Amal Clooney signs on to lecture about human rights at Columbia Law School

133667PCN_Clooney03

I’m sure this is just the effect of a loosely fit coat, but doesn’t Amal Clooney give you some knocked up vibes in these photos? Amal was photographed out and about in NYC on Friday evening. She was apparently running errands in leather pants, a beret and this boxy, bump-hiding coat. Why does she look knocked up to me? Hm… I guess it’s because the coat looks heavy and everyone looks heavier in a heavy coat. Also: Amal genuinely looks like she’s put a few (just a few) pounds back on after her wedding thin-out. So is Amal knocked up? God knows. But it will be SO MAJOR if she is. Like, People Magazine will probably devote three consecutive covers to Amal and George if and when she gets knocked up. Update: Amal’s bulky coat and cute bag are from Giambattista Valli.

What else is going on with Amal? Nothing much, she’s just signing on for even more work! In addition to scheduling in about a million new cases, Amal has just signed on to lecture at Columbia Law School this spring. According to Page Six, Amal has been named a “senior fellow with the Law School’s Human Rights Institute” and her lectures will be about human rights law (which she knows a lot about because many of her clients have been despots). Amal released a statement about it too (she’s using the name “Amal Clooney” professionally all the time now).

“It is an honor to be invited as a visiting professor at Columbia Law School alongside such a distinguished faculty and talented student pool. I look forward to getting to know the next generation of human rights advocates studying here,” Amal said.

Amal served as a senior adviser to Kofi Annan when he was the UN’s envoy on Syria, and she represented WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in extradition proceedings. She has also handled cases before the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights, as well as in domestic courts in the US and the UK.

“We are privileged to have an international human rights practitioner of Amal Clooney’s stature join our faculty,” said Professor Sarah H. Cleveland, the Louis Henkin professor of human and constitutional rights and faculty co-director of the Human Rights Institute. “Her extensive experience advocating before UN and regional human rights mechanisms complements our existing offerings and will enrich the experience of our students.”

At Columbia Law School, Amal will lecture in Cleveland’s Human Rights course and speak about human rights litigation strategies to students in the Human Rights Clinic. She is also the author of the upcoming book “The Right to a Fair Trial in International Law,” which will be released by Oxford University Press this year.

The announcement comes after newlyweds Amal and George moved to New York for a few months as he films the movie “Money Monster,” directed by Jodie Foster, in the city and on Long Island.

[From Page Six]

Good for her. It doesn’t sound like Amal is really going to be a full-on professor, grading papers and hanging around with office hours. She’s just going to pop in to another professor’s classes to give some lectures. It makes me wonder how long George and Amal plan on staying in New York. George will probably film in the city for a few months, I guess, and then what? Would Amal and George ever create a homebase in NYC? It would be much easier for her to commute to work if they lived in NYC (rather than LA). Plus, if George and Amal lived in NYC, then they really would be our new John-John and Carolyn.

But… there are still rumors about George’s political ambitions, and if he does run for office, it would probably be in California. You guys know Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is retiring from her Senate seat? The election to replace her is next year. Do you think Clooney is thinking about that?

133654PCN_Amal02

133654PCN_Amal03

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

174 Responses to “Amal Clooney signs on to lecture about human rights at Columbia Law School”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. thinkaboutit says:

    The stylist must have had the night off. This is more “cooky old Amal” than the Mrs. C look she debuted in Venice.

  2. Kendel says:

    She’ll give 2 lectures so George’s PR team can say she’s “working”.

    • Helen says:

      ‘Even more work’?! When does she ever do any work? She look like 6 months off for the wedding. Then she’s off galavanting in Mexico and LA. She’s a total part timer. Also who is she to lecture on human rights when she represents terrorists?

      • Liv says:

        So human rights don’t apply to terrorists or what?

      • Belle Epoch says:

        THANK YOU HELEN! no way you can persuade me a) they needed someone for this position or b) she’s the best qualified. This must have been a private invitation job for the “prestige” she brings. As if.

      • Bridget says:

        George Clooney marries a lawyer and all of a sudden everyone’s an expert on the legal profession.

        Did you catch that she’s on the team that’s actively representing Armenia and was in chambers just a few weeks ago- she’s been working the whole time. She’s a lawyer, her job is research and strategy, and she can take her files with her. I don’t get it, why do people have to rip her to shreds about her job?

        And Liv said it: everyone has the right to a fair trial. It’s what makes the system work.

      • Hazel says:

        Apparently she’s written a book, too. In between having tequila shots in Cabo, I guess. Actually, I’m jealous. I’d like to be that productive.

      • jwoolman says:

        I don’t understand why people object to lawyers representing the unlikeable and guilty. That’s how the system works. The prosecution and the defense do their best to prove their side of the story and hopefully some truth will come out of the process. The alternative is to not have trials at all, let anybody who is arrested be tortured in jail (since they have no rights, yes?) until you folks vote on how much you love or hate them as of five minutes ago, and chop off the heads of anybody a majority don’t like. Is that really what you want? Heaven help you if you are ever falsely accused of a crime.

      • Mac says:

        At present she is also representing Mohamed Fahmy. She traveled to Egypt to help facilitate his release. And as his court case is ongoing (today delayed again) she will be occupied with his case for the next while along with everything else she is working on.

      • LeAnn Stinks says:

        I hope no one takes her class and I wonder if she will teach about her about her arms dealer uncle, Ziad Takiedinne. I can’t even with this woman and her politics.

      • Helen says:

        I’m not saying human rights doesn’t apply to terrorists. My point is that she’s represented far more terrorists (Gadaffi’s right hand man) and corrupt organisations (Enron) than real people in need, which is what the press (ie George’s PR machine) would have you believe. Lawyers pick their cases. Where was she when the MH370 victim’s families need help (like right now)?! She’s no Mother Theresa.

      • Helen says:

        Also, she appears to have no ties to any charities or causes and for a “human rights attorney” does not seem at all uncomfortable at the amount of potential humanitarian relief (medicine, clean water, food) the cost of her engagement ring alone represents.

    • lisa says:

      i hope someone asks her about the privatization of water

      • deehunny says:

        yes that is such a ridiculously huge issue that most people are unaware of. 2052 is coming ya’ll

    • Sara says:

      I’m surprised she’s being billed as professor when she’s going to guest lecture in one of the workshops.

      • SH says:

        The class she is teaching with Sarah Cleveland is described as “a core course in the Law School’s human rights curriculum.”

        not a workshop.

      • Sandy says:

        This! No other guest lecturer would be billed as a professor. But then, no other guest lecturer has George’s PR team spinning 24/7.

  3. BNA FN says:

    GC is saying AC is the smart one in this marriage. If she is so smart why did she marry a man who is 16 years her senior with a bad back and a drinking problem? Is it about the $$$? I’m thinking GC is the smart one in this marriage.

    Btw, where is she going to find the time to lecture at Columbia with her heavy work load as a barrister in London?

    • OhDear says:

      Re: finding the time: a good number of practicing lawyers (including and especially law firm partners with large workloads) do so in addition to their full-time jobs.

      • Hazel says:

        True. And that’s true of a lot of professionals–they teach/lecture part-time at the local university.

    • Jaded says:

      How on earth can you say he has a drinking problem? Honestly, the tin foil hats that come out on some of these posts….*shakes head in disbelief*

      • serene says:

        He himself stated that he drinks too much at times, and not for fun. And there have been quite a few tipsy moments caught on camera over the years as well.

      • Jaded says:

        “I drink, at times, too much,” Oscar-nominated star says in a new interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “I do enjoy drinking, and there have been times in my life when it’s crossed the line from being fun to having to drink late at night for absolutely no reason. So what I do is, I stop. I haven’t had a drink since New Year’s Eve.”

        That interview was in February, 2012. I think he’s got his “drinking problem” under control as he realizes when he’s gone overboard. A drinking problem is when you won’t admit you need to cut back. Oh, and a bad back and a 16 year age gap is certainly not a deterrent to marrying. It’s not like he’s wheelchair bound and needs 24 hour care…..

      • BNA FN says:

        You should not shake your head in disbelief about GC drinking problem or fans mentioning it. As you mentioned: “I think he’s got his “drinking problem” under control…”. You THINK, you do not know this as fact after 3 years of him saying so. why are you taking exceptions to another comment when you do not know if he has in fact stop drinking. This is a gossip site,
        we all have opinions and if they were all the same this would be so boring for most of us. And about his 16 years age difference, as Tina Fay and Amy P made fun that George would rather floats away in space than to be with someone his age. Just saying.

  4. Maya says:

    Amal is intelligent, good looking and seems like a nice women and yet I just can’t warm up to her.

    It also seems that Amal is getting the best of this relationship. Being married to Clooney gives her free press which in turn gets her more clients. It’s a win win situation for her.

    • Lilalis says:

      I agree on not being able to warming up to her for no specific reason. But I’m not sure about her profiting from this marriage career-wise. This celebrity circus makes her look less of a serious lawyer/business woman, at least in my eyes.

      • Santia says:

        And yet, firms will kill to get her on the roster, even as “of counsel,” which means not a full time post. Lawyers and law firms love free publicity as much as the next person.

  5. misty says:

    G&A left LAX without being photographed and arrived in NYC without being snapped. Tho there was a pic of them flying coach taken by another passenger. They made it to their hotel and were there about a week; again, without being snapped.

    Now, we get 3 days in a row of staged photo-ops, with AA looking so well turned out. Does anyone still believe they aren’t steering-creating their public image?

    • BNA FN says:

      I always get the feelings GC wants AC to be his Angelina, jmo. Always thought he admires what Brad and Angelina are doing with their live and want to be respected in that way.

      • Malak says:

        @BNA FN – I think you could be right, but if it’s true that GC wants a life like Brad & Angelina, then he needs to have kids too.

        Didn’t he sever his connection with the UN?

  6. NewWester says:

    I actually would like to sit in on one of Amal’s lectures.

    • Tapioca says:

      Me too! And given some of her previous (tyrannical right-hand man) cliente it would be titled something along the lines of, “Human Rights: You Get What You Pay For”.

    • OhDear says:

      Same here!

    • MinnFinn says:

      Amal is a greenhorn. She has so little experience. She was selected b/c of her celebrity status. Columbia chose form over substance i.e. her celebrity cache is more important than maximizing its law students’ learning. If I was a Columbia law student I would be very disappointed that my tuition dollars were funding her as a lecturer instead of a seasoned pro with 10, 20 or more years of experience.

      • Hazel says:

        Wouldn’t be the first time a major university did such a thing. In the end, they’re always chasing dollars & if they can get a ‘name’, that jumps up the enrollment, jumps up the donations, etc.

      • jwoolman says:

        The seasoned pro with decades of experience might not be available. She’s experienced enough for the job.

  7. Remember says:

    Do other Hollywood actors’ non acting wives release statements about what they are doing work wise? I now agree with some that she is a famewhore, so is George. Page six, People, seriously?

    • Rachel says:

      No but universities put out statements about its visiting lecturers…

      • Rach says:

        Sorry, but it isn’t typical to put out statements about a visiting lecturer unless he/she is famous for his work which Amal isn’t. Columbia, is totally famewhoring here.

      • jwoolman says:

        Rach- colleges and universities keep everybody awash in press releases about any visiting lecturers, whether or not they have Kim Kardashian name recognition. Being well known to the general public is a nice perk for the school, but they’re not doing anything different for her than they do for others. The media just perks its little ears when it hears the name in this case.

      • Sara says:

        Sorry, but this is atypical and embarrassing for Columbia. I had no idea celebrity could buy someone gravitas in the legal profession. I’m extremely disappointed.

      • Lori says:

        Yeah, but do law schools put out a press release regarding visiting lecturers in the middle of a law school semester? Based upon my own experience, such announcements tend to issue at the beginning of a law school term.

      • Rach says:

        Let me reiterate, Columbia – whose law school I attended – does not put out tweets for low level visitors/adjuncts like Amal. I’m totally disgusted by my alma mater.

      • Amelie says:

        Rach:
        I hate to upset you further but you may want to take a look at the write up your alma mater has given Amal on its official website. Given the few years that she has practiced, I wonder if they have her confused with someone else? Either that or maybe someone has recently made a rather large ($) gift to the law school!

    • Bridget says:

      Press releases are sent out about professional endeavors all the time in the non-celebrity world. They’re just not usually picked up by People magazine.

  8. Kendel says:

    I’m sorry to hear Barbara is leaving the Senate. She’s one of our best. George would have to be readying his campaign NOW, not making movies if he wanted her seat.

    I think George wants a diplomatic post at some point. He’ll continue his charity work, all with the end goal being the NOBEL PRIZE. I really think he’s that f-up to believe he deserves it.

    • Birdix says:

      Right. The candidates are already circling–Kamala Harris, Villaraigosa–it’s going to be an interesting race. Feinstein? Even one of my exes is considering a (long-shot) run. I hope electing Arnold to governor taught Californians something about electing washed up actors.

  9. Miss M says:

    She is giving me “AnnE’s vibe”. what a difference few pounds make, she looks great!

    Congrats on the visiting Professor!!!

  10. LAK says:

    Don’t know if she’s pregnant, but she’s definitely put on some pounds.

    • Abby_J says:

      I was wondering the same thing! I didn’t notice the weight gain, but usually when someone is pictured in a baggy jacket, SOMEONE has to mention she might be pregnant.

  11. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think she looks cute in the first picture.

  12. Amelie says:

    I reviewed Amal’s resume again and it looks to me that her total professional work experience comes to 7 years; only 4 years have been spent in Human Rights. From media information, it doesn’t appear as if she has ever been the sole legal representative/lead attorney on a human rights case. Never-the-less, she is an “Expert” qualified to teach others. In my grad program, I can’t recall having a professor with less than 20 years experience; all of whom were licensed to practice independently. But, they were not married to George Clooney!

    And per the photos, although there is a question about Amal’s emotional connection with her spouse, there is certainly no doubt about Amal’s love for the camera!

    • Snappyfish says:

      This!!

    • Bridget says:

      But is Columbia historically a “stunt casting” type of entity? They could feel that she brings interesting strategizing to the table. And if it’s a 101 Class it doesn’t need to be overly in-depth.

      • Hazel says:

        Exactly. And let’s not forget, you don’t always get the full-fledge PhD lecturers. Undergrads frequently get fobbed off on grad students, who only have a few years’ additional education.

    • bettyrose says:

      She’s not a professor though. A fancy-titled guest lecturer? At a lower tier school angling for big name recognition I could see your point, but does Columbia pander to celebrities?

    • nic919 says:

      She has only been called in the UK since 2010. That is barely five years out and in the legal profession no one fast tracks. Well perhaps in this case because of the world wide attention her name brings to cases now.
      It is possible to be a lecturer and often law faculties have practitioners give lectures. That said, usually they are not given by lawyers with barely five years of experience. It is called the practice of law for a reason, it takes time to gain experience. She has not been lead counsel on anything so far and has been travelling with George more than most lawyers who have a full time practice do.

      • Judy says:

        My brother in law was only 32 when he lectured at a top notch law school. He’d only had 5 years experience in the DA’s office and an additional three representing death row inmates. Since then he’s moved around a lot career wise, holding positions on the exec board of non-profits. I have 5 attorneys in my extended family and some work 14 hour days and some work from home. They all have different careers, some in the public sector others private. Many of you seem to think that there is only one way to be an attorney. There isn’t.

      • OhDear says:

        In certain areas of the law, five years in that area is actually considered fairly experienced (for example, criminal law).

      • Katherine says:

        Many law schools use lots of adjunct professors – much cheaper for the school and looks good on a resume. In my day the profs were making around $100k a year and the adjuncts were making maybe $4k a semester.

        I went to school in DC and my mergers and securities adjunct professor was THE chief of mergers & acquisitions at the SEC. That was a pretty common experience.

    • Miss M says:

      I don’t know much about lawyer’so career, I know enough about academia to throw in my 2 cents. She is a visiting professor, which means she could be hired just from few lectures to a couple of years. She is not a tenure track professor, which is completely different.

    • Sara says:

      If you scrutinize her CV, you’ll find that most of her high-profile human rights experience was acquired from 2013 onwards, around the time she met Clooney (including all UN related work). I truly believe that if she had not met Clooney, no one would have heard of her, and she never would have been considered by Columbia.

    • Sara says:

      Columbia is not above this.

  13. Catelina says:

    If George were really running next year he would be working on that, not living in NY making movies with Jodie Foster. As for Amal and her schedule, not sure if the situations are comparable but my mom is a lawyer and she can work from home fairly often without a problem. But she is a very different kind of lawyer than Amal so maybe you all know something I don’t.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      No they don’t know anything you don’t know. They just can’t stand it for some reason. The comments on this thread make me embarrassed to be a woman. People always say that women tear each other down, and I always disagree because my women friends don’t do that. But I have never seen people put so much effort into discrediting a woman’s career and so much hate because she smiles for the camera. What’s she supposed to do – turn her head away like a four year old? It’s truly disheartening.

      • Bridget says:

        Word. I’ve never seen so much effort into discrediting a woman’s professional accomplishments. She smiles for the cameras and she automatically is labeled a famewhore and her career automatically reduced to resume filler.

      • oneshot says:

        It’s not even as if she had some faff career like modelling or sporadic stage/acting work – law is a career that requires real work both at the qualification and practice stage. The hours spent in prep for a court appearance/hearing are no less ‘work’ than the time she spends in those appearances.

        And some people really do not seem to grasp the concept that defence attorneys are a necessary part of the legal system? Because the alternative is a kangaroo court.

      • BNA FN says:

        What the commentors on this thread writes about AC is very mild compared to some other sites, the amount oh hate out there for AC is shocking. If you want to read hate comments and be embarrassed as a woman, visit some of the other sites eg, DM. They are really some crazy comments over there and other sites. CB is a love fest for AC compared to others.

      • EC says:

        THANK YOU. Here we have a well educated, working woman who is also married to movie star, and nothing she does is good enough. She can’t be working hard because she had a fancy wedding. She cannot be smart because she wears interesting clothes. She doesn’t care about her career because she travels with her husband. She is thin, pretty and smiles at the papz, ergo she is a famewh*re. No woman has ever multi-tasked before! Amal couldn’t possibly! Can’t believe some of the things I read about this woman, who seems completely admirable in my opinion. End Rant.

      • Amelie says:

        As someone who is old enough to remember the women’s movement in the 1970′s and the fight for the ERA, where real women did real work for a real cause at great cost, I do take exception to how Amal is acquiring her career acclaim.
        She was obviously born to a family with means and was given the opportunity of a good education, including a grad program in NY. She worked a couple of years in corporate law-fyi, new corporate associates do grunt work like research etc; they don’t run the show-she then returns home to England where she BEGINS a career in human rights law four years ago(fyi, there is some disagreement whether human rights law and humanitarian law are the same). She then marries George Clooney and suddenly she is the greatest HUMANITARIAN lawyer known to man. She also apparently gets a fashion redo and regular photo ops from the media.
        Amal can’t hold a candle to Malala Yousafzai, a fearless advocate for girl’s education; Holly Williams, an intrepid reporter for CBS who somehow gets into the worst war zones in the Middle East to report the news;any female medical provider who has cared for an Ebola victim etc. Amal is a caricature of a true professional(girls, its all about who you marry!) and yes I frankly mind her being given any credit because frankly she is as other have stated just a fame whore.

      • Bridget says:

        @Amelie: so what exactly constitutes a “real woman” and “real work”?

        I find it ironic that you’re namechecking ERA, and yet you’re behaving as though there are only a finite number of women who are allowed to be intelligent and respected. Is there only room for a Malala if Amal Clooney is a famewhore?

        Amal is highly educated from prestigious universities, and fact that she is given a seat at the table (even as a junior member) says a lot. I simply don’t understand this need to reduce her to a camera loving famewhore.

      • ilovesunnydaze says:

        I agree Goodnames. Some of the comments are really quite unfair.

      • Amelie says:

        Bridget:
        I wonder at your question and suspect you are perhaps not old enough to understand what the women’s movement was fighting for the 70′s. Here are a few of the things women couldn’t do:
        1. Keep her job if she was pregnant.
        2. Report cases of sexual harassment in the workplace.
        3. Be acknowledged in the Boston Marathon
        4. Get a credit card.
        5. Refuse to have sex with her husband.
        6. Have a legal abortion in most states( full disclosure, I personally oppose abortion). Includes other gyne procedures.

        To continue, do you think that colleges always offered athletic scholarships to women, that girls were allowed in Little League or that girls were able to wear pants to school? Do you know that the airlines required ‘stewardesses’ who married to resign? What about equal pay for equal work? Do you know how much larger the discrepancy was in pay for women versus men prior to the 70′s? These are just some of the issues that feminists addressed in the 70′s. Women owe these feminists a boatload of gratitude.

        Who is a real woman? Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan and Germaine Greer are a few of the well-known American feminists.

        Amal is nowhere in the league of these women.These women advocated for women to be accepted on their own merits, it wasn’t about riding on your husband’s coattails.

      • vauvert says:

        Thank you GNAT, I don’t get the hate at all either. No matter what Amal does, she gets ripped to shreds. She’s too thin, she works in London so her marriage is a sham bc they are apart, oh no, she is a lazy ass lawyer bc she does travel with her husband, she hates his friends, oh wait, she went on vacation with his friends, it is the price of her being a famewho, she smiled at the camera nicely like an adult, rather than giving the finger or scowling, well that proves she married him for his name and money.
        Grrrrr. How about she is well educated, polished, pretty (I think), well dressed, comes from a good family which sent her to good schools, and then had the nerve to marry a movie star. She works, her company and bosses seem happy with her performance, her client roster may not be what you would choose if you were in her position, but that is her business. And if she writes an article or is a guest lecturer, whom exactly is she hurting? Why compare her with every other woman under the sun to find someone else she does not quite measure up to?
        All I can think of is that if my boy marries someone like her one day , I would be happy, and I can’t think of higher praise than that. Now going in a corner with my mimosa waiting for the cries of horror.

      • Bridget says:

        @Amelie: please don’t use feminism as an excuse for being a jerk.

        Katherine Switzer would be horrified at you using her as an example for your poorly thought out point. And for future reference, you probably want to make sure that the person you’re making that point at hasn’t actually run the Boston Marathon herself.

        Happy International Women’s Day to you too!

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Amelie
        So if you’re not Gloria or Betty or Germaine you’re not intelligent or respected? That’s all Bridget said – that Amal was highly educated and intelligent. Which she is, and was before she met Clooney. How is she “riding his coattails?” You seem to have an extremely rigid view of what a woman should be. And I’m 58, so please spare me the lecture. I remember, and we’ve come a long way, and have a long way to go still. One improvement would be not picking apart other women for their personal choices.

      • Miss M says:

        I agree. My only side eye is for the wedding extravaganza and the pr roll out. But I am glad she is getting the attention even if it is for the wrong reasons. I prefer. Well educated, independent and competent wan in the tabloids than someone who is known for showing their bodies.

      • serene says:

        Actually, It’s Clooney and his PR who discredit Amal by overselling her to the public. I’m not surprised people are checking facts, and therefore resisting this kind of hype. Many of her published achievements are exaggerated, or put into a misleading context. It’s not hate for an accomplished woman, it’s about how an educated woman can let this happen. And just a thought on the side: IF she was that intelligent- why would she marry Clooney, knowing full well that she would become part of his circus?

      • Katherine says:

        I agree with you, Amelia. It’s nice to see a working professional but the obvious puffery and out and out lying about her credentials is very annoying to those of us who have paid our dues as real independent women.

        People are too easily impressed and too easily fooled.

      • Amelie says:

        As some folks here prefer to name call, I won’t respond to their specific comments.

      • Bridget says:

        If there’s anything that feminism and the ERA taught us, it’s that you’re either a Nobel Peace Prize nominated humanitarian or you’re a vapid famewhore. Thanks ladies!

      • hmmm says:

        @Amelie

        I was there as well. To add to that list, it was also almost impossible for women to get a loan for women. All of it was an absolute slog. ITA with everything you said! Well put!

        I shake my head how diluted and superficial, clueless, entitled and downright arrogant so many of this generation of women has become. They’ve gone soft. And have no respect for their elders, those who fought so hard for women’s rights in the trenches. This is not the future, or a future full of rude, sneering girls that I envisioned but I guess it’s better than the alternative.

        Amal is no prize whatsoever. She is superficial, shallow, and she’s the current big cheese because she got her “Mrs” degree. How ironic that this is what is being touted as the face of ‘feminism’ and feminine success. It’s like being back in the 50′s.

      • Amelie says:

        @hmmm:
        Women continue to make 70 cents for every dollar that a man makes. Why this wouldn’t galvanize the younger generation of women, I don’t know. I am a 50-something and I know that feminism didn’t die with my generation; its the 20-30 somethings…

      • lenje says:

        Count me in to those who don’t understand the negativity towards Amal based on whom she married. She was already part of a team working on a few high profile cases before she was with Clooney. Yes, she was the junior member, but still — she got selected for those cases.

        Her marriage to Clooney definitely opens more doors to her. It doesn’t diminish her own accomplishment. Marrying Amal will probably open more doors for Clooney too, so it’s two ways.

        I also didn’t know that calling oneself a sort of “feminist fighter” entitles you to belittle other women, whose path to fame or success are different to your perception. And this isn’t even some sort of fame that was attained because of a sex tape, or constantly breaking the law, or wearing revealing clothes in socialites parties. Geeze.

        Do make comment on today’s situation for women in general, make reminders. But putting down other women undeservedly gives the impression of arrogance or even jealousy.

      • Bridget says:

        @Amelie: I don’t even understand what discussion you’re a part of. The topic was the vitriol that’s been aimed at Ms. Clooney, and you’re going off on some tangent about wage inequalities and feminism. You could just say “she’s not my cup of tea” and be done, but you’ve clearly chosen otherwise, instead going on some completely unrelated topic and working yourself in some sort of self righteous tizzy.

        Though just so you at least have your information correct, the wage gap isn’t 70 cents on the dollar, it’s 78 to 82 cents depending on your source. It’s a pretty widely known figure.

      • Sara says:

        @ Amelia: Exactly.

        Anyone with a true appreciation for academia/scholarly work/human rights law would not only be bothered but annoyed by all the attention Amal has received since marrying Clooney. Given her extraordinarily privileged background, she attended some prestigious schools. But let’s not forget that she only acquired a liberal arts 3-year degree from Oxford and a 1 year degree from NYU. The truth of the matter is that, although she’s a smart and capable woman, she’s not exceptionally smart or capable, and most of the attention she’s garnered recently derives from the fact that she’s Mrs. Clooney. This doesn’t send out a positive message at all and is in fact disheartening as it highlights the corruption and injustice inherent in the contemporary professional world, including academia and the legal field.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        Seriously. Does anyone remember that moment from The Simpsons when the softball player visits the Mystery Spot and falls into that vibrant red, endless chasm from another dimension? I feel like that guy. What is she supposed to do? I’m pretty sure that if she stopped working altogether people would talk about her being a lazy gold digger and if she weren’t working before they got together–same result. Do I think she’d be getting all of these engagements if her husband weren’t famous? Nope, but that doesn’t mean she can’t. Did I sit through guest lectures given by people who were older students? Yup. Was I a first graduate student marking term papers and exams Yes. Let’s remember, these Ivy schools power of off nepotism. Do I think that because she’s married to someone so famous it automatically trained at University of Frat Boy, Toga Campus? Nope. She’s not the only adult on the planet with connections.

    • Artemis says:

      She was obviously born to a family with means and was given the opportunity of a good education

      Being given an opportunity does not equal having a great career. There are a lot of steps in between and she clearly put in the WORK. So many people are born into riches but do not achieve their full potential because of a lack of ambition and laziness.

      Amal can’t hold a candle to Malala Yousafzai, a fearless advocate for girl’s education

      Apparently you seem to think that real work requires a woman possibly losing her life in her line of work/ambitions? Anything else is not deemed real work? People fight differently, the work that Amal does is just as valuable albeit different. Who are you to say that Amal is inferior to other women? That thinking is counter-productive and I would not support any woman who spouts of nonsense like that

      Amal is a caricature of a true professional(girls, its all about who you marry!)

      She was successful before her marriage so to reduce her to some trophy wife just shows how bitter you seem to be about another women’s achievements. She had a life prior to her marriage, a life you barely acknowledge as you seem to think that being born well-off means you magically get good grades, don’t have to work your ass off interning and working on cases. Nope, she just skated through life because MONEY…ugh bye girl!

      @others

      So true, people like to pretend to be for women’s rights here (see all the threads where they dislike celebs who don’t know the meaning of feminism) but they show their assess every time they discuss a woman they don’t like. Feminism is not only supporting women we happen to like, it’s also about acknowledging and supporting women who we don’t like for some reason. We don’t have to like every woman, but to dismiss their career and achievements is so anti-woman it’s quite disgusting to read.

      • Katherine says:

        Again, it’s nice to see a working professional but it is not nice to see her being portrayed as something she is not – being portrayed as having the kind of experience and professional standing she doesn’t yet have.

        For those of us who fought the original women’s rights battles, we don’t need to be lectured about feminism. We know what it looks like when a woman is gaining success via marrying the right man. Her professional life before her association with her now famous husband was not what most professionals in law would call anything more than a young lawyer beginning her career. Not sure why you think it was an example of “success.” Unless you just think having work makes you a successful lawyer.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Oh, please. You fought the “original women’s rights battles?” Were you a suffragette?

        “We know what it looks like when a woman is gaining success by marrying the right man.” You don’t sound like a feminist at all. You sound like a man from 1950s. Would you say that Hillary Clinton has not achieved anything because she “married the right man?” Because she certainly would never have had the opportunities she has now without having married Bill.

        Do you honestly think Amal married Clooney to further her career as a lawyer? Laughable.

      • Amelie says:

        Katherine:
        Thank you for your ‘service’ advocating for women’s rights. I think that this work and the successes cost alot of you and your feminist sisters…I am concerned that women have yet to earn true equality with men and that younger generations of women do not know the history of the movement and are not moving forward to complete ‘the work.’

      • oneshot says:

        @ GNAT – word.

      • Bridget says:

        How is this even a discussion about feminism? The topic was “why are people such d!cks about Amal Clooney”. Not the ERA, not the wage gap.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I don’t know, Bridget, it’s really quite ludicrous. If you don’t belittle Amal Clooney, you’re not a feminist, because she married an actor? Seems to me that this bitterness stems from an inability to let go of the way things were. Sort of a “glory days” complex. Nobody cares about feminism but them. Nobody gets feminism but them. These young girls don’t appreciate what they did as the original women’s rights warriors. Meanwhile, they’re turning off an entire generation who don’t want to be associated with this rigid, joyless, angry, judgmental point of view, and I don’t blame them. I haven’t read one coherent reason why Amal is the enemy of all that’s feminist. Just a lot of anger over feeling unappreciated.

      • Sara says:

        You’re quite naive if you think Amal’s success in corporate law/ the international law field has nothing to do with her family’s connections to Arab oil wealth (Saudis, Qataris, et al.) or her weapons-dealing uncle, people whose endowments don’t go by unnoticed in places like the UK, continental Europe, and the US. The fact of the matter is that a young, Muslim, Arab woman is a valuable asset in the field of international law, where money and power matter more than the law itself. She would not have been noticed otherwise. Is she smart? Sure, she’s smart and capable, but so are millions of women. Is she exceptionally smart? Not from what I’ve seen. In fact, she strikes me as superficially smart, and isn’t at all someone whose ‘work’ I’d seek out if I were truly interested in the field.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Sara
        So what? Who said she had to be the most intelligent person in the world, who pulled herself out of desperate poverty by her bootstraps and never accepted a dime from anybody? So she has family money. I’m sorry that bothers you. She “strikes you as superficially smart,” does she? From all of your conversations together? You’re just grasping at anything, any reason to hate her. It’s just so odd to me. I think the real reason is in your post above. You hate all the attention she’s getting since she married somebody famous. These arguments against her by you and Amelie and Katherine are so transparent and so weak.

      • Malak says:

        @Sara -So true!
        I think Clooney’s PR have been over-enthusiastic and should tone it down.

      • Lori says:

        Katherine,

        Thank you for your comments. I was too young to participate in or observe the fights associated with the women’s rights movement in the 1970′s. As I understand it, however, the goal of the feminist movement, then, and now, is to promote and facilitate equal treatment of men and women on their merits in the home, in the work place, and in educational institutions, among other settings. That assertion raises the question of the “merits” of the individual men and women in question. Amal is not immune from questioning about her credentials just because she appears to be (on the surface, at least) a successful professional woman.

        Frankly, questions about Amal’s credentials became fairly obvious to me upon a cursory review of her law firm profile shortly after the engagement. For instance, her original CV suggested that she represented Enron and Arthur Andersen as an associate at Sullivan and Cromwell following the completion of her LLM, and stated that she “clerked” for then Second Circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor. Her CV stated and (still states) that she is “representing” a number of clients, including Julian Assange, when her role in those cases has either concluded or was subordinate to more senior counsel.

        I didn’t need to do too much research to conclude that someone (?) inflated her accomplishments. I *knew* from my own experience that a very junior associate at a large Wall Street firm would never be considered to represent a large corporate client. A quick search on LEXIS confirmed that she was not, in fact, listed as the attorney of record for Enron or Arthur Andersen. Similarly, a quick Google search revealed that she was, at best, co-counsel (if not junior counsel) on most of the cases highlighted in her case profile.

        At the time, I excused the puffery (although I gave it a side-eye) because it was not clear to me that she, in fact, produced the profile. However, her professional conduct after the wedding leads me to believe that she, in fact, supports such embellishment, as part of a larger PR campaign to raise her profile in international law circles without putting in the hard work and sacrifices that would be expected of other practitioners in her field of law.

        By “PR campaign,” I am not referring to her wedding or her paparazzi photos coming in and out of sushi restaurants in Studio City. I could care less about those photos. What bothered me, most, was the dozens of paparazzi photographers that lined the entrance to her hotel in Athens when she arrived to talk about the Parthenon marbles, the photos documenting her (allegedly) confidential communications with a client (in that case, the Greek government), and the constant stream of photos of her visiting museums, drinking wine, and prancing around in haute couture to and from meetings.

        At a minimum, it was disconcerting to see photos of her in the Daily Mail in straight-off-the-runway clothing throwing her head back in laughter, as she’s listening to a joke from the Greek Prime Minister while the rest of the country is suffering from 25% (or higher) unemployment. Someone in the Greek government must have noticed that spending hundreds of thousands (?) of dollars on recovering antiquities was bad form when the country was seeking a bailout, so apparently an unnamed shipping magnate has stepped in to foot the legal bills for the country in a “gesture of patriotism.”

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/shipping-magnate-foots-the-bill-for-amal-clooney-to-represent-greece/2015/03/03/5755c1f0-c180-11e4-ad5c-3b8ce89f1b89_story.html

        WTF??? At best, this payment arrangement represents a huge conflict of interest. I cannot imagine that the shipping magnate in question expects no benefits from his generosity.

        Beyond that, the impromptu photo shoot inside the European Court of Human Rights, before she gave a rather mundane presentation on whether the Armenian genocide happened (spoiler alert: it happened), is, at best, a departure from the ordinary practices of lawyers in a courtroom setting.

        I agree that her temporary appointment at Columbia law (in the middle of a semester?) says less about her professional achievements than one might assume on the surface. However, Amal’s Columbia Law profile at least fixed the American portion of her resume, by clarifying that she was a “litigation associate” at Sullivan and Cromwell for “a few years,” and that she “worked” for then Judge Sotomayor for a semester while pursuing her LLM.

        I really don’t make a practice of writing messages on Celebitchy or other gossip sites. However, her “career,” such as it is being represented to us, is so much at odds with the lives of other public interest lawyers that I feel compelled to correct the record. The public interest lawyers (human rights lawyers?) who I know have to put in a lot of hard work and sacrifices (both financial and emotional) just to improve their clients’ lives. What I see, here, is one step away from someone sleeping with their boss to get ahead.

      • Amelie says:

        @Lori:
        Your post provides evidence of the discrepancies regarding Amal’s professional experience and calls into question the appropriateness of her lecturing at Columbia U. Law School. To add to this, I understand-from lawyers-that law school focuses on preparing lawyers to pass the bar. Since many skills are required for the successful practice of law, it is logical that this means that there is a lot of skill building that takes place after graduation and passing of the bar. Just based on this fact, it is clear that any characterization of Amal as an expert couldn’t be correct.

      • jns says:

        @Lori:

        Comments like yours are why I regularly visit celebitchy– well researched, well articulated, fair, reasoned, and feminist to boot. Thank you.

  14. manda says:

    I LOVE the coat! But I would probably never wear it for fear of it getting dirty. I work in dc, I take the metro, I like to sit down. Nope. Gorgeous, though!

  15. bettyrose says:

    This is a pretty big deal. Marrying George Clooney doesn’t get you a fancy title as an ivy league lecturer. That’s all her. And maybe she was tired of her long last name, so she changed it. All good. But it’s gonna be awkward after the divorce when she’s branded herself stateside as a Clooney. And why do I assume divorce? George Clooney. That’s why.

    • A says:

      Doubt if it wasn’t for George Clooney she’d lectured except for her office colleges .5 years work doesn’t give you that ..Clooney effect.

      • bettyrose says:

        Quick glance a Wikipedia tells me that Clooney spent two years at Northern Kentucky University, but didn’t graduate. An academic he ain’t. If it’s true that Columbia is trying to hitch itself to his wagon, I certainly hope they plan to lower their tuition, since they’ve clearly lost every ounce of prestige.

    • Sara says:

      If it were not for Clooney, Columbia would never consider Amal for this, admittedly, lightweight position.

  16. OhDear says:

    That’s great for her! Since her work doesn’t require that she show up at court all that often, she’s probably able to take her work with her when she travels. I work with people who teach law while working full-time jobs, so it’s not an issue of her taking vacations all the time.

    The fact that she’s lecturing at Columbia says a lot about how her reputation and experience – Columbia Law is highly regarded/ranked and doesn’t need to pull off stunts.

    For her personally, it seems like a good arrangement for her, since she’ll be with George when he’s filming.

    • Katherine says:

      “The fact that she’s lecturing at Columbia says a lot about how her reputation and experience – Columbia Law is highly regarded/ranked and doesn’t need to pull off stunts.”

      How naive you are. ALL schools want attention and media mention. They all compete for students because that’s how they make money. Law schools are huge money makers for their universities. And let’s don’t go overboard – NYU is fine but it’s not Harvard or Yale. It’s not even Columbia.

      I’m not saying she can’t pull together a series of lectures about human rights litigation procedure and strategies. That’s not exactly a difficult task. I’m also sure she’ll have interesting anecdotes. She’ll also get lots of help from colleagues, etc as do other professors, lecturers or whatever they are calling her.

      This says almost nothing about her actual rep in her profession. Nor does it really speak to her rather limited experience. It does say everything about her new name and what that can get you. It’s akin to hiring a lawyer who handled a high profile case and gained notoriety on the Nancy Grace Show. Like the lawyer who successfully defended Casey Anthony – except, of course, he was the winning lead attorney in a very difficult to win case.

      Why are people so easily impressed? I guess this is why PR people earn their keep.

      And I do not think George is in any way interested in political office.

      • OhDear says:

        Do you know anything about law school or the legal profession at all? NYU may not be Harvard, Yale or Columbia in terms of *undergraduate* rankings, but their law school is considered to be top notch. Law and law schools are generally huge on reputation – it’s incredibly difficult to get hired at firms or other positions if you don’t have the right credentials. Especially at a school like Columbia Law, they wouldn’t have signed her on if they thought she was just someone coasting off her husband’s name – she’s obviously done decent work in high profile cases pre-George Clooney (which – even if she’s not lead counsel – aren’t going to be given to someone who’s thought to be too inexperienced to handle). Lecturing at Columbia Law is far different from being asks to be a legal analyst for the Nancy Grace Show.

      • Bridget says:

        Are the two extremes our only options? Either vapid famewhore or the world’s best human rights attorney?

        Also I just want to point out that NYU is tops for it’s International Law program, which seems to be Amal’s chosen field, and its consistently a top 5/top 10 Law School in general.

      • OhDear says:

        @Bridget: For the record, I was trying to make the point that she’s well-respected in the field, as people were saying in previous that she was only hired because of her last name.

      • Bridget says:

        @oh dear: I didn’t see your reply when I typed mine. Your point was certainly better worded than mine!

      • Katherine says:

        I stand corrected – I misread the article. She is lecturing at Columbia not NYU. Still not as big a deal as people are making it.

        And, yes, I know law schools and the legal profession. For some 3 decades now.

        You are being very naive if you don’t understand the politics and economic realities of law schools. Of course they want “big names” to attract attention and hopefully that will translate into other benefits to the university – even more applications adds to their coffers, attracting other lecturers, donations (maybe from Clooney himself), etc. Letting her lecture on a limited topic can’t hurt anything, may prove fun and interesting for the students but it can also be very beneficial to the school. People need to stop infusing these schools with such lofty qualities as if they are above trying to stay relevant for today’s students.

        Where is this “she is well respected in her field” coming from? Before she got with Clooney she wasn’t even a known entity by those who ARE well respected in her field except in her immediate circle. Sorry but this Clooney association has given her career a huge jump start. And changing her name seems part of it. Why would a liberated, professional women “well know” and “well respected” in her career change her name after marriage? I think that question answers itself.

      • Emmet says:

        Good call – Katherine!
        Where is the mainstream media on checking AAC’s resume? Everything on her is spoonfed by the GC publicity team.

        By the way – how quickly will she get her green card? She cannot vote for GC until she does as permanent resident alien. Not before.

        Still think this is all about a political career for GC.

      • Bridget says:

        Katherine: I think that reality lies somewhere in the middle. There’s no denying that her higher profile as Amal Clooney helps her, but that won’t mean anything if she’s not competent (and that includes her lecture series at Columbia). By all appearances, she’s a reasonably talented junior associate, who’s building a nice resume for herself. Is she the most important human rights lawyer EVER? No. But neither does she appear to be lawyer Barbie (complete with Casamigos tequila in her briefcase).

      • Sara says:

        Actually, NYU is ranked higher than Columbia, which is why NYU did not hire Amal as a visiting lecturer (for the workshops in this case). However, Amal did not acquire NYU’s law degree. She acquired the much easier and less noteworthy L.L.M, a one-year degree that mainly international students pursue. As it is, hiring her is simply a stunt. I don’t see how Columbia students will benefit from her presence in any way, particularly given that she’s not the senior council in most of the cases she’s been involved in. The fact that she enthusiastically accepts these opportunities despite her limited credentials says quite a bit about the woman’s character and her opportunism.

      • lenje says:

        According to this site http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings, Columbia’s law school is ranked higher than NYU.

        As per your claim that “She acquired the much easier and less noteworthy L.L.M, a one-year degree that mainly international students pursue”, here’s the description of LLM from Harvard:

        “The one-year LL.M. (Master of Laws) program provides students who already have excellent legal training and experience – many have served as practicing lawyers, judges, diplomats, community leaders, most outside the U.S. – with broad latitude to design a course of study that will give them an expanded understanding of law and legal theory.” http://hls.harvard.edu/dept/academics/degree-programs/

  17. seesittellsit says:

    Ah yes the start of building the post-marriage US presence so George can start planning his 2020 campaign.

  18. Lahdidahbaby says:

    i want to like her but can’t get past how she’s so obviously digging the press attention. She blasts that big on-a-float-in-the-Rose-Parade smile at the paps every time she goes anywhere. Embarrassing.

    • Malak says:

      Yes, she sure does. Maybe she fell in love with the OTT attention from the media that she didn’t have before Clooney. It will get old soon and then she’ll settle down. lol

  19. EC says:

    My obsession grows. I love this outfit. I hope we get some good shots of her bringing smart-sophisticated realness to Columbia. Maybe I’ll order her book!

  20. oneshot says:

    Anyone who thinks George married her for the sake of a future political career needs a reality check – a British woman of Middle Eastern Muslim descent is not exactly your ideal political spouse anywhere in America in the 2010s. (and that says a lot more about America than it does about her)

    yeah of course there is image management going on on both ends, but I doubt this particular angle is it. And Columbia is not some university that needs celebrities to endorse it, if she’s giving lectures there as a visiting professor it is very likely legit.

    • bettyrose says:

      Oneshot – As I’ve said above, I also think an ivy league lecturer status is legit, given that they’re presumably above pandering to celebrities.

      On Georgie’s end, though, I disagree that her background will work against him. In California (where I assume he intends to launch his career), he’s only helping himself by increasing his credibility in human rights circles, and while we have racism here just like everywhere, the majority voting population would be considered “minorities” in other states, so I wouldn’t assume that prejudice falls into the same patterns as it does elsewhere in the U.S.

      • oneshot says:

        bettyrose – yeah, this is a visiting lecturer gig too, and universities are known to do that. I’m amazed by the amount of ignorance about common legal practices here, such as the fact that it’s very common for practising lawyers in many places to give guest lectures/teach alongside their practice. Or even the fact that you need a defence attorney for, you know, trials conducted according to the law.

        As for Georgie, a Palestinian Muslim wife may not be as heavily objected to in california as other parts of the US (though I remain sceptical about that), but she’s foreign on top of it. Not exactly some homegrown Jacqueline Bouvier/Maria Shriver type.

      • bettyrose says:

        Oneshot:
        I say this only as evidence of the bizarre dynamics in California. Schwarzenegger was also foreign born (with questionable English abilities well into his film career). He had star power and didn’t necessarily need a high profile wife, but he married into our country’s most powerful political family, which certainly did more to boost his political career than his already established Hollywood career. Strangely, though, he married a famous Democrat and then built a career as a (albeit moderate) Republican. Served two terms, he did, while continuing his ways as a philandering jerk.

      • oneshot says:

        bettyrose – I definitely did think of Arnie, but I still wonder about Amal’s heritage and nationality being a one-two punch that perhaps not even California might come to terms with. It’s not just the one thing, but both.

        I mean, she has already been accused of anti-Semitism in New York-based (supposedly liberal) media for conducting some inquiries into the Israel-Palestine conflict as part of her job, I can just see the smear campaigns on her if George ever tries to run for office.

      • bettyrose says:

        OneShot –
        You’re definitely right that if she gets a rep as anti-Israel, Georgie might need to distance himself from her views to run in CA. Working at Columbia should be a good test run for her compatibility with different viewpoints on Israel. But Arnie was also not entirely free of rumors of anti-semitic leanings.

      • Sara says:

        I’m sorry but you’re incredibly naive about Ivy League schools, whose many centers colleges are named in honor of despots (endowments).

      • bettyrose says:

        Sara – Please elucidate on your implication. In what way are Columbia’s endowed buildings and colleges related to Amal’s new position?

    • jwoolman says:

      She’s not Muslim. I can’t remember the name of her family’s traditional religious affiliation, but when I looked it up a while ago it was definitely not Muslim. But Americans will perceive her as one, regardless. There are other religions in the region.

  21. Louise177 says:

    It’s annoying that wives/girlfriends of a celebrity becomes a thing. Seriously the next Carolyn and John Kennedy? It reminds of George’s last girlfriend Sara. All of the sudden tabloids and blogs were painting her as a huge supermodel. When she and George broke up, she fell off the face of the Earth. Making Amal happen is annoying.

  22. Toni says:

    You’re right Helen. I always thought human rights was to defend innocent victims.
    😮

  23. SH says:

    I think one of the issues I have with how she’s being portrayed various places is the idea that there is automatically some level of saintliness attached to her job. While I think that her work is absolutely necessary and important, even more so in certain situations where her clients are unappealing and she is attempting to enforce standards around due process of law, it kind of looks like everyone she works with is paying full freight for her billable hours and expenses. Which are most likely considerable. And deservedly so. But there’s no personal sacrifice or even massively complicated unwinding of facts and circumstances going on here – these are all high-profile clients who will have (comparatively) fulsome and complete court dockets that are easily obtainable. And there’s a whole lot of work to be done after she gets the documents but that sort of review and drafting is pretty standard for attorneys. There are thousands of human rights lawyers out there toiling away at low profile cases for which they will never get paid, for clients that no one cares about. If there is saintliness for the profession itself, it should be reserved for people who are actually making a sacrifice for the work they do.

    Again, I think her work is really important and she is probably great at it and it is enough that she is a totally rad badass lawyer but I don’t think it makes her an amazing human being, in and of itself.

    re: Columbia – she might be lecturing about the process behind certain proceedings she was a part of which which would be a slide deck of background, timeline, notable laws, outcome etc which you don’t really need 20 years of experience for.

    • Bridget says:

      It’s a gossip angle. It makes headlines. Angelina Jolie gets the saint treatment too. Then again, pretty much everyone gets their jobs inflated in the gossip rags – titles like “model” “celebrity stylist” “jewelry designer” “t shirt designer” … you get the idea. When its done for someone with a real job and a real profession, though, it rings off key and that’s the problem. We take every other People Magazine and Us Weekly article with a grain of salt, why do people have such a hard time here?

  24. Tara says:

    I just don’t get why the media cares so much about George Clooney’s women. They aren’t movie stars. He is. They act like this woman is Jacki O. No disrespect to this woman and what she’s done in her career, but really just because she’s married to George Clooney people are interested in what she wears. I just don’t get it. People act like Clooney is President of show business. He’s not even a draw.

  25. Heather says:

    I am getting the pregnant vibe too, but not from the clothing. She just has a “first trimester = exhausted all the time” look on her face.

  26. boredblond says:

    Prof Cleveland is a friend and advisor to the prez, was given state dept gig…cloon raised millions for him..why the surprise? Some people ask for ambassador spots, and some people and companies ask for favors ..ooo, big shock.

    • Katherine says:

      “Prof Cleveland is a friend and advisor to the prez, was given state dept gig…cloon raised millions for him..why the surprise? Some people ask for ambassador spots, and some people and companies ask for favors ..ooo, big shock”

      Well, there it is. Business as usual. Thanks, boredblond, for the skinny.

      Maybe the posters naive enough to buy into this PR selling of Amal can get a clue. Also their naive thoughts that Ivy League schools are “above it all.” They’re not – they’re some of the worst fame chasers.

  27. Peggy says:

    George’s ego is too fragile to run for political office. Just look at the emails he sent to Amy Pascal begging for her help when MM bombed.
    His PR guy replies to everything that does not show him in the best light.
    Just asked Fabio and Steve Wynn about George.
    Why can’t he go on a vacation without Rande Gerber? Things that make you go hmm.
    It would be fun seeing him run for political office, he would not last a month.

  28. JLo says:

    When I saw the header picture, I thought “pregnant,” too. It’s the nose and face.

  29. ilovesunnydaze says:

    Regardless of whether she’s married to George she’d be doing the same things as she is now. She’s very accomplished on her own merit. She’s got great style too!

  30. lisa2 says:

    It would be wonderful if the people posting in defense of Amal would be just as passionate when it comes to any woman whose accomplishments are reduced to being PR antics or fake. But that doesn’t seem to be the case, because I have seen quite a few women who have accomplished a great deal attacked and not a word of defense has been said. But I guess when it is someone you admire the line is drawn deeper and it is fine to do that to someone you don’t like.

    Amal Clooney is not an entertainer. She is married to a man in entertainment. I think that fact is why and the only reason she is on gossip sites. She seems very accomplished.

    • BNA FN says:

      AMEN SISTER!

    • Bridget says:

      Just curious, what women are you talking about?

      • lenje says:

        They must be talking about Jolie.

      • lisa2 says:

        I didn’t mention anyone’s name.. but I’m sure your post will bring the comparisons and attacks.

        I’m always interested in how hypocritical some people are on gossip sites.. Many women are attacked on here. I was on that Cumberbatch site and it is always crazy to me how his wife if demeaned and criticized. So yes I purposefully didn’t mention names. It wasn’t necessary to be that specific. But I’m sure some will turn this into something completely different.

        Amal is lucky that so many people have discovered her. Especially since she has been around for some time. I wonder what took them so long to learn about her and what she has been doing over these many years.

      • Bridget says:

        Lisa2: I think if you frequent this site you know that the Cumberbatch posts aren’t an example of the bulk of the posters here :) .

      • Bea says:

        Well to be fair Cumberbatch’s wife only has a career on paper. Unfortunately all her projects turned out to be either collaborations and such, she has proved the crazies right about the fluffing of her resume. However you are right that it is easier to criticise women unless their accomplishments are outstanding like Amal Clooney. Women aren’t given the opportunity to be simply competent.

  31. Zombie Shortcake says:

    I am looking forward to reading something she’s written.

  32. Snowpea says:

    Oh my stars… That header pic! I thought it was a particularly haggard looking Anne Hathaway.

  33. Teri says:

    She looks like Ann Hathaway.

  34. jwoolman says:

    As far as her name change is concerned- having the choice means also being able to choose to change your name after marriage if you wish. I know plenty of “liberated and professional women” who chose to take their husband’s name for a variety of reasons (in one case, she decided to do it after several years). I would also guess that is more in line with Amal’s family and cultural expectations.

    I also must say that true equality comes when we don’t have to be “the best of the best” in order to play the game. Should I throw away my physics Ph.D. because I am not an Einstein? Or am I allowed to be like the vast majority of male physicists, competent enough in my field to teach and do research but not a Nobel prize winner?

    I am baffled by the things said here about Amal, especially the claims that she’s riding on George’s coat tails. She seems quite competent and was so before she met him. I’m sure she’s knowledgeable and experienced enough to give some lectures in her field and she’s more readily available to a school in the US because of her husband’s residency. It doesn’t hurt that her name has come to the attention of the US-centric media here because her husband is well known to them in an entirely different context and they can now spell her name, but if she weren’t competent then the law school wouldn’t have made the offer. I remember the lads in grad school sneering that I was asked to interview and then offered a job “only because they needed a token woman, we would have to be a black Puerto Rican woman to get a chance these days” (ignoring the fact that there weren’t enough of us females to make a dent in their chances, we were about 3% of the total) and this discussion smells like that to me. It’s true employers might have had a little more interest because I was female in those days of Affirmative Action, but if I couldn’t do the job – they would have kept on looking. The previous generation of female physicists would typically never even been admitted to grad school, had to be primarily self-taught, and had almost zero chance of getting a job although they were allowed to assist a scientist husband or relative (rarely getting official credit for their work). I had no sympathy for the whining guys at all. I had a grand total of two interviews and one job offer, I don’t think I was getting more than my share. More likely I would be running into people like my grad school department chairman, who would never have hired a woman for the faculty (finding some convenient excuses), and barely tolerated us even as students just so he could tally up the number of women and blacks for the Affirmative Action people.

    Anyway- I am really tired of people assuming that women get opportunities only because of the man they sleep with, which seems to be a recurring theme on CB for anybody who is not unconditionally beloved. It’s insulting. And may I say, a very male attitude ….

    • Bea says:

      Truer words have never been spoken my friend, or written it this case.

    • Sara says:

      The woman has been privileged her entire life, so there is really no comparison.

    • Dal says:

      This is the best post I’ve read all day- thank you for sharing your perspective- I’m jealous of your brain!

    • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

      I think it’s funny that the only women cited as feminist heroes were women who–for all the good that they did do–were concerned only with women just like themselves. I guess that’s why today the only women who qualify as ‘good’ feminists are the ones who are exactly like the people judging them.

  35. moo says:

    I’m more interested that she’s going to lecture at Columbia rather than wondering if her outfit makes her look knocked up. it doesn’t, if i were to comment on that.

  36. Upshot says:

    Mr. Bean always gets the hoi polloi rattled. Here, though, his little coat is cute.

  37. Nimbolicious says:

    I don’t know about the validity of her credentials or how smart/accomplished she actually is. What I object to is the arduous effort to sell us all a very weird bill of goods. We are all being really, really encouraged to view AC as the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I’m not really sure why. It’s the nonstop pep rally for the new Mrs. Clooney that does the most to obscure what she’s really about. All I see are outfits, comments about the outfits, mugging for the camera and carefully crafted photo ops and “statements” designed to promote the Clooney brand. As long as she’s married to this guy, we ain’t never gonna get a glimpse of the true Amal……

  38. katy says:

    Amal Clooney just filed a cast before the UN to get former Philippine president Gloria Arroyo released from “hospital arrest”. This is a president who plundered the government coffer and under whose administration the country saw the biggest massacre of journalists in Maguindanao.
    Human Rights my ass, Amal!

    • Elly says:

      it seems you don´t know what Human Rights are or how our modern western justice system works

      • katy says:

        I know very well how the justice system works. I understand that everyone has the right to legal representation. But if this Amal Clooney is the human rights advocate that she tries to present herself as, she wouldn’t represent a human rights violator herself.

  39. aqua says:

    Let me show some support for Amal. She has neither said or has done anything to deserve the kind of hate that she get on any gossip site.All she did was marry GC and because of that reason she gets picked apart and vilified. I like that she just keeps moving on with her career that she went to school for and has worked very hard to earn as oppose to people who are just famous for nothing more that taking selfies all day.

  40. Sandy says:

    I saw her last week in New York having lunch with someone I now realize was Sarah Cleveland. She is very beautiful in person, much more so than many of her photographs show. Amazing skin, and very tall. I still want to like her, but then days later, more of the pictures of her that say “Look at me! Look at me!” Please, put it to rest. Also she has a nice resume, but as others have noted, a lot of it is owed to her wealthy background, and now George’s influence. Also, I can’t wait to read the students’ critique of her.

  41. original kay says:

    Say what you will, Amal earned her degree. She’s earned her place, her right to practice law and yes, teach it if the school deems her qualified.
    it has nothing to do with her marriage- why anyone would want to take away this woman’s accomplishments, that she earned, is beyond me.

    I don’t care for how the wedding, etc, was handled, because it was way out of drama control IMO.

    But that has absolutely nothing to do with what Amal earned with her own intelligence and perseverance.

    • original kay says:

      And don’t get me started on the right to fair trail and adequate defense. Everyone should have that right (Raif Badawi is a prime example).

      Know why? because people can be innocent. Just because the media slants info and judges, does not mean it’s the law. And you never know, it could be you some day who needs the benefit of the doubt and a fair trial.

      So people don’t have to like whom she defends.

      /end rant