Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You're right, I wanted partner and didn't get it.

Now that that's handled, holy shit, this is one of the most unhinged things I've ever read in my life. You imply that this is a common "type" in biglaw, the "type" we all hated, but my God. I'm quite sure I've never met someone like you, and if I had, I would have an entire comedy set about you.

Well, I’m sure you would’ve hated me, since I got tons of associates to follow my lead and say no to unreasonable crap, especially from people who had no firm influence. Like yourself.

Sorry your bullying didn’t work out for you. Enjoy everyone at your firm knowing you’re subpar.

Unlike you, I'm not too worried about the opinions of people at law firms. As long as the checks clear, I'm happy. My real joy in life (other than my family) is investing and watching my money grow.

Um, you mean watching your husband’s earnings grow right? Because we are both on this thread because we are spouses of law firm partners haha.

He makes much more than me (especially since I'm part time) but obviously we both contribute to our investments. Are you here because you flamed out of the legal field entirely? Can't imagine how that happened, with your sparkling personality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You're right, I wanted partner and didn't get it.

Now that that's handled, holy shit, this is one of the most unhinged things I've ever read in my life. You imply that this is a common "type" in biglaw, the "type" we all hated, but my God. I'm quite sure I've never met someone like you, and if I had, I would have an entire comedy set about you.

Well, I’m sure you would’ve hated me, since I got tons of associates to follow my lead and say no to unreasonable crap, especially from people who had no firm influence. Like yourself.

Sorry your bullying didn’t work out for you. Enjoy everyone at your firm knowing you’re subpar.

Unlike you, I'm not too worried about the opinions of people at law firms. As long as the checks clear, I'm happy. My real joy in life (other than my family) is investing and watching my money grow.

Um, you mean watching your husband’s earnings grow right? Because we are both on this thread because we are spouses of law firm partners haha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You're right, I wanted partner and didn't get it.

Now that that's handled, holy shit, this is one of the most unhinged things I've ever read in my life. You imply that this is a common "type" in biglaw, the "type" we all hated, but my God. I'm quite sure I've never met someone like you, and if I had, I would have an entire comedy set about you.

Well, I’m sure you would’ve hated me, since I got tons of associates to follow my lead and say no to unreasonable crap, especially from people who had no firm influence. Like yourself.

Sorry your bullying didn’t work out for you. Enjoy everyone at your firm knowing you’re subpar.

Unlike you, I'm not too worried about the opinions of people at law firms. As long as the checks clear, I'm happy. My real joy in life (other than my family) is investing and watching my money grow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You're right, I wanted partner and didn't get it.

Now that that's handled, holy shit, this is one of the most unhinged things I've ever read in my life. You imply that this is a common "type" in biglaw, the "type" we all hated, but my God. I'm quite sure I've never met someone like you, and if I had, I would have an entire comedy set about you.

Well, I’m sure you would’ve hated me, since I got tons of associates to follow my lead and say no to unreasonable crap, especially from people who had no firm influence. Like yourself.

Sorry your bullying didn’t work out for you. Enjoy everyone at your firm knowing you’re subpar.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course it’s “worth it” to a non working spouse!

I'll give you credit for a subtle troll of calling a biglaw counsel a "nonworking spouse" instead of assuming you can't read.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You're right, I wanted partner and didn't get it.

Now that that's handled, holy shit, this is one of the most unhinged things I've ever read in my life. You imply that this is a common "type" in biglaw, the "type" we all hated, but my God. I'm quite sure I've never met someone like you, and if I had, I would have an entire comedy set about you.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]^ 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.[/quote]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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

I didn't mean junior partner, I meant junior associate. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

Kirkland makes everyone who sticks around to 10th year "junior partner" (non-equity)[/quote]

+1

They do that so you can claim to be a "partner" at dinner parties, for people like OP, who posts these same questions so often. [/quote]

Lots of firms are like this—only equity partners are real partners.

Anonymous wrote:I don't work. Kids have everything they need, and I don't think about money. Plus, I think marriage is easier when money is not an issue. But you have to be ok with someone who works a lot, and you have to take care of every detail in your life - kind of like being a single parent - because the other person works more than anyone else you'll ever meet.

Honey. I’m a single parent. If you don’t work - you’re nothing like a single parent. You’re More like a nanny, being given a stipend to raise his kids.

Anonymous wrote:How much money does a typical Biglaw partner in a top 10 or 20 law firm in DC bring home in a month? I keep asking and nobody tells me. Am I right that it’s like $200,000 a month?

Yes, mid-career that's about right for my DH's firm. It can go way up from there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

WTF? No associate gets to choose to work for partners who didn’t go to Ivies. This biglaw partner would get your ass “doesn’t meet expectations” reviews until you quit. Which is probably what happened.

Lol right. And then the management committee would gently direct you to use associates you actually liked because I’d have several rainmakers going to bat for me. Remember, I didn’t want to make partner - but I was excellent at my job but wouldn’t bill more than 2100 - so they didn’t want me wasting time on your shit anyways. The alternative was no one got me.

Prime example of why I have steered away from big law despite the money. Glad I started reading the thread backwards and am done here.

Um, you wouldn’t have been good at it. Your reading comprehension sucks. I’m the PP scaring you from biglaw and I left it. If you went to a T10 we might even work together!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You sound truly awful.

I was somewhat heroic amongst associates actually. And a number of partners. You never had the shit to back your talk up?

Lol at the random posters worried about biglaw partners (who if they were white, from a crap school, and made it were entirely due to some connection, usually that didn’t actually result in revenue).

I’m hooked. More stories please.

Lol I don’t want to out myself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

WTF? No associate gets to choose to work for partners who didn’t go to Ivies. This biglaw partner would get your ass “doesn’t meet expectations” reviews until you quit. Which is probably what happened.

Lol right. And then the management committee would gently direct you to use associates you actually liked because I’d have several rainmakers going to bat for me. Remember, I didn’t want to make partner - but I was excellent at my job but wouldn’t bill more than 2100 - so they didn’t want me wasting time on your shit anyways. The alternative was no one got me.

Prime example of why I have steered away from big law despite the money. Glad I started reading the thread backwards and am done here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

WTF? No associate gets to choose to work for partners who didn’t go to Ivies. This biglaw partner would get your ass “doesn’t meet expectations” reviews until you quit. Which is probably what happened.

Lol right. And then the management committee would gently direct you to use associates you actually liked because I’d have several rainmakers going to bat for me. Remember, I didn’t want to make partner - but I was excellent at my job but wouldn’t bill more than 2100 - so they didn’t want me wasting time on your shit anyways. The alternative was no one got me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

You sound truly awful.

I was somewhat heroic amongst associates actually. And a number of partners. You never had the shit to back your talk up?

Lol at the random posters worried about biglaw partners (who if they were white, from a crap school, and made it were entirely due to some connection, usually that didn’t actually result in revenue).

I’m hooked. More stories please.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Ah, but you actually wanted biglaw - people who 'make' counsel basically wanted partner but didn't get it. By the way, I was biglaw too until I jumped ship - I was the associate you all hated because I was super smart, super good, and also super jack@$$-y about the fact that I wouldn't work for partners who didn't go to Ivies. I also memorized all of the associates published hours so I could tell you which dummy to bother instead of me who wasn't hitting their billables.

WTF? No associate gets to choose to work for partners who didn’t go to Ivies. This biglaw partner would get your ass “doesn’t meet expectations” reviews until you quit. Which is probably what happened.