The recent social media trend of various forms of ‘math’ – first ‘girl math’, then ‘boy math’ – now has a new entrant: ‘lawyer math’. Originating perhaps as a way to spin the tedious realities of our lives into something slightly more humorous, these mathematical monikers have taken on a life of their own, humorously illustrating some of the enduring stereotypes and experiences of different professional and social groups.
The term “girl math”, for instance, has been used to depict a range of behaviors typically observed with spending, such as the idea of turning a ‘preloaded Starbucks card into a free drink tomorrow’ or the sense of achievement from profiting by returning a previously purchased item.
‘Boy math’, on the other hand, attracted a wide range of interpretations highlighting some contentious socio-economic issues. For instance, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar used the term to criticize the widening gap between minimum wage and cost of living. Others expressed similar frustration regarding business transactions that do not add up or fears that seem disproportionate to personal wealth.
But of all these coined phrases, ‘lawyer math’ resonates with a particularly poignant note. As pointed out by Twitter user @_adrxante, ‘lawyer math’ is when one spends 12 hours in the office but somehow only ends with 8.6 billable hours. This encapsulates a powerful image of inefficiency and time wasted that doesn’t contribute to billable targets – a depressing reality experienced by many legal professionals.
Plenty of other tweets offer even more dreary examples of ‘lawyer math’. One user @CanPanicNow suggests that lawyers may calculate the relative brevity of retirement after years of stressful work and payments, while others lament over delays in legal processes or existential concerns.
Unsurprisingly, ‘lawyer math’ has not seemed to spark joy among the legal fraternity. The admission by some lawyers of not being good at math is likely not just an excuse for their uncomfortable reality but perhaps a testament to the ironic and often gloomy nature of ‘lawyer math’.
While these forms of ‘math’ are certainly not revolutionary, they provide an avenue in which we can take a humorously self-deprecating look at our personal and professional lives amidst our increasingly complex society.