ahduth wrote:If you do this look, for the love of god, get your pants hemmed better than the model. One of my pet peeves is seeing women wearing four inch heels with pants that were obviously hemmed for flats. Uuuuuugh.
Those are definitely not conservative peep toes...
I guess I've been thinking pant suits are better for younger women, because dress suits can seem kind of dowdy, whereas pantsuits just seem more modern and "with it." Maybe women can pull off more ass in a pant suit? I'm not really sure now... I guess I have no real reason.
There are no conservative peep toes or whatever, for interviews / important meetings. It is really stupid to walk into an interview, and have the 60 year old curmudgeon on the other side of the desk think, "Those shoes make her look like a harlot." Save it for when you run the firm.
I used to do costume design and construction, so I'm kind of a hem nazi.
I agree no open toed for interviews, ever. Depending on firm culture, I think they can be okay for important in-house meetings. I always looked at what the (two) female partners wore when I worked at a firm and adjusted accordingly.
Regarding pantsuits, I've heard through the grapevine that some older partners don't want to give the job to a woman in a pantsuit. Since they don't wear signs saying "Hi! I don't think you should wear pants!" I err on the side of caution and wear a skirt suit (change from within!). It wasn't too long ago you could be kicked out of a courtroom for wearing pants... Obviously, this probably won't be an issue for admissions interviews.
From highest to lowest possible dowdiness, to me it goes classic pantsuit (think Ms. Clinton, bless her heart) -> classic skirt suit -> modern skirt suit/modern pantsuit -> high fashion pantsuit with skinny legs I can never pull off because of my ass.