Stereotyping’s just not fair. Unless its true of course…

Consider this little extract from Litination arbiter of, ‘the truth, the half truth and nothing like the truth’:

Lawyers often worry that their legal training provides a useful, yet annoying, set of critical thinking skills. Sure, these skills make lawyers indispensible to their clients, but they also carry the unfortunate consequence of making the lawyer intolerable to the average Joe. In order to compensate for these feelings of social ineptitude, lawyers like to reference stories that involve their non-lawyer friends as much as possible. For lawyers, the non-lawyer leads a more interesting, yet not as intellectually challenging life that should be revered.

‘Intolerable’, really?

The ultimate coup for a lawyer is to date or marry a non-lawyer. This may prove difficult for a lawyer to accomplish because non-lawyers usually have more time to date, have more practice with dating and can carry on first-date conversations that don’t include terms like summary judgment, deposition or sua sponte. If a lawyer is lucky enough to acquire a non-lawyer mate, numerous doors will be opened for him. Beyond the pleasure that comes with not having to break the news to family and friends that he is dating another member of his own profession (can you say boring?), dating a non-lawyer also creates sought-after opportunities such as invitations to sports leagues or social events that are not limited to lawyers.

Sound familiar? No? Well click over for the summary judgement…

Unfortunately, it is often difficult for lawyers to return to lawyer-only functions after participating in non-lawyer events. As a result, it is safer for the lawyer to only spend enough time with non-lawyers to be able to reference them as friends while not coming to the realization that the life of a non-lawyer might be too tempting to pass up.

Lead us not into temptation – there’s a life beyond drafting, due-diligence and dictaphones?