The New And Improved Fashion Board

[bold_n_brazen]

Originally posted by dtb
Can that happen?!?

Not in my experience.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Tell that to the unemployed men and women living on the other side of town whose jobs are now in Shanghai, Bangalore, and Ho Chi Minh City.

If their wives didn't make them live on the other side of town, they wouldn't have such shitty commutes.

[dtb]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'm not discounting your personality requirement, but saying physical beauty is legit and power is not is crap.

I was thinking this exact thing, but having trouble coming up with a trenchant way of saying it.

Thanks, fringe!

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
On a new topic, I'd like to get a sense of what happens in everyone's offices regarding gifts and collections and parties and whatnot. I guess too much detail would be really outable, but at my current place, the frequency, scope, and level of collections far exceeds anything I have ever encountered in any previous workplace. Basically, everybody is asked to contribute to everything for every big occasion (not birthdays) involving everyone, which is awkward, and gets a little expensive, and seems to put a disproportionate burden on (desperate, lonely) single associates without kids.

I'm of no help with this because no one collects for anything here. But if they did, I would tell them I wasn't interested every single time unless it was something of value (under my definition of "value," of course) to me. That way, they don't bother with you.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
1. You are speaking in absolutes. I don't think there are many people who are simply completely unappelaing physically and utterly lacking in personality. But a person's drive and ambition is certainly a part of their personality that other people may find attractive.

2. You can't just set up a hypothetical and define what is and isn't "legitimate" in that hypothetical and then act like a victim because everyone doesn't agree with that definition. Maybe this is why you feel like spanky.

TM

1. I agree. But my suspicion is, a lot of people make decisions on whom they marry/fuck based more on the person's ability to provide creature comforts than what I'd call actual love. I've felt that sort of pang myself, when dating someone without drive or ambition, and finding myself disgusted that I was considering that sort of shit. I'd like to think maybe there was one element of my life that wasn't a hedge, and I have always tried to view relationships that prism. The idea of being with someone seriously for reasons other than purely being into that person for exclusively what they are - their physical self and personality, sitting across from you at a bar, chatting... you without any info about her background or what she does for a living - kind of grosses me out. I'm an odd purist on that. As to the criticism that I'm a hyprocrite because I allow physical attraction to have a huge influence... Well, I don't know how to divorce a personality from its body.

2. I didn't play victim. I ran a wild argument up a dead end. I take full responsibility. I said it. It's right there.

[nononono]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
On a new topic, I'd like to get a sense of what happens in everyone's offices regarding gifts and collections and parties and whatnot. I guess too much detail would be really outable, but at my current place, the frequency, scope, and level of collections far exceeds anything I have ever encountered in any previous workplace. Basically, everybody is asked to contribute to everything for every big occasion (not birthdays) involving everyone, which is awkward, and gets a little expensive, and seems to put a disproportionate burden on (desperate, lonely) single associates without kids.

Cards/money get passed around for various reasons; flowers from the practice group have been sent to sick people or for new babies or a death in the family. Birthdays are people bringing in something on their own birthday to share, and the firm has a once-monthly "celebrate all [December] birthdays" things - sweets in the afternoon, usually. Generally there are baby showers for every pregnant mom; optional to participate in contributing or attending party.

[dtb]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Marie Curie?

Good point. Who am I to stand in the way of the onward march of scientific discovery?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I ran a wild argument up a dead end. I take full responsibility. I said it. It's right there.

Please stay off the PB until the urge to acknowledge this sort of thing leaves you. You'd wreck the place.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The idea of being with someone seriously for reasons other than purely being into that person for exclusively what they are - their physical self and personality, sitting across from you at a bar, chatting... you without any info about her background or what she does for a living - kind of grosses me out. I'm an odd purist on that.

I think your definition of "personality" is limited. People who end up very wealthy or powerful have specific personality traits that make them that way. I don't think those traits are easy to hide when talking to them at a bar and I also think people find those traits attractive.

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
2. I didn't play victim. I ran a wild argument up a dead end. I take full responsibility. I said it. It's right there.

Understood.

TM

[NotFromHere]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
On a new topic, I'd like to get a sense of what happens in everyone's offices regarding gifts and collections and parties and whatnot. I guess too much detail would be really outable, but at my current place, the frequency, scope, and level of collections far exceeds anything I have ever encountered in any previous workplace. Basically, everybody is asked to contribute to everything for every big occasion (not birthdays) involving everyone, which is awkward, and gets a little expensive, and seems to put a disproportionate burden on (desperate, lonely) single associates without kids.

It's not just a burden at work, it's also a burden outside of work (See Sex in the City, baby shower episode.

But yeah, I think I've mentioned before that we had 5 secretaries out on "leave" which also included 5 baby shower parties.

Outside of work, not only do you have to buy gifts for baby showers, you also are now stuck buying birthday and generic winter presents for their kids as well. It's bullshit.

[nononono]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
1. I agree. But my suspicion is, a lot of people make decisions on whom they marry/fuck based more on the person's ability to provide creature comforts than what I'd call actual love. I've felt that sort of pang myself, when dating someone without drive or ambition, and finding myself disgusted that I was considering that sort of shit. I'd like to think maybe there was one element of my life that wasn't a hedge, and I have always tried to view relationships that prism. The idea of being with someone seriously for reasons other than purely being into that person for exclusively what they are - their physical self and personality, sitting across from you at a bar, chatting... you without any info about her background or what she does for a living - kind of grosses me out. I'm an odd purist on that. As to the criticism that I'm a hyprocrite because I allow physical attraction to have a huge influence... Well, I don't know how to divorce a personality from its body.

2. I didn't play victim. I ran a wild argument up a dead end. I take full responsibility. I said it. It's right there.

So you are saying that what a person looks like is more a part of "who they are" than what they choose to do with their time?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I just reread this and, wow, physically unappealing people are by definition unloveable in your world? Or, maybe can be loved by, like, a parent or a sibling, but no romantic love for the physically unappealing?

Don't be greedy.

[Jack Manfred]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I can't believe Live at Fillmore East is new to you. That's always been one of my "desert island" discs.

That album was recorded before I was born. In high school, classic rock was popular. It was played on the radio and was constantly being used in beer commericals. Greg Allman even had videos (with lots of "powerful" scantily-clad women) on MTV. There didn't seem to be any need to pay for what was abundant.

I didn't get seriously into music until college. Grunge happened and that dominated the musical landscape of my college days. I also got into jazz, but I was under the influence of Wynton Marsalis, so I thought fusion was crap. I've grown up a lot since then. Now I just think that most fusion is crap.

That's why I asked for recommendations. You can still hear most classic rock singles on any AOR station in the country. That means unless you want to sync Pink Floyd to The Wizard of Oz, the only albums you need are albums full of great songs that don't get played on the radio.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
On a new topic, I'd like to get a sense of what happens in everyone's offices regarding gifts and collections and parties and whatnot. I guess too much detail would be really outable, but at my current place, the frequency, scope, and level of collections far exceeds anything I have ever encountered in any previous workplace. Basically, everybody is asked to contribute to everything for every big occasion (not birthdays) involving everyone, which is awkward, and gets a little expensive, and seems to put a disproportionate burden on (desperate, lonely) single associates without kids.

There are no collections for anything here. I have attended one baby shower for a fellow associate during my tenure. Birthday cakes (in my section) are paid for by the firm and we have a monthly firm-wide birthday celebration, which is also paid for by the firm. I will probably buy a small gift for my secretary this year. Last year I was exempt from that because my secretary quit in early December (that was excellent). To the extent that flowers are bought for births/deaths, those are paid for either by the partners or by the firm.

At my old firm, there were annual collections for the floor attendants for holiday boni because they were independent contractors and the firm didn't give them anything. I always had the distinct impression that they wound up with higher (and all cash, non-taxable unless they decided to report it) holiday boni than the secretaries received from the firm. I'm sure that they received into the hundreds of dollars, since every attorney on the floor basically chipped in a $20 and secretaries and paralegals also chipped in. But the rest of the year I'm sure they were paid horribly.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by nononono
Cards/money get passed around for various reasons; flowers from the practice group have been sent to sick people or for new babies or a death in the family. Birthdays are people bringing in something on their own birthday to share, and the firm has a once-monthly "celebrate all [December] birthdays" things - sweets in the afternoon, usually. Generally there are baby showers for every pregnant mom; optional to participate in contributing or attending party.

Ok, I am not a meanie for thinking that my office is totally ridiculous. I think the problem is that the traditions established when the place was very small and everyone knew everyone else have been continued despite the fact that it's now pretty big and impersonal.

I caved this time, because I am a wimp, but honestly, the request for contributions was done in a way designed to induce giving out of guilt, nd the size of the contribution was large, and I can't be the only one who thought it was obnoxious. I would rather allocate twice as much to the gift for my assistant.