I’ve always cared a lot about what I wear. Not necessarily because I’m obsessed with looks, but because I like clothing and it makes me feel good. However, as I’ve begun to get into the legal world, I’ve realized how limited I am in terms of what is and isn’t acceptable, and the issue stems far past what clothing is professional and what is not.

Like any other teenage girl thinking of going to law school, I wanted to be Elle Woods. I always pictured myself walking into a courtroom in a pink suit and wowing everyone with my legal skills. I know that "Legally Blonde" is not reality, but that doesn’t mean I couldn’t have a little Elle in me.

I started watching "What Not to Wear" at a young age. I didn’t know too much about fashion, but I was fascinated with the expertise that stylists Stacy and Clinton brought to the table. Every week, they took someone who didn’t dress well and transformed their wardrobe.

Over the years, of course, I’ve learned not to judge people on their attire. A person is not their clothing and that’s fine, but I also learned a lot from this show. For one, Stacy and Clinton were always explaining how a person’s appearance affects the way people see them. If they constantly wear dark colors, others will be put off. If they wear crazy outfits, others will be afraid to approach them.

Many of these people felt attached to their wardrobes because they didn’t want to lose something that made them feel like themselves. Stacy and Clinton were so great at telling them how to still be themselves in more appropriate attire. People who liked to wear rainbow hair and tutus could still wear color by wearing floral prints and colored blazers. People who liked sweatpants because they were comfy could find nice fitting jeans or dresses that were just as comfy.

The point is, Stacy and Clinton found ways to make people fashionable and approachable. They stressed the fact that your wardrobes sends a message about who you are. However, they always stressed to stay true to yourself. If you love big necklaces, then wear big necklaces. If you love sequins, you can wear sequins.

In college, I read a book by my idol, Kirsten Gillibrand. A New York State Senator, Kirsten wrote a chapter about her struggles with figuring out how to dress for her job. Her size fluctuated so often that she couldn’t find certain clothing, and she didn’t know what was expected of her.

She said that over time, she found that she had to wear dull colors like gray and navy, because it allowed her to fit in. But what’s worse about it is that she felt that wearing anything brighter made the men in Congress unable to take her seriously. They focused more on her appearance than her her policies.

She was constantly hearing male members of Congress tell her she looked cute in her feminine colors, or that they could tell by her new pants that she’d gained weight. Essentially, she explained that you can’t dress too flamboyantly in her profession if she wants to get her job done.

And it's not just her, or just Congress. The situation is the same for most women in politics. I mean, is Hillary Clinton not known for her pantsuits? I always hear people talking about what pantsuit she's going to wear in the next debate. Okay, but what about what she actually has to say at the debate? What about her stances?

This was such an upset to me. I had, and still have, this dream of being a boss lawyer with a great wardrobe. And here was my idol telling me that sexism in the workplace is so bad that I can’t wear my hot pink or my royal blue because my colleagues won’t pay attention to my ideas and the things I have to say.

So I’ve come to this standstill between self-expression and conservatism. Stacy is telling me to dress in what makes me feel strong and confident and myself while Kirsten is telling me to dress in what will allow me to be taken seriously.

Why can't it be both?

I don't really have an answer. I just wanted to present my dilemma. Unfortunately, we live in a world where female professionals are still belittled to the point where we focus more on their wardrobe than their opinions.

When I was in Albany on Thursday, I met an NYS Supreme Court judge who was wearing a black dress with a hot pink blazer, and I had to ask. I introduced myself and then told her that I was concerned about what I had read in Kirsten's book. She told me that she understands, but doesn't necessarily agree. When in front of jurors, she wears black or navy, but in her office, she wears whatever she wants. She told me that while she doesn't want to be distracting, she also loves bright colors and intends to keep them in her wardrobe.

So I guess we're getting there. As determined as I am to break the stereotype, it's not really for me to break. I can wear whatever I want, but it's up to my peers to see past my attire and see what real substantive qualities I bring to the table.

I'll probably wear a black pantsuit when I'm going on my first job interviews, but you can be sure as hell that once I'm in a position of power, I will be rocking hot pink like no courtroom has seen before.