Anonymous wrote:Can I ask why this board is so fascinated with big law partners? Don't like Wall Street spouses or tech or venture capital spouses make more? Or is it because big law is more common than the others in DC?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Not even close. My husband is very happy at home and miserable at work. We are saving FU money as fast as we possibly can. It think it’s the more materlistic/less materialistic divide. They happy wives are willing to up with anything just for the giant paycheck. Even if it’s “easy street” now, they didn’t get there on easy street.

Yea, I'm the PP with a big law spouse but who also works. Reading this thread was fascinating. I think the people who think it's worth it can't make their own money.

Double Biglaw for over a decade (he made partner I made counsel). I don’t understand what you’re getting at. Of course having so much money you never have to think about it is worth a lot of BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Not even close. My husband is very happy at home and miserable at work. We are saving FU money as fast as we possibly can. It think it’s the more materlistic/less materialistic divide. They happy wives are willing to up with anything just for the giant paycheck. Even if it’s “easy street” now, they didn’t get there on easy street.

Yea, I'm the PP with a big law spouse but who also works. Reading this thread was fascinating. I think the people who think it's worth it can't make their own money.

Double Biglaw for over a decade (he made partner I made counsel). I don’t understand what you’re getting at. Of course having so much money you never have to think about it is worth a lot of BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Not even close. My husband is very happy at home and miserable at work. We are saving FU money as fast as we possibly can. It think it’s the more materlistic/less materialistic divide. They happy wives are willing to up with anything just for the giant paycheck. Even if it’s “easy street” now, they didn’t get there on easy street.

Yea, I'm the PP with a big law spouse but who also works. Reading this thread was fascinating. I think the people who think it's worth it can't make their own money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ And I'll add, WE miss dinner with the kids when we go out on a date or have another social obligation, but HE has missed dinner for work only once in the last six months.

Geostationary.

Clearly there is something wrong with your memory if you only remember once. No one believes this is true. I do believe that your cognition might be faulty.

Well, I believe it to be true. I had a law school professor who was always home for dinner. She said it was just really, really important to her to be home for dinner every day so she did it even when she was a junior partner at a big law firm (in case anybody is curious I think it was Kirkland in litigation). Her husband wasn't an attorney but had a really demanding job as well and he was there for dinners too. Of course they stayed up late to get things done. It's just about what you prioritize.

I didn't mean junior partner, I meant junior associate.

Yes, of course, because you don’t make partner at Kirkland by leaving every day at 4pm and never traveling. Hence, she’s a law professor making 1/50th of what a Kirkland partner makes. Cool story bro.

Yes, law professor =/= big law partner. They get summers off, ffs. The PP who keeps mentioning the law professor sounds like they are either still in law school or fresh out of it.

Good lord. We have people in this thread who can't distinguish between the lifestyle of a junior associate and a junior partner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ And I'll add, WE miss dinner with the kids when we go out on a date or have another social obligation, but HE has missed dinner for work only once in the last six months.

Geostationary.

Clearly there is something wrong with your memory if you only remember once. No one believes this is true. I do believe that your cognition might be faulty.

Well, I believe it to be true. I had a law school professor who was always home for dinner. She said it was just really, really important to her to be home for dinner every day so she did it even when she was a junior partner at a big law firm (in case anybody is curious I think it was Kirkland in litigation). Her husband wasn't an attorney but had a really demanding job as well and he was there for dinners too. Of course they stayed up late to get things done. It's just about what you prioritize.

I didn't mean junior partner, I meant junior associate.

Yes, of course, because you don’t make partner at Kirkland by leaving every day at 4pm and never traveling. Hence, she’s a law professor making 1/50th of what a Kirkland partner makes. Cool story bro.

Yes, law professor =/= big law partner. They get summers off, ffs. The PP who keeps mentioning the law professor sounds like they are either still in law school or fresh out of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Not even close. My husband is very happy at home and miserable at work. We are saving FU money as fast as we possibly can. It think it’s the more materlistic/less materialistic divide. They happy wives are willing to up with anything just for the giant paycheck. Even if it’s “easy street” now, they didn’t get there on easy street.

Yea, I'm the PP with a big law spouse but who also works. Reading this thread was fascinating. I think the people who think it's worth it can't make their own money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Not even close. My husband is very happy at home and miserable at work. We are saving FU money as fast as we possibly can. It think it’s the more materlistic/less materialistic divide. They happy wives are willing to up with anything just for the giant paycheck. Even if it’s “easy street” now, they didn’t get there on easy street.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ And I'll add, WE miss dinner with the kids when we go out on a date or have another social obligation, but HE has missed dinner for work only once in the last six months.

Geostationary.

Clearly there is something wrong with your memory if you only remember once. No one believes this is true. I do believe that your cognition might be faulty.

Well, I believe it to be true. I had a law school professor who was always home for dinner. She said it was just really, really important to her to be home for dinner every day so she did it even when she was a junior partner at a big law firm (in case anybody is curious I think it was Kirkland in litigation). Her husband wasn't an attorney but had a really demanding job as well and he was there for dinners too. Of course they stayed up late to get things done. It's just about what you prioritize.

I didn't mean junior partner, I meant junior associate.

Yes, of course, because you don’t make partner at Kirkland by leaving every day at 4pm and never traveling. Hence, she’s a law professor making 1/50th of what a Kirkland partner makes. Cool story bro.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ And I'll add, WE miss dinner with the kids when we go out on a date or have another social obligation, but HE has missed dinner for work only once in the last six months.

Geostationary.

Clearly there is something wrong with your memory if you only remember once. No one believes this is true. I do believe that your cognition might be faulty.

Well, I believe it to be true. I had a law school professor who was always home for dinner. She said it was just really, really important to her to be home for dinner every day so she did it even when she was a junior partner at a big law firm (in case anybody is curious I think it was Kirkland in litigation). Her husband wasn't an attorney but had a really demanding job as well and he was there for dinners too. Of course they stayed up late to get things done. It's just about what you prioritize.

I didn't mean junior partner, I meant junior associate.

Anonymous wrote:Lucerative .. lol.. did you mean “ulcerative”?

Anonymous wrote:I think what you’re seeing here are spouses who’s married to biglaw and fall into 2 camps… 1 happy marriages, 2 unhappy marriages. The happy marriages find a way to maximize time at home and the unhappy marriages the biglaw partner throws in more and more time at work for possibly diminishing returns because it’s more palatable than being at home. This is supported by the claims of better work/life balance being accompanied by less unpleasant posters and the claims of bad work/life balance being accompanied by bitter, accusatory, suspicious, and unpleasant posters.

It all seems to align.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But once the kids are in elementary school, they have sports practices and activities and no family has "family dinner" together every single weeknight.

I’m the Pp with the law professor who was militant about family dinner. She didn’t let her kids choose activities that interfered with it. This wasn’t a huge deal because they weren’t like DCUM posters’ kids with tons of activities and the only thing she had to say no to was a dance team or something.

Not everyone lives like DCUM posters. Even big law attorneys!

Anonymous wrote:But once the kids are in elementary school, they have sports practices and activities and no family has "family dinner" together every single weeknight.