You can read that post here.
Since then, the original author and I have begun a conversation of sorts in the comments section. Click the link above and scroll down to the comments if you would like to see our conversation in context.
Because his most recent comment was rather lengthy and my response even lengthier, I thought it may be beneficial to some if I posted them both here on the main page. This is his original comment. To read my response to this comment, click here.
No sarcasm intended. I’m not sure, though, what you meant in your last note by “ However, it is outrageous that you would apply that experience to someone at a gas station with a Mary Kay window sticker.” If your interpretation was that I was projecting onto every woman associated with MK sticker the preconception that they had suffered from the experience to the same degree, you’re right. That would be rather presumptuous. That was not the message I intended to convey.
I do though, very much, believe every woman participating in the “opportunity” is exposing themselves to a very real vulnerability. There is a significant level of vulnerability, particularly when the extent of participation in the “opportunity” reaches a point where the IBC’s director (or “higher up”) occupies a position of trust. I don’t, mind you, believe this vulnerability is at the same level as that associated with most any other sundry independent business undertaking. The MK MLM offers a far greater risk due to it’s deceptive, predatory recruiting and front-loading tactics. My concerns about the “opportunity” have nothing to do with the quality of the products. My repudiation stems from personal knowledge of the MK MLM tactics.
Do I believe participation in MK exposes all participant’s to an often unanticipated, too often unrecognized, level of risk?
Do I believe women and their families should take pause before swallowing the polished pitches and exposing themselves (their time, dollars and trust) to the MK “opportunity”?
Nice comments re “Your money.” On target. If I were to warn you that while in a particular neighborhood, you should always travel in groups, avoid unlit areas, and keep moving at all times, the mere fact I offered such a warning would indeed tell you something about the neighborhood, wouldn’t it? Consider the message you send (however unintentional) when you are inclined to warn those interested in the “opportunity” they should avoid the things you mentioned in this article (“Your Money”). Revealing.
I applaud your blog as an additional outlet for information re the “opportunity,” regardless of the stance you take. Ironically, your offering yet another conduit for retort to the many testimonials from those who’ve suffered at the hands of the “opportunity” validates the growing body of information/warnings that the “opportunity” should be avoided, that potential MK targets should be weary. MK Corporate refuses to even publically acknowledge this growing body of “Mary Kay Cosmetics clarity.” I welcome such acknowledgment from sites such as yours. I look forward to reading more.
Again, this was a comment left on a previous post. If you want to read my response to this comment, click here.
Thanks for stopping by.