could have at least combed her hair and put on a jacket. This is a hearing for Supreme Court Justice, not Lane Bryant retail manager.

So mean-spirited. Do you call yourself a feminist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could have at least combed her hair and put on a jacket. This is a hearing for Supreme Court Justice, not Lane Bryant retail manager.

So mean-spirited. Do you call yourself a feminist?

are you new here?

[Anonymous]

She looks fine and professional. I don't know anything about what's expected of attorneys in these situations, but seems ok to me eye.

I heard about The Fold London on DCUM a while back and looked it up and though I can tell it's well made and has nice fabrics and is expensive, it is all just dowdy AF to me and I really dislike it. But seems about right for ACB.

[Anonymous]

With 7 kids, I doubt the hair was a consideration. I like the dress but am scared as hell of her getting confirmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could have at least combed her hair and put on a jacket. This is a hearing for Supreme Court Justice, not Lane Bryant retail manager.

So mean-spirited. Do you call yourself a feminist?

It's not about feminism, it's about professionalism. A Hill intern wouldn't be allowed to show up looking like that.

[Anonymous]

She doesn't deserve a fashion thread.

[Anonymous]

The dress is pink. It doesn't look like THT.

That doesn't diminish my apprehension about her principles and judicial judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She could have at least combed her hair and put on a jacket. This is a hearing for Supreme Court Justice, not Lane Bryant retail manager.

It's raining today. Her hair looks like anyone else's who blow dried / flat ironed and then stepped out into humid air. I'm not going to snark on flyaways; my hair does much worse things in the horrid DC climate.

[Anonymous]

Pussy bow. Another subtle sign that's she actually secretly pro-women and is just trolling us all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an attorney and regularly in professional situations where men would wear suits as business attire. I sometimes wear suits, sometimes business dresses. Both are business attire for women and we do not have to wear a suit to be appropriately attired. We can, but don't have to.

You would wear that to federal court? I would wear it to a client meeting, a training or a conference. I *might* wear it to a depo, an arbitration hearing, or a low-level administrative hearing -- although even for those I'd prefer a suit or at least a dark dress. It doesn't strike me as a gender thing, it just strikes me as a professionalism thing. I can't think of any time I've seen a female lawyer wear anything like that for an interview, a court hearing, or even a deposition.
I did just buy a hot pink blazer that I was planning on working into my rotation with black pants for client meetings, trainings I give, and maybe depo defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be honest when I saw this thread title I though "hmm. what fashion?
and I say that as someone who likes the way she dresses and also dresses in very basic, conservative dresses.

Me too! Fashion?? ACB?!

[Anonymous]

She looks great and her kids are adorable