More BigLaw TikTok drama! Forum

[MergerQueen]

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Yes. We all think this of nepo babies and legacies. We're simply asking you to apply the same logic.

Ironically, the tiktoker in question is from a very wealthy family and self-reported that her parents have paid for her many years of schooling.

And yet, posters still fixate on her skin color as the basis for her under-qualification... hmmmmmmm...

[Anonymous User]

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

I was starting to feel bad about all of the (deserved) negative attention she was getting. But now I don't since it clearly doesn't phase her. That's probably part of the issue here. She lacks self awareness and genuinely feels like she's God's gift to mankind.

Perhaps her parents didn't say no enough and praised her for every breath she took as a child?

But when a bunch of other BigLaw attorneys are critiquing you, and *they're all* the problem--not you. Wow; well, that's just another level.

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Yes. We all think this of nepo babies and legacies. We're simply asking you to apply the same logic.

Ironically, the tiktoker in question is from a very wealthy family and self-reported that her parents have paid for her many years of schooling.

And yet, posters still fixate on her skin color as the basis for her under-qualification... hmmmmmmm...

She never said she had a connection at STB or that her parent is an alumnus of Pace Law.

[Anonymous User]

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

She's trying hard to appear unbothered.

Unfortunately for her, making a video to acknowledge the "trolls" and spending hours defending herself under every negative comment about her on reddit makes clear that she cares very much.

[Anonymous User]

So disingenuous to pretend she's being called dumb because of the color of her skin. And not because of the moronic things she says and does in her videos. Have her defenders seen any sizeable portion of her content? Even outside of the STB controversy? This girl is a flaming idiot and such would be the case no matter the color of her skin.

[Tableau]

It's strange that the people discussing this in the biglaw subreddit are more capable of nuanced conversation about the role of race in the sociopolitical decision-making process at law firms than the supposed TLS autists.

That's not to say there are not any inappropriate or racist comments on reddit. For example, someone made a comment about LP's inability to say "asked" and noted that she says "axed" instead. I would say that's an example of racist commentary. I'm not seeing any bad faith takes here that are meant to inflame.

With that said, I once again encourage that we all (myself included), move this discussion away from the role race plays in firm management decisions, so we don't risk a mod shutting it down. Let's continue simply to discuss the nauseating and insufferable content this individual puts out.

[Moneytrees]

It's strange that the people discussing this in the biglaw subreddit are more capable of nuanced conversation about the role of race in the sociopolitical decision-making process at law firms than the supposed TLS autists.

That's not to say there are not any inappropriate or racist comments on reddit. For example, someone made a comment about LP's inability to say "asked" and noted that she says "axed" instead. I would say that's an example of racist commentary. I'm not seeing any bad faith takes here that are meant to inflame.

With that said, I once again encourage that we all (myself included), move this discussion away from the role race plays in firm management decisions, so we don't risk a mod shutting it down. Let's continue simply to discuss the nauseating and insufferable content this individual puts out.

Not to derail, but have a genuine questions about "asked" vs. "axed". What makes you say that it's an example of racist commentary? I ask because there are a few members of my staff that are white that pronounce it with the "x" and I've thought about asking them to pronounce it correctly.

[Anonymous User]

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

There was a reddit commenter on a rampage on the Reddit biglaw page over the weekend, calling everyone who criticized her a Karen, etc., then denying that they were the tiktoker. All the comments from the Reddit commenter in question have since been deleted, roughly to coincide with the more regular "day in the life" tiktok video that come out yesterday.

[Tableau]

It's strange that the people discussing this in the biglaw subreddit are more capable of nuanced conversation about the role of race in the sociopolitical decision-making process at law firms than the supposed TLS autists.

That's not to say there are not any inappropriate or racist comments on reddit. For example, someone made a comment about LP's inability to say "asked" and noted that she says "axed" instead. I would say that's an example of racist commentary. I'm not seeing any bad faith takes here that are meant to inflame.

With that said, I once again encourage that we all (myself included), move this discussion away from the role race plays in firm management decisions, so we don't risk a mod shutting it down. Let's continue simply to discuss the nauseating and insufferable content this individual puts out.

Not to derail, but have a genuine questions about "asked" vs. "axed". What makes you say that it's an example of racist commentary? I ask because there are a few members of my staff that are white that pronounce it with the "x" and I've thought about asking them to pronounce it correctly.

It was racist because the reddit comment was implying that her pronunciation of the word implied something about her intelligence. In general, saying "axe" instead of "asked" is something associated to black Americans and they are often stigmatized and mocked over this.

Here's an article with some interesting linguistical insight: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-xpm- ... story.html

[Anonymous User]

It's strange that the people discussing this in the biglaw subreddit are more capable of nuanced conversation about the role of race in the sociopolitical decision-making process at law firms than the supposed TLS autists.

That's not to say there are not any inappropriate or racist comments on reddit. For example, someone made a comment about LP's inability to say "asked" and noted that she says "axed" instead. I would say that's an example of racist commentary. I'm not seeing any bad faith takes here that are meant to inflame.

With that said, I once again encourage that we all (myself included), move this discussion away from the role race plays in firm management decisions, so we don't risk a mod shutting it down. Let's continue simply to discuss the nauseating and insufferable content this individual puts out.

Not to derail, but have a genuine questions about "asked" vs. "axed". What makes you say that it's an example of racist commentary? I ask because there are a few members of my staff that are white that pronounce it with the "x" and I've thought about asking them to pronounce it correctly.

I say "axe" as a cis white male, but that is because I am a fan of heavy metal and sold my soul to the devil and we try to incorporate metal terms (like "axe") into our everyday language. I would tread lightly before you accuse me of appropriating.

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

There was a reddit commenter on a rampage on the Reddit biglaw page over the weekend, calling everyone who criticized her a Karen, etc., then denying that they were the tiktoker. All the comments from the Reddit commenter in question have since been deleted, roughly to coincide with the more regular "day in the life" tiktok video that come out yesterday.

Finally just checked her out. Don't know how anyone can stand to listen to that for more than 30 seconds.

With that said, not hating the hustle. She treats her biglaw job with the same amount of care and competency a retail worker at GAP might treat their job, knowing she will never ever be fired because of [redacted], all while raking in social media money and clout. Not gonna lie, I'm pretty jelly of her.

[Tableau]

Update. She has acknowledged forum "trolls."

https://www.tiktok.com/@legallypriscill ... 4318940458

There was a reddit commenter on a rampage on the Reddit biglaw page over the weekend, calling everyone who criticized her a Karen, etc., then denying that they were the tiktoker. All the comments from the Reddit commenter in question have since been deleted, roughly to coincide with the more regular "day in the life" tiktok video that come out yesterday.

It's very clear that the commenter was LP herself. She was defending herself in other threads dated back to March and February. The details match up. Her recent reddit activity is meant to make it seem as though the account is not hers. I feel badly about her actual reddit account being outed. There was some personal stuff in her post history that should stay private.

[bigboybob]

Idk--third year drafting the checklist? Sus.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User" post_id=10546767 time=1683041319 user_id=45852]
[quote="Anonymous User" post_id=10546743 time=1682998276 user_id=45852]
Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.
[/quote]

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.
[/quote]
Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

[Dr Tobias Funke]

This title inflation must be stopped. Third years are not midlevels. Fifth years are not senior associates.

1-3: junior
4-6: midlevel
7-counsel or partner: senior

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts and prayers for any junior under her

[Anonymous User]

Idk--third year drafting the checklist? Sus.

Is that not typical? What year would you expect that from?

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts and prayers for any junior under her

This is the one thing that bothers me the most—the fact that it seems like she’s not a team player when it comes to assignments.
Source: her own videos where she laughs about sending the wrong documents to clients and not being on the call when she was needed + being on Tiktok and vacation all the time

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

Yup, that’s why a bunch of firms have a number of partners whose parents were partners at peer firms, who never seemed to work the same hours as other associates when they were rising up the ranks but were always “anointed”. (Not saying they weren’t good lawyers, just that it was known that they’d be ok and favored when coming up the ranks.) This includes at STB - look at the current managing partner’s NYT wedding announcement to see what his father did, or where the Paul, Weiss managing partner’s daughter works.

I’m not condoning the tiktoker’s activity, or saying that these folks should be disqualified from biglaw practice. I’m just laughing at the notion that it’s ever an even playing field. Nepo babies are as real in big law as anywhere else. Many of the rest of us are expected to shut up and be cannon fodder.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

Yup, that’s why a bunch of firms have a number of partners whose parents were partners at peer firms, who never seemed to work the same hours as other associates when they were rising up the ranks but were always “anointed”. (Not saying they weren’t good lawyers, just that it was known that they’d be ok and favored when coming up the ranks.) This includes at STB - look at the current managing partner’s NYT wedding announcement to see what his father did, or where the Paul, Weiss managing partner’s daughter works.

I’m not condoning the tiktoker’s activity, or saying that these folks should be disqualified from biglaw practice. I’m just laughing at the notion that it’s ever an even playing field. Nepo babies are as real in big law as anywhere else. Many of the rest of us are expected to shut up and be cannon fodder.

Did you really try to argue that Karp's daughter, who graduated with honors from Cornell and HLS, got her STB offer largely because of her dad's connections? lol. Most people at HLS can get STB NYC without connections. (Wouldn't be surprised if his daughter got the fame & legacy boost for HLS though...)

Just because a number of biglaw partners' kids go on to biglaw too does not mean that those kids got their jobs through their parents since many of them end up going to top tier law schools (thanks to mommy's and daddy's money). Sure there are some that manage to irritatingly snake into partnership with less effort, but it's far less common than you'd think.

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

Yup, that’s why a bunch of firms have a number of partners whose parents were partners at peer firms, who never seemed to work the same hours as other associates when they were rising up the ranks but were always “anointed”. (Not saying they weren’t good lawyers, just that it was known that they’d be ok and favored when coming up the ranks.) This includes at STB - look at the current managing partner’s NYT wedding announcement to see what his father did, or where the Paul, Weiss managing partner’s daughter works.

I’m not condoning the tiktoker’s activity, or saying that these folks should be disqualified from biglaw practice. I’m just laughing at the notion that it’s ever an even playing field. Nepo babies are as real in big law as anywhere else. Many of the rest of us are expected to shut up and be cannon fodder.

Nepotism will always be with us. S&C was founded on nepotism as were many other firms, and tight nit service groups will always have clannishness.

If you can’t beat ‘em, join em. Have some kids and hook them up.

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

Yup, that’s why a bunch of firms have a number of partners whose parents were partners at peer firms, who never seemed to work the same hours as other associates when they were rising up the ranks but were always “anointed”. (Not saying they weren’t good lawyers, just that it was known that they’d be ok and favored when coming up the ranks.) This includes at STB - look at the current managing partner’s NYT wedding announcement to see what his father did, or where the Paul, Weiss managing partner’s daughter works.

I’m not condoning the tiktoker’s activity, or saying that these folks should be disqualified from biglaw practice. I’m just laughing at the notion that it’s ever an even playing field. Nepo babies are as real in big law as anywhere else. Many of the rest of us are expected to shut up and be cannon fodder.

Did you really try to argue that Karp's daughter, who graduated with honors from Cornell and HLS, got her STB offer largely because of her dad's connections? lol. Most people at HLS can get STB NYC without connections. (Wouldn't be surprised if his daughter got the fame & legacy boost for HLS though...)

Just because a number of biglaw partners' kids go on to biglaw too does not mean that those kids got their jobs through their parents since many of them end up going to top tier law schools (thanks to mommy's and daddy's money). Sure there are some that manage to irritatingly snake into partnership with less effort, but it's far less common than you'd think.

I'm not the poster you responded to and I'm not endorsing their (or any) view about race whatsoever.

As a separate point though: It's safe to assume that being Brad Karp's daughter played a role to her advantage when it came time to be considered for partner. There is no doubt that share partners at STB were more than familiar with daddy (PW chairman for 15 years) and that this was a factor in her becoming a partner. Was it a driving factor? There's no way to know unless you were part of the partner committee that made that decision.

[Anonymous User]

Why is it racist to at least suspect someone of being (comparably) underqualified for their job when their employer lowers the objective metrics for hiring people of that given category? You have to be an idiot not to at least suspect it.

Do you suspect the same thing of rich people/legacies? or can you not tell because they look like a historically typical biglaw associate (aka white)? Do you also assume the same of women and LGBT people? Also huge lol at thinking hiring is objective... please stop deluding yourself.

It's racist because you are using skin color as a proxy for something that could apply to literally anyone at the firm, but are only applying it to the group with the obviously different skin tone, unless you're going around and asking every attorney if their uncle is a client, as well.

Law firms are not recruiting legacies. (It's not college) They do recruit some rich people's kids who are woefully underqualified. And yes don't worry we all know who is there only bc of family $$$. It shows pretty quickly.

Yup, that’s why a bunch of firms have a number of partners whose parents were partners at peer firms, who never seemed to work the same hours as other associates when they were rising up the ranks but were always “anointed”. (Not saying they weren’t good lawyers, just that it was known that they’d be ok and favored when coming up the ranks.) This includes at STB - look at the current managing partner’s NYT wedding announcement to see what his father did, or where the Paul, Weiss managing partner’s daughter works.

I’m not condoning the tiktoker’s activity, or saying that these folks should be disqualified from biglaw practice. I’m just laughing at the notion that it’s ever an even playing field. Nepo babies are as real in big law as anywhere else. Many of the rest of us are expected to shut up and be cannon fodder.

Did you really try to argue that Karp's daughter, who graduated with honors from Cornell and HLS, got her STB offer largely because of her dad's connections? lol. Most people at HLS can get STB NYC without connections. (Wouldn't be surprised if his daughter got the fame & legacy boost for HLS though...)

Just because a number of biglaw partners' kids go on to biglaw too does not mean that those kids got their jobs through their parents since many of them end up going to top tier law schools (thanks to mommy's and daddy's money). Sure there are some that manage to irritatingly snake into partnership with less effort, but it's far less common than you'd think.

I'm not the poster you responded to and I'm not endorsing their (or any) view about race whatsoever.

As a separate point though: It's safe to assume that being Brad Karp's daughter played a role to her advantage when it came time to be considered for partner. There is no doubt that share partners at STB were more than familiar with daddy (PW chairman for 15 years) and that this was a factor in her becoming a partner. Was it a driving factor? There's no way to know unless you were part of the partner committee that made that decision.

Sure, it probably played a role in her partnership to a small or large degree. On the other hand, being well connected can generate more business for a law firm (client relationships and so on), so even if nepotism is unfair, there are financial elements that sometimes warrants its supposed boost

[Anonymous User]

Sure, it probably played a role in her partnership to a small or large degree. On the other hand, being well connected can generate more business for a law firm (client relationships and so on), so even if nepotism is unfair, there are financial elements that sometimes warrants its supposed boost

Ok - so taking into account who your family is = warranted discrimination.

Taking into account someone's race when most of the building has looked lily white since 1884 = unfair and unwarranted.

Got it.