What women's rights look like when the two sides come together as one.
What women's rights are when women are no longer manipulated by party rhetoric.


Sunday, July 29, 2012

Buzzing Bees-----

Cynthia Ruccia



Above is THEM!!!!

Below is ME----triumphant!!



Just call me Hannah Post!!!  Whassup? Well, here's the story. For having the unmitigated GALL to go after Virginia Sole-Smith for embedding herself into Mary Kay Inc in order to write a hit piece, she and her "group" decided to go after me like a swarm of angry bees!! Now I am about to turn 60, and this particular piece of the younger generation makes me feel a bit like an old fogey. I rarely think that things were better "in the good old days," but THIS little tete-a-tete...........



You see, I have been with Mary Kay 28 years. I chose this kind of work after having my first child so that I could make the kind of money I wanted to make but still be able to be the kind of mother I wanted to be. It was an odd turn of events for me at the time. I was an ivy-league educated musician, and I was making a nice income being my own boss in the music world. However, it became pretty clear to me that my music life wasn't going to be very compatible with my goals as a parent. And then the Mary Kay opportunity came along. I looked at it as nothing more than a business opportunity that promised to resolve the work/family issues as no other company did. And in my case, with alot of sweat equity, setbacks, etc., I have been able to sustain a very nice living for myself over the past 28 years.

As I read Sole-Smith's hit piece, it became pretty obvious to me that she was using the Mary Kay company to make a name for herself. She found a group of disgruntled former Mary Kay people and based her entire piece on their point of view. Now let me say this: the Mary Kay business isn't for everyone. In fact, 90% of business startups in ANY industry fail within their first year. Mary Kay is no different. However, we have alot to offer many many people, and there are many many successful Mary Kay folks who have done well.

My argument is that her article was 1) way off base when it came to the facts, 2) lacked an equal point of view from those who have succeeded, and 3) when the few successful folks were cited, she used one of the most heinous, sexist memes out there to make her point. That meme? That women are stupid and naive and in fact too stupid and too naive to make responsible decisions for themselves. And then she went off the deep end and accused Mary Kay of bankrupting people and destroying marriages. I mean really.........

Marriages would have ended without Mary Kay, since 50% of marriages in the U.S. end up in divorce. It would follow that the Mary Kay sales force would not be immune from this statistic. And no one, I repeat NO ONE is stuck in Mary Kay spending money and throwing it down a black hole. The Mary Kay company has a 90% buy back GUARANTEE so people can get out of the business with their finances intact. Like I keep saying, find me a business with that kind of guarantee!!!

None of these facts emerged in her article, and so I decided to defend my company. I expected to have some blowback, but I am not accustomed to the behavior that the internet has brought out in folks. Well, that's not exactly true-----I remember the death threats I got in 2008 for speaking up about the sexism, the hatemail, the severed friendships. All for standing up for my beliefs that sexism is wrong. But I had decided that that behavior was an isolated event (all evidence to the contrary pointing out I was wrong on that score).

So, I have been barraged for telling the truth once again. My friend T points out that when today's internet savvy (and social network savvy) young folks can't win on the facts, they resort to ridicule, name calling, and character assassination. And then wonder why we can't have a more civil discourse to get things done. So what if they were wrong on the facts? It happens. But according to them I am a loser for not being #1 in the company, a slacker because I just got done a few months ago with almost two years of 4 surgeries and 32 rounds of chemotherapy for my second bout with breast cancer (guess I should have pushed myself even harder than I did---LOL!!), a liar about my success, a no one who no one would ever deign to listen to, and ------ta da--------they said------SHOW ME YOUR TAX RETURNS!!!! And if I don't, there must be something to hide. LOL!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!

From my angle, they are wasting their misery and energy. If they couldn't admit to themselves that it didn't work out because they weren't meant for that kind of work, then clearly it is everyone else's fault that they didn't make it. And this is one of the flaws I see in this next generation in some of the people. The blame is always on someone else. And they surely don't know how to debate a good point. And if you have a "gotcha" moment at their expense, they will go after you like a pack of angry bees. A sad waste of energy. We could certainly use some of their positive energy and smarts to help try to solve some of the pressing problems we have in the U.S. And I am hoping that they will grow up and out of this ugly phase. Otherwise, we are doomed. People can disagree agreeably------we do it all of the time. But it looks more and more like disagreeing agreeably is threatening to become a dying art.

Anyways-----my final point dovetails very neatly with the kinds of things this blog has been writing about. I called Harper's magazine to discuss this article with one of the editors. I spoke with someone who informed me that the reason why this article was published was because the new editor is a woman. YAY!!!! And she wanted to remedy the absolutely awful gender imbalance that exists in publication after publication. We all know the drill. Only about 18% of articles have female bylines.  I was thrilled to hear that. HOWEVER, I wanted to know if they were aware about all of the inacuracies in the article. I could forgive them if they were unaware. But if they printed this article to poke a hole in one of the few companies today that really helps women because it was fun watching women fight one another, they could just cancel my subscription. I've gotten that magazine for awhile and had never seen this done before. I was told (music to my ears) that the powers that be at Harpers have ended up being very upset with what this author wrote, and they thought that they had made a mistake putting the article in. It wasn't up to their standards in terms of what they expect from a journalistic piece and it was entirely too sensational. Maybe there is a future for Sole-Smith at the National Enquirer.......

I am hopeful for no good reason that the obnoxious pack-of-wolves' behavior of the young folks on the internet is just a passing phase. And because of that, I am at the ready with a can of good old whoop ass---------a can of bee repellent!!

80 comments:

  1. ah yes. I remember the name calling, hate mail, etc. of 2008. It sure is tempting to put these haters in the same box as the Obots who call all of us racists 24/7 because our skin is white. But darn, I won't go there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Omg! They asked for a tax return?!!! That is hilarious! Well, just as long as they don't find out about your Swiss bank account. Whew! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You never sent me the non mary kay email for me to send you mine. I think it is funny you mention that, but you didn't mention your offer that you would send them to anyone who sent their first. I offered, and still have not received an e-mail to send them to.

      Delete
  3. Cynthia - I've noticed that publishers, including female publishers, love to post stories that stir up hate because they get a lot of hits and a lot of posts, which translates into lots of web page visitors which in turn allows the owner of the website to charge more for their online ads. So, they are just playing the game and making more money for whomever their employer is. They have sadly gotten to the point where they don't care if inaccuracies, lies or flat our nonsense and drama are all the piece is made up of. All they care about is the increase in website hits which means more online ad dollars.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it's always about the bottom line, and sexist cat fights sell!!

      Delete
  4. Omg! Tax return?!!! Hilarious! Well at least they didn't find out about your Swiss bank account. Whew! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. or my Cayman Islands tax shelter........

      Delete
  5. http://twitter.com/lovelalola/status/229695008968699904

    I loathe women who fail and blame & bully others for their own lack of integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think a lot of this foolishness is aided and abetted by the shallowness of too many peoples' thinking. People are not reading and thinking. They are grabbing sound bites and small pieces of information. Then their reaction becomes a chain reaction to misinformation. Reading and thinking prevents this.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cynthia, yes- your tax return shows exactly how much money you have made in your Mary Kay business for the last 28 years. Since you're independent, you need to fill out a schedule C. That says how much money you are making. That is cut and dry and very honest. Since you are having terrible medical issues, what medical benefits are you using? Not MK benefits!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To the very brave and courageous "Anonymous" who is not willing to stand up and reveal who they are and stand behind their comments, let me say this. Yes, I know exactly what is on my tax returns, I never said I didn't. Do you know how to read?

      Also, I don't know any entrepreneur who starts and runs a business who doesn't need to resolve their health insurance issues since they must provide that for themselves. An Independent sales force member with Mary Kay is in that same position. Why anyone would feel bitter because the Independents don't receive health insurance is beyond me. It is stated right up front that that is the case, and if someone needs company-provided health insurance, Mary Kay isn't for them. There is total transparency on that issue.

      Go somewhere else "Anonymous" to grind your ax. You do not understand the reality of Mary Kay and your pitiful attempts to put it down are just that, pathetic. Why don't you use your intelligence to do something uplifting? And develop some courage while you're at it......

      Delete
  8. But Cynthia, you DID lie about your success. You claimed on Sole-Smith's Facebook page that you made six figures. You were proven incorrect by the fact that your name has failed to appear in Mary Kay's Magazine, Applause, which lists the top 500 commission earners in the company. Not even the top earners on that list are making six figures, much less anyone who ISN'T on it.

    That was a pretty straightforward scenario if you ask me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But Scrib----this is where the inaccuracies occur. First of all, I move tons of products and have tons of customers. This figure is not reflected in the director commissions. You cannot add up someone's earnings based on the commissions on the director scoreboard. That is where your figuring goes awry. Anyone who knows anything about Mary Kay knows that. I know that you naysayers think you know everything there is to know based on flat statistics and sour grapes people, but that is where your entire argument falls apart.

      Having been in Mary Kay as long as I, I have a great inventory to service my many many clients, many of them of longstanding years. My inventory has been built over a number of years. Sooooo, you can't come to accurate conclusions based on the numbers to which you are referring.

      Not meaning to be cruel, but you look pretty stupid making the claims you make. And to imply that because I had to pull back my unit activity to survive a second onslaught of breast cancer didn't mean that I couldn't maintain and service my customer base up to my own high standards.

      The smart people in Mary Kay understand to work all avenues of income so that if one isn't going well at the moment, another will. I certainly hope you aren't one of those snarky cruel imbeciles who will berate me for bringing up the fact that I had cancer and needed to adjust my working habits to cope with 32 rounds of chemo and 4 surgeries.
      Anyone who does that has no soul. YOU trying living through that. And I will tell you that I KNOW I made the money because I still was responsible for paying my share of two weddings and finishing up paying for college for my younger son who graduated with no student loan debt thanks to my Mary Kay income.

      I appreciate you commenting, but you are as wrong as rain. your argument and the arguments of Sole-Smith are shallow and ill-researched. And THAT is why the people at Harper's are realizing they made a mistake publishing her piece.

      Delete
    2. Having been in Mary Kay as long as I, I have a great inventory to service my many many clients, many of them of longstanding years. My inventory has been built over a number of years.

      If you have enough to service your "many, many" clients, that's one heck of an inventory. If it was built up over a "number of years", that means you have obsolete product on your shelves that didn't fly off them while it was still in the Look Books.

      Here's a business tip for you that you won't get at any weekly team meeting or even Seminar: The fastest way to increase profits is to minimize the amount of money locked up in inventory. Every manufacturer I have ever worked for (among them, Intel, Motorola, Honeywell, and Philips) stressed keeping inventory down to keep profits up.

      Delete
    3. Lazy----I don't need you to tell me how to run my business. I understand the "just in time" concept. My way of running my business has worked splendidly for me and I couldn't be happier. Come back and give me advice when you've achieved a greater success than I have (and there are many who have, actually). Then I'll listen to your fabulous wisdom.

      Delete
  9. Why is it "hilarious" to prove income claims? I find the Schedule C to be an accurate account of profitability in any business.

    MK distributors are known for inflating earnings, and not counting "unbillable" hours that are a necessary part of doing business. So I'm sure you can understand why this skeptic would want proof.

    And playing the cancer card? Not cool. But that does illustrate a valid point. You better have a husband or another job which includes medical benefits or you are screwed. Been there, done that, wouldn't wish it on anyone.

    Unfortunately Cynthia, the issues raised by Virginia Sole-Smith and the Harper's article do exist. Simply denying their presence does not make them go away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok Anonymous---I see you are still wanting to lob bombs behind your spineless anonymous mask.But I shall address your concerns:

      1) I agree with you that Schedule C is accurate.

      2)I disagree with you that Mary Kay consultants (we are NOT distributors----that is a legal term that is inaccurate) "are known for inflating earnings" and not counting "billable hours." Where do you have the proof to make such a claim? If our sales force has a milllion consultants for instance, you would need to make a scientific sampling to make such a claim. That there may be people who do such things is without doubt, but to make a blanket statement that the entire sales force is that way is ridiculous. Where is the proof? Where are your numbers? The reason you cannot answer that question is that you can't. As far as I know, there have been no commissioned studies backing up your claims.

      3) ah yes----playing the cancer card. Anonymous, you are truly a cruel, hard-hearted person to not cut someone some slack for having had breast cancer twice. This came up in my discussions because someone wanted to knowe why I didsn't appear on a certain scoreboard. The real answer (because I am an honest forthright person unlike you who must hide behind "anonymous" and lob bombs with no responsibility)is that I was fighting for my life and had to adjust my working habits accordingly. I wish that it hadn't happened----believe me. And I was able to work some. But I had to cut back on some areas of my work in order to survive the surgeries and chemo. Have you ever had to go through such an ordeal? Likely not or you would find some compassion for those who have. I was simply stating it as fact, not looking for sympathy. Fortunately for me, I had the kind of work where I COULD cut back and still have a job awaiting me when the worst was over. I was able to make money during that time, pay college tuition for my younger son who graduated without any student loans thanks to my Mary Kay income, and pay for my share of two weddings. I am grateful to the Mary Kay business for making all of that possible while I was ill. And anonymous, you need to be ashamed of yourself for your lack of compassion. I only hope hyou don't have to face what I did with people ready to come out of the woodwork and try to shame you for it. Shame on you!!!!

      Delete
    2. I still want to know whose insurance paid for all that cancer treatment, because Mary Kay does not provide medical insurance benefits.

      I'm inclined to think that your husband's job played a considerably larger role in this scenario than you may be willing to admit. The least you could do is give his hard work/job the acknowledgement it deserves.

      Delete
    3. OMG How could that possibly be any of YOUR business? So RUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    4. If one is going to openly and repeatedly use their weepy cancer tales and outrageous income claims as a way of praising Mary Kay, Anne, then the public is entitled to ask questions regarding such.

      Cynthia claims that Mary Kay made everything possible. If MK does not offer insurance benefits (and as such, a means to pay for surgeries and chemotherapy) then this is a false claim. The insurance benefits had to have come some somewhere, so I'm suspecting the husband played a major role.

      Delete
    5. sheesh-----ANOTHER spineless "anonymous" making bone-headed statements on my blog. sigh-----so many many wimpy people from pinktruth who can say anything they want as long as no one knows who they are.

      For the record-----show me, oh brave anonymous, where I ever said that Mary Kay paid for my medical bills. And I will give you a tip-----NEVER demean someone for a disease that is causing them to have to fight for their life. You should be ashamed of yourself and your mother should be ashamed of herself for teaching you such empty values. And I have never made false income claims. Someone in your warped circle made these false claims about me. Get your facts straight!! But then of course, you don't have to. You are the brave anonymous who can say anything you want because you are too afraid to out yourself for who you are. Amazing......you might want to try getting out from behind your computer and into the world a little bit.

      Delete
  10. I just want to make sure I understand...you are saying that you had sufficient inventory on your shelves to service your customers? So you did not have to place inventory orders large enough to get you onto the Queens Court of Sales? This is how you were able to fly under the Applause and Queen's Court radar yet still net six figures for the year? Holding inventory on your shelves is a cost of doing business - it IS debt in ANY small business or large business for that matter. This would net against your revenues as a cost of doing business and reduce the amount you could claim as NET income for the year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stevie----you are right. What is the scandal in these innocuous facts? While I was ill, I lived off the fat of my business. I have been on the Court of Sales many times-----I can't even remember how many times. But my inventory saved the day for me this past couple of years, and although I still ordered while I was ill, I had a sufficient backlog to service my customers. That's the long and short of it. You must be so busy demonizing Mary Kay that you can't see the great scenarios possible for those of us in the business where it is working.

      Delete
    2. The only "great scenario" I see here is that you have a huge, obsolete inventory on your shelves. I am in no way demonizing Mary Kay. The beautiful thing is that Mary Kay does that for themselves and makes it very easy for an intelligent, thoughtful person to ask simple questions about the Mary Kay business. I'm sorry if those questions threaten you.

      Delete
    3. Stevie----Your questions hardly threaten me-----they make me laugh!!!! I have NO obsolete inventory on my shelves and my customers receive only current inventory. Most of our products have a three year shelf life, legally by FDA standard. I forgot to put that in my comment, but I figured that since you have nothing better to do, you'd come back with that one and I was right!!! Sorry----ROFLMAO.......

      you might think yourself thoughtful and intelligent, but you really don't come across that way imho. You just sound disgruntled and a whole lot of sour grapes. Don't you have anything better to do with your time than to dump on Mary Kay? That just seems like a ginormous timezapper, again IMHO. If you consider all of the time and mental energy you put into dumping on Mary Kay, you could have opened up a business you like and made some money. Instead, you're giving your dissatisfaction, "intelligence" and creativity away for free and getting nothing in return for it. Again---life is too short-----why are you wasting your time on something so inconsequential and not on the things that could make you feel good about life and about yourself......

      Delete
  11. When you're recruiting, do you tell people 90% of all Mary Kay businesses will fail in the first year? Do you train your downline to tell potential recruits this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all, I don't refer to my unit as a downline. That term isn't used much within the Mary Kay world.

      Secondly, I often tell my prospects (and I was on the National Court of Recuiting this year) that this business may not be for them, but they won't know that unless they try it. And if they come in and discover that it is not for them, they need to feel good about themselves for trying something new and that they will learn something valuable that they can carry to their next career. I have had a number of ex-consultants come back to me and thank me for teaching them such and such that made them successful in what turned out to be the career they were meant for. And I ALWAYS discuss the 90% buyback and have never ever stood in the way of anyone sending their inventory back. I've even helped pack it up in a few instances.

      Delete
    2. Don't 85% of all new small businesses fail? Why should Mary Kay be any different? Why is it the fault of the company that some people just can't hack it? Sheesh.

      Delete
    3. It's an honest question. I was never in Mary Kay, but I've been aggressively pitched to on more than one occasion. Nobody ever said to me, "The risk of failure is high" or anything like that. They said things like "the product sells itself!" and "It isn't work!" and all kinds of things like this--it was like talking to telemarketers reading from a script. So my apologies if I don't have the vocabulary of your company down. I was not ever affiliated with it. My experience with Mary Kay ladies is that they really don't listen to what I'm saying and they try to turn the conversation in weird directions.

      Good on you if you do outline the risks, but it's just not been my experience with Mary Kay ladies. Quite the contrary.

      Delete
  12. Ms. Ruccia, I have a few questions -- which, as a show of good faith, I am asking under my own name, no pseudonyms, since you have issues with anonymous/pseudonymous comments. I'll turn away from the "commissions v. product sales" discussion, and instead focus on this:

    "I called Harper's magazine to discuss this article with one of the editors. I spoke with someone who informed me that the reason why this article was published was because the new editor is a woman...I was told (music to my ears) that the powers that be at Harpers have ended up being very upset with what this author wrote, and they thought that they had made a mistake putting the article in. It wasn't up to their standards in terms of what they expect from a journalistic piece and it was entirely too sensational. Maybe there is a future for Sole-Smith at the National Enquirer......."

    1. Who was the editor with whom you spoke?
    2. Were his/her comments to you on the record?
    3. If those comments were meant as off-the-record comments, will that editor be okay with your posting them?
    4. Is this conversation with the editor the only corroboration you have for the allegation that "that the powers that be at Harpers have ended up being very upset with what this author wrote, and they thought that they had made a mistake putting the article in"?
    5. If you are unable or unwilling to provide an on-the-record source for the above-quoted comment, can you explain how that comment is not any less a "'gotcha!' moment at [someone else's] expense" than the comments from MK critics that you find so distasteful?
    6. Do you genuinely believe that when women disagree with you, it's simply because you are speaking truth to power about sexism, but the rest of us are just tools of the patriarchy? Is there no room in your fight against sexism for feminists and anti-sexists who just plain disagree with your conclusions?
    7. Is "LOL!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!" part of your professional vernacular?

    Thanking you in advance,
    Jen McAllister

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well Jen----thanks for owning up to your identity. As for your questions, I'm opting not to answer them. I am not a journalist, just a blogger, and I don't fancy myself to be a journalist. And as such, I can only tell you that yes indeed, that conversation happened just as I laid it out, and I have no need to corroborate what I said to you or anyone else. I know you will feel disappointed not to get your questions answered, and I am sorry for that. I can only hope that you will not throw a tantrum and try to berate me, call me names, and try to assassinate my character because you are not getting what you want from me.

      I am optimistic that since you had at least the spine and courage to use your own name that you might actually be able to exhibit a few positive character traits as well for being rebuffed. My apologies for not answering your questions.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for responding civilly. No, I won't throw a tantrum, try to berate you, call you names, or try to assassinate your character. (Of course, we might have different standards for what constitutes "character assassination," but that's another conversation entirely.) And I certainly recognize that your refusal to answer my questions is your prerogative -- just as it is my prerogative to remain skeptical about your claims without independent evidence to verify them.

      Delete
    3. Well, that conversation told ME all I needed to know. Yes, I spoke with Harper's, but I'm not going to tell you the details because I don't have to corroborate what I said to you or anyone else. Classic.

      Hot tip: People who can back up claims do not fear providing proof of such. People who CANNOT back up claims generally refuse to provide proof, instead playing the Dodge-the-Issue game and spitting out empty answers that hopefully will pacify the at-home audience and get them to stop from asking troublesome questions.

      Here's the $100,000 question, Ms, Ruccia: Are you going to come clean regarding this whole "I spoke with a Harper's editor" claim or do I need to contact Harper's myself to get the answers I want?

      Delete
    4. I'm not sure that I agree that the response to the question was civil. It doesn't really look like you're interested in a well-reasoned discussion.

      To respond with, "I hope you don't throw a tantrum" is at the very least exceedingly condescending.

      Delete
    5. Well, sure. My definition of "civil" has an arguably low threshhold. ;)

      Delete
    6. Scrib----in answer to your intemperate tantrum, be my guest and call Harper's. That is certainly your right and actually, I hope you do call them. They need corroboration that the article they published was written with the weakest of arguments. They will understand that even better once they speak to you.

      Delete
    7. and to the very very courageous "Anonymous," if my response was condescending, check out the condescending questions. I figure that if someone wants to ask me thpse kind of questions, it's best to answer in the same tone because maybe that's all they understand. Once aqin, people can snark, insult, etc., and expect to be taken seriously since they don't have the bravery to identify themselves. Whatever, Anonymous.......

      Delete
    8. Only in Mary Kay is a desire for more information considered a tantrum; as such, I truly weep for all those potential recruits who get deceived by your "I make six-figures" lie.

      It's disturbing how one could work for a company whose motto begins with "God First" and yet be completely okay with engaging in such blatant deception.

      Delete
    9. Ms. Ruccia, I think that we may indeed be communicating on a different wavelength. Because Scrib's question strikes me as neither intemperate nor a tantrum. I have to say, I'm a little less than thrilled to see a self-described women's rights advocate describe her opponents' arguments in such infantilizing terms. *That's* the sort of behavior I generally expect from sexists, not from my sister advocates on either side of the political spectrum. It's disappointing, actually.

      Delete
    10. I have to say, you do not make your case in a way that is at all sympathetic to you, Ms. Ruccia. Your sarcasm seems much more like a tantrum than anything else said here. You don't have much credibility when you stoop to that level, no matter what anyone does.

      Delete
    11. To our brave anonymous and to Jen and who has the courage to identify herself, and to Scrib----this "conversation" is getting a little ridiculous. Scrib----you made demands, not requests. I think that in a decent conversation, there are more questions and fewer demands. And you continue to throw out accusations with no basis in facts whatsoever. It just proves my point that you have completely lost the argument on the facts. Completely.

      To my brave brave hearted Anonymous above, I do not care if I appear sympathetic to you or not. I have no idea who you are, and you have alot of nerve hiding behind a rock with your anonymity, lobbing insults under the cloak of darkness, and thinking that you appear erudite. You only appear mouselike, stupid, and actually rather silly. There is no having a reasonable conversation with someone who cannot identify themselves.

      As for you Jen, you can really cut the garbage about the women's rights insults. You also have lost the argument about the facts concerning Mary Kay, and because you have, you are continuing to resort to name calling and ridicule, something you had assured me wasn't in your repertoire. I have no proof whatsoever that you give a damn about women's rights. I have devoted my entire life to this pursuit on all levels. And honestly, it doesn't pay for people like you and me to argue with each other about who is more feminist or who is more pro women's rights. Where does that get us? Only stuck more in our current morass of low empowerment which works for those in power. That way we are divided and squabbling amongst ourselves. I do not know what your connection to Sole-Smith is, but I stand by my original premises-----she wrote a piece flimsy on the facts, poorly researched, poorly balanced in giving all sides to her premise, and she used her embed position in a prejudiced fashion to try to disgrace an organization that has done more for women than most. And Harper's has regretted the decision to print her piece. How about you stop trying to question and point fingers about who is the biggest feminist. It gets us nothing-------absolutely nothing....

      Delete
    12. You may not care what I think. I could make up a fake name just as easily as posting anonymously, you know, and then you'd have less chance to mock me, though you'd be just as unaware who I am. You don't know the first thing about why I choose not to reveal my identity. But you are a sarcastic one, since you don't mean I'm really "brave." But I didn't insult you--I told you how you appear to me. That's a matter of my subjective perspective.

      You can speculate all you want. But all this really does is to convince me that Sole-Smith was onto something. Certainly none of this gives me any warm-hearted thoughts about Mary Kay, Inc.

      Incidentally, your blog did come up on a Google search of "Mary Kay Harper's article," though I tend not to click Google links because of a Google virus problem I'm having, so you may not see the referral in the blog stats. People who just want to look into things can run across you that way. And you don't come off so well.

      We'll see if Harper's prints any retractions. It's a very well respected magazine, and if what you say is true, I expect them to apologize for a cover story as flimsy as you say it is, but really, I'm not holding my breath.

      Delete
    13. I don't understand anon why you think I care what you think about how I come off. That is your singular obsession. And you are right----I have no idea why you would comment anonymously. I just think, IMHO, that if someone is going to pointedly criticize and demand, that they at least ought to identify themselves. At least if you did, you might actually get a more honest response from the person from whom you are awaiting a response.

      You and I are actually in agreement about Harper's. I don't expect any "retractions." I've been a subscriber for a long time and Harper's doesn't retract anything. However, I'm considering cancelling my subscription anyways. I still found the entire premise of the article insulting, and I really don't want to pay to be insulted in such a shoddy fashion.

      The problem is that Sole-Smith wrote a lopsided article. And since much of her research was simply quoting pinktruth, she owed it to her readers to present the other side of the argument in a respectful and equally balanced fashion. This she didn't do, and as such, she has opened herself up to much ridicule. I read extensively and always have, and I was shocked to see such a piece in Harper's. They rarely if ever publish a piece so thoroughly prejudiced. I just called them on it, and they agreed with me and informed me that the editorial staff, as far as this article went, wasn't in agreement about whether to publish it and that there was real discord among them because they were aware of how sensational the piece was.

      If you think I wrote about this on my blog to promote myself, that is wrong. I don't thirst for the limelight. I've had enough of it over the years, and I don't really like it.

      I completely disagree with you. Sole-Smith was onto one thing and one thing only and that was to promote herself. The negatives about the Mary Kay business are consistent with any business's negatives. They are not exceptional or sensational in any regard. Trust me----I've looked for the downside for years, and there really isn't any exceptional downside to Mary Kay. Sole-Smith's conclusions were extremely naive. But her motivation was age old.....self promotion.

      Delete
    14. One glaring negative of the Mary Kay business opportunity is that you are not able to advance to higher ranks or positions within the company unless you recruit other consultants or distributors. This practice makes it so that you now take your customers and turn them into your competition. I don’t know of any other business – apart from MLM, direct sales, etc. – that encourages this behavior and in fact makes your advancement dependent upon it. Why in the world would anyone think that turning their best customers into competition is a sound business decision? It’s NOT, and that is why the products are hard to sell – because the market is completely saturated with consultants.

      So no, I do not agree that “The negatives about the Mary Kay business are consistent with any business's negatives.” Above I have detailed a big negative that is absolutely not consistent in any other businesses. I have never been approached by Walmart, Target, Sephora, my grocery store, my dry cleaner or ANY of the other establishments I frequent and been asked if I would like to set up shop next to them and begin selling the exact same products that they are.

      Delete
  13. she and her "group" decided to go after me like a swarm of angry bees!! Now I am about to turn 60, and this particular piece of the younger generation makes me feel a bit like an old fogey.

    Cynthia -
    What do you mean "her group". I had never heard of Virginia Soles- Smith before the Harpers piece.

    I'm only asking you to prove your income claims. When the recruiting material is stuffed to the brim with information on how to make money, it's a core principal of the business.

    If I were selling a landscaping business, I would be expected to show five years of income and expense records to prove the business is worth the money I'm asking.

    But when Mary Kay directors brag about their "executive income", and are asked to prove their claims ... they whine about being bullied. They prance around the claims like Rafalca, but never get close to a direct answer.


    And as for trying to pull the "wise old crone" maneuver, I'm older than you are. I was a feminist before feminism was cool.

    And nothing is the antithesis of feminism like a business that depends on women making money by deceiving other women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lazy-----my sitemeter on this blog shows a swarm of people coming over from www.pinktruth.com, an endeavor that spends its time trying to debunk the Mary Kay business. I wish I could respond to you but I am having trouble getting on your wavelength. I would like to add, that I hardly see myself as a "wise old crone" as you say. I'm just trying to get through the day just like everyone else on this planet. and I bet if you and i met in other circumstances, we'd probably discover that we see eye to eye on many many things. Thanks for taking the time to comment

      Delete
    2. One of them was me ... I've been reading and contributing to Pink Truth since it was "Mary Kay Sucks". Saw the link there, although I also hopped over here from the NPR site.

      http://voices.yahoo.com/mary-kay-consultants-predators-pink-106774.html explains how I got pulled into the fray.

      That and having an uncle who died in poverty, being supported by his kids, because he fell for every MLM there was ...

      Delete
    3. well Lazy----I am truly sorry for your disgruntlement, truly. wish I could do something to make you feel better--------how about a free facial?? And a gift certificate so you'll have some money to spend?

      Delete
    4. I'm not disgruntled, I just dislike the MLM business model.

      If I want a facial I'll go somewhere where I'm not handed a mirror and told to do it myself, thank you very much.

      What I am trying to get an answer to is "Are you prepared to prove your claims of 6-figure income"?

      Delete
  14. Cynthia - A bunch of these people sound like stark raving hateful loonies to me. I would suggest you NOT post or send any personal information of ANY kind. Your tax return - even redacted - is not information you need to make public for any reason. These are the kind of people who will continue to make other demands even if you revealed information - release one year they want two then three etc etc. The axe they have to grind is not with you or even with Mary Kay for that matter - it is with their disappointment in their own failure and their inability to accept that someone could be successful doing something they could not do.

    Just feel sorry for them - then ignore them and move on.

    My .02 worth of advice ;)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cynthia,

    I am dismayed with your visceral, combative response to my comments. Why the hostility? I would have welcomed that mature dialog you referred to earlier.

    I would ask that you simply prove the income claims you speak of sans toxic insults.

    Re: cancer. I sympathize AND relate more than I will ever discuss with you. Suffice to say I support and counsel breast cancer patients and am currently undergoing treatment for advanced breast cancer. Like I said in my prior post, I would not wish this journey on anyone. My point concerning this is that if you don't have good insurance (which we know Mary Kay does not offer) you will find yourself in dire straights unless your hubby has medical insurance or you have a full time job which provides said benefits.

    BTW, I used the term "distributor" because that is what you are, and what I was. Unless you have full control of how you operate your business, it is not "your" business.

    The question remains, prove the income claims. If only to yourself. On second thought, prove it to those to whom you offer the opportunity.

    Sincerely,

    This Anonymous, aka Teresa

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for outing yourself Teresa, and I'm sorry for your bitter experience.

      Delete
    2. Oh, you assume my experience was bitter? On the contrary. I was simply looking to make money to support myself. When I calculated that I was making less than minimum wage, I moved on to greener pastures, ie. a guaranteed paycheck and insurance benefits.

      Regards,
      Teresa

      Delete
    3. Teresa-----Sorry for my assumption. I'm glad you found what you were looking for. Mary Kay is not for everyone.

      Delete
  16. to everyone from www.pinktruth.com. This has been rousing fun!!!! I need to go because I have to get things together for my sales meeting tonight. I promise when I'm done I'll answer each one of you back if you wish to continue commenting. Till then-----bye bye!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wondered where all the new names I didn't recognize were coming from. I wish you would just toss them. They obviously have an agenda and I'm sure I'm not the only regular reader they are annoying the sh*t out of.

      Delete
    2. No you are not alone Kathy.

      Delete
  17. Cynthia,
    I am neutral to the pro MK or against MK. If I was to be approached by a MK person I would ask for proof of income probably a Schedule C. This is the reason why. It is my personality and I have been researching and saving to start my own daycare. I have a math background and love numbers. Because I have been wanting to start a daycare I know how important a Schedule C is. It is only one form and it shows the profit vs expenses. Lets say that I have started my business and after a year I need to borrow money from a bank to expand. I would have to prove my income to the bank.
    It isn't rude or bad it is business.
    From reading your post it seems that their is more emotion than facts. You are taking it personal rather than realizing it is business.
    And for the 90% buyback. I love Google and have researched it. It is not something MK offers because they care so much about their consultants. You need to look at the Direct Sales Association rules and Texas Law. Bottom line is that MK must be a member of the DSA in order to have headquarters in TX and the rules states that the company must offer the buyback of the products in the past 12 months. Two problems with this, 1. Lets say that you have been in MK for 10 years and have lets say $10,000 of products. but you only orders $1,000 in the past 12 months. The rule states that you can only return 90% of the $1,0000 so you are stuck with the rest. 2. Mk does not tell the entire truth. They leave out what I stated above. They make it appear that MK does it because they love their consultants so much. Not because they are forced to
    From my reading here and research on the internet and reading other articles it seems that MK does this a lot. They will tell some of the truth they leave out some parts. They also play on women's emotions.
    I want you to understand that I have read many articles and even training docs from NSDs websites so I am getting my information from both sides. Women are told not to go home and think about it and that they should not ask their husbands. I read something about a Husband Unawareness Plan. NSD Linda Toupin
    I read something about God First Family Second Career Third (playing on emotion) yet I read from NSD Gloria Mayfield Banks and NSD Linda Toupin that it is ok to "Fake it until you Make it"
    Lastly from GMB she states in a training doc on her website,"lastly tell minimum facts"
    I am like some who is skeptical because I play with numbers and I see that numbers don't lie and from what is in the Applause magazine( someone mention this in other comment) and since you can't provide actual facts and real numbers it seems that you are not telling the complete truth.
    I wish you the best again please remember that I am not a person who had a bad experience or someone who is mad just a person who did some researched, asked questions, and crunched the numbers.
    And BTW if you don't like someone posting as anonymous why do you have that as a chose under the comment as section of your blog?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I appreciate this, as someone with a similar story and way of approaching things.

      Delete
    2. OK anonymous-----you are clearly a C personality. I am a D personality, and we have a different way of approaching things. I understand that you enjoy the facts per se. I am married to my wonderful engineer husband for 40 years and he operates on this frequency. HOWEVER, it is improper to ask someone to produce their tax returns. A person's tax returns are not a public document, and as such to make someone cough them up by request is bordering on rude. You probably don't mean it that way, but believe me, when I tell you that it is rude to ask someone to do this. although it is not exactly a symetrical argument, I would not ask you to produce your medical records so I could decide whether I want to follow the same protocol as you for a certain disease.

      I want to wish you all the best in your daycare. Good daycare can be hard to find!!

      But even though you may have read alot about Mary Kay, reading and actual practice are really two different things. Your C personality has a real reverence for the written word, and I understand that. But if you were actually in this world of which you have studied, you would discover things are quite different in practice.

      Did you know that Mary Kay Ash was the one who insisted on developing the Direct Selling Association to establish standards? t was one of her dreams, and our company is on the front lines helping to develop those standards.

      As for the 90% buyback, what you say is true to a point. I always tell all of my consultants all about the 90% buyback because I think it is one of the feature that makes our business so unique and special and it allows people to have a sense of security that they will not throw their money away. The fact that people are embittered about money lost puzzles me. I just don't run into that with my group.

      As far as it goes with "anonymous" it is a google blogspot feature that I had nothing to do with. I just find it infantile and ridiculous for people on any blog to use "anonymous" to insult, defame, etc. It shows a lack of character and a lack of respect for themselves and for humanity. It sadly is one of the real downsides to the internet and social network phenomenon. As I said in my piece, it is the one time when I find myself looking back to the "good old days" when people didn't behave in this fashion. It hasn't really helped our discourse much.

      But again----I wish you all the best in your business venture!!! With your meticulous study, I bet you will be a BIG success!!!!

      Delete
  18. Cynthia-
    You mentioned that there are many people coming here from the site www.pinktruth.com. Wouldn't that prove there are many, many women who have been taken advantage of by MK SD and NSDs? Many of the women (and men) on the site share the same stories. Any other readers on this site, visit www.pinktruth.com for the real truth about moving up in MK.
    gettingoutofdebt (GOOD)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous----many of the folks coming over from pinktruth have stated that they have never even been in Mary Kay. It appears that they are using the Mary Kay company as a stand-in for their hatred towards an experience in direct selling. I have had people insist that they were in Mary Kay and then use language that was never ever even used in Mary Kay. I am suspicious about the folks who have gathered there. I understand that there ARE some people who weren't happy with their experience in Mary Kay. But measured up against the existing sales force and those who left without such disgruntlement, pinktruth represents an infinitesimal number of people who have passed through the Mary Kay world.

      and I am dismayed that these people seem to devote so much time to dissing Mary Kay. People who lost money can only really fault themselves for poor money management skills. Many many people lose money in business, not just Mary Kay people. Many many successful business people went bankrupt more than once before they found their success. Why Mary Kay should get such a disproportionate amount of the blame is foolish bordering on the ridiculous. Pinktruth looks like a bit of a cult for the disgruntled.

      and of course, since you are "anonymous" you have joined the lilylivered who haven't the spine to identify themselves for fear of showing the world who you really are. What are you possibly afraid of if your argument is so good?

      Delete
    2. I'm not afraid of revealing who I am. My name is Cyndy Detlefson from Kansas City, KS. I was a 2-time car "winning" director and Rookie Unit of the Year for my National Area.

      I have and always will take responsibility for my words and my actions. What I want is for MK and ALL SDs and NSDs to take responsibility for sharing "half-truths" and admitting they lie by omission. For instance, the claim that everyone makes the same commission by selling the product, no matter what your rank is in MK. Consultants, Directors, and NSDs all make 50% off the sale of the product. Well--guess what all consultants- that's not true. As a director you earn an additional 13% off of your own order. Cynthia- do you share that fact with your consultants? I bet not.
      May I ask you to be completely honest with us and yourself-- have you ever "strongly encouraged" a consultant to start with a higher inventory package than she was really ready for? And did you know it in your gut?

      The sad part is that if someone who has been in MK gets out, then they are called a lazy loser. Well, what do you say about former NSDs Allison Lamarr and Amy Dunlap?

      Delete
    3. Cyndi----Thank you for coming on this blog, identifying yourself, and posing some honest questions in such a pleasant manner.

      First of all, congratulations for the successes you had while you were in Mary Kay. I would never call you or anyone else a lazy loser----EVER. People come and go for personal reasons that one else needs to know, and to characterize someone as a "lazy loser" is unfortunate indeed. I am sick at heart if anyone ever called you or anyone you cared about that. That was wrong.

      Secondly, although you are technically right, it is also technically right to say that everyone buys the product from the company at the same discount. The 13% additional that a director receives is part of the director compensation package. As I said, although we are both right, it is a bit of a hair split and a gray area. I've certainly shared that piece of info in my meetings and trainings, but to be honest, after 28 years in the business, I've never even thought about it the way you do.

      I've come up in this business pretty much in the go-give area and haven't really been plugged into what goes on in a national area. I am not familiar with who Allison Lamarr and Amy Dunlap are and what happened to them.

      I've NEVER strongly encouraged anyone to start with a higher inventory package than was beyond their own comfort level. I've always believed that that approach was counterproductive and sure to backfire. And I suppose the existence of pinktruth kind of proves my point a little.

      But Cyndy----I just don't understand the egregious, long lasting, long term rancor toward Mary Kay out there. For example, I made my living as a musician for about 15 years. I played a bunch of instruments, sang, dance and wrote. I would have loved to have been a great musician. I practiced hours and hours every day, wrote reams of music, and had years of study under my belt at great expense to both me and my parents. I wasn't a great musician, just a good one. And I did okay at it professionally. But it wasn't meant to be for me especially once I started having kids. I didn't grow bitter about it. I just moved on to my next thing. And my performance background was a real asset when I got into Mary Kay.

      In that spirit, why can't people just move on from whatever their experience in Mary Kay was?

      Another example from my life. I ran for Congress here in Ohio in 1994 and 1996 and I was still a Mary Kay Sales Director at the time. Because of the skills acquired in Mary Kay I was a prolific fundraiser raising money beyond anyone's expectations. No one up to then had raised that kind of money in such a difficult district.Ii had amazing experiences as a candidate, got to campaign with the president numerous times in 1996, and I could make a long list of all of the great things. However, I lost, and some people have asked me how I ever got over losing. My answer was that it was such a phenomenal experience, I wouldn't have changed anything about it. I could have become embittered. After all, I lost, and some would expect me to take on a "loser" mentality. But I really didn't go there and just moved on. Why do so many people feel so bitter about Mary Kay?

      Delete
    4. (Cyndi----this is a continuation of my remarks)


      To be honest, as I've stated many times, the negatives about the Mary Kay business are truly unremarkable. You'd find them in most businesses. Why should Mary Kay carry such a disproportionate burden of blame for some mostly universal negatives?

      On the other hand, I am devastated if you were made to feel somehow "less than" for moving on yourself. Those words should have never been spoken and that type of thinking is not only wrong but counter to everything Mary Kay Ash taught us. I tell my consultants that although we have a beautiful, perfect concept, it is a company run by imperfect humans, and mistakes are made. Again, I am sorry if someone else's stupidity lessened you. You made an important contribution to the company while you were in it and that fact should be acknowledged. I am really a small cog in the company, but for whatever it is worth, I'd like to acknowledge your contributions to our company.

      And I am interested in what you have to say.

      Delete
    5. Cynthia said, "-I just don't understand the egregious, long lasting, long term rancor toward Mary Kay out there.

      I'm not reading it as rancor, it's rage. It's wrath. It's open hostility. It's an earnest and deeply felt desire to raze the headquarters and tapdance on the rubble.

      The internet makes it possible for the ex-IBC or struggling SD in Dusty, New Mexico to find out that her experience was not unique.

      How should they feel towards a system that systematically exploited them and then tossed them to the curb when they were no longer useful?

      How should they feel towards the upline women who told them they were a failure when they finally find out it wasn't just them ... it was the system and the MLM business model. That everyone had the same problems, but no one was discussing them because they were "negative".

      I see the scripts and the e-mails, I read the training material, I hear the speeches, I hear the personal stories, and as an outsider I can see the tricks and pressure points that are being used to lure women in and then shape them into the perfect Kay-bot (or Ar-Bot or Am-bot).

      The love-bombing, the bestowal and withdrawal of attention to the acolytes, the mindless chanting and dancing, the avoidance of non-believers .... it's straight out of the David Koresh handbook!

      Delete
  19. Cynthia - I am so very sad for you and your black little soul. You called Virginia a liar, but didn't even cite one single lie that she told. Why? Because there are no lies in her article. How sad that you spend your life defending this farce of a business that damages so many women every year... women who just want to make some money. You are lying about your earnings, and I'm sorry that you are angry because you've been asked for proof. You don't have the proof, and you're simply an angry, dishonest, opportunist. God help the women you come into contact with. I am praying for them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anonymous----brave little anonymous-----I am only answering you because I said I would answer everyone today, and I am a person of my word. I must say that I NEVER called Sole-Smith a liar. Those are YOUR words. Do not put them in my mouth. I said that her article was thin on the facts. I hardly recognize the Mary Kay you speak of and I have been doing it the best part of my adult life. I love my business, I love my co-workers, I love my customers. My group DOES make money----what in the world are you talking about? I don't need to prove to you what I make and I find it hilarious, truly hilarious (LOL!!!!) that you think that demanding my tax returns and me not coughing them up for poor anonymous you means that I am lying. But then those are your words. Yours must be the black soul not mine. To have to come onto a woman's blog and then anonymously say the false things you are saying with a sneer doesn't speak well of you. Come to my sales meeting sometime, and you will be disabused of your ridiculous notions. I bet you never were a Mary Kay consultant ever. You are just happy to be filled with hate. That is a sign of a black soul indeed.....

      Delete
    2. Oh and BTW-----save your pity. I have a terrific life, a happy life, and I have been blessed. I only hope you can find some happiness yourself. You sound like the bitterest of people....

      Delete
  20. Cynthia----tell all of these losers to get lost. They sound like just a bunch of of people who won't take responsibility for their own mistakes and failures just like Thia says. I'm tired of having them dirty up our blog with their foolishness!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Cynthia---why are you putting up with these idiots? That Laura thing is atrocious. You should block her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kathy----I always love seeing you here. We've been through alot together since 2008. I appreciate your support, I really do.

      I feel kind of sorry for all of these poor folks coming over here to vent their rage. They just can't seem to get over the hump and get on with their lives. They come from a website dedicated to gathering poor souls like themselves together and nursing their grudge. It's sad really. The only people who end up looking bad are they themselves.

      Look at all of these commenters. Most of them are just angry. Angry at who knows what really. Maybe angry because their lives haven't turned out the way they want, angry as Thia might say because they would rather blame everyone and everything else for their own shortcomings. But they are completely stuck in their anger and it makes me feel very sad for them. My wish would be for them to find some peace. They certainly won't find it in their anger at Mary Kay. Our company is just a business like any other, and as I said to one of our anonymouses, our negatives as a company aren't exceptional in any way at all. You'd be able to find these same negatives in any business. The fixation on Mary Kay is pretty sad and ridiculous. You should see all of the really happy and fulfilled customers and consultants that I see on a daily basis. Mary Kay has made a great positive difference to so many. There will always be a few who need to moan and groan, and sadly we have seen their misery on this blog. Sigh.......

      Delete
  22. Cynthia,

    my name is Dana Campbell from Salem, OR Dazzling Diva Dana on Pink Truth (in case this posts as anonymous),

    You sure have hours, upon hours of time to spend on defending your "successful" Mary Kay business all over the net of late.

    With all the, "TONS of customers," you claim you have...
    (1) your phone should be ringing off-the-hook,
    (2) your email should be full of orders,
    (3) your MK website should be hoppin', and
    (4) texts should be blowing up your phone.

    Bagging up all that product for each customer and/or shipping it out to your TONS of customers should be absolutely filling your day.

    Reponding on here is an interesting use of your time... Not exatly positive... and you look frantic in your damage-control.

    Oh, and your use of the term, "sour grapes," I have only seen that used in Mary Kay. Do I have them? You betcha. I have a personal mission to pull women out of Mary Kay. I have been VERY successful in doing just that. Think I'm up to five or six that I am sure of. Many other women think I have a pretty strong I-Story.

    I'm Dazzling Diva Dana on www.Pinktruth.com if you're at all interested.

    Cynthia, for the intelligence you claim your self to have, you rely SO very much on the scrips and lines of Mary Kay Corp. Nice one.

    When pressed for true income facts you continue to lash-out. Why?

    If you are SO proud of your executive-level income, one would think you would be shouting it from your rooftop.

    Huh... Me thinks you are full of BS.

    Have a GREAT day tomorrow spreading even more BS about Mary Kay. You seem to thrive on it of late. You've made quite an infamous name for yourself.

    Sincerely,

    Dana Campbell

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dana---I'm rather enjoying going toe to toe with the crazies on pinktruth. It's been a blast. But alas, I'm getting bored with hearing the same old thing over and over again. And all of the stats that have been bandied about are incomplete. But go ahead and contiue on your bitter path. t's a sad story that you just can't get over yourself. Good bye....

      Delete
  23. You are attacking me just because I decided to a be a neutral party you include "all" when you use the above name calling. Again it shows that you only have fluff and emotion in your responses.
    You are only responded to parts of my comment. You picked out what you wanted and then rambled on about it. I am about facts and it seems that MK doesn't like to address the hard facts/truths. What about the quotes from the training docs. I discussed. You know those things are true and you probably use them yourself because in the MK world scripts get passed around.

    Again maybe you didn't understand what I was talking about with the Schedule C. You again, like in above posts, you take someone's trhought and turn it into something else. Do you tell the bank they are being rude when they are asking for proof of income when you are applying for a loan? That was my question and I know a bank asks this, because I have been for a mortgage. Why not answer that? And a schedule C is not the entire tax return you know t his and why do you try to change what it is when someone discusses it? It is one piece of paper that shows the 'actual profit" after expenses at the end of the year.
    You don't need to ramble on and fluff you your responses just give the complete truth and facts? Why is that hard in the MK world?
    Personally I think MK people don't actually prove their income claim because they know it isn't as good as they claim and that would be bad for business. They need women to think they are making the money so they will sign up.
    If you make so much why isn't your name published in the applause magazine that those above have mentioned? And please don't give a lot of fluff in your answer just gives the straight truth. That is what MK is about right? the truth and putting God first?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Boring------yawn. All of the answers to your rant I written about above. Do you read or are you happy just spouting off?

      Delete
  24. Actually, these women have backgrounds in business, so they know what they're talking about. The MK business model does not work. I have a background in market feasibility, and I can tell you that the biggest red flag for me was market saturation. Several MK reps within a few blocks of each other, all with the same warm market has led to too much inventory sitting in their basements, and a lot of bad feelings. I knew right when I attended my first recruiting event that this product would not "fly off the shelves". I am so glad I didn't believe the SD who told me that would be the case. Furthermore, when I did my research to determine if this would be a good fit for me, I also found The Pink Lighthouse, The Pinking Shears, and a yahoo group called Recovery from MK. After voicing my concerns about market saturation to a friend in MK, I was told that I was "too negative" and she will not have anything to do with me. This was a very dear, close friend. So I think this speaks volumes as to the culture of MK. Critical thinkers not allowed. The women who exchange information on Pink Truth are all critical thinkers. All 9,000 of them. Many of them worked the MK business diligently. Nobody made consistent executive income. They want to help others deal with the loss of finances, relationships, and shame they feel for being sucked in. They give of their time and expect nothing in return. They are wise, kind, and supportive to all women who join the forum. You should open your heart and mind, and think about what they are trying to

    ReplyDelete
  25. as one of the courageous legions of pinktruth cowards who can rant and accuse without divulging their identity, why must I pay for the mistakes your "dear, close friend" made? I am sorry for your experience, but it is not my fault.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete