They’re Just Boobs, Rush

Michael Estrin Columns, Lawyer 20 Comments

According to Rush Limbaugh, there are 35 undeniable truths in life.  Mr. Limbaugh discussed Bitter Lawyer on his radio program last Friday (see Story #5) for making a case in support of number 24 on that list. With regard to “The Real Story On Fake Boobs,” our article posted last Thursday addressing the impact breast implants might have on a female lawyer’s career, Mr. Limbaugh said the piece will “set feminism back 50 years.”

We had no idea we had that kind of power. In fact, we’re a little surprised that merely asking if implants could help a female lawyer’s career would reverse the feminism movement five decades. Mr. Limbaugh, however, seems to believe that by investigating the cosmetic surgery choices of women working in BigLaw, Bitter Lawyer somehow succeeded in proving Undeniable Truth No. 24: “Feminism was established as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society.”

It seems that he is suggesting that female lawyers are no longer getting what they need from the likes of Betty Friedan and are instead turning to silicone in their fight for gender equality.

On his show, Mr. Limbaugh said:

This is a five-page story at If you’re a woman, you want to be a successful attorney you better go get a boob job before you finish school ‘cause in this tight job market it might be the ticket to a job at a law firm. It will enhance your self-esteem, confidence in and out of the bedroom, in the boardroom.

That’s one conclusion from reading “The Real Story on Fake Boobs.” University of Wisconsin Law Professor Ann Althouse simply linked to Bitter Lawyer with the text: “Breast implants. The career move.” None of Althouse’s comments (61 and counting) seemed to indicate Bitter Lawyer had undone a half-century of feminism—although one commenter, who accused us of “silly armchair psychologizing [sic],” suggested that most women with discretionary income likely consider implants.

Following that logic, perhaps, a “fashion and lifestyle blog for overachieving chicks,” might consider adding “boob job” to a post on things women can do with their tax refunds. Instead, the blog wrote:  “Will fake breasts help you get a job in Big Law? Probably—but probably not the one you want.”

Curse those silly overachieving chicks and their nuanced answers. We were expecting charges of misogyny followed by a strongly worded letter from a gang of the most ugly feminists the movement could muster.  Curiously, none of those charges came from any woman who responded to the story. And if Bitter Lawyer is due a letter from angry feminists, it must be lost in email cyberspace. In fact, no women were as alarmed by our article as Mr. Limbaugh was gleeful.

One female lawyer commented on Bitter Lawyer that her decision to have other kinds of cosmetic surgery, “immediately [gave her] more self-esteem and confidence, and that translated to every aspect of [her] life.”

Another female lawyer chastised the men on the site for using the article as a launching pad into the timeless debate of real vs. fake—a topic we didn’t even approach.

But those comments speak volumes about the larger point: In the end, we are simply talking about boobs. Just boobs!

Yes, boobs matter. But they aren’t magic. They can’t make an unattractive women pretty, as Mr. Limbaugh implies, nor are they the soft underbelly of the feminist argument or a guaranteed ticket to success.

Silicone, like so much else in life, is in the eye of the beholder.  And it’s hard to see why a woman exploiting her femininity—or society’s preoccupation with boobs—to game the system would in any way rollback the feminist argument.

If women working at major law firms use their often unseen implants to boost their confidence and, as a result, gain access to the male-dominated halls of power (or, even crazier, make partner), that is a good thing for those interested in gender equality, right?  But that is provided they’re afforded the opportunity to demonstrate merit. Sometimes that opportunity is there, and sometimes it is not.

Any firm that promotes a woman based solely on her looks won’t last long, not because such a firm will be sued into oblivion by the unattractive feminists of Mr. Limbaugh’s nightmares, but for a more simple reason: That firm will face a genuine shortage of qualified male and female lawyers.

And that is an undeniable truth.

Share this Post

  • Alma Federer

    Again you oafs are promoting boob jobs for women, and again you ignore my comment about this?  How about an article about male penile enhancements? Why no article about this?  You all know that bigger is better, but you nutless wonders don’t want to brooch that subject.  It seems Rush was right–you are glorifying boobs, rather than the content of a woman’s minds.  Face it, you guys are incorrigible.  You think of women as a set of boobs, rather than as persons with minds.  I can’t wait to see what the other malke losers will make of this update.  We are working hard to do our jobs, and all you can focus on is our boobs?  Guess what?  You are the boobs!

  • BL1Y

    Alma, again you seem to forget that boobs are not genitals.  The male equivalent would be muscle implants (or just working out, since we do have a natural way to enhance), or hair plugs.  Penis enlargement would be analogues to vaginal reconstruction, not breast implants.  Please re-take your highschool sex-ed class and learn what does what.  But, I do think an article on building muscle for male lawyers would be very interesting.  Does building muscle help the career prospects of a male lawyer?

  • Bill Dugan

    As a breast afficiando, I think these articles are relevant and timely.  I suggest that Alma “avert her eyes” if she doesn’t like the subject matter.

  • Anon

    Can’t believe Rush is in favor of boob jobs, and that they’re somehow part of this great anti-feminist movement.  like the writer said, they’re just boobs.  fake or real.  sort of apolitical if you ask me.  Good follow-up piece, bitter lawyer.

  • c_broski

    how honored all of you must feel at BL to have joined the ranks of people who have had their point totally missed, and thus their argument totally twisted, by rush limbaugh! what a mistake to have thought he only does this with politics – he does it with everything! it was as if he hadn’t even read the article, and instead some intern read it and created a little five minute piece of filler for rush to bloviate.

  • Al

    Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot.

  • Anonymous


  • Alex Hump

    I would like to make the kind of money that Yutz takes home!

  • Anonymous

    Wow, even the humpster doesn’t like Rush. That’s saying something.

  • A daily reader

    Leave Rush alone folks and be thankful he noticed and mentioned the site.  He does have bigger fish to fry.  His staff thought it was funny and mentioned the article.  Thanks Rush for noticing the newer blogs.  Can’t take a pill to make boobs bigger so the males win again.

  • Anonymous

    @ Daily Reader,
    You sound like a Limbaugh lover.

  • BigLaw Rush

    Jesus you guys, Rush is an ENTERTAINER, and an article on the career implications of implants just BEGS for controversial mention.  Give it a rest.  Oh, and BTW, Al Franken is a big fat idiot, fraud, and totalitarian, so if that’s the horse you’re lining up behind, you deserve what you get.  Hope you Obama voters are enjoying the fact that he is continuing domestic surveillance, continuing the war, and dramatically increasing the size, power and intrusiveness of government at home all at the same time!  Gee, an expanding government not choosing to give up power, who’d a thunk it?

  • Confused?

    BL editor? Really?

  • Anon Female

    enough already about boobs. ok well I have to comment atleast once and say I don’t think boobs really help women professionally, however, they can hurt if they are too big for a woman’s body type. I think boobs or no boobs if a woman is generally attractive that is what can help in certain ways.

  • Anon male

    Personally, I think everyone on this site is a boob.

  • Man

    Two words. Sabrina Sabrok (do a google image search).

    Anything less & we are not interested.

    Why can women want tall, dark & handsome, but men are judged for wanting blond, busty, & gorgeous.

    If a man was handsome like Tom Selleck, charming like Tom Selleck, wealthy like Tom Selleck, but 5’4” rather than 6’4” like Tom Selleck, woman would not be interested. (honest woman). Bigger is better. Huge is great. These woman who can’t understand why men like huge, round, perky & perfectly shaped breasts (with no bra) are most likely jealous, prudy, unattractive feminists.

    By the way….. We don’t care how they feel or how sensitive they are. How many guys have felt Pam Anderson’s breast? A few. How many have stared at them? Every red blooded American Male.

    Again…. Sabrina Sabrock, Nicole Coco Austin, Pandora Peaks.

  • ugly, bitter feminist with big boobies

    Dear Mr. Limbaugh,
    You sound fat.
    P.S. My natural 32Gs haven’t helped my career none. Is the magic in the silicone?

  • Anonymous

    Those are magic boobs.

  • davemgood

    I heard Rush on this. He actually treated this as something humorous, with a slight recognition of the double standard that you find in the current feminist movement.
    You can boil it down two things,
    1. “Look at me!”
    moments later
    2. Don’t look at me!”

  • davemgood

    “I think boobs or no boobs if a woman is generally attractive that is what can help in certain ways.”
    Soooooo, it IS looks.