OCI/callbacks/etc Men's Clothing Mega-thread

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
acr0504
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:55 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby acr0504 » Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:55 pm

Tave wrote:Does anyone else call "braces" "suspenders?"



yes. I didn't even know what they were referring to when they said "braces"

User avatar
grobbelski
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:50 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby grobbelski » Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:55 pm

OperaAttorney wrote:
Fac Ut Gaudeam wrote:
For the most part, not really. Flat fronts lend themselves for a cleaner silhouette and just look better on most people. There was a topic on this before and I remember almost all the TLS ladies giving pleats a clear thumbs down. This especially holds true for men under 35 yo.


+1. If you're fit and trim, pleats are unecessary. If you're portly, pleats are a necessity. That's my hard-and-fast rule. I belong to the former category.


Does height factor anywhere into the pleat v. flat argument? Being tall and not portly I am curious...

jrs12
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:47 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby jrs12 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:27 am

Tassels loafers are actually the quintessential lawyer's shoe, though it's not a very youthful look, and I wouldn't wear them at an interview. Alden has been making the original tassel loafer since the 1930s, if I remember correctly.

Church's are incredible shoes, but unless you really love fine shoes, there's little reason to get anything but Allen Edmonds--they offer unparalleled quality for the price. In most professions, in the US, AEs will be perfectly appropriate (many US presidents have worn them). Overseas, it can be a little more important to wear more expensive shoes to parallel increasing professional prestige.

User avatar
OperaAttorney
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:48 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby OperaAttorney » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:32 am

grobbelski wrote:
OperaAttorney wrote:
Fac Ut Gaudeam wrote:
For the most part, not really. Flat fronts lend themselves for a cleaner silhouette and just look better on most people. There was a topic on this before and I remember almost all the TLS ladies giving pleats a clear thumbs down. This especially holds true for men under 35 yo.


+1. If you're fit and trim, pleats are unecessary. If you're portly, pleats are a necessity. That's my hard-and-fast rule. I belong to the former category.


Does height factor anywhere into the pleat v. flat argument? Being tall and not portly I am curious...


No. I'm 6'2" with a lean, muscular build. I never wear trousers with pleats. I do, however, have my trousers altered for extra room in the seat area since I have the black man's...er...blessing ;).

User avatar
OperaAttorney
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:48 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby OperaAttorney » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:35 am

jrs12 wrote:Tassels loafers are actually the quintessential lawyer's shoe, though it's not a very youthful look, and I wouldn't wear them at an interview. Alden has been making the original tassel loafer since the 1930s, if I remember correctly.

Church's are incredible shoes, but unless you really love fine shoes, there's little reason to get anything but Allen Edmonds--they offer unparalleled quality for the price. In most professions, in the US, AEs will be perfectly appropriate (many US presidents have worn them). Overseas, it can be a little more important to wear more expensive shoes to parallel increasing professional prestige.


Allen Edmonds shoes are nice, but they're too conservative for me. I'd buy a pair for my dad, but I prefer a more modern look. Plus, I wear size 14/15 shoes and have never seen AE's in my size. When it comes to dress shoes, Prada's my friend. You can get Prada on the cheap too. You just have to know how to shop.

User avatar
nightlight
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby nightlight » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:39 am

RussianGirl wrote:
atlantalaw wrote:i didn't even know victorias secret had suits

They have everything. And they make it sexy!


Hmmm. Call me old-fashioned, but I like to try my suits on before I commit. Besides, mail-order returns can be such a pain in the ass. My longtime favorite for suits has been Sisley/United Colors of Benetton. Their cuts are stylish and fit well, and they always have plenty of options. Added bonus: the sales girls always have fun European accents, no matter which store you go to.

Banana also keeps a couple of suiting options on the floor in regular and petite sizes.

User avatar
premierock
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:09 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby premierock » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:51 am

In regards to suits being expenseive, the way I get mine is asking for them for the holidays/birthday. I ask my parents for a suit, and ask for shirts and ties from aunts, uncles etc. This is also a great way to get books for school!

jrs12
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:47 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby jrs12 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:10 pm

AEs have a few models that are a bit more fashion-forward. I'm wearing a fairly long-lasted wholecut right now that looks almost Italian. In general, they are quite conservative. That's not necessarily a bad thing in a professional wardrobe, though.

I don't know much about Prada shoes. I thought that designed the shoes and contracted out the production, so some lines were much more durable/well-made than others?

User avatar
joschmo
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:16 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby joschmo » Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:21 pm

Someperson wrote:
YankeeFan wrote:My father uses a farily prominent tailor, and, thus I also have a few suits from him.


I was BORN and BRED for SUCCESS and ACHIEVEMENT.


His name's Sam Walton.


I loled at work.

User avatar
Lily
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Lily » Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:23 pm

I am cheap as hell. I buy suits at Ross for 50-80 bucks a pop. I like Tahari and Calvin Klein. (chick suits, not dude suits)

I am more concerned about shoes. They don't last, and they're terribly expensive. grrrr. What the hell shoes are women supposed to wear that don't fall apart after a month? Everything is just so poorly constructed.

User avatar
atlantalaw
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:37 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby atlantalaw » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:39 pm

agreed. women's shoes are terrible (and did i mention uncomfortable?)

User avatar
hrvd214
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby hrvd214 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:59 pm

What do people think about J. Press suits?

User avatar
nightlight
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby nightlight » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:05 pm

Lily wrote:I am cheap as hell. I buy suits at Ross for 50-80 bucks a pop. I like Tahari and Calvin Klein. (chick suits, not dude suits)

I am more concerned about shoes. They don't last, and they're terribly expensive. grrrr. What the hell shoes are women supposed to wear that don't fall apart after a month? Everything is just so poorly constructed.


What kind of shoes do you expect to find if you're cheap as hell? Go to a DSW or Neimen/Saks outlet and invest in a pair of quality black pumps for $100-120. Your feet will thank you and so will your posture. High-end shoes make you feel sexy and more confident and I don't care how shallow you think I am for saying that. It's absolutely true.

If you really have some cash to drop, go with the louboutins.

CupOfJava
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:50 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby CupOfJava » Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:35 am

RussianGirl, that is a beautiful suit, which I would buy, except the skirt would unfortunately accentuate my hips a bit too much. (I can't wear trumpet skirts, and I adore the way they look!) I forgot that VC had suits on their website.

nightlight, I'll have to check out Benetton. I completely forgot about that store.

Lily, I too, am cheap as hell. I don't think there's a Ross or Marshall's near me. Any other bargain hunting tips? I'm not looking forward to shelling out $150 for a suit; that's a few months of bills.

Ladies, any comments on shirts? Are we stuck with long-sleeved button downs as well, or are camisoles and other shirts OK? Color-wise, Are we stuck with charcoal and navy, or can we do more colorful suits? I can do business casual, formal, and casual, but business suits are a foreign concept to me. And every time I think of a suit, I think of the light green one my grandmother wore to my wedding. (IE: church suits)

I, too, am concerned about shoes. I like sandals and boots, but I hate, hate, hate pumps. They're uncomfortable. I'm also vegetarian, so finding nice shoes in general is very difficult.

User avatar
RussianGirl
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:06 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby RussianGirl » Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:41 am

I'm also interested in the color question... how are we feeling about oranges, pinks, and such?

User avatar
Chris_cpb
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 6:03 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Chris_cpb » Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:42 am

Italian. Don't shop at Men's Warehouse unless you live in Wisconsin.

law_fun
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:40 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby law_fun » Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:45 am

http://mises.org/story/3372

this has some interesting points about proper dress...apparently you should have a wool suit.

jrs12
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:47 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby jrs12 » Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:29 am

J Press offers decent value, although their prices having been going up. Their style very old-school, east coast, establishment. Their shoulders are unpadded, which is a plus in my book, but their jackets are have no darts, which means that the jacket hangs totally straight, without an iota of waist suppression. People who recognize the style will be impressed. Most others will not, since it lacks the flair of Italian tailoring.

readereader
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:58 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby readereader » Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:09 pm

RussianGirl wrote:I'm also interested in the color question... how are we feeling about oranges, pinks, and such?


I think (and this goes for men and women) that if we're talking about clothes to wear to work during law school or right after, that everyone says that law is a fairly conservative environment, and that generally subdued colors are the rule. (I don't think we have to wear all black or all navy. I just think that toned down is the way to go.) We all agree that it's wrong to judge someone on the color of their suit, but if a someone interviews me for a summer job, I want him/her to not look askance at my outfit, even if they are a chauvinist. It's entirely likely that as a summer intern, I will never see the folks at the top again unless they're interviewing me for a job, in which case, even if I get the job, I probably won't see them again for several years, so the fact that I'm aware that they're judging me is irrelevant. I don't want them thinking about my clothes (either because they're too loud or because they're too casual). I want them thinking about my skills.

Once you are the senior partner and have your own office and can generally act as unconventionally as possible, because people have to humor you no matter how strangely you behave, go for the bright colors. Hell, go for sequins and a feather boa! Walk around barefoot like the guy on Mad Men (and make everyone else do it too)! But I would definitely wait to become established before making any kind of unusual statement with your appearance.
Last edited by readereader on Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

readereader
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:58 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby readereader » Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:12 pm

CupOfJava wrote:RussianGirl, that is a beautiful suit, which I would buy, except the skirt would unfortunately accentuate my hips a bit too much. (I can't wear trumpet skirts, and I adore the way they look!) I forgot that VC had suits on their website.

nightlight, I'll have to check out Benetton. I completely forgot about that store.

Lily, I too, am cheap as hell. I don't think there's a Ross or Marshall's near me. Any other bargain hunting tips? I'm not looking forward to shelling out $150 for a suit; that's a few months of bills.

Ladies, any comments on shirts? Are we stuck with long-sleeved button downs as well, or are camisoles and other shirts OK? Color-wise, Are we stuck with charcoal and navy, or can we do more colorful suits? I can do business casual, formal, and casual, but business suits are a foreign concept to me. And every time I think of a suit, I think of the light green one my grandmother wore to my wedding. (IE: church suits)

I, too, am concerned about shoes. I like sandals and boots, but I hate, hate, hate pumps. They're uncomfortable. I'm also vegetarian, so finding nice shoes in general is very difficult.



Re: shirts - with a suit, I think that shells and camis are fine as long as you don't plan to take off your jacket. (Also, we're figuring that if one person is wearing a suit, most people are wearing suits, and that means that the building will likely be climate-controlled accordingly in most places, so wearing a cami will make you cold as all get out.) Re: colors, to expand on my last post, I don't think anyone has to wear navy pinstripes every day. I'm sure a teal or maroon or powder blue suit isn't getting anyone pink slipped at work, but I think wearing anything unorthodox is considered... well... unorthodox. Not to sound like a fuddy duddy. But that's what Mom tells me.

User avatar
applepie
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby applepie » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:14 pm

i heard somewhere that grey suits are supposed to make you appear intelligent whereas blue suits are for power (some old Palm Beacher told me this)

opinions?

I have also heard that any pastel (even as your shirt) is not appropriate for legal attire

CupOfJava
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:50 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby CupOfJava » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:16 pm

readereader wrote:
Re: shirts - with a suit, I think that shells and camis are fine as long as you don't plan to take off your jacket. (Also, we're figuring that if one person is wearing a suit, most people are wearing suits, and that means that the building will likely be climate-controlled accordingly in most places, so wearing a cami will make you cold as all get out.) Re: colors, to expand on my last post, I don't think anyone has to wear navy pinstripes every day. I'm sure a teal or maroon or powder blue suit isn't getting anyone pink slipped at work, but I think wearing anything unorthodox is considered... well... unorthodox. Not to sound like a fuddy duddy. But that's what Mom tells me.


Thanks! I will likely be asking for suiting for X-mas for a while; I hate wearing the same thing twice in one week. I was raised in LA, and old habits die hard.

meow09
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:43 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby meow09 » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:15 pm

Image[/quote]

Super cute!.. but isn't it a little too trendy/sexy for a law office? The side slit skirt and the way the buttons are arranged, etc. I could be totally wrong I have no idea but that's just my initial impression.. opinions?

AP33
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:40 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby AP33 » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:00 am

betasteve wrote:
spondee wrote:
Spor wrote:I've read other places that black is a definite no for any business environment.


Is that true? What's wrong with black?

Black is reserved for evening and mourning.

OP - Stick with grey or navy. Both are equally versatile, and should serve you for some time. 2 or 3 button is a matter of preference. Pleats are a no-go unless you are carrying extra weight, then perhaps.


TITCR

Black is a no no for most jobs since it's generally evening wear. If you don't like grey/navy you can go with a number of pinstripes/herringbones etc.

I would say only do a 3 button if you are on the tall side (but that's me being picky in fashion)

User avatar
Lily
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Lily » Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:28 pm

nightlight wrote:
Lily wrote:I am cheap as hell. I buy suits at Ross for 50-80 bucks a pop. I like Tahari and Calvin Klein. (chick suits, not dude suits)

I am more concerned about shoes. They don't last, and they're terribly expensive. grrrr. What the hell shoes are women supposed to wear that don't fall apart after a month? Everything is just so poorly constructed.


What kind of shoes do you expect to find if you're cheap as hell? Go to a DSW or Neimen/Saks outlet and invest in a pair of quality black pumps for $100-120. Your feet will thank you and so will your posture. High-end shoes make you feel sexy and more confident and I don't care how shallow you think I am for saying that. It's absolutely true.

If you really have some cash to drop, go with the louboutins.


I am absolutely cool with dropping some cash on shoes if they will last. It ends up being more cost-effective anyway. Thanks for the tips. :)




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.