I think her stylist needs sacking or needs to get a bowl with a straighter edge as her fringe is not as straight as it should be.

I never use LinkedIn which I believe is a website for professionals to use to connect with each other in their fields of work and recruiters use to headhunt potential employers.

If its supposed to be a site for professionals and strictly for business purposes why the need to post a picture? Surely a picture is irrelevant on a site like that as opposed to a dating site or other social media site. So why the need for a picture on LinkedIn?
Why do I need to see a picture if I wanted to comment on something you had done in your field or that with your qualifications I would be interested in connecting with you to discuss something or that my company is looking to hire someone with your expertise.

She is now getting her 15 minutes of fame and now facing the trolls on social media. Im not saying she was right or wrong but these are the consequences she is now facing.

That's a stunning picture for linkedin, he's right. The comments he made weren't anything like some sexist things I've heard. Though he didn't mention it she is pretty too, (though the picture of her in the robes has far more potential for fantasy). The challenging pose in her pic probably seemed right to her as a lawyer but is a departure from the neutral expressions on most linkedin profiles. That one is more glamourous as well (could be an ad for her hair salon). She was able to point out that she's half his age, which could gain her a few fans but if she's as tactless in person as she is online it could cost her in career advancement. If she'll embarrass a senior partner in a law firm to draw attention to herself can she be trusted to be discreet with her clients? FL I think her hair's nice, it's supposed to be like that - the scalloped bangs give balance to the crinkle thing she has going.

Quite likely.

It's just that in the UK there have been several recent high profile examples of this sort of thing resulting in embarrassed apologies, official reprimands, and job losses.

He really should have better awareness.

I dunno...some of the photos of women realtors look like that.

I agree, sort of!. Carter Ruck was wrong to comment in such a way and he knew it. I think her response was too great for the crime. Too pompous.

She's going to be a civil rights lawyer though, and this advertises her in the same (general) sort of confrontation she hopes to be working on.

I don't buy the smokescreen that he was commenting on the quality of the photo. Looks like she connected to him (for career gain purposes) and he sent a rather silly PM, and he definitely should have known better.

The other thing is you might get away with complementing a female peer on her appearance (ideally with your hands out of your pockets and not panting/ sweating etc) but you really can't say anything to anyone junior to you. That's just how it is thanks to history.

Which is also a load of bollox as employees senior to me often compliment me or call me a pain in the arse when I challenge them on the latest greatest CBSA policy. OK so he is a senior lawyer big ****ing deal does that make him better than me as a person. Yes we need to have people in charge or as figure heads but lets not put them on some pedestal as I know some allegedly senior figures in various functions who are complete assholes both male and female.
He said it she replied it went viral so now we have 3 camps discussing this.
1. Those who say he shouldn't have said it
2. Those who defend him for saying it
and the most important camp of all

3. Those of us WGAF and have more important stuff to do but still can have an opinion and comment.

Im in camp #3.

No, but as a lawyer one would think he would be more aware of the potential for litigation.

I imagine there are things you or anybody could say in many situations that wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

But you probably wouldn't say them at work to a colleague or someone coming into the country for fear of how it might be taken. Fair?

Her reply does not explain why it was wrong, it only explains her opinion/perception of why it was wrong.

So complimenting someone is wrong now? Sweet Jebus...............

Nobody ever suggested that all lawyers be they senior or junior are the sharpest knives in the drawer
Only he truly knows why he sent that message and as a lawyer will deny that it was meant to be sexist in any way. We can speculate as to why he sent it but that is our opinion and you know what they say about opinions and what they are compared to.
Im sure I say certain things that could be construed as whatever they want it to sound like and a recent complaint about me attests to this. Doesn't matter if it was true or not the Agency hates getting complaints and the hierarchy have to deal with it and respond to them.

Exactly.

Agree. But it's not just attention seeking, it's vindictive. So called public shaming. I don't think she did herself any favours with how she handled it.

Nobody has suggested that complimenting somebody is wrong. Several people have suggested that for a senior lawyer to compliment a junior lawyer, for her appearance in a photograph, in a response to a networking request on LinkedIn, is wrong. There's a context here, as there is everywhere, and which a senior lawyer certainly ought to have appreciated.

I also suggest that her response was probably coloured by the kind of work she does, where it is a part of her job to look for (and make the most of) slights, insults, discrimination or abuse of position, whether intentional or otherwise. It might have been wiser, in hindsight, either to message the guy directly through LinkedIn, report his post through the existing LinkedIn process for that, or to take the compliment and move on. Posting it on Twitter, naming and shaming in public, was not very professional, and loses her some of her moral high ground.

Mind you, it probably won't do her career any long-term damage: IANAL but I can imagine a practice area such as rights litigation would be boosted by the notoriety of a practitioner. Just look at the fact that Bats mistakenly called the guy here Carter Ruck - he was the famous libel solicitor who turned that industry on its head in the 90s and was the scourge of Private Eye (where, natch, he was known as Carter ****). Having him representing you in a libel action, it was claimed, would be worth an extra zero on the damages (and not just for his notorously exorbitant fees...)

[lame attempt to bypass the sweary filter failed dismally. But it doesn't take a lot of imagination to delete the R from Ruck and insert an F instead...]