An 8 step Pinterest guide to what to wear during legal work experience

By on

King’s College London student Jessy Howard reports from the mini-pupillage and law firm work placement front line via Legal Cheek‘s new ‘Lawyer Looks’ Pinterest board

Follow Legal’s board Lawyer Looks on Pinterest.

1. Dark and formal at the bar

When I was offered my first mini-pupillage, the barrister I would be shadowing gave me two words of advice on the dress code: dark and formal. My rainbow-coloured wardrobe would require supplementing.

2. A dash of colour is OK at law firms

While chambers look down on colour, my experience so far of the solicitors’ branch of the profession — including two large international firms — is that you can risk, for example, a red cardigan or that gold, peacock tie you bought in Selfridges. Go sparingly, though. Men: save bow ties, cravats and neckerchiefs for when you eventually get a job.

3. Skirts should be just above the knee

The two women in the pictures above have got it about right. Too short and you risk not being taken seriously, and too long can look frumpy.

4. Matching skirts and jackets don’t come cheap

From what I’ve noticed, women barristers always seem to match their skirts to their jackets. Solicitors do this less. A word to the wise: the ONLY place I’ve been able to find to buy affordable and matching skirt suits is M&S (I got mine there for £60). I spent six hours schlepping through Oxford Street before I realised this. Matching skirt suits do not exist anywhere else below £300. If it doesn’t fit, get it altered. Believe me, it will still be cheaper.

5. Make uncontroversial jewellery choices

Be as demure as possible on this one. I once heard a barrister complaining about a former mini-pupil’s nose ring. For women, small pearl or fake diamond earrings work well. The alternative is a stud earring. Avoid heart shapes. Similarly, modest necklaces or a simple ring are good choices. Guys, a ring is fine but nothing else I’m afraid.

6. And then there are the shoes…

Ladies, if you’re anywhere but a big corporate law firm, wear flats or low heels. After all, you might be getting up at 6am and running across town to Woolwich County Court in time for an 8am client briefing.

Opinion is split about wearing high heels in the City. Some firms think heels are inappropriate, while others encourage them. However, just from walking around the City or spending time in a firm waiting room, it’s clear that most women seem to choose heels.

7. Hide any tattoos — even if they are law-themed

Tattoos seem to still be pretty taboo in both law firms and chambers. So hide them — unless, maybe, if you’re working for a really cool, hippy human rights or environment lawyer and your tattoo is equally cool and hip.

8. Oh, and don’t forget…


Not Amused

Hmmm … I’m not sure I like this.

I just want young people to stop being self conscious. I appreciate that’s like wanting them to stop being young but I can still hope.

The Bar universally acknowledges that “it doesn’t really matter” but the only way to stop worrying is a uniform. My headmaster had this approach. He knew that we all came from families with a big variety of incomes and he didn’t want us to start some ridiculous competition over clothes. So we had a simple, plain, cheap uniform of black trousers/skirt, tights/socks, white shirt, tie, jumper.

In the world of work the principle is or ought to be the same. I only dress up for clients and court but then the rules don’t apply to me. For pupils and mini pupils the uniform is something vaguely respectable. That means suits and the best advice really is M&S. We’re counsel for goodness sake, we may have many skills (may) but the one I can promise we don’t have is knowing how much clothes cost, where they come from or who is the chappie who made them.

Wear the uniform so you don’t feel self conscious, so you can do what you are there to do. Don’t start obsessing or becoming self conscious about the uniform itself – it doesn’t matter.





Not Amused

Firstly I’m not sure I understand what you mean. Please use full sentences – there is plenty of space.

Secondly IF you mean that looking at and assessing the clothing of women who practice at the Bar is common practice then you are wrong. I am also glad that you are wrong. I don’t want to live in a world like that, I’m very glad that I don’t and I’m not going to allow such a world to come into existence.

If you mean to stir up and create gender divisions which do not exist then I am afraid that I see you as just a different side of sexism. Sometimes diametric opposites are in fact the same thing – two sides of one coin – two heads to a hydra.


The Real Niteowl

“I don’t want to live in a world like that, I’m very glad that I don’t and I’m not going to allow such a world to come into existence.”

Wow, look here. I didn’t realize God was in England and needed a wig. But it looks like He is and He does.

Or not.

How exactly do you plan on doing this?



I wasn’t referring to your post directly in my short comment. I was expressing my disappointment that female barristers constantly have to be instructed on what type of earrings to wear, what type of hair to have, what length of skirt to wear, what amount of make-up to wear, in order to give the right impression in a professional context. In preparation for pupillage, this advice was incessant and frankly, outrageously gendered.

I am, nonetheless, drawn to how you frame dress at the Bar as being uniform. This is helpful to bear in mind as an explanation for these rules that arise. Bar dress-code is important to the tradition and our reputation, I accept that.

If we were all freely able to wear the same thing regardless of gender without disdain or raised eyebrows though, then I wouldn’t have an issue with this. In preparation for Call, Ede & Ravenscroft laughed as female friends and I asked repeatedly not to be fitted with a ‘pretty and lacy bib to fit over a dress”. This type of assumption is unacceptable to me, but I take no issue with others choosing this style. I am yet to wear a dress in court, and I don’t intend to unless my M+S suit collection is burnt in a fire.

In relation to your second comment, I disagree with you, in part. I’m afraid we do live in a world like that. It is sad that you are somewhat blind to this. It is important to challenge gender norms, for ourselves and for others. I didn’t come to the Bar to be told to make sure I had a skirt that was “just above the knee – (23″)”. I came to the Bar for far more than this kind of rubbish.


Not Amused

Well we really need to analyse what you are saying.

” I was expressing my disappointment that female barristers constantly have to be instructed ”

This raises some questions. ‘Have’ to? Are you sure you meant ‘have’? I don’t think you did. Then you said ‘constantly’? Where is this constant and incessant advice? I think what you mean is the media and I personally do not like the Bar being criticised for a failing of the media. That said do you understand/accept my point about uniform? Male and female kids from diverse backgrounds are what we want at the Bar. That means some may come from backgrounds where they need to be told expressly what the uniform is. We cannot wait for people who do not know to ask us. That is unkind and unhelpful. Instead we must tell people what the uniform is.

Then you need to accept that the uniform is only needed during mini-pups, pupillage or latterly in front of clients/judges. If your Chambers try to tell you how to dress then you need to (in the finest tradition of the Bar) tell them to **** off. Might I suggest being as offensive as possible, pausing for 5 seconds dead faced and then laughing as though you were joking, then abruptly pause for a second (ideally just after they have started laughing), thin your eyes slightly, then without explanation continue laughing. You don’t have to adopt my style of delivery but you do have to stand up for yourself.

In a similar vein to my first point – the gentlemen of Ede & Ravenscroft are not the Bar. They have been unsubtly referring to my expanding waistline for years but that’s hardly the Bar’s fault. Although in the instance you describe are you entirely sure that it was not nervous laughter? You can come across as quite aggressive.

Then we have the classic “I’m afraid we do live in a world like that. It is sad that you are somewhat blind to this.”. If this were pleadings you’d face a pretty nasty Part 18 request following such a silly and bold assertion. I live in the world I live in, whether you like it or not. What you are saying is that you *feel* you live in a world where women are constantly told what to wear. You use the examples of the uniform pupils are informed of – but that applies to both genders and the uniform exists for a reason. You cite articles in the media – please ignore them or comment on how they are not true (as I do). Please do not accept the premise and start pretending that there is some dark force at work criticising or judging female barristers – there is not. Finally you cite Ede & Ravenscroft. I think that’s a tad desperate.

I appreciate you are angry but to my eyes you are drawing a distinction that does not exist. You are wrongly disseminating an idea that such sexism or sexist practices exist and are widespread. The readership of this blog is mostly students and young people – is that what you want them to believe? That you as a barrister are routinely told by “the Bar” how you should dress? That is in my mind misleading. You know, or ought to know, that it is not true. No matter how upset you are about this or other actions of the media – please blame the media, get angry at them – draft a petition and I shall sign it! But I do not want the young people to believe what you say about the Bar because that is simply not true.



I never mentioned the media. I was talking about members of the Bar talking to students about what they should wear. This has happened at chambers open evenings, at panel events on pupillage, at Inn dinings etc. Colleagues and I have experienced it in different chambers too. Dress codes have been hammered out. It happens, it happens repeatedly, and it’s irritating and anachronous.

I am absolutely standing up for myself, and for all male and female kids who ought to be able to get to the Bar without gendered and outdated advice on dress. We need to make their access as wide as possible. Uniform in this context is of course, important, like knowing the etiquette of the Inns and courts, I accept that. I wasn’t challenging the actual need for the ‘black and white, plain and straightforward’ uniform, rather *how* we (as students of different genders) are told about it. It is either absent (as you quite rightly note) or really quite sexist in its delivery. In my view, it makes students clones.

Regarding Ede & Ravenscroft, this was hardly a desperate point to make. It was merely an anecdote regarding the presumptions made about what female barristers ought to or are assumed to want to wear. I didn’t like how I felt that day because of it. It was demeaning. I am entitled to stand up for myself in expressing my frustration about this. Ede may not be ‘the Bar’, but it dresses it (at least for Call). What do you suggest is done about this? It’s not acceptable, in my view, that the predominantly young, incoming members of the Bar are spoken to like this.

I didn’t cite articles in the media. What did you mean by this?

The ‘dark force at work’ is a reality for me. I don’t know any woman who doesn’t feel at least some of the effects of patriarchy on the way in which they dress. You must be quite lucky not to.


Not Amused

I’m sorry to say that I don’t find your argument has any real merit.

You admit that the uniform needs to be told to pupils and mini-pupils. It does. If you find an individual’s delivery irritating or patronising then have a quiet word with him or her. Don’t pretend that your dislike of *how* a barrister passed on the information that we have a uniform (incidentally the same uniform as the rest of the business world) makes the fact that he/she said it somehow ‘bad’.

“rather *how* we (as students of different genders) are told about it”

I unhesitatingly reject your suggestion that the different genders need to be told about the uniform in a different way. All genders are equal.

So if you accept kids need to be told then it cannot be sexist to tell kids now can it?

As for Ede & Ravenscroft. They are a business and you are a big grown up barrister. Go and tell them how you feel. I utterly refuse to be blamed for anything they do.

I don’t consider you are standing up for yourself, I think you are whining. Worse you are whining where the people you disagree with cannot hear you and whining behind a mask of anonymity – worse still whining to kids who know no better and who might accidentally believe you. Go and tell them how you feel if you want to convince me that you are standing up for yourself.

“I don’t know any woman who doesn’t feel at least some of the effects of patriarchy on the way in which they dress. You must be quite lucky not to”

I am lucky in all of the male and female members of the Bar I know. I am lucky that they are all brave enough to tell people how they feel and brave enough not to mislead young people in to thinking that the Bar is sexist when it isn’t. I am exceedingly lucky to know the brilliant female barristers and judges who I do know. I reject utterly and with contempt, the idea that they were somehow oppressed when they had to wear the uniform (pupillage/infront of clients) or that I am oppressed when I have to do up my tie.

I want to make it absolutely categorically clear to you that people who wrongly tell other people (but particularly kids) that a third party/organisation are sexist or racist when it is not true are in my eyes *just as bad* as real sexists and real racists. I would probably criminalise it if I could because I think the effect on young people who hear/read this nonsense is just as pernicious and damaging as real sexism/racism would be.



Helping young people to find different information about views of the structural and divisive issues faced at the Bar is surely important. You seemed very keen on diversity and access for young people in previous threads. I’m disappointed.

How do you think the implementation of these dress codes affect LGBT young people? These codes disproportionately affect women and LGBT young people. It might not be obvious to you, but it does.

It’s not the tone of voice I care about, it’s now normalised it is for senior members of the Bar to tell others, predominantly women, how to dress and how to conform.
I never said that different genders need to be told about uniform in different ways. That was precisely what I was challenging, that we ARE told about it in different ways on the basis of our gender (see above!).

If you wear a tie, then perhaps you are indicating you identify as male. I therefore find it deeply dismissive, yet unsurprising, that you suggest there are few issues of concern for women at the Bar and that sexism is non-existent.

As I said, repeatedly, I don’t care for the fact that everyone has to wear the ‘Bar uniform’ in court etc; I care, publicly and loudly, about the gendered, stereotyped and heteronormative way in which incoming members are told HOW to dress and how to act.

We both know brilliant female barristers and judges and paralegals and solicitors. They should all be able to shine, without prejudice and without all this bullshit.


The Bar Necessities

I don’t really understand what you are waffling about. The ‘uniform’ at the Bar, when in court or when meeting clients is:

Dark blue/grey suit
White shirt
Tie (with a ‘quiet’ pattern)

Black (or maybe dark blue?) suit
White shirt
Shoes with a small heel

Thereafter the principal rule is the clothes should not be noticeable. Generally this seems to mean that everyone should avoid clothes that show their physique: i.e. avoiding clinging or ‘skinny’ cuts, avoiding skirts that tend to ride up, avoiding trouser cuts that sit very low or carry excessive break at the ankle, avoiding shirts/dresses that might show cleavage.

I find something odd about the idea that “it’s now normalised it is for senior members of the Bar to tell others, predominantly women, how to dress and how to conform.” Just have a go at wearing a pastel pink shirt or chelsea boots to court if you are a man and see if you make it past the robing room before somebody notices. The reality is that women have a far greater range of options and are under far less pressure to conform. The downside, of course, is that there is far greater scope to wear something that does draw attention (and is, by definition, unsuitable).


Juan Pertayta

Well said. There are plenty of problems with the Bar, but they don’t include the dress code. The wailing about it is adolescent nonsense.


Not Amused

You are not informing anyone. You are disseminating misinformation. Probably because you feel angry. But I didn’t make you feel angry, something else did, and I think it is wrong to mislead kids just because you are angry.

You are dangerously manipulating facts to suit a personal political agenda.

I have addressed what substantive issues you raised. You are now flailing around seeking and finding increasingly weaker arguments. Trying to construct ad hominem attacks on me will not avail you and is hardly a good debating technique.

I appreciate that you are upset but it is categorically untrue to suggest that “now normalised it is for senior members of the Bar to tell others, predominantly women, how to dress and how to conform”. That is twisting the truth beyond credulity.

You say “I care, publicly and loudly” and you are disingenuous. You are complaining quietly and anonymously.

If a more senior member of the Bar once commented on your dress and this has upset you – then go and seek them out. Tell them how you feel. Have the courage to confront the individual. What you are doing instead is wrong. You are falsely over dramatizing whatever happened to you. You are wrongly telling young people that the Bar regularly tells women how to dress. You are quite wrongly using inflammatory language.

It is not fair to impact the view that young people have of the Bar in the way in which you are doing. To put it into plain language – you are scaring young people just because you are upset/angry. That’s can’t ever be right. I expect better of you. If you had any interest in diversity then you would encourage and support it. You would calm irrational fears not stoke them.



Oh please. Is psychoanalysis another of your talents?

Don’t discount or belittle individual experiences and viewpoints just because they doesn’t match your own.


Not Amused

My ‘psychoanalysis’ offered you an excuse to explain for the pretty disgraceful way you’ve been wrongly scaring kids that the Bar is a sexist place. When it isn’t.

I think a rational person would have taken that lifeline.



Before we all start arguing the toss about what new entrants to the Bar should wear, what we really all should be thinking about is how those new entrants will make ends meet financially if they make it that far. That’s the problem right now, and it’s a big one.

Put another way, the real issue faced by prospective barristers from “alternative backgrounds” isn’t how to dress on a mini-pupillage. It’s how to afford everything that follows if they manage to get in.



I find advice aimed at female law students, pupils and barristers on how to dress incredibly irritating and sexist. The only “uniform” is court dress, and while it is of course necessary to inform barristers of both genders what is meant by that, there is simply no need to go further and start commenting on appropriate skirt length / cleavage / shoe heel height.

The bar is, in my experience, incredibly non-judgmental when it comes to how women dress. The women in my chambers wear colours, jeans, short skirts, long skirts, shorts, trouser suits.. You get the idea. We are all self employed, and if a barrister started commenting on what a female pupil or mini pupil is wearing in a manner that suggests s/he takes her less seriously because of it, that barrister would swiftly be put in their place by other members of chambers. Of course it may be sensible to look professional in court or when meeting a client, but surely that is so obvious that no one needs telling? If a woman is genuinely unsure what is appropriate then she is perfectly capable of asking someone.

The advice in this article is outdated except in the most old fashioned chambers. The attraction of the bar to me is that it has so many eccentric, individual and interesting characters. Ultimately, your choice of what to wear and how you present yourself is a business decision. But if clients think you are good and like your advice, they really won’t care if you are wearing colourful clothes, dangly earrings, make up or a bare face.

I am not saying that you can get away with absolutely anything – simply that the parameters are far wider than this suggests, and I have yet to meet a woman capable of becoming a barrister who isn’t capable of working out on her own what to wear each day.


Not Amused

The advice was not aimed at barristers. You didn’t read the title. I seldom defend journalists – but it’s not acceptable to just be lazy and consequently produce an entirely irrelevant comment.



Oh for goodness sake. The article’s advice was aimed at both barristers and solicitors. You have just engaged in a long discussion below this article about whether female barristers need advice on what to wear. I am a female barrister and am replying in that capacity. My comment was entirely relevant!

I think that it is very dangerous deliberately to twist circumstances, particularly where new entrants to this profession are concerned.


Not Amused

“Oh for goodness sake” being the usual cry of the lazy barrister caught out for not actually bothering to read the papers …

The advice in this article is for pupils and mini pupils as well as vac schemers and trainees. It is all good sensible advice. It is advice that kids need to know and as usual with these things, it is the kids from the most difficult backgrounds who need to be told – so telling them *improves* diversity.

Instead you decided to try and twist what this article was addressing in order to allow you to have a little rant about a variety or non-related topics. You made an unjustifiable accusation of sexism. That’s pretty bad in my book. I’ve already written about how dangerous it is for people to make totally unsubstantiated allegations of sexism or racism – particularly where young people may see them.

“You have just engaged in a long discussion below this article about whether female barristers need advice on what to wear. I am a female barrister and am replying in that capacity. My comment was entirely relevant!”. I am naturally grateful for your exclamation mark. Unfortunately just as gender and sex are never an objective indication of inability the opposite is also true – your gender does not grant you special insight, nor does it make your comments any more valid. That’s the flip side of equality.

As it happens you are again wrong. I sense a disturbing tendency towards sloppiness – are you perhaps not giving your full attention to this? I have not been arguing in favour of any establish barrister being given advice on what to wear. I am not an advocate for the fashion industry. I have said (as you would see if you looked) that establish barristers should do what they want – I even gave advice on how to handle any comments. I think it is ridiculous to suggest that female barristers cannot stand up for themselves – you clearly can (even if you are untroubled by details or fact).

I am, as I have said repeatedly, concerned that young people do not get the wrong end of the stick by reading comments which wrongly (in one case) or sloppily (in your case) give the impression that the Bar is sexist when the Bar is not sexist. Kids need advice on the uniform – and in many areas of practice that means both Court dress and what to wear for clients. It’s not sexist to give kids advice. It’s not sexist when the LCJ revises the Court Dress guidelines. It’s not sexist to tell pupils they need to dress smartly at all times and to then tell them what smartly means.

I remain a great supporter of M&S in this regard. You appear to instead want to be irritated and say things are sexist, when they are not.



I think you should calm down, accept that people have different views, and perhaps proofread your own posts (and use of language) before accusing other people of being “sloppy”.

I use the word “sexist” deliberately, because it reflects my own experience on this issue, as a woman who has felt patronized and insulted by being told what is appropriate to wear at various points in my career. This kind of advice can carry with it a variety of implications depending on how (and by whom) it is delivered: that women should hide their bodies; that women only wear short skirts because they are more interested in flirting than in doing their work; that women do not know how to fit in to a profession that is still dominated by men by dressing on those male terms. Your perspective (as a man, presumably) is absolutely valid. However, please do not try to tell me that my experiences and feelings are somehow not worthy of being heard.

However, my main point – and it is an important one, given that there is a clear implication in this article that the bar is somehow conservative and stuffy when it comes to how women should dress – is that this is not my experience of the bar at all. I want all students – whether male or female – to know that there are many chambers out there which do not give a stuff what they wear as long as they have the skills and intellect for the job. If they want advice on what is “smart” for meeting clients, I’m sure they are perfectly capable of asking.


Incidentally, I think you also talk a lot of sense in your comments on this thread and am slightly unsure as to why you have been so aggressive about my comment. The only thing we seem to disagree on is that I think that advice on how women should dress should not be doled out unless asked for (largely because of my own experience of this), and you think it’s fine to keep putting it out there.

However, I really do not understand how you think my comment gives the impression that the bar is sexist. My whole point is that it (generally) is not. It is the rather inaccurate advice in this article from a non-barrister which I find sexist, and which really does not reflect the reality of my experience at the bar, either as a mini-pupil, pupil or barrister.

The Bar Necessities

I don’t think it’s helpful to use the rhetoric of feminism (e.g. “Women hiding their bodies”) in this context.

I think you would find that anybody who chose an outfit that displayed the wearer’s body–and I’d include in that a man who chose to wear a a tightly cut suit to show off a muscular physique–would be criticised for being inappropriately dressed.

I really don’t think it is appropriate for anybody (male, female, young or old) to wear clothes that invite or allow clients, advocates or judges to think of them sexually. And that applies equally, regardless of sex.


For any students reading this post and the string of comments above, enjoy the post for what it is and ignore the comments!

Work hard, do your best and keep your eyes and ears open. If you want a career at the Bar, that’s the stuff to focus on doing. How you dress and how you sound is pure ephemera.



The Bar Necessities – I fully agree with you. But there is a difference in how men and women are perceived to wear clothes that “show off” their bodies. Have you ever tried to find a shirt that fits well when you have large breasts? Have you ever tried to find a skirt that doesn’t look short if you are 6ft tall? Clothes that are flattering on men and designed for the (male) workplace simply don’t work for many female bodies when simply adapted as a female dress code. It is a nightmare for me to wear a trouser suit and blouse because of my short, curvy size 10 figure. A shirt that doesn’t bunch messily around my waist looks too tight on my chest. Trousers are difficult when you have curves because they are either clingy or too loose.

The fact is that men do not have quite the same issues in finding suits that fit. The clothes that suit me (and I don’t just mean in terms of attractiveness – I mean in terms of comfort, fit and style) don’t hide my curves, and probably don’t fit in to the stereotype of how a lawyer should dress. And really, why should they? I have a particular body shape as a woman and shouldn’t feel I have to hide it. I don’t ever dress for men at work, but it’s impossible for me to hide the fact that I have breasts! That is why it is typically women (and not men) who are accused of dressing inappropriately.

Sorry for hijacking this thread with my feminist comments. I am fully aware that there are more pressing issues facing women in the world today. But being told what is appropriate for me to wear (whether on work experience or in my job) is something that I find difficult to put up with when it really doesn’t affect my ability to do my job.

Anyway, it is an interesting debate! I guess the point is really that clothes shouldn’t matter as long as they don’t make you look as though you don’t care about your job.



The female barristers that I’ve met have been adamant on one particular issue – never, never, ever, have your skirt hem above your knee. As the writer of this article points out, it’s M&S the entire way forward and all your problems are solved! (The only thing I found awkward about this was that some M&S suits make you look better dressed than solicitors… and that can’t ever really be a good thing, can it?!)

Finally, given the seriousness of the bar, don’t tell young people to relax because many of them do not know how to dress and need to be told. Otherwise, you end up with 20 year old mini pupils dressed as if on a night out, who honest to god don’t know any better.


NC Trainee

Echoing Not Amused (as usual….), information about what to wear can be very comforting for many who may have no ‘work items’ in their wardrobe. It is important to distinguish between telling students what you ought to wear in order to conform to the normal uniform worn by lawyers, and saying that you HAVE to conform to this normal uniform. If you don’t want to conform then you don’t have to. There may be negative consequences that arise from this. I believe that these negative consequences arise because if you don’t conform you will appear somewhat flamboyant and therefore unprofessional. I doubt that men at the Bar will judge a woman for her earrings on anything less than whether they are “professional” or not. If you don’t want to wear jewelry then don’t.

I think that Barristar was complaining that there even are different dress standards/uniforms for men and women. To this all I can say is that, whether she is right or wrong, the rest of the world does not have to conform to gender neutrality.
They must not discriminate against you because you choose to dress ‘like a man’ or denounce gender, but they themselves do not have to adopt the same standards. The vast majority of people identify with one gender or the other, and so it is perfectly acceptable to frame uniforms according to the separate genders.

Being a minority has inherent disadvantages. Some are not acceptable. Some, such as the framing of differing dress codes to suit the 99%, are acceptable, as long as those who don’t conform are not discriminated against.


NC Trainee

Not Amused, your argument in this thread makes me question more than before my choice to apply for TCs rather than pupillages. If I could join the bar, I now believe that I certainly would.


Not Amused

Excellent 🙂

As you can probably see I think one of the best things about the Bar is the way that we can honestly discuss our views. I never feel the need to hide my true feelings because I have spent a lot of time testing my beliefs (indeed I am happy to re-test them through conflict/debate).

If I find one of my beliefs is wrong then I change it. I don’t think I am wrong on this. I think this type of advice is helpful. Just like I think invitations with “smart casual” on are unhelpful. I was a kid once and I didn’t know what to wear – much rather someone told me than look a fool. There’s nothing sexist in it and IF the outside world is judging women all the time on what they wear (Daily Mail I expect) then oughtn’t we really celebrate the fact that the Bar isn’t? Rather than pretending it is?



Next is always worth a look for women’s suits.



“Your gender does not grant you special insight, nor does it make your comments any more valid”

Not Amused – research what ‘objectivity’ means in terms of oppression and social power dynamics and what bias you might have as a member of a privileged group. You are tedious. I have little time to correct such a badly informed and dismissive belief system.



It is petty and childish to complain about dress codes. As a client I would have no confidence in anyone with tattoos, nose/lip/tongue piercings and such like. Speaking as a layperson here.


Comments are closed.