An Overworked Attorney's Blue Apron Review

The ingredients for pork chops with "salsa verde".

As I mentioned a few weeks ago, we've been trying Blue Apron. I feel guilty about it too, because I know it's a questionable choice, from both the environmentalist/low-waste and frugality perspectives. I really would prefer a lifestyle where I could plan and cook my own meals. But neither K nor I have such a lifestyle right now, so it came down to either this or ordering delivery food from Seamless more often. And we're really tired of even our favorite local places on Seamless, where, as with most restaurant food, the dishes are often less healthy and come in excessive portions.

So that's how we decided to try Blue Apron. We ended up getting Blue Apron for nine weeks total, getting one box for free due to using a friend's referral code. That should be enough time for a full assessment. My overall conclusion is that it often feels like a bad value and the recipes take too long (60 to 80 minutes each), so I'm inclined to cancel. Cancellations, by the way, must be done by contacting their customer service, rather than simply logging in to their website. (I generally don't like this retention tactic by online subscription services. It's not promising when they make it hard to cancel.)

First, the nitty-gritty: Including shipping, the smallest Blue Apron box option, for two meals for two people, or four servings, a week is $51.95, which works out to ~$12.99/meal or ~$26.00/dinner for two. Portion sizes for grains (farro, quinoa, couscous) are large, and could generate enough food for a third, or even fourth serving, but they're a bit stingy with everything else. For meat and fish, they generally promise approximately 10 ounces for two people. While groceries are very expensive in NYC, I could generally make a much more generously sized meal for two with a "fancy" protein like salmon or beef for around $17 to $21, so Blue Apron is expensive even by NYC standards. This probably makes it a major extravagance in any other part of the country!

The completed pork chops and "salsa verde" with sides of sautéed kale and roast potatoes.

Blue Apron Pros: 

• (1) Wide range of recipes to choose from each week, usually four dishes with meat or fish, four vegetarian dishes, and a pasta dish that might or might not contain meat; 
• (2) every shipment is on time and problem-free, and I don't doubt that they'd be willing to make it right with a refund if any problems arose; 
• (3) the service is quite convenient (obviously) as everything comes in the right quantity, no meal planning or shopping needed; and 
• (4) it may be a good way to build kitchen skills and expand one's comfort zone with cooking, allowing one to start planning and cooking their own meals in the future. 

Blue Apron Cons:

• (1) Expensive and a bad value, even by NYC grocery standards, as I mentioned above, and they also sometimes nickel and dime us with smaller than promised portions (I got 9.1 ounces of salmon instead of a promised 10 ounces once) or meat that feels like cheap trimmings (any of the dishes with chopped up beef); 
• (2) lack of variety in flavors and ingredients, in nine weeks I got dishes with this same "salsa verde" of chopped capers, parsley, and garlic no less than three times, and had carrots and kale almost once a week (I like kale, but I don't like carrots), and by now I feel like I've seen all the flavor profiles they have to offer;
• (3) extremely fussy recipes, they say their recipes are supposed to take 30 to 40 minutes, but 70 to 80 minutes is the actual norm, unless I start dramatically omitting steps, and most of it is "active" cooking time where I'm busy chopping or tending something on the stove and often multitasking, rather than "passive' cooking time waiting for something to simmer or roast; and that leads into 
• (4) the recipes don't seem optimally designed, while I'm an experienced home cook with a high level of comfort in the kitchen, many of the instructions seemed odd or clunky to me, resulting in a few memorable mistakes (couscous instructions, in particular, didn't work). 

What do I mean by "fussy" recipes? Well, I recently received my first Hello Fresh box, and while the jury's still out on whether I think that's a better service, the first recipe I cooked, pesto chicken with roast potatoes, was such a refreshing change from Blue Apron. It was so much simpler! I chopped up and lightly seasoned some potatoes and popped them in the oven (<10 minutes); put some pre-made pesto on chicken breasts before coating the tops in a bread crumb mixture and put that in the oven (<12 minutes); and made side salad (<5 minutes) while the other items roasted for ~20 minutes. If it was a Blue Apron recipe, they'd have me making the pesto, which ultimately would have been time consuming and likely wouldn't have been as good as what Hello Fresh sent in a jar. They'd probably have swapped out the salad for sautéed kale, and might have had the chicken cooked on the stove, in the same pan as the kale. (Blue Apron's generally reluctant to ship vegetables less hardy than kale or broccoli, which contributes to the lack of variety. They'd almost never send salad.)

Will I be Judged for Not Having Expensive Clothes or Bags (in Biglaw)?

I often allude to feeling some anxiety about dressing more cheaply than many of my peers, and sometimes feeling out of place, "too poor" for this profession. It's madness, because I grew up privileged and never wanted for anything. I just don't come from the kind of background so many of my peers and colleagues seemed to (given, say, how more than half my cost of attendance for undergrad was covered by need-based financial aid). This worry isn't a big part of my day to day life. In the end, I'm reasonably comfortable wearing my J.Crew Factory suits to court and to interviews, and it's all turned out fine. That being said, because I've never been discerning enough to tell the difference between a cheap and expensive suit on anyone else, and because I've never tried on a suit more expensive than Ann Taylor, there's always a part of me that wonders whether other people can tell. I'm confident it's never cost me a job or anything, but this is a profession that values conformity to expectations and rules more than most. 

Please note that this post contains affiliate links that could result in a commission, typically a few cents, for me if you click. Thank you for your support!

So my answer to the this question, which came up recently on "TLS" (the primary internet forum for law students), might be surprising. It's a firm no for women in NYC biglaw. No one will judge you for not having expensive clothes or handbags, provided that items fit you reasonably well and are appropriate for your setting (dress codes and levels of formality can differ quite a bit by firm). I've never been given any real reason to believe my occasional anxiety about this topic is well-founded. I had a hard time with my first-ever law internship because I simply didn't have enough work-appropriate items, and I ended up feeling very self-conscious about how my attempts to "make do" didn't quite work, but since then, I've not had any real problems. Some might assume that at the biglaw income level, there's an expectation to wear expensive clothes all the time, but that's definitely not true. Most of us are far too busy to pay attention to what anyone else is wearing, unless it's standing out in some glaringly obvious way. 

Out of anything on TV in recent memory, I find Karen Page's wardrobe in Daredevil to be a very good approximation of what biglaw associates wear at business casual firms, with the exception of the dress in the middle (at least without a sweater or jacket). 

The answers people gave largely conformed with my understanding, that the price of the items in your work wardrobe is not a thing to worry about, and that people only notice things that stand out, and generally only because they're not appropriate for the particular dress code culture of the office. Other fashion-conscious individuals might pay a bit of attention to something that looks very snazzy, but that's generally just to notice that their colleague is fashionable and has good taste.

The suggestion of getting a nice watch is a bit off base, at least at the firms I've been at, where most junior associates don't wear or notice each other's watches (the fanciest one I ever noticed was a Shinola). Someone more senior is just as likely to be sporting an Apple Watch, with the silicone sportband no less, or a Fitbit, as anything else. I myself am partial to Skagen, either the larger Anita or the smaller Freja.

The $50 handbag price OP mentioned probably won't get you a leather bag at retail, but can definitely buy a suitable professional-looking faux leather tote. If one is willing to step up a bit in price for leather in the under $200 range, the Fossil Emma tote is fairly affordable, and I've also heard someone vouch for the Cuyana zipper tote. For non-leather professional-looking bags in the under $200 range, one will always fit in with the large Longchamp Le Pliage in black, gray, or navy, or the black Lonchamp Neo. Note that, outside of one's time as a summer associate, when there are frequent social events, or when one is headed to court or off-site meetings, few people will ever see your handbag except when you're on your way in or out of the office for your commute.  

My one concern about OP's post was their mention of how they generally relied on business formal-looking things from Zara, not so much because of the price point, but because, in my experience, it is harder to find a well-fitting, definitely work-appropriate item from Zara than from other brands that cost about the same, or only slightly more (Ann Taylor, Banana Republic, J.Crew with their frequent sales, J.Crew Factory, and in the past, Loft). I have a basic blazer from Zara that I really like. It somehow fit perfectly, was affordable, and is made of a softer fabric that is comfier than most, but I'm fairly certain that's a rare find. So I'd likely encourage OP to shop more from one of those standard mall brands for workwear. One also finds the occasional piece from Uniqlo (like the smart style ankle length pants) or Old Navy (like that ponte blazer). And of course, there's always the (probably better) option of shopping secondhand. Thredup always has a robust selection of J.Crew and most of the other workwear brands. Certain arguably "fancier" brands like Tory Burch or Diane von Furstenberg can be found for more J.Crew-like prices at TheRealReal.

One other thing I'd be concerned about with business formal from Zara is durability. K and I have found that some suits don't hold up that well to frequent wear, even if trips to the dry cleaner are kept to a minimum. As I mentioned in a discussion with Archana, even pricey men's suits (his primary interview and court suit is wool from Brooks Brothers, nicer than anything I own) don't necessarily hold up well to only occasional wear over several years. I had thought my collection of older all-synthetic suits (mostly Ann Taylor Seasonless Stretch) was holding up extremely well, though more recently, I've noticed a rip where the shoulder attaches to the sleeves in one jacket. Previously, the only problems I've ever had were with jacket linings, which do tear with frequent wear. Granted, I don't have any direct experience of whether something from H&M or Zara would do worse than something from Ann Taylor, but the lesson I take from this is that suits are more fragile than one might expect. Spending a bit more upfront may be a good idea for something that absolutely must look presentable, and for which the need will come up with unpredictable frequency.

Certain other categories are particularly good for "saving" on, such as shoes for wearing around the office, because so many office-dwelling women commute in sneakers or boots and switch shoes at their desk. There are several biglaw associates out there who swear by the Payless Karmen pump, if you're so inclined. I do think people are better served by shoes that are comfortable for walking in, which for me, often means spending a bit more (mostly Cole Haan and Sam Edelman), but one generally only needs fancier shoes for walking within the building, from office to conference room. Court appearances and off-site meetings can be rare for junior associates, so there's not as much need for one's more formal-looking shoes to "travel" well. Still, the need could come up, so I value having walkable formal-looking shoes. For me, that's the Sam Edelman Petty booties in fall/winter and the Cole Haan Tali bow flats when the weather is too warm for tights. The former are comfortable for a whole day of walking, but the latter are only good for a half day.

Do people judge each other for what they wear in your profession? I assume that NYC law and finance-type offices are some of the most conservative and formal anywhere in the country, with the possible exception of Washington D.C. (though I imagine the rules of professional dress there are slightly different, and maybe a bit more conservative). 

Link List: Ferrero Rocher and Employment Discrimination

The pretty backdrop at the Sezane store downtown.

That intense period at work I mentioned has come to a close, at least for now, which I'm quite pleased about. K and I had both been busy at the office, so we haven't even had a chance to go see the new Avengers yet. We're big fans of both Star Wars and Marvel, and usually see just about every movie shortly after opening night. Hopefully we'll be able to see it soon!

1. // This Racked article regarding a lawsuit between the now-shuttered OCC Cosmetics brand and Sephora was an interesting look at what appears to be standard business practice when it comes to selling cosmetics. It wasn't something I'd ever thought about before, so the article was an interesting read. I had no idea that most brands are expected to pay for their own "fixtures", the shelving for their brand's products in each store. I'm a little less surprised that someone has to cover the cost of "gratis", or gifted items for sales associates so that they can promote the product, but I might have assumed that the retailer covered that. 

2. // Does anyone else's family have a thing for buying boxes of Ferrero Rocher as host gifts or keeping it at home as special treats for house guests? It's kind of thing for some Taiwanese Americans, both as something we bring abroad to extended family and something that's frequently brought around as a host gift to other households. (From my time living in Hong Kong before law school, they seemed to like Ferrero Rocher the same way there too.) I had no idea this was something that was seen in other communities! 

3. // This is probably one of the first times in recent memory where an associate (in this case three Jane Doe associates in a putative class action) sued their biglaw firm for employment discrimination. There have been a few cases with partners as plaintiffs, and many other cases are brought by staff attorneys or contract attorneys, who aren't on the ultra-standardized, ultra-transparent associate payscale that prevails in most biglaw offices in "major markets." Read the complaint here, if you're curious.  

4. // I'm was glad to see that Engineer L is back! I'm always happy to see blogs I enjoy come back from a hiatus, if the person feels like it's right for them. (Like Adina a few months back.) For those who have ever thought about switching from an iPhone to a Google Pixel, Michelle's more recent outfit photos may be a compelling case for the quality of the Google Pixel's camera.

Please note that this post contains affiliate links that could result in a commission, typically a few cents, for me if you click. Thank you for your support!

5. // As you might have seen from my Instagram stories, I ended up picking up those Soludos llama slip-on sneakers in pink. They always get sold out fast, but I think they can still be pre-ordered at Revolve. That pretty, light, and floaty, but actually still kind of warm cashmere/silk-blend scarf I bought at Nordstrom last year is on sale in a few more colors, though sadly, I don't like any of these colors as much as the ones last time. I think my favorite is the pale blush-peach "pink tropics", but the full price "pink silver" shade is better. That particular Nordstrom scarf was definitely a better choice than the tissue-weight wool-cashmere one (also on sale, but again in odd colors) which is only about equally warm in my experience, but less pretty.

Are employment discrimination lawsuits... common in your industry? I'd always gotten the sense that few biglaw associates would ever dare bring one. It'd quickly go public on Above the Law, (past cases generally didn't proceed with anonymous plaintiffs) and few people would want that kind of notoriety. It always felt to me like a very "you'll never work in this town again" situation. Plus, in my limited experience, most attorneys "know better" when it comes to saying things that could be obvious and direct evidence for an employment discrimination claim, so I'm a bit shocked by some of what is alleged in the Morrison and Foerster lawsuit. I'm not surprised that there is discrimination, I'm just surprised that some people seemed to have been pretty open about it. 

The Shape of My Discontent

A version of this post has been sitting in my pending drafts for weeks, but I could never quite get it right. It concerns a decision I've made, which arises from a longtime body image-related insecurity. It's something I've grappled with my entire adult life, more than a decade, so I'm ultimately quite sure. By all standards, including financial ones, it's a significant decision, one that can't be taken lightly (especially in light of my student debt and all my future financial obligations to my family). It's another one of those things that Refinery29 commenters, among so many others (including my parents, if I raised it with them, which I probably won't, because it's a personal choice that needs no one else's input) might be eager to criticize because it's undeniable that there are countless arguably better things the money could totally be spent on.

I've decided to have breast reduction surgery, and having researched my health insurance plan's guidelines for coverage (only if deemed a medical necessity through extremely stringent criteria that I likely don't meet), I believe I'll be paying out of pocket. Due to needing to save more money, accommodate vacation plans such that medical leave wouldn't result in too much time off from work on the heels of a longer vacation, and a few other things, I won't be consulting with plastic surgeons until sometime in 2019. Anecdotes suggest I should expect a price tag of at least $15,000, which means there's going to be another year soon where my biggest expense will, like last year, be medical, only this time, it's entirely elective, and instead of costing approximately two Burberry trench coats (I had another root canal so my bills were significantly more than reported, but the fancy endodontist couldn't definitively attribute it to the accident, so I didn't include it in the post), it'll cost approximately seven.

There's no real way around how strange this decision might seem. Were I to speak of it with anyone who knows me in person, I don't think they'd understand. All the photographs of myself that I've ever shared here most likely obscure my size a bit, and I am extremely careful about selecting clothes that downsize the feature at issue. I've even joked that a necessary criteria for clothing is that it has the effect of an optical illusion that hides, or at least balances out, my chest.

Make no mistake, my size is one where a brick and mortar specialty shop that used to accommodate me with a range of brands and cute designs barely five years, and two cup sizes, ago now only offers one brand and some dismally boring and expensive designs. With my most recent size increase, it crossed the exact threshold where a specific brand I used to wear switched from a narrower band with two hooks per row to a more "industrial strength"-looking band with three hooks per row and wider spacing in between. (Given my particular insecurity, when I received that order, I pretty much decided I wouldn't wear the brand anymore.) I probably sound like I have a complex, where I can't be objective, and well, that's probably kind of true. I think one's relationship with one's own body, and the related insecurities, is always going to be deeply personal and subjective. One is always going to be prone to seeing things that other people can't.

Whatever else, this inspiration album from r/femalefashionadvice might give an approximate sense of what I feel (except most of the people there are more sharply dressed than I tend to be in my own day to day life, and generally in pieces that have likely seen some tailoring and thus fit better). It's photos of people (both celebrities and some bloggers) who I'd generally identify, from these photos, as mostly being "busty hourglasses" like myself (with one or two exceptions), and it shows that someone who seems very busty sometimes can look much less so in other outfits. See what I mean about optical illusions? Nonetheless, though I think I'm pretty good at hiding it with clothes, at the end of the day I'd just rather be far less busty, and have the ability to wear more styles without being reliant on things having a "just right" optical illusion effect. And I'm willing to pay for it.

In trying to explain this, through several different drafts, I could never find the right tone. Because it is ultimately about body image and standards of beauty that feel a bit unattainable (at least without surgical intervention) and oppressive, and because it relates to weight and body size as well, it all sounds rather dramatic and emotionally heavy whenever I try to articulate it. It has its roots in those teenage struggle with feeling "too big" and thus an "abnormal" and "defective" Asian-American girl, after all. Except that, at this point in life, as someone with more self-assurance, confidence, and sense of self, all of which seemed to just settle in quite suddenly starting in my mid-20s, without much fanfare, I started to forget the excessive heights or intensity of those old emotions. I know, intellectually, that I used to get very upset, but I can't remember why, or even, really, how it felt. So it really isn't that dramatic or emotionally weighty anymore. It's a decision I've made, and one I'm fully certain about, full stop, and nothing more to it, provided that I get to a point where I'd feel comfortable paying all at once, which will take at least seven more months. I've had some sense that I might make this decision for nearly my entire adult life, though it had never been a serious financial possibility until now. Now that it is, I'm ready.

Financially speaking, I won't be comfortable scheduling a consultation until I have more cash saved. I'll want enough to cover the procedure (let's call it $15,000) and have six months' emergency fund on top of that (currently a bigger number than it used to be, mostly because I've refinanced my student loans, and no longer have income-based repayment to fall back on, and I'm also working with my typical monthly living expenses now, rather than a "bare bones" monthly budget), so more in the vein of an additional $27,000, for a total of $42,000, which will likely take seven more months. Beyond that, there's some logistical issues, including working around vacations and scheduling my medical leave so it won't follow too closely before or after a longer international trip. I'll still have a substantial student loan balance by then, and thus, a negative net worth.

Finally, due to the dramatic changes to my schedule and my extreme commute while clerking, I gained nearly 15 pounds in an extremely short time (part of how I sized myself out of some of my blazers last year), which I wasn't able to shake naturally just by returning to a more typical schedule. I couldn't really see it myself in, say, these photos, but it was there. So I'm also trying to shed that before my future consultation. (And I'm on schedule with that goal so far, after about a month's work, at a pound a week.) This was important to me because, if I didn't accomplish this, I'd worry that I could undermine my investment, as weight gain could reverse some of the effects of the surgery. If I'm going to be paying full price, I just need to know it won't be wasted.