Reddit mentions: The best legal profession books

As a second-year law student, and a guy who threw his heart and soul into the law school application/admission process, I want to offer a few pointers here, maybe lead one person down the right path.

1. Too many people go to law school for the wrong reasons: their parents pushed them into it, they don't have any other direction in their life, or they just want to make money. If you just want to make money, that's fine, but you really, really need to understand #2:
   
   
2. There is a bimodal salary distribution in entry-level legal jobs. This means, when you graduate, you will either: A) Make six figures working 80 hours a week, minimum, at a top-tier law firm, B) Make $50,000, if you're lucky, doing contract jobs, or if you're really lucky, working government/non-profit, or C) Be unemployed. Law schools game the employment figures to all show 99% employment, when those actually gainfully-employed, able to pay off their crushing student loans on a reasonable time frame, are more like 10%, at a mid-level school, 25-50% at the best.
   
   
3. There are 200 law schools in America. Very seriously, if you really want a job, you have two options: Go to the best school in the region (i.e., to work in Kentucky, you can only go to the University of Kentucky, maybe Vanderbilt. People from Louisville and NKU struggle for employment). Or, you can go to one of the top law schools in the nation, the very few where your degree might actually have some national reach. Law schools are ranked annually by U.S. News and World Report, and, broken system or not, the best firms in the world hire almost exclusively from the "top 14" schools.
   
   Some highly suggested reading before you start thinking about law school:
   
   

• Law School Economics: Ka-Ching! - A NYT article from this summer that kind of brought the law school scam (spinning employment statistics, including median salaries, and jacking up tuitions) to the forefront. There was a lot of outcry from the legal profession and legal academia at its publication.
  
  
• Above The Law - A tabloid blog for the legal profession. Sometimes fun reading, they take a very cynical tack on law school and legal prospects in general.
  
  
• The Top-Law-Schools.com forums - If you really want to go to law school, this is the place to spend all your time. These are a bunch of people really dedicated to getting into, and succeeding at, the top law schools in the country. Your GPA and LSAT are everything here, so study HARD, and retake if you have to.
  
  
• Law School Confidential, by Robert Miller - This is a great guide for success once you're in law school, and I would recommend it for every incoming 1L.
  
  
• 1L, by Scott Turow - This is a really fascinating memoir of a famous author/lawyer's first year at Harvard Law, and it holds true for the 1L experience at almost any law school. The 1L year is very standardized across the country: same classes, same case method, same Socratic method.
  
  
• Planet Law School II, by Atticus Falcon - This one I recommend with a big caveat: the author is a very jaded, cynical person who hides behind the wall of a pseudonym and rails against law schools and the legal profession. It's also a pretty long book. But if you have the extra time/money, it's worth thumbing through, albeit taking what's in there with a grain of salt. It pretty much angrily tears apart the American law school institution.
  
  
• How to Get Into the Top Law Schools, by Richard Montauk - This book is gold for the law school admissions process. The TLS forums (above) will recommend this highly. If you're dead-set on going to law school, read it. And best of luck at Yale!
  
  
• The Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions, by Anna Ivey - This is another one that I recommend for law school applications, along with the Montauk book. It's shorter, and Ivey comes off as a know-it-all snob, but the information is solid.
  
  I'm not trying to out-and-out discourage you from going to law school. If you actually do research, then find out it's what you really want, go for it. Crush the LSAT out of the park and go somewhere that will guarantee you a job. Do not go to a fourth-tier law school (John Marshall, Florida Coastal, Cooley, etc.) just because they sent you a bunch of marketing materials in the mail with an offer for a free scholarship. These places are the University of Phoenix of law schools. Any law school that has to advertise by mail really isn't worth the price of the (worthless) degree.
  
  
  

Experience doesn't necessarily make him a great writer. Still, don't let him bring you down or demoralize you. Especially since you're trying to improve your writing. It sounds like a normal control thing; in my experience, lawyers rewrite things for no reason except that it's what they learned in law school or it's just what's worked for them in the past. And lawyers hate changing their writing style—since Bryan Garner's tips from TWB are the "new" style that most practicing lawyers don't really care for, he may disagree with some of it. Ask him for recommended reading and see what he says. (I had a similar experience and I can understand how it's incredibly frustrating.)

But in the short term:

1. Keep in mind that random briefs (on random topics) for one attorney during one summer don't reflect your entire writing ability. Nor is his judgment of your writing necessarily accurate. If you can, ask someone else (friend/atty not at the office) to look at a copy of an early draft that you think is good and see what they say.
   
   
2. Figure out however he wants you to write, in whatever format, and stick to it. Don't bother trying to change his mind. (Sounds obvious, I know, but the point is that you can write how he wants you to at work, and develop your own style on your own.)
   
   Long term, I recommend these for improving brief-writing skills:
   
   
3. The best book on brief writing is Winning on Appeal by Ruggero Aldisert--a fed app judge
   
   
4. For some of the best examples, read the Solicitor General's briefs that are all available online
   
   
5. I found the no-longer-secret Supreme Court Style Guide to be helpful and interesting
   
   
6. Also, not super helpful, but interesting is the OSG Citation Manual
   
   
7. Another good resource is The Art of Advocacy
   
   
8. And Plain English for Lawyers
   
   Good luck!

> I'd be very surprised to hear that a justice has his or her mind completely made up from the outset of every single case. Some or most cases, maybe, yes.

This is because the Justices are necessarily generalists. Orin Kerr has a really fascinating interview about how the idea that a Justice can just decide his or her ideology can get them from point A to point B is pretty much an illusion in a vast majority of cases.

> Perhaps I am an optimist, but I imagine most of the justices do order their clerks to conduct a metric fuckton of research on the merits of the arguments of both the appellant and appellee.

Speaking as a former, non-SCOTUS clerk, I can tell you that the briefing of the parties matters a ton more than independent research by clerks. You'd never have enough time. And from a judicial economy sense, it's clear why: the parties (especially at that level) have likely turned over 99% of the rocks to make the best case on the appellate issue before the Court. You're so unlikely to discover something new.

And, from reports of clerks (also this one) delays in getting opinions have less to do with research and writing and more about consensus building. You'll almost always find that the briefs share a great deal with the briefing of some party (or amicus). Deviations occur where there's a negotiated middle ground.

OP, I just did a timed preptest with a 173 yesterday that has been falling into a larger trend, so I'm feeling the fire and if you don't mind I'll share some of my experiences to help you. Because frankly, it's a rough world out there and we need to help each other.

1. I was going to take the test in June, but the week before the test I was only hovering low 160s. I withdrew and am applying for October, since then my average has steadily increased at a linear rate. If the week before the test you are unsure, I heartily recommend that you withdraw and redouble efforts for the next test.
   
   
2. I now keep an Excel sheet where I keep my score, raw score, and fractional breakdown of each section and a running tally of my average. The far right column I list weaknesses that kept me from doing my best on that particular score, both in terms of the test itself but also in terms of the context I took the test (for example, I have personally found that being strung out on caffeine results in a far worse drop in score than simply having not enough sleep). I strongly believe that my diligent efforts to record my progress has been responsible for my sharp increase in scores recently.
   
   
3. I have done both the PithyPike method and also simply drilling tests sequentially. I think PithyPike is a great method for a foundation to the LSAT, but the drilling of tests has been best for me. YMMV.
   
   
4. I personally think the LSAT does just test you on the LSAT, but that is really irrelevant to how you should deal with it. The reason why is it's also the biggest predictor of your career in law (out of the LSAT, your law school, or the bar exam). You really shouldn't coast at any point on your path to this career, but you simply cannot afford to coast on the LSAT or you will hamstring your career before you even start.
   
   
5. I don't know if you've ever worked a corporate job before (I have), but to just about anyone fresh out of college and hasn't had that experience, they suck and they are by nature very competitive no matter what industry you are in. I thrive on that and don't mind hard work and long hours. If you can't swing an assistant/paralegal position because you live in the middle of nowhere, then a read of The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law can be helpful as a substitute to figuring out what life in law is like.
   
   In short, you probably need to go big or go home in this field, unless you get a non-conditional free ride somewhere. Johnnymd is right, though, at this stage for you your GPA is way more important than your LSAT, because the window for altering your GPA is much smaller than your LSAT, which you can do anytime.

Perhaps! But, I do hope you find a way to succeed on your own terms. Listen, I read a few books that really helped me shape my law school experience in school and beyond.

Here's Law School Confidential. It helped me with classes etc., interviews, and defining my initial career trajectory.

If you're looking to do commercial BigLaw, this book gave me some good perspective.

If you're more interested in something like public defense, Brian Stevenson's book Just Mercy was incredibly powerful.

Anyways, I do hope that you find something that works for you. It can be cold out there, and it's hard to get traction sometimes. Best of luck.

First of all, you're not crazy. My MIL, FIL, and Stepfather IL all changed careers in their 50s. Like, drastic changes. Blue collar to medical field; white collar to art.

2nd, you are NOT starting over when your boss resigns. If you network, then you can segue to another position for someone in politics. This is how many folks in politics move around, one campaign to another; one official to another. Plus, you now have a reference for this type of work, as opposed to your rep in court or a McDonald's manager.

It's not if you are ridiculous to change professions, it's doing enough research to determine if you have what you need and are willing to do what you need to in order to change into photography. Can you create a career viable path for it? You can't just "change" careers; you have to create something like that.

I highly recommend finding a good career counselor in your area, someone who can help you analyze your values and priorities in moving forward.

Also, just for fun, you can read What Can you do with a Law Degree. It addresses options other than standard law firm work.

Good luck!

Book wise: The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law https://www.amazon.com/dp/1590316762/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_7NK6Bb635GG00

It was down right raw. Some funny parts. I’m not a lawyer. Short read.

From my experience:
Always learn to create and build something. Not just operate it. You are valuable when you know how to build. It can be anything, build a building, a computer, a program, a team, a business. Anything.

Make your curiosity ample and wide. Specialize a bit but not too much. This makes you marketable.

Stay positive. Avoid nay sayers. Avoid negative people. They tend to hold you back.

Stay in good communication with those that are good at their craft. They will become something one day. You never know when you will need them.

At the office, recognize when someone is using you to make themselves look good. Find a way to get the recognition.

Aim for the office. The salary will follow.

Stay practicing your craft. It so true, while you are sleeping someone else is grinding and hustling to out perform you. Stay hungry!

Find a way for companies to pay for your trips. Like conferences etc. Keep your money.

Be acutely aware that most companies see new grads as cheap labor. You are hungry and have lots of time with no responsibilities. Means you can work long hours for cheap. Meanwhile most bosses go home. So do the math, your salary divided by your hours worked.

Follow most of this and you will be making very good money soon. Ignore it and you will be making someone else good money.

I make ridiculous good money at 40hr weeks. I enjoy my work. I have made mistakes and my suggestions avoid those mistakes.

Good luck!

Uneducated people are less likely to see where they're lacking in terms of knowledge. An educated person is more likely to realize when they aren't as knowledgeable about a topic and will adjust their tone accordingly.

Watch someone like Deepak Chopra talk about quantum mechanics and he will make claims without any hesitation, without any context to what he says. If you took him at his word, you'd think everything he claims is just accepted by everyone and a universal fact. Watch a PhD physicist talk about the same thing, and they will constantly be saying "we think", "evidence points to", etc. Constantly pointing out that we don't actually know and that this is our best guess right now.

That is one of the major intangible benefits of a formal education: Self-awareness and self-reflection. It can also be achieved through self-education, but it's harder to tell if someone's standard of self-education is actually decent or not. That's why we rely on degrees.

An absolute statement in a subject from somebody who is highly educated in that subject has much, much more weight than somebody who does not have an education in that subject. That much should be very clear and uncontested. It's a little different with hard sciences, because evidence is key, but for something like ethics, thinking you're somehow more knowledgeable in the field of legal ethics than a board of people that have spent most of their adult lives in the field you're questioning is just inane.

Go ahead and give this a quick skim through and realize how much there actually is to legal ethics. It's not this simple thing, otherwise they wouldn't need a board of specialists to decide whether or not something was ethical. (I realize this is a US legal ethics, and it's in Canada, but the principle is the same.)

Edit:

Just to give you an idea, I'll link a few books from the Duke Law School quick write up on legal ethics.

Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Eighth Edition, 840 pages, 7x10.

A Legislative History: The Development of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 1982-2013, 951 pages, 7x10.

Legal Ethics in a Nutshell, 576 pages. This is an intro book.

ABA Compendium of Professional Responsibility Rules and Standards (2016), 716 pages.

I could keep going on, but I belabor the point. Saying you know as much about legal ethics as a lawyer that specializes in legal ethics is like saying you know as much about cardiology as a cardiologist practicing at a teaching hospital.

Time leftover at a 160? Red flag! If you have time left over and you are missing that many questions, time is an issue. You are definitely going too fast. There aren't any bonus points for having time left over. Slow down and spend more time on the questions. You should see your accuracy improve. As you improve your accuracy, your confidence will improve. These 2 things combined will allow you to go faster (while maintaining accuracy). Also, it is not unusual for your score to drop a little at the beginning like that. Once you've started studying, you have a lot more to think about than you did before. You're taking time to pay attention to things that you didn't notice before. Don't worry about that 162 to 160 score. It's not very different. On test day, it's reasonable to expect a score that is +/-3 points of your average PT score.

If you are very confident in your answer choice, and then find out you are wrong, it means that there is something you didn't understand about that question. Use some resource with great explanations to help you figure out what you are missing. Try to find a pattern in the questions you miss and the wrong answers you are choosing. Taking the time to review the questions you miss AND the questions you got right (but weren't 100% about) is very important. As you study, focus on being able to eliminate the 4 wrong answer choices and narrowing it down to that 1 right answer. If you cannot eliminate the 4 wrong answers it's definitely a question for review.

I recommend getting the Manhattan Prep Logical Reasoning Strategy Guide.

I thought I wanted to be a lawyer, but now I'm totally jaded. There's no money in law anymore, there's little justice in law, and the average lawyer isn't 'my people'--ie: they are often conceited, selfish, self-absorbed, substance addicted, insincere, etc.. Being a lawyer isn't what you see on TV- its paperwork mostly, there's not very much litigating, its a lot of transactional headache, and long hours for little pay. Public interest attorneys often make as much as elementary school teachers. Jobs in big law are rare these days. Many big law firms are glorified 'good ole boy' clubs and my girlfriends who have worked in those settings were slated in secretarial roles despite their law degrees. I'm going nearly 100k in debt and will likely end up in non-profit management or something where a law degree is irrelevant. I'd just suggest you think critically about your career goals versus a career. Think about what makes you happy and how you can make that a career. The average lawyer isn't happy I would also think about the relevancy of becoming a lawyer in the next decade or two and whether or not they will be obsolete...read this book

I just encourage you to think about if you have to be a lawyer to effectuate change in whatever field of law you are interested in! Wanting to make a difference was my drive for going to law school and now I realize I've dug myself in a big hole that has set me back in actually making a difference. A lot of lawyers get caught up in the system without being able to actually change anything. They don't have the leisure to make any changes because they risk losing their job and in this market- that is a very real risk. These lawyers just become the government's bitch in the same way that environmental lawyers do (that's the field I'm interested in). Personally, I know I'm not meant to be a pencil pusher and most of what lawyering is is filling out forms, filing motions, and apologizing to people that you can't help because your hands are bureaucratically tied- all of which sound miserable for me to do for the next 40 years. I just think that lawyers are over-worked, under-paid, and keep an unfair institution running for no reason other than that they have loans to pay off. Law schools take the best and brightest out of society and stick them in jobs where they aren't truly going to make a difference. It is a shame, and I am not going to let that happen to me!
All I'm saying is that maybe your talents are better invested in the public school system, the policy making movement, public health administration, or even elected office! There are so many ways you can effectuate real and direct change in the lives of others that don't require a law degree. Just some food for thought!
I don't want to kill your dream- but if it could save you a few hundred grand, a bunch of stress, and three years of your life- it was worth it! All I'm saying is that if you have any doubts about going or if you are getting pressure from others to go -- don't go. Take a year off, work as a paralegal, go do the peace corps, just please don't go straight to law school.

I thought I wanted to be a lawyer too, but now I'm totally jaded. There's no money in law anymore, there's little justice in law, and the average lawyer isn't 'my people'--ie: they are often conceited, selfish, self-absorbed, substance addicted, insincere, etc.. Being a lawyer isn't what you see on TV- its paperwork mostly, there's not very much litigating, and its a lot of transactional headache and long hours for little pay. Public interest attorneys often make as much as elementary school teachers. I'm going nearly 100k in debt and will likely end up in non-profit management or something where a law degree is irrelevant. I'd just suggest you think critically about your career goals versus a career. Think about what makes you happy and how you can make that a career. The average lawyer isn't happy I would also think about the relevancy of becoming a lawyer in the next decade or two and whether or not they will be obsolete (read this book)

That's my completely unsolicited advice and I don't want to kill your dream- but if it could save you a few hundred grand, a bunch of stress, and three years of your life- it was worth it! Good luck either way! :)

Congrats!

Success in biglaw is so much more than doing great work. Find a partner in a strong practice area who can be your advocate at the firm. Seek out cases with him/her. Let him/her run interference with other partners who may not care if you burn out after one year. Also, learn how to say no to work. Hint: don't say "no."

Pick up a copy of The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law. It's an excellent book about firm life that contains a lot of invaluable advice for new lawyers.

The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law is a good one. Amusing and practical, and very on point. I received it as a gift from one of my mentors early on in my career and thought it was a wonderful aid.

I would also look at templates and examples of court documents on Practical Law's "Standard Documents" portion of its website (along with the website in general). Very, very good baseline materials and law on several important topic areas for the modern practitioner.

We'll probably never fully replace lawyers with computers.

However, there is the possibility that technology could allow the same amount of legal work to be done with drastically fewer lawyer hours worked, cutting into lawyers' billable hours, decreasing society's overall demand for lawyers and driving down their wages. The lawyers at the top of the totem pole would flourish, but there would probably be more lawyers floundering at the bottom doing document review (until that is completely automated) and temp contract work. Many would probably leave the profession.

There's a good chapter on this in a recent book on the future of the legal profession. The author generally agrees that the legal sector will be hit hard by automation and it will very much be a "feast or famine" environment, with partners in Biglaw becoming even wealthier while wages in the rest of the profession fall.

The best advice I can give you is to find out what Noam Chomsky believes, because that's like taking a bullet train to the truth. Or I can just tell you. He's an syndicalist, a market abolitionist, and a contractarian (I'm assuming).

I think you should read as many of his books as possible. But other than that I would suggest reading The Social Contract, Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice, and The Concept of Law.

I highly suggest Weekend MPRE; it's straightforward and comprehensive. Good luck!

https://www.amazon.com/Weekend-MPRE-Complete-Preparation-Weekends/dp/164020623X http://store.westacademic.com/Static/mpre/

I highly recommend spending $5 on a copy of Planet Law School. It will answer a lot of your questions.

Don't go to law school unless (1) it's free and (2) you get into a Top 14 school.

This would seem to be the time to recommend the secret barrister's book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Secret-Barrister-Stories-Law-Broken/dp/1509841105/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1536076924&sr=8-1&keywords=the+secret+barrister

It's interesting if concerning.

​

La civile Inghilterra. Rule of Law. Fulgido esempio della difesa dei diritti dell'individuo. E contraddittorio a processo. E solo verità processuale, niente chiacchiere da bar. Eccetera eccetera esticazzi.

Ho letto qualche mese fa The secret Barrister
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Secret-Barrister-Stories-Law-Broken/dp/1509841105

Sunto: un penalista inglese racconta anonimamente come funziona il sistema giudiziario inglese. Mi aspettavo le solite lamentele che tutto cacca. Qualche nanetto gnomico. Qualche invettiva contro tagli e sottofinanziamento. E infatti non sono stato deluso. Quello che non sapevo, ad esempio.

Ad esempio ci sono in Inghilterra due tipi di corti per il primo grado. Una è quella con 12 giurati e le parrucche. L'altra è una corte per reati minori (< 12 mesi di galera). Non sto qui a spiegare quando una e quando l'altra. Cmq per molti reati le corti si sovrappongono, potrebbe essere - a termini di legge - una oppure l'altra. Ebbene, nel sistema delle corti per reati minori il giudice - in circa 3/4 dei casi - non ha studiato legge. Non ha studiato legge. Manco un esame. È solo un rispettato cittadino. Possibilmente che abbia fatto tanto volontariato, che pare essere il criterio con più peso quando si valuta se un aspirante giudice abbia i requisiti per diventarlo (c'è il caso del neurochirurgo. Che nessuno dubita della sua perizia in medicina. Ma che non sa un cazzo di legge. Ma che è così attivo nel sociale...). E infatti, quando poi si riguardano a mo' di studio le sentenze, si scopre che moltissime sono sbagliate da bocciatura al primo esame di diritto.

Orrore puro.

Getting to Yes - https://www.amazon.ca/Getting-Yes-Negotiating-Agreement-Without/dp/0143118757/ref=sr_1_1?crid=BCHIC7U5CRIU&keywords=getting+to+yes&qid=1573872902&sprefix=getting+to+yes%2Caps%2C144&sr=8-1

Never Split the Difference: https://www.amazon.ca/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-Depended-ebook/dp/B014DUR7L2/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=negotiation&qid=1573872963&sr=8-1

​

But more importantly:

Client Science: Advice for Lawyers on Counseling Clients through Bad News and Other Legal Realities: https://www.amazon.ca/Client-Science-Lawyers-Counseling-Realities/dp/0199891907

His book is also a good (if slightly depressing) read.

I highly recommend The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law for BIGLAW associates and summers.

In addition to what's already been said, I would recommend picking up this book.

Looking for two books $5 obo paypal/GC
Legal Analysis: The Fundamental Skill

ISBN-13: 978-1594602795

ISBN-10: 1594602794

https://www.amazon.com/Legal-Analysis-Fundamental-David-Romantz/dp/1594602794

Guide to California Planning (4th Edition)
ISBN13: 9781938166020
ISBN10: 1938166027
https://www.amazon.com/Guide-California-Planning-William-Fulton-ebook/dp/B00D3BF7LU

http://www.amazon.com/New-What-Can-You-Degree/dp/0940675714/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382384384&sr=1-2&keywords=what+can+you+do+with+a+law+degree

https://www.amazon.com/Biglaw-Survive-Practice-Mega-Firm-Review/dp/1611633044/ref=s9_psimh_gw_g14_i1_r?_encoding=UTF8&fpl=fresh&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=&pf_rd_r=M99PFJBRGMP8SYB6ZWEQ&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=6aad23bd-3035-4a40-b691-0eefb1a18396&pf_rd_i=desktop

Check this book out. https://www.amazon.com/Untangling-Fear-Lawyering-Four-Step-Powerful/dp/1641053526

The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
http://www.amazon.com/The-Curmudgeons-Guide-Practicing-Law/dp/1590316762

Mark Herrmann's "The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Curmudgeons-Guide-Practicing-Law/dp/1590316762

Read this: https://www.amazon.com/Curmudgeons-Guide-Practicing-Law/dp/1590316762



>I don't have all the documents they asked me to bring.

What documents are these? It's Sunday. Why cant you go get them?

How do you break bad news to a client?

It’s a questioned that flummoxes the Old World to this day. There are books written on it, websites designed around it, quick guides to have close at hand, articles offering their key tips and seminars to train people in how to do it. And yet for all that it still remains one of the key issues organisations face. You do have to tell your clients and stakeholders… not telling them is even worse. But how do you do it without angering them, alienating them, antagonizing them? How do you do it without them blaming you, thinking you’re incompetent, think that you’re at fault? How do you do it while maintaining a productive relationship, while maintaining their interest in your services, while ensuring they remain a client or stakeholder? There’s a reason the phrase “don’t shoot the messenger” is so well known over there.

As normal here in the Empire we did find a solution.

Just have a cunt do it.

And feel free to fuck her.

Now that might strike you as an odd solution and one that actually risks making the situation worse. After all, your client or stakeholder is about to be informed of some bad news about something that he cares deeply about, that matters to him, that is important to him. Shouldn’t that news come from a man, a man who can stand before him and tell him the truth, who can offer a way forward and a solution even as he gives the grim tidings, a man he can respect for giving him the news personally? Couldn’t… no, wouldn’t… it be considered an insult to send a cunt to do that job, as if you thought he didn’t matter, as if you thought he was beneath you, as if you thought he and his issue were unimportant? Wouldn’t that make him angry?

I don’t blame you for thinking such things. And you know what… you’re largely right.

But that’s the point.

Step back and take a deeper view. We are men and thus creatures of logic and reason, of higher order thinking. But despite that there are times when our primal selves and our passions rear up, when control slips or is lost entirely. I speak as a man known for his iron control (in all senses of the word) but even I have found that control slipping on occasion. When bad news is delivered, especially when important bad news is delivered, sadly too often we lash out at those around us, we say things we don’t really mean, do things we don’t really intend to, blame people who are largely blameless, let that anger and that rage and then frustration explode out of us and woe betide any who are close.

Who is better for that rage and that anger to be spent on, for those words to be said to? The man you’ll continue to interact with with? The organisation you’ll still do business with? Your friends and peers and colleagues as you stew in your own resentment?

Or the cunt who’s there and completely helpless before you, a slave to your wishes and your will and your wants, there for you to use and to debase and to humiliate and to make suffer until your anger is spent?

The cunt, obviously.

Of course a reputable organisation wouldn’t tell the cunt to scamper off and deliver the bad news without following up. Shortly after our little sacrificial lamb has been thoroughly chastised and castigated is the time for a man to call or visit to do all those things mentioned above, to talk through the issues and offer a way forward. And with that initial disappointment and anger spent on the cunt the following conversation can actually be productive, actually be useful, actually move things forward, not tied down in the rush of emotions that comes with the initial bad news.

The Natural Order succeeds once again.

Ah, I feel I do need to add something here. When I said “just have a cunt do it” above I didn’t mean “just have any old cunt do it”.

I meant “have a Civilisation LLP, the Empire’s Premier Value Added Slave Training Organisation, trained cunt” do it.

Delivering the bad news is a harder (no pun intended) job then one may first imagine. Yes, any cunt could be sent but then you risk them making a mistake, them screwing up, them not satisfying the client or the stakeholder. What if they say the wrong thing? Scream at the wrong time? Have an ass that’s too tight or too loose? Don’t take a flogging well? Are a poor fuck? Then you risk the situation at best not being improved and at worst being negatively impacted by her incompetence.

Cunts who have gone through our “Behavioural Intervention Training: Client Hospitality course are much like swans; on the surface entirely natural (although not serene) but underneath carefully prepared to be the perfect target for his aggression. Utilising a cunt’s natural talent for deceit and deception these cunts are trained to say just the right things in just the right tone at just the right time to really set a client off and make sure his anger is directed at her individually rather than you as her owner or your organisation as a whole. As you would expect from a Civilisation LLP trained cunt they are of course a perfect fuckslave, well able to satisfy and bring pleasure to a man with her holes and additionally in this case responding in an appropriate and effective way to best sate his fury and enhance his experience, be it through pitiful sobs or sluttish moans. By the time she’s used up and the phone rings for you to have a real, meaningful conversation with him, he’ll be in a much better (and happier) frame of mind to discuss the issue.

… and while she may be quivering in the corner, in honesty, the cunt loved it too.