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!!