New Blog to focus on Pink Truth

Hi all!

Thank you mk4me for the kind words and the great posts.  I would like to announce a new blog.

This blog is hosted by one of our readers - Michelle - and will have a link (along with a quick summary) to whatever Pink Truth is posting.  Not sure at this point if it will be updated daily, weekly or what, but it should be pretty current.

The blog can be found here - http://pinktruther.blogspot.com/

The idea here will be that this blog can stay focused on discussing Mary Kay as questions and thoughts arise.  The blog that Michelle is hosting will be for responding to things that Pink Truth is saying.

If you have no desire to be weighed down with the garbage on Pink Truth, you can stay here and help keep this community alive.

But if you enjoy occasionally picking a fight, or if you are just frustrated that no one gets to respond to Pink Truth and want to speak your mind, give this new blog a visit.

Hopefully this will keep the two concepts separate, but give room for both of them.

Thanks Michelle.

http://pinktruther.blogspot.com/

Long overdue update and politics

I want to thank all of you for your patience and must apologize in advance that this will be brief.

I have been so busy lately that my email responses (to the few people that actually send me emails) have been, at best, hastily scrawled notes about what I would like to do, or what I intend to do.

In terms of what I will be doing with this blog, at this time, could best be described as "maintaining". I think that it has earned itself a place here and should not be discontinued. I also know that it is not something that I can devote very much time to currently. However, and very fortunately, all of you - the readers and authors - have proven to be much more effective at continuing the discussion than I ever could.

To that end, here is what I have resolved to do for the time being.

Concerning the DMCA takedown notices, I will do nothing. If any of you feel strongly enough about the dozen or so posts that were removed, please contact me with a game-plan that involves more you than me :D and I will see if I can help. Otherwise, lets show them we can't be bullied by "doubling our efforts" in other areas.

Concerning criticizing Pink Truth, I will resume posting a "today on Pink Truth" with the notable difference being a link to that day's Pink Truth post. I encourage you to go visit the post in question, gather your thoughts, bring them over here and tell the world. We now KNOW that "they" read over here. We also know that through honest, unfiltered back-and-forth discussion, understanding can take place. Let's hope that this is the beginning of some really good discussion, by 'both sides'.

Concerning Mary Kay, please feel free to express, openly and honestly, any concerns you have and allow others to either echo or speak to those concerns.

Concerning politics, well, they are a part of our life right about now, aren't they? You will notice that the current poll runs all the way through until the day after election day. Please feel free to change your vote (on this site) as often as you like, right up until after you cast your real vote. If you are leaning one way, and suddenly start leaning the other way, feel free to change your vote to reflect that leaning. The three of you, for instance, that are currently undecided... I hope that we see your votes move to one of the other columns before the poll closes. Keep in mind that I can not see who voted at all... so I won't be judging you... even if your decision is to not vote!

That is all for now. As always, please feel free to leave your thoughts about all of this. It is, after all, your thoughts that make this site what it is. Even more importantly, please be sure to stop by, from time to time - if not daily - to leave your thoughts about Pink Truth or Mary Kay.

My most profound thanks for every one of you in your loyalty and support of this blog.

Update on Pink Truth's attempt to silence their critics (this site) with false copyright infringement claims

Well, I was waiting to see what action (if any) blogger would take regarding the alleged copyright infringement.

As you may or may not have noticed, I went through the posts alleging copyright infringement and removed any infringing content that I could see.

I also posted a note on the ones that had (apparently) no such infringing content essentially asking blogger to define what exactly was being labeled as infringing.

As the weekend passed and none of the posts were removed, I assumed that this action had proved sufficient. However, as of this writing, I see that it was not.

Now, I know that I can counter notify blogger that the content is indeed legitimate. And I might just do that. However, as Sean (at Franchise Pick) points out, this would amount to "standing up for my "right" to make fun of those who make fun of Mary Kay" (quote is from Franchise Pick website, no copyright infringement intended) This (to me) seems a bit petty.

I have not yet decided what I will do about all of this. I believe that there needs to be a place where the lies that are told on Pink Truth can be exposed. I hope that this site will continue to provide a venue for that. I do not feel that the dozen (less one) posts that were removed are all that crucial to the spirit of exposing those lies.

I am currently leaning toward doing nothing. It is truly sad that Tracy feels so threatened by the truth that she would stoop to this level of bullying and harassing with such obvious deception. Nonetheless, I am beginning to feel that the best thing to do is to not do anything at all.

By the way, and in the interest of full disclosure, as I have read and educated myself on the subject, I believe that the full screen, screenshot that a few of you may have seen could have been construed as a copyright violation, particularly with my encouragement to all of you to not visit Pink Truth. Worthy of a DMCA take-down notice? Not really. Technical violation? Possibly.

Finally, let me apologize for the sudden sparsity of posting lately. I believe that I will be needing to change the schedule of posting here. It seems that all of the regular authors, myself included, have been quite busy lately. I think that I may begin posting more like once a week than trying to produce something daily. Still trying to figure out what works best for the goals/purposes of this site.

Please let me know what you think. What do you want from this site? What do you like? What is important? What can you do without?

Update on Pink Truth's Outrageous Claim of Copyright Infringement

On Saturday, I informed all of you that someone claiming to be from Pink Truth (but without so much as a signature) alleged that I have "infringed" and "violated" their copyrights on this site. (Link - Pink Truth Threatens Balanced Mary Kay)

Now, as I assured you all in my last post, the very nature of my use of images and text from that website is clearly not a violation or infringement. Nonetheless, even as I contemplated what to do in order to ensure that I would not find myself being forced into a courtroom to discuss this, I received an email from blogger (the ones that host this blog), indicating that someone has, indeed, claimed that "content in your blog allegedly infringes upon the copyrights of others".

The following posts are the ones that are being called into question:

(For your convenience, I have labeled them all as accurately as possible)

Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 1
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 2
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 3
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 4
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 5
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 6
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 7
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 8
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 9
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 10
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 11
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 12

Here is the part that I find most interesting:

We are asking that you please remove the allegedly infringing content in
your blog. If you do not do this within the next 3 days (by 10/2/08), we
will be forced to remove the posts in question. If we did not do so, we
would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its
merits.

Here is the thing. If "blogger" who is owned by google, does not want to deal with a claim of copyright infringement, "regardless of its merits", I have to wonder, why would I?

They conclude with:

"We can reinstate this content into your blog upon receipt of a counter
notification pursuant to sections 512(g)(2) and (3) of
the DMCA."

I have not yet decided what I will do about this. My life is fairly busy right now and I have other "drama" cooking in my "real" life. But in the meantime, I want to keep all of you up to date.

I am particularly interested in making sure that everyone sees clearly the pathetic tactics and maneuverings that someone who is afraid to be completely truthful will stoop to in order to maintain the cloak of lies that she must constantly perpetuate in order for her jaded world view to continue to seem "true".

I now put it to you, my readers. What should I do?

Special thanks to those of you that have already emailed me with your findings on this subject.

Pink Truth Threatens Balanced Mary Kay with Copyright "Violation" and "Infringement"

Greetings Balanced Mary Kay Readers,

I suspect that what I am about to share with all of you will come as no surprise to most of you. Nonetheless, I have chosen to be completely transparent with all of you, my readers, about what is going on.

I am, unfortunately, faced with a dilemma. This dilemma involves deciding between doing what I know is right and risking a legal battle that would most likely be awarded to whoever has more time and money – or – allowing something I know to be wrong to prevail in order to “play by their rules” and stay safely away from the potential of facing frivolous litigation. Unfortunately, thanks to the way our law is currently written, right and wrong will probably have less to do with this decision than money and time. As the adage goes, “The golden rule prevails, the one with the most gold makes the rules”.

As most of you are aware, at 12:01 AM (PDT) Friday, September 26, 2008 I posted a screenshot of PinkTruth.com’s most recent attack on Mary Kay. The intention of posting this image, naturally, was to allow discussion about the claims represented in that post. I also explained that I would make every effort to provide similar images on a daily basis.

Shortly after 9:00 AM (PDT) Friday, September 26, 2008 I received the following email:

from Pink Truth pinktruth@gmail.com
to This information removed because a private email address that has never been posted on this site was used to deliver this message to me.
date Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:04 AM
subject Copyright infringement
mailed-by gmail.com

It's come to my attention that you're taking screenshots of pages of Pink Truth material and posting it for Balanced Mary Kay readers. That's a copyright violation, as I own the rights to the material and have not given you permission to post it. Please remove the infringing material immediately, and in the future, refrain from using PInk Truth's content without my express permission.

Now a few notes about this.

First of all, I am not an attorney, and I don’t claim to have a full grasp on copyright law.
Second, keeping the above in mind, I am extremely confident that this use of screenshots is NOT a copyright violation.
However, because of the first statement, and because I have not yet received legal counsel about this, I have chosen to err on the side of caution.

It is unfortunate that the people spreading lies about Mary Kay, ironically on a website with the name “truth” in the title, are so afraid of any scrutiny of their assertions that they would resort to ambiguous and unsubstantiated threats about “copyright infringement” to prevent their lies from being exposed.

I do not take kindly to being manipulated.
I firmly believe that Pink Truth is spreading malicious lies about Mary Kay.
I wholeheartedly intend to find a way to expose their lies for what they are.
I will, starting immediately, begin looking for the solution to this problem.
In the meantime, I ask for your patience.
I also would ask that – if you have any knowledge on this subject or could offer legal advice, recommendations or potential safeguards to consider – you contact me at balancedmarykay@gmail.com

Balanced Mary Kay will continue offering the pros and cons, the good and the bad of Mary Kay. As always, all are welcome to participate and we welcome everyone’s opinion. Please keep in mind that we STILL do not allow opinions to be expressed as facts… even if doing so is necessary for your “style” of self expression.

Now, what do you think about this?

It is obvious that someone from Pink Truth is reading this site. What would you like to say to them?

Someone claiming to own the “rights to the material” on Pink Truth is suggesting that using an image of their work for the purpose of criticism (as I have done) is “a copyright violation”. However, I think that the U.S. Copyright Office – Title 17, U. S. Code, Section 107 clearly disagrees. What do you think?

In my opinion, this feature is important. Possibly crucial. Do you agree? Is this worth putting the energy into? Should I just give in, roll over and allow them to continue spreading vicious lies about Mary Kay unchecked? What do you think?

I know that some of you have not yet created a profile. I am sorry for the inconvenience, but I hope that you will take this opportunity to log in and weigh in on this important decision.

Thank you all for your support and continued patience.

What do Tough Financial Times mean for Mary Kay

New Feature Announcement

***MAJOR EDIT***

***

Please note, the full screenshot that I posted earlier is gone. It is replaced with something that could not possibly be construed as copyright infringement. I am out the door to take care of some other business. However, rest assured that a full explanation is forthcoming. Look for it, as well as my thoughts and what I plan to do about it, tomorrow.

Thank you and sorry for the temporary inconvenience.

***

Yesterday, "Shashew", a Balanced Mary Kay reader and commentator pointed out some of the frustrations many of the other readers of this site share. Specifically that every visit to that site is like a "vote" of approval as it gives the impression (to search engine spiders and the like) that people are going there as a source of information about Mary Kay. We, in what seems like a majority (based on the current poll), know that it is not. As has long been my contention, there would be no problem with them expressing their opinions if they were being presented as opinions. They are not. They are being presented as "facts" and "truths".

As many of you know, one of my goals in setting up this site was to create a forum that allowed opinions that disagree with the vehement anti-Mary Kay sentiment expressed on Pink Truth.

In light of all this, I am introducing a new feature that I hope will help ease these frustrations for all of my readers.

Starting today, I will begin posting full screen-shots of Pink Truth's daily blog. I will try to post each day's post the following morning. In other words, yesterday's post will be available today. Alternatively, every day you can read yesterday's Pink Truth post here.

By waiting one day to post the screen shot, you will be able to see the comments from that post. It seems that there is rarely conversation on a certain subject after the day that it appears, so this seems to be the best way to get the "feel" of the conversation about that topic.

Please alert anyone you know that has been frustrated in the past at Pink Truth's lack of transparency, tightly restrictive comment moderation, and frequent banning.

This is a place that they can come and see what Pink Truth is talking about and respond. If you are a Pink Truth reader, please consider this a much better place for you to leave your comments, as you will actually be able to engage in conversation with someone that will challenge your thinking and help you escape the anti-pink-fog that has been created on Pink Truth.

Consider this. If all the people that visit Pink Truth daily - wishing that they could leave a comment but knowing they will be banned if they say anything - would visit this site instead, Pink Truth might just be pressured to allow other points of view and offer a more accurate depiction of Mary Kay.

Now, without any further delay, here is yesterdays Pink Truth post:

(hint, click on the link below to see the post)



Not sure how this will look, so we will work on it as we go. Please don't forget to leave your own comments after you read it.

If you are having trouble seeing the image below, you can either click on the image or the following link - Pink Truth talks about Mary Kay




Ok, there you have it. Be sure to leave your comments. Also, don't hesitate to tell me what you think of this new feature. If I can keep up, I will do this daily.

If you have not created a profile yet, I encourage you to give it a shot so that you can join the conversation.

Pink Truth calls Mary Kay a Scam, as usual, Can't Deliver any evidence

What does it take to convey the truth about a situation to people who stubbornly refuse to consider that they may be wrong?

Take for instance, this latest lament from "SuzyQ" of Pink Truth.

"Oh, I wish I had the magic words! Just what does it take to get the message across to the pink believers that MK is a scam? What part don't they get?"

She follows this up with 13 "short reminders" allegedly in hopes of convincing "pink believers" that Mary Kay is a scam.

With the exception of (maybe) the 13th example, none of her "reminders" come anywhere near demonstrating that Mary Kay is a scam.

She concludes,

"Decided to stop at 13 as that is the Mary Kay sacred number. Please. You can not make it in MLM. Read and listen. Watch and learn. I promise you, your dream is carved in sand."

Here is an interesting thought about all this.

What is the real problem here?

We recently discussed (thanks to shadesofpink) the "proliferation of misinformation".

Consider two different consultants. For the sake of argument, let's assume both of them started Mary Kay at about the same time, were "in" for about the same amount of time, and ultimately decided to stop representing the Mary Kay brand.

Both sat under the same director, were recruited by the same recruiter, and had, basically, the same "version" of the opportunity presented to them.

One of them, like "SuzyQ", was caught up in the enthusiasm and energy of a charismatic leader, took away her own version of the key selling points, and went about selling the "omg-incredible-amazing-perfect-infallible-opportunity" in her own way.

Unfortunately for her (person 1) there were a lot more people in this world that were more like person 2 than she had expected.

The second one, realizing that there is no such thing as "too good to be true" wanted all the information. When "they" said, "no quotas", she asked, "what if I never sell anything?" When "they" said, "best selling brand in the U.S.", she wanted to know, "what is that based on?"

They both were convinced to give this thing a go.

The first one went in headfirst, like Pete Rose. (AD anyone?)


The second one "took some convincing".

In this story, it didn't work out for either one of them.

But which one do you think ended up in debt?

Which one, do you suppose, burned some relationship bridges and is now bitter at the entire company?

And finally, the reason I am so openly hostile to the majority of Pink Truth members, which one do you think is now on a smear site parroting vicious lies that she hasn't taken the time to verify?

Now please hear me. I do not know anything about SuzyQ. To be perfectly honest, I do not even do that good of a job keeping track of who's who on that site. I do not know what her Mary Kay experience was like. Please don't get distracted by that.

My point here is simply this.

"SuzyQ" just posted, antagonistically, that Mary Kay is a scam.

Her "defense" of this assertion is riddled with lies for one. (no, not the Mary Kay kind, the Pink Truth kind) It also (even if her lies were true) does not in any way defend the premise that Mary Kay is a scam.

No wonder her "brand" of Mary Kay hate (her and the ones that think like her) is never well defended on objective sites like this one. I guarantee that if she were to post that on this site, she would eventually realize that she has no clue what she is talking about and say, "just go visit pinktruth.com".

And this is the site that is supposed to be promoting the "Truth about Mary Kay"?

Pathetic.

Pink Truth: Promoting Wild Speculations About Mary Kay - Surprisingly, No One Is Surprised

That Pink Truth's "version" of the truth is not credible is hardly a shocking revelation.

However, the wild speculations that are promoted on that site - and subsequently promoted as "the truth" - need to be pointed out and discredited by someone. That is one of the reasons this site exists.

So, here is the most recent venture into turning one thing into something completely different, courtesy of Pink Truth.

The title (apparently from Tracy) is - Massive Mary Kay frontloading is applauded

The evidence presented is as follows:

A recent announcement from Mary Kay:

"We’re thrilled to announce that Independent Elite Executive National Sales Director Barbara Sunden, who currently ranks as the No. 1 NSD nationwide, has broken yet another record – this time for the highest monthly commissions earned. Barbara’s June commission check reached $140,682.91, breaking her previous monthly record of $111,653.92.

As we announced at Seminar 2008, Barbara holds the record of highest earnings in NSD commissions in a Seminar year. During the 2008 Seminar year, her commissions totaled $1,047,747.30.

We’re also excited to report that Independent Elite Executive Sales Director Ekene Okafor has broken the record for unit sales, achieving the $2,400,000 Unit Circle. On behalf of Mary Kay Inc. and the entire Mary Kay independent sales force, congratulations, Barbara and Ekene, on these incredible achievements!"

The first question that is posed indicates just how convinced Pink Truth is that their lies are truth.

"Do you realize the massive frontloading needed to get to these figures?"

(maybe later someone will ask, "How do we know that this came from frontloading?")

Now I hope that everyone will take a moment to note that I do not advocate the idea that Pink Truth does not provide ANY truth. Their next lines about this subject (although I have not done the math myself) seem likely to be true.

"At a minimum, Sunden's area alone did $1.4 million in wholesale orders (probably much more).
And Okafor's unit alone did $100,000 wholesale each month."

These seem like reasonable assertions.

But then we go back to the fantastic assumptions that Pink Truth is famous for.

"I feel sorry for those frontloaded consultants."

and then...

"There's no way all that product was actually being sold."

Is there really anyone out there that can defend this insanity? Would anyone really stand up and say, "I know that these women accomplished this by frontloading consultants"? Besides Tracy, is there really anyone that hates Mary Kay this aggressively that they are willing to deride someone's accomplishments so vehemently on nothing more than an assumption? Is anyone really bitter enough (again, besides Tracy) to declare that their assumption ("There's no way all that product was actually being sold.") is a fact?

Does this outright lie about Mary Kay bother anyone else besides me?

In case you are wondering, the comments just add to the assumption pile.

puc4now said:

"Just what the good people of Nigeria need - $2,400,000 worth of Mary Kay products. Gotta love those Ruby directors.

Can you say "illegal exporter?" I knew you could."

Stepping Down said:

"They are the spin masters....when every else is suffering with: consultants dropping like flies, customers hating the new color, directors stepping down in droves, massive allergies to the new mineral products reported, the new holiday line being tiny and overpriced as usual....they have to find something positive to report.
So, they found two impressive numbers to report to make everyone else feel inadequate. So now everyone else will strive for these numbers and kill themselves trying to make it happen.
It's all a vicious cycle. They will feel that if one person can do it, so can they, and they'll work like dogs to try for it.
They will never believe the 'rumors' that product is being shipped to Nigeria - they'll say - 'oh, that's the enemy talking....she's really got an incredible work ethic...that's why her numbers are so high'
And on it goes.....round and round......until they drop in exhaustion like I did. It's pretty sick, isn't it?

I also find it interesting that this is the first major time that they have highlighted the 'success' of the Nigerian Directors. They've been awfully hush hush about how great they were doing.....except at Ruby Seminar where they spoke. Curious, isn't it?"

nofoolinme said:

"Barbara Sunden should hang her head in shame! She knows how her money is made and it ain't a pretty picture! Granted, we don't see her on U Tube begging everyone to buy $1,200. wholesale but behind the scenes, that's what she's doing. Her downline have incurred massive debt for Barbara to be so handsomely rewarded.

And for Ekene Okafor - There's your sign! MK is refusing to admit that the Nigerian directors are doing anything wrong! That's their greed! I guess it's hard to turn down $l00,000. a month in wholesale production! As puc4now said "illegal exporter". Ya think?"

lightershadeofpink said:

"I know MK Corpse needs women like this to make this much money so the rest will "beelieve" and donate their life savings to the cause. Its a weird strategy . . . its hurts so many."

and I guess the best one of the lot so far,

Queen of Section 2 said:

"How can you even wrap you head around those numbers except to say that if it were me, I would've been sitting with $3600 on my shelves.

I can say that, because that's what happened to me!"

I think that really sums up Pink Truth's alleged quest for the truth...

"I can say that, because that's what happened to me!"

Or, more concisely, "It happened to me, so it must be true for everyone!"

"I did it, so everyone must be doing it"

Anyone else feel this way?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 7 of 7) Mary Kay Didn't Put a Gun To Your Head

This is part 7 of a 7 part series. For those of you that thought we would never make it through all of these horrible, terrible, atrocious lies, we are at the end. The last one.

For those of you that were/are starting to get tired or bored with these "lame" and "boring" lies, this one should really put a pep in your step!

In fact, this lie is SO good, I am going to make you click on the little "click here to read the whole thing" link.

Trust me, I promise you... It will be worth it!



Ok, you all made it past "the jump" and are here now. I am sorry that I am making you work so hard for this... and I really hope that you think it is worth the effort.

Now remember, we are discussing the LIES that Mary Kay people (kaybots if you will) tell.

So this next statement... ready for this... is ((gasp)) a lie....

Ok? Everyone tracking.

This is a lie.

Alright, I think you are all on the same page.

....

Here it is:

"No one put a gun to your head!"

((pause for laughter))

I know, I know... okay... calm down... no really... please, no comments about spewing your coffee on your monitor... no seriously... people, settle... aw forget it..


(((pause for more laughter))) ((wait for composure))

That, ladies and gentlemen, that, is a lie.

Come on. Pink Truth. Seriously? Are ANY of you going to "come out" and tell me, with a straight face, that your Mary Kay recruiter held a gun to your head?

Please.

Anyway... in the interest of hearing this one out:

"Maybe the biggest fallacy of all in Mary Kay is this statement by the pro-Mary Kay crowd as a defense for any of the wrongs that happen. They contend that women should have said “no” to anything they didn’t want to do. They had free will and should have exercised it. The truth is that Mary Kay trains women on mind games used to exploit needs and weaknesses in women, and they train women to not accept “no” as an answer. No is “a request for more information” in the Mary Kay world and they will stop at nothing to get you to change that no into a yes. So while there may be no physical gun to your head in Mary Kay, the emotional torture that you will be put through is just as scary and effective."

Oh... I see. "...there may be no physical gun to your head..." That's better. But wait what is this "emotional torture" thing?

Now look, I know all of you are warming up your "personal responsibility" keys on your laptop... and to be perfectly honest, I can't blame you.

I mean really, I am not sure how many different ways it can be illustrated that just about anyone you meet is liable to try to convince you to do something you don't want to do. Sometimes, they will have your best interest at heart and it will still lead to disaster. Other times, they will be plotting your ruin for their gain, yet somehow it will turn out to be the best thing to happen to you.

But, just this once, let's think outside that box.

Since it seems that most people (that end up really, really pissed off at Mary Kay) don't really want to read things and they (because of their desperate situation, or any of a number of other things) believed, wholeheartedly, the very nice, convincing, professional woman that said, "trust me and give me your money".

Shouldn't all of you that work your business ethically and honestly have to suffer because of this?

Shouldn't you all bear the brunt of daily abuse at the hands of a smear site that says that your business, the company you work for, and you personally are evil, condescending, manipulative liars?

And really, why would you complain about that? I mean, if there are people in different states, saying the same exact lies, doesn't that mean that you must be also? And don't even try to tell me that the fact that you know people in different states that don't lie negates that "inconvenient truth".

What you really ought to do is give Mary Kay a call. Tell them that unless you see a complete and total end to all abuse, all manipulation, all deception across the entire sales force, you are going to quit and join the "blind with pink rage" minions in decrying the awful atrocities against humanity that this company commits on a daily basis.

((whew))

(aside to "blessed" aka "deleted") Settle down, that was sarcasm... I have not given into the crazy side of the force... yet.

Right, so that is all seven of the alleged lies that Mary Kay tells. There are plenty more in the comments section if you care to go check it for yourself. If you would like to quote one of your favorite Pink Truth "fav's" and whether or not you feel it is a lie, you can do that here.

And let's be realistic. There are lies told. Some accidental. Some intentional. Some negligible. Some pretty serious.

If you are considering a career in Mary Kay (or any new business venture) Please, Please, Please do your homework. Ask questions. Feel free to be a royal pain in the @$$. If you are putting your money into something, you better make sure that you really, really know what the deal is. What are you agreeing to. What are your options to "get out" if things don't go according to plan.

Seriously. This is what we call common sense.

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 6 of 7) Executive income for part time hours

This is part 6 of a 7 part series. Pink Truth made a list of their favorite Mary Kay lies and we have been examining to see just how accurate it is for Pink Truth to call these lies.

While many of the "lies" we have examined so far are, well, "debatable" at best - and it seems that we have managed to point out more lies from the Pink Truth crowd, as they try to pin their unique spin on "all" or "the vast majority" of Mary Kay - this lie is (correct me if I am wrong) most certainly a lie.

Executive income for part time hours

Just as it’s a lie that you can do Mary Kay in a few hours a week, it’s an even bigger lie that you can make an executive income in Mary Kay with part-time hours. Almost no one makes an executive income in Mary Kay to begin with . And those who do are easily working 50 to 60 hours a week, most of that during what many would call prime “family time”… nights and weekends when the spouse and kids are not at work or school and would love to see mom.

Now again, it is (and I can't emphasize this enough) NOT a lie that you can "do" Mary Kay in a few hours a week. Don't expect to see any huge results, but beyond the shadow of a doubt, Pink Truth is LYING when they say that you CAN'T "do" Mary Kay in a few hours a week.

Another Pink Truth lie?

"Almost no one makes an executive income in Mary Kay to begin with ."

"Comparatively speaking", perhaps. Like, if you say, compared to the hundreds of thousands of women in Mary Kay, almost no one is making 'executive income'... however, just like many Mary Kay reps neglect to properly explain the "best selling brand" thing, they don't say that, do they? They say,

"Almost no one makes an executive income in Mary Kay to begin with ."

And that is a lie. Period. (sorry to be blunt, but since we are on the subject of lies..)

So, people do make executive income in Mary Kay.

Also, people can "do" Mary Kay in a few hours a week. (Again, please don't expect any fantastic results from this, but if that is the time input you would like to commit to, there are no rules barring you from doing so, and you most likely will see some results.)

So what is the lie here?

The lie is when you combine both of these elements. When you say, "You can earn an executive income with just a few hours a week." That is a lie.

But my question is:

How often is this really said? And how many people really believe it?

So far the only genuine "lie" that has been posited by the Pink Truth post called "My Favorite Mary Kay Lies" is this one. And whenever you really press an "anti-mker" about this one, this is not a real complaint. I really can't imagine that very many people actually try to convince people of this. And even harder to believe is that people really buy it.

Is it possible that people here "Mary Kay... blah blah blah ... executive income... blah blah blah ... Mary Kay ... blah blah blah ... part time hours ... blah blah blah ... Mary Kay" and, later, when they are processing everything they just heard, this somehow stitches together into "Mary Kay is awesome because you can earn an executive income with part time hours"?

How about it? Any of you ever heard someone say that you can earn an executive income working part time hours?

Were you told this?

Did you believe it?

Do you ever tell people one or the other of these? (Part time hours? Executive income?)

Does anyone know the actual statistic or the real truth behind any of the "more millionaires, more 6 figure incomes, etc" stories?

It does seem to me that most companies have one (1) CEO and maybe a few other well paid 'upper management' types, so while it is not as grandiose as it may seem, the fact that Mary Kay has paid "x" number of women "$yyy,yyy" they qualify to make this claim. Is this perhaps the grounds from which this selling point rises? Does anyone know?

*****

On a side note, did anyone else notice the incredibly powerful, borderline poisonous way in which Tracy manipulatively throws this one in:

"...easily working 50 to 60 hours a week, most of that during what many would call prime “family time”… nights and weekends when the spouse and kids are not at work or school and would love to see mom."

This may just be my own personal hatred (I know, strong word, but I really hate this) of manipulation and manipulative tactics. Whether it is an MK recruiter that uses the "shouldn't you spend more time with your kids" or the "I hate Mary Kay" misanthropist that uses it, it is ugly. Very ugly.

Is it just me? Did that bother anyone else?

***

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 5 of 7) All Statistics are Lies

This is part 5 of a 7 part series. We are diving right into Pink Truth's "favorite" Mary Kay lies and making some interesting discoveries along the way.

Today's "lie" has a very distinct irony to it.

Any statistic about success in Mary Kay (more women making six figures, more women millionaires, etc.)

"Recruiters use these made up statistics to entice women into Mary Kay. None of them are true. Mary Kay is not the “best selling brand.” But for a few select individuals, women in Mary Kay aren’t making anything close to an executive income. Women aren’t “promoting themselves” when they’re ready… they’re just trying to tread water and hope they don’t lose their teams and units. Did you ever wonder why no one presents any proof for these statistics or claims? It’s because the proof doesn’t exist and these claims are completely fabricated, but repeated with vigor by those attempting to recruit you."

I will let you guys pick apart the specific "statistics" listed here and discuss in what context they are true and in which they are lies. For example, that Mary Kay is the "best selling brand", is obviously not true. But, stated in the correct context, with the proper disclaimers, it is certainly a very strong and accurate selling point for the company. (And yes, all you contrary disparagers, they use sales to consultants to determines sales volume, and yes, that is the standard they use to compare to other companies, and no, that does not make the claim any less true or significant.)

What I find interesting here, is the self-righteous, holier-than-thou way in which Pink Truth scoffs at misusing statistics in the very same post that they misuse (and I use that term very casually) their own favorite statistic. "99% of women in Mary Kay lose money." Not only is the statistic applied very loosely to Mary Kay (in the original publication they take it from), it is also completely taken out of context. Remember I mentioned irony? Check it out, here is what Tracy (or at least I am still under the assumption this was written by Tracy) said about Mary Kay consultant's misuse of statistics... consider how relevant it is (and much more passionate than I could ever be) when redirected at HER misuse of HER personal favorite stat-*cough*lie*cough*-istic:

"Did you ever wonder why no one presents any proof for these statistics or claims? It’s because the proof doesn’t exist and these claims are completely fabricated, but repeated with vigor by those attempting to recruit you."

Ironic, no? (I though it was)

Also, there's this:

"None of them are true."

*ahem* Tracy... wanna help me out again? What was that thing you said?

"Did you ever wonder why no one presents any proof for these statistics or claims? It’s because the proof doesn’t exist and these claims are completely fabricated, but repeated with vigor by those attempting to recruit you."

Right... that's what I was thinking too.... it was, all, on the tip of my tongue, ya know? Couldn't have said it better myself... thanks.

((sigh))

Right, so, what do all of you think?

Do recruiters misuse statistics? (HA! Is the Pope Catholic!?)
Which ones are true? How do you know they are true? Do you ever ask the person telling you the statistic, "What is that based on?" or "Where can I see it in writing?" OR, do you simply parrot the information to the next person you are talking to and hope they don't ask you how YOU know it is true!?

Has anyone on Pink Truth asked Tracy how she KNOWS that 99% or people in Mary Kay lose money? Have any of YOU read the PSA article for yourself? Did you understand it? Or are you just mindlessly passing around the same misused statistics in much the same way you did when you were in Mary Kay? What will it take for you to use your own brain? Obviously Tracy is not going to help you with that!

Would this site be better if I misused statistics? Is that the secret to getting popular?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 4 of 7) Mary Kay Will Consume All of Your Time

This is part 4 of a 7 part series. As you will see, by this point, apparently even asking a question is a lie.

Do you have a few hours a week to devote to Mary Kay?

"This one is a simple con. Who doesn’t have two or three hours a week that they waste on nonsense and could devote to something productive? Probably all of us. The problem is that Mary Kay doesn’t just require a couple of hours a week. Especially not if you’re interested in making more than $25 a week. The truth is that developing a legitimate customer base takes many hours per week. You have to find prospects, talk them into hosting parties, preparing for the parties, holding the parties, wrapping up loose ends after the parties, and then do it all over again. Then there are all the meetings and “training” events that you’re coerced to attend. Quite simply, there is a lot of time involved in Mary Kay, and anyone who tells you that you can do it in a couple of hours a week is lying."

1. Is simply asking, "Do you have a few hours a week to devote to Mary Kay?" a lie? If they say, "yes, I do" and you say, "oh good, with just a few hours a week, you can make oodles of cash", then YES, you are lying. But just asking... I don't see it.

2. "The problem is that Mary Kay doesn’t just require a couple of hours a week."
(Really? What happens? You get in and they say, "ha ha, now we gotch... you have to work, like, totally, 4 hours a week...[maniacal laughter]...andyou can't quit...ever.WHat did I miss?)

3. "The truth is that developing a legitimate customer base takes many hours per week."
(Right, but don't worry if you want an illegitimate customer base. If you want one of those, this question is not a lie!)

4. "Then there are all the meetings and “training” events that you’re coerced to attend."
(Here's a radical idea. DON'T GO!)

5. "Quite simply, there is a lot of time involved in Mary Kay, and anyone who tells you that you can do it in a couple of hours a week is lying."
(The "truthfulness" of this point depends a great deal on what "IT" is. And, frankly, "...there is a lot of time involved in Mary Kay..." sounds like a bit of a *cough*lie*cough* misrepresentation *cough*lie*cough* to me.)

Ok, MK newbies, PU consultants, and "hobby level" types. Weigh in please! Is "it only takes a few hours a week" a possibility? Obviously, (or at least hopefully this is obvious) you are not gonna be rakin' in the big bucks this way, but can Mary Kay be "done" with just a few hours a week?

Anyone out there know someone that does Mary Kay part-part-time? Is it worth it to them?

Is it weird to anyone else that Pink Truth is calling a question a lie? (not that anything they do is 'weird' to me anymore)

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 3 of 7) No One Really Likes Mary Kay, Really

This is part 3 of a 7 part series that, frankly, has lost hope of keeping a straight face while examining the erroneous accusations of Mary Kay's extensive foray of lies.

Mary Kay products sell themselves

"Anyone who has ever done Mary Kay knows what a total lie this is. Of course, there will occasionally be a customer who is hunting for a consultant. That’s rare. One in a while you’ll find an excited hostess who has a bunch of spendy friends at her party. That’s rare too. What we know is that the actual market for Mary Kay products is very small. There is a very tiny pool of women who are legitimate customers buying the products. There are certainly not enough of them to allow many women to turn a profit selling the products."

In keeping with the goal of allowing discussion to flow from the readers of this blog, I will try to keep my observations brief.

1. "...Anyone who has ever done Mary Kay knows what a total lie this is..."
(Anyone here care to disagree?)

2. "...Of course, there will occasionally be a customer who is hunting for a consultant. That’s rare."
(Anyone here care to disagree?)

3. "...One in a while you’ll find an excited hostess who has a bunch of spendy friends at her party. That’s rare too."
(Anyone here care to disagree? Also, isn't "spendy" an adjective for something that is expensive... like a purse? Did the hostess spend too much "buying" her friends affection?)

4. "What we know is that the actual market for Mary Kay products is very small."
(WE? KNOW? HOW?)

5. "There is a very tiny pool of women who are legitimate customers buying the products."
(Really? I would love to see the research that backs up this assertion!!)

6. "There are certainly not enough of them to allow many women to turn a profit selling the products."
(Really? I would love to see the research that backs up this assertion!!)

Sorry for the repetitiveness above, but the only consensus about the "truth" presented in this "no one likes Mary Kay" diatribe seems to be amongst people that did not do well selling Mary Kay. Hmmmm... the ones that could not find a market to sell Mary Kay to all agree that there is no market to sell Mary Kay to... whodathunkit?!?!!

Also, the "lie" they are supposed to be exposing is "Mary Kay products sell themselves". How does "there is no market for Mary Kay" whining prove that Mary Kay is not so good that it tends to save some saliva by "selling itself"? (oh... did they think their recruiter literally meant that the product was going to bust out of the box it came in, sneak out of the house when you are not looking, stroll down to the corner and 'make eyes' with passing consumers until someone picked it up, tracked you down so that they could pay you for this incredible product? I guess they have a point then. It does not "sell itself". My bad.)

What do you think? Does Mary Kay sell itself? Is this fair to say when talking to a prospective recruit? Is it possible to carve out a niche market in your area that is big enough to make decent money?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 2 of 7) The Vast Majority of Mary Kay Recruiters Tell Lies

This is Part 2 of a 7 part series that raises an eyebrow at Pink Truth's (eyebrow at the Truth part of that as well) assertions about the rampant lies in Mary Kay. Please note, it is perfectly acceptable, if you feel so inclined, to move from the "eyebrow raise" into the "wholehearted belly chuckle" as the nefarious irony builds up.

Just One Bad Apple In The Bunch

(Again, I believe this to be from Tracy, but could be corrected after she reads this):

"Sorry, but if you look at Mary Kay recruiters in general, the vast majority of them tell lies to recruit. Many of the lies are lies of omission… They don’t tell the potential recruit how low their sales really are, the true quotas that are required to move up, and the fact that an estimated 99% of women actually lose money with Mary Kay."

I'll be brief, and allow you, my readers, to fill in any blanks here.

Pink Truth Lies:

1. "...the vast majority of them tell lies to recruit"
(This is particularly funny to me because in the original article, she links to another page that uses more lies to back up this assertion. Note that most people see a link as a sort of "footnote-like" reference that makes a thing more true.
I honestly keep hoping that one of these days, I will see the evidence that they have of things like this, "...vast majority..." BS, but every time I follow a link, I just find more exaggerations and unfounded claims.)

2. "...Many of the lies are lies of omission… They don’t tell the potential recruit how low their sales really are, the true quotas that are required to move up..."
(Ok, "...vast majority..." crap aside, you either say your sales are higher than they are (a lie) or plainly lay out your average sales (not a lie). You either lay out the required sales and recruiting levels to reach certain titles (not a lie) or you spare the poor, already overwhelmed recruit all the gory details until she is ready to find out what it takes to reach this level (also not a lie). Telling her that she can reach high levels in the company without meeting quotas (a lie) is not a lie of omission... it is just a lie.)

3. "...and the fact that an estimated 99% of women actually lose money with Mary Kay."

(This has to be my favorite... because this "fact" IS A LIE. To be fair, it is a partial truth, stretched into an exaggeration, and then twisted into the lie you see here.)

What are your thoughts on the "one bad apple" line?

Do you think there are more bad than good? Or more good than bad?

Does anyone else think that it is ridiculously, absurdly hilarious that Tracy would like Mary Kay recruiters to LIE, spreading her "99%" deception, in order to avoid being accused of lying... get this... by her?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lies - a mini-series (Part 1 of 7) Mary Kay Exploits Christianity for Monetary Gain

Pink Truth (the website that smears Mary Kay) has a very interesting, if liberal, definition of "truth". I doubt if anyone that has read here long has any doubt about the contempt I hold for the standards that website holds for conveying "truth".

So what happens when a weblog that plays loose with the truth starts slinging accusations about rampant lies? (sounds like the lead-in blurb about an upcoming TV sitcom) Intrigued? I hope so, because we are going to spend the next several days talking about the so called lies, manufactured or otherwise, that Pink Truth would like you to believe that Mary Kay tells.

Tonight, by way of introduction to this concept (and the ensuing conversation I hope it will spark) lets look at Pink Truth's explanation to us of just how credible it is to allege that lies are being told in Mary Kay.

Although Tracy has gotten better at giving credit to her guest posters, one can never be too sure whether or not she "forgot" to give credit... so, barring any later revelations, this is from Tracy:

"I thought it would be fun to tell you about some of my favorite lies told in Mary Kay. Lies? Lies, you say? But you thought Mary Kay was a “Christian” company!

Wrong! It’s a company that exploits Christianity for monetary gain. By spouting things about Christianity, they get women off their guard. Their defenses are lowered, and they’re more likely to believe the lies they’re told."

Now, I really want to hear your thoughts on this, but I would like to take a moment to make a few personal observations.

First of all, I strongly disagree with any assertion of "Christianity" being applied to inanimate objects.

A Christian company
A Christian song
A Christian band
etc.

A "Christian", by definition, is a person, no? Carried out further, a person that "follows Christ", right? So, do some people (in and out of Mary Kay) refer to Mary Kay as a "Christian" company? Of course. Does that make it a given? Does that mean that everyone in Mary Kay is a Christian? Of course not.

Was Mary Kay founded on Christian principles? Are some (or many) of Mary Kay's core values guided by Christian values? It sure seems that way.

My question is, "What does this have to do with a discussion about rampant deception in a company?"

Wouldn't lies be bad whether or not the company was "Christian"?
Isn't it possible that a company aiming to uphold Christian values be capable of lies?

Now this, in and of itself, is not really very shocking. (considering the source) It irritates me, yes, but, really, Pink Truth is hardly the first or only people to mock someone that tries to put Christian principles into practical application and they certainly won't be the last. However, what changes this from a minor irritation (like the rash you get as a result of chafing) to something worth committing an entire post to, is the second part of this "introduction".

For the sake of emphasis, I will quote it again:

"Wrong! It’s a company that exploits Christianity for monetary gain. By spouting things about Christianity, they get women off their guard. Their defenses are lowered, and they’re more likely to believe the lies they’re told."

Using the "It's a Christian company" line as a segue, they tell the most insidious lie in the Pink Truth handbook. "Mary Kay exploits Christianity for monetary gain."

This has been discussed in other places, and undoubtedly, there are people that fit this accusation. However, consider the person that holds their beliefs and values so highly that they make an effort to incorporate them in their business dealing. When they approach a potential recruit (for the sake of argument, let's assume that this potential recruit holds similar values in similarly high esteem... how else would they be "exploitable"?), they encourage them, as they would like to be encouraged... to pray about it, to ask God for guidance, and whether this would be a good direction for them to take. Pink Truth would have you believe that this person is exploiting Christianity for monetary gain. And not just this person. Mary Kay as a company is doing this. How, you may ask. "By spouting things about Christianity..."

Here's the problem with this "theory".

A God-fearing, Bible-believing Christian is not going to be taken in by someone "spouting things about Christianity".

Anyone that doesn't identify as "Christian" is even less likely to be taken in by "things-about-Christianity" spouting.

So, who exactly is Mary Kay using Christianity to exploit for monetary gain?

What are your thoughts? Does Mary Kay exploit Christianity for monetary gain? If so, how? Can anyone explain this to me?

Mary Kay Recruiters Consistently Lie About Everything. True or False?

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, I posted this question, "Is Mary Kay an illegal pyramid scheme? Will the results of the Y.T.B. lawsuit change things for Mary Kay?".

While there were many good responses, yesterday someone saw fit to go through all the trouble to create a blogger profile just so they could "flame" this site with Pink Truth propaganda.

It went something like this.

"Let me tell you in no uncertain terms that getting into Mary Kay Cosmetics is extremely dangerous! Recruiters consistently lie about everything, and the lies are perpetuated over and over:
"MK marketing plan taught at Harvard" NOT!!!!
"MK is a dual-marketing plan" NOT!!!
"Executive income on part-time hours" NOT!!!!
"You can write off your personal use of products as advertisement" NOT!!!!
Make no mistake that MKC is a devious, corrupt company whose catchy motto "Enriching Womens' Lives" is anything but! Thousands upon thousands of womens'lives have been destroyed by following the advice and business practices handed down from their uplines: divorce (their widely taught "husband unawareness program"), foreclosures (ordering incentives and "short-term loss for long-term gain"), and bankruptcy ("fake it till you make it").
Beware! Mary Kay Cosmetics preys on womens' natural trust.
If this lawsuit being discussed here rests upon the fact that their salesforce consistantly lie about the "flopportunity", then yes, MKC will be next. And for the sake of innocent women, I truly hope it will."

As I suspected, the cowardly deviant had no designs to stick around and explain his/her position, much less defend it.

However, and I am sure quite opposite the expectations of aforementioned deviant, I would like to discuss this further.

Since this seems to mirror somewhat accurately the complaints and missives of the Pink Truth crowd, this is a great opportunity for the "balanced" crowd to respond.

What say all of you? Are these rantings valid? Have you seen any of these things take place?

Pink Truth and Balanced Mary Kay Joining forces to expose Mary Kay?

That's right, you heard it hear first.

This post is, as Wikipedia is fond of saying, a "stub". A thought popped into my little head, and as things have been (relatively) quiet around here, I figured I would share.

You see, Pink Truth is not all that different from this site. Really.

Now if you think I am off my rocker, keep reading... this gets better.

The "ah ha" moment, the "one thing" that sparked this thought for me... came from.... none other than, wait for it...

...

"Raisinberry" (for those of you that do not follow Pink Truth, "raisinberry" is one of the more prolific commentators on that site)

That's right, "raisinberry" said something that made me realize that, almost unilaterally, the folks that post over there and the folks that post over here, fundamentally speaking, see eye to eye.

Think about it.

Most (if not all) here hate manipulation. Religious or otherwise, we can't stand it.

So do they.

Most (if not all) here hate false income claims. From cars to paychecks to commissions to "quit your job" lines, we hate to hear about it.

So do they.

Most (if not all) here hate pyramid schemes. Whether it is perpetuated in Mary Kay, or in "life outside of Mary Kay", we disapprove.

So do they.

I could go on.

Fundamentally speaking, the stuff they hate about Mary Kay, we hate.

The only "little detail" we disagree on is how widespread these problems are in Mary Kay. (They more, us less.)

So, in "healthy" negotiating style, I propose a 'set-aside'. We both agree to "set aside" the part we disagree about, and explore just how much we do agree about.

Having said all that, let me ask you to consider the following quote from "raisinberry". Yes, the one that lit the little light bulb in my little head. Those of you that have "issues" with "raisinberry", set them aside for a moment. Allow yourself to picture someone that came to the realization that she had been lied to, and was manipulated into lying to other women. Imagine how you would feel (or recall how you have felt in a similar situation), remove the "Mary Kay" factor from this completely, and just picture this purely in terms of someone that got scammed.... bad.

"That means, all those women whose faces we looked into and believed were either masterfully duped themselves or fully aware predators. That is the scariest thing of all...listening to, modeling your behavior, repeating the words that work from, and otherwise obeying a voice in complete denial...or one that is frankly a sociopath. Who can watch the financial life blood drain out of her directors year after years after year and not give a rats rear? Who can say, "no, next!" being a party to phony words that manipulate women into coughing up another round of wholesale?"

Do we not all agree that, assuming there is a real person that embodies the evil she speaks of here, a person who would do this to another person is someone who (at best) should be avoided?

Really, our mission is the same. We do not want people to be victims. We want to stop the culprits.

Do you think this is possible? Is there hope that we could "meet in the middle" and actually do some good? What are your thoughts about this?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay Lady Harassed Me - And I Kinda Liked It!

Well, since a few of you were talking about this, I thought it worth bringing "out in the open"

Today's "Pink Truth Comment" is brought to you by the letter X and Pink Truth commentator, "sherineill":

"Wahoo!!! I love it!

I walked into a restaurant about a month ago and saw a MK ballot box in the washroom. I filled out a ballot (I wanted IC to call me) and then on another one put this site address.

Well sure enough about a week later I got an excited MK lady on the phone telling me I didn't win the "free gift" (which was satin hands) you would think she would be promoting the new product but whatever. However, for filling out the ballot I was going to get a "free facial!!!!!"

Her: Now what is better for you the beginning or the end of the week. ( I almost hurled at the thought that I used to do this weekly)
Me: Neither
Her: Oh so you're telling me weekends are better, how abou.....
Me: Actually no. I didn't say that at all. You're not listening. Are
all MK Consultants like that or just you?" ( I was having fun)
Her: (silence) Well my appointment book is filling up quickly...I would really like to get you in as soon as possible
Me: Why? It's free, you're not getting a thing out of it. I am not going to buy anything.
Her: Why not pamper yourself? Do you have children?
Me: What difference does it make? I am still not buying anything.
Her: (stammers...) well I was going to say if you have children this would be a nice time to finally have your husband take care of them so you have time for you self. We woman need that.
Me: Listen, how dare you insult my husband. He actually does take care of HIS children. I know in MK you think hubby's do nothing, but in the real world they actually do! I don't want you to step foot in my house and try to get me to buy your timewise stuff, or your new mineral make up or worse try to recruit me. I've been in MK and and am climbing out of debt. I wish you luck with that!!!"

And I hung up.

I then went to the restaurant and complained to the Manager that I was being harassed by the MK lady.

HA!!"

I would love to hear the conversation with that manager!

Sheri: A MK lady harassed me.
Manager: Which one?
Sheri: The one with the "ballot box" in your washroom.
Manager: How did she get your phone number?
Sheri: I wrote it down on a card and put it in the ballot box in your washroom.
Manager: Oh, then she must have called you a bunch of times?
Sheri: No, no, just the once... I made fun of her.
Manager: O...K, then in what way did she harass you?
Sheri: No, see by putting the B box there, she harassed me.
Manager: I don't follow.
Sheri: Oh, I see, you are in the pink fog too, never mind, *cough*PINKTRUTH.COM*cough*
Manager: Huh? I'm sorry, I didn't catch that.
Sheri: Nothing... *cough*PINKTRUTH.COM*cough*
Manager: Um... is there anything else I can help you with?

...to be continued!

What are your thoughts?

Pink Truth: Mary Kay and Faith don't mix

Here is a really quick thought, but one that should probably generate a lot of discussion.

Some people on Pink Truth claim that their faith was manipulated in order to force them into ordering more than they needed, and, in some cases, ultimately manipulate others this way as well.

Others maintain that faith and religion have no place in any work environment and therefore should not be spoken about in Mary Kay.

Meanwhile, some in Mary Kay insist that it is God who blesses their Mary Kay and they would be remiss to not at least acknowledge the good favor He has blessed them with.

Still others agree that faith and religion have no place in any work environment and therefore should not be spoken about in Mary Kay.

There are people in Mary Kay and people on Pink Truth that would call themselves Christians, and those that would not.

My question is, if ones faith can be manipulated as easily as some claim theirs was, wouldn't that cause serious concerns about ones faith being weak?

There is a lot here, and I must warn everyone... If you are easily offended, you should probably not join in this conversation. If you put your thoughts, feelings, beliefs, etc. on this post, be prepared to defend them.

Should religion and faith be kept quiet in Mary Kay?

Is talking about God to a potential recruit manipulation? Or just out of place?

If someone tells you, "God's will for your life is to sell Mary Kay" and you just blindly take their word for it, who really is to blame there?

Pink Truth: How much inventory does Mary Kay require?

There has been some considerable conversation on one of our recent posts "Are ALL Mary Kay ladies scary?" about how much inventory a new recruit should come in with and how much a director (who is supposed to be helping the recruit) should recommend.

The way I see it, the level of inventory that a person thinks is good will vary from person to person. So while mk4me, strt, or others may think that $6,000 wholesale is too much, the director that is recommending this seemingly insane level may actually think that this is a good level to get started with. So, if she really believes that it is in the best interest of the recruit that she is recommending this level to, is she really an evil, master manipulator bent on destroying someones finances just so that she can pocket a few hundred dollars, or is she just painfully unaware of the fact that not everyone can expect to sell that much merch. right out the gate?

On another note, a "who's to blame note", it seems that there are some that are so desperate to "get rich quick" that they eschew the advice of their director to "start small" and they "get crazy with the cheez-whiz" and find themselves in a world of hurt. Is it possible that there is a large "middle ground" of people that desperately want to put loads of cash in their pockets, and when the conversation about inventory comes up, their "eyes are bigger than their stomach" (or in this case they think they can sell more than they really can) and they, essentially, convince the director that they should buy a certain level of inventory because they "know" they can sell it?

I don't doubt that there are some directors that put pressure on their recruits to buy more inventory than they should. I am sure that some of these are selfish people that can't see past today to realize that this will hurt them in the long run. I am sure that some of them are not selfish at all and genuinely think a large inventory is the best thing for their new recruit. While some may fundamentally disagree with that position (and good reasons certainly exist to disagree) I don't know that it makes them wrong.

I also don't doubt that there are some recruits who, despite every warning from their director, throw caution to the wind and buy enough inventory to make the UPS man cry. I am sure that some of them do this because they know they can sell product quickly and efficiently and don't want to waste any time "finding out" something they already know. I am sure that some of them are just WAY too optimistic in their own opinion of their ability to sell and soon find themselves massively regretting their headstrong disregard for their director's advice.

But what about the others? What about the ones that were not this extreme?

Were you happy with the inventory level you started with? What did you like about it?

Were you unhappy? Why?

Did you feel pressured? If you were pressured (either to buy more or to buy less), were you glad you were pressured? Did you wish you listened to the suggestions and gave in to the pressure?

If you are a director, do you strongly recommend a certain level? If so, do you try to get people to "rise" to that level? Do you try to convince them to lower their expectations to that level?

Ex-consultants, were you "gently suggested" or "heavily pressured" to place a large inventory order? OR, were you told that a large order was mandatory?

"bonus points" to anyone that can accurately tell the group the answer to the question posed by the title of this post... "How much inventory does Mary Kay require?"

Happy Weekend all.

*****EDIT*****

Directly from the "Ready Set Sell" brochure


Congratulations to "Blessed" for being the first to accurately answer the question! You get 10,000 bonus points. And since I have never assigned bonus points before, that puts you in the lead. Congratulations!

****EDIT*****