« Adventures at Work: "How Dare You Tell My Friend about My Dirty Habit...No, It doesn't matter that she already knew about it...That's Not Relevant." | Main | How to Keep People from Sitting Next to You on a Southwest Flight (and also not die) »
December 15, 2005
Two Memories From My Days as a Summer Associate at a Washington Law Firm
Random Memory #1: Back in the day when I was a summer associate at a law firm in Washington, D.C., I composed what I still think was a pretty nifty email.
-----Original Message-----
From: Very Serious and Incredibly Diligent Summer Associate
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 5:06 PM
To: Summer Associates DC
Subject: Admin Law
Has anyone taken Administrative Law?
-----------------
From: Thinking Fool
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 5:08 PM
To: Very Serious and Incredibly Diligent Summer Associate, Summer Associates DC
Subject: Re: Admin Law
[Very Serious and Incredibly Diligent Summer Associate], I have not taken it. At my screening interview, [Summer Partner] recommended I take it before graduating. I have some friends who took it last semester with an adjunct FROM UCLA. Apparently, she was an awesome teacher. Hope this helps.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Random Memory #2: The biggest perk about being a summer associate at a big law firm was the plethora of fine dining experiences. If you actually wanted to have a nice lunch every single day, you could definitely achieve such a goal and never have to pay for a meal the entire summer. One day, my favorite summer associate had lunch scheduled with two partners. He was looking forward to this particular dining experience because he actually liked the partners a lot, and they happened to work in the area of law that interested him the most. About thirty minutes before his lunch was scheduled to begin, a fourth-year female associate called my friend and told him that he had to cancel whatever lunch plans he had scheduled because some public interest types from outside the firm were going to give a presentation about pro bono opportunities in D.C. Apparently, the female associate was in charge of the program and was horrified to learn that most of the summer associates did not plan on attending the event. (Nobody had even told us about it until a few dozen minutes before it was set to begin.) My friend was understandably upset. It was late in the summer, so he wanted to keep his lunch plans with the partners because he didn't know if he'd have another opportunity to eat with them. On the other hand, he didn't want to spurn a firm event because he didn't know if that'd look bad to the hiring committee. Thus, he consulted one of the firm's paralegals.
My Friend: Hey, I have lunch plans with Partners X and Y, but "Fourth-Year Female Associate" told me to cancel them to go to some pro bono event.
Paralegal: Who told you to cancel them?
My Friend: "Fourth-Year Female Associate."
Paralegal: She's a fucking NOBODY!
My friend kept his plans and somehow we all managed to get offers for permanent employment.
Comments
interesting that you find it important to use the term "female" in your description of the associate. Is this just for descriptive purposes, or does this have something to do w/ the connotations/undertones of the "nagging/b***ing" nature of the incident and that such qualities are more likely to be endemic to women?
Posted by: fermanator at December 15, 2005 11:29 AM
"She's a fucking NOBODY!"
That is great.
Posted by: Finished.Law.School at December 15, 2005 03:59 PM
i'm guessing fermanator does not work at EEOC
Posted by: gator girl at December 15, 2005 04:02 PM
No need to guess twice, crocodilian chick.....but why do you ask? Did my last comment appear to you to be intended to reflect my own mentality rather than to be a comment on my perception of what Fool meant (as was intended)?
Posted by: fermanator at December 15, 2005 04:40 PM
For better or worse, the use of the word "female" was done solely for descriptive purposes. I actually thought about whether to include the associate's gender and ended up deciding to do so simply because I think it paints a more vivid picture of what transpired. I should have mentioned that the paralegal was female as well, though the default gender for attorneys still seems to be male while the default gender for paralegals is female. Gender roles/classifications/why we include gender sometimes and exclude it other times...interesting topcis that should be explored more. I'm sure I've got built-in biases of which I have zero awareness. Freud write anything about this? I think I'll take a peek in my trousers to look at something I know he discussed!
Posted by: Fool at December 15, 2005 06:14 PM
You mean penis envy?
Posted by: fermanator at December 15, 2005 10:09 PM
trust paralegals. and be nice to them. pays off in spades, i tell ya.
Posted by: buddha at December 23, 2005 02:43 PM
