Somebody Hand God the Rubber Chicken: He’s Being Negative Again!

Written by TRACY on . Posted in Culture & Manipulation

chicken.jpg

Written by The Scribbler

“At one sales meeting, a Director placed a small bank on the table. If anyone said something negative, she had to pay the bank! At another meeting, consultants were given a rubber chicken to hold if they said something negative.” (Former IBC)

Have you ever had to cough up coin for being contradictive in Mary Kay? Ever been stuck with the duck? Ever hear about the frustrated director who screamed at a unit meeting, “Punks hold skunks!”

The last one was made-up, of course, but it’s probably not that far off of the mark, particularly when we’ve got NSD Rena Tarbet telling new consultants, “Your attitude MUST always be positive! One of the reasons you can be terminated as a Consultant is for NEGATIVISM.”

I was surprised to discover that “negativism” is an actual word. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as, “A habitual attitude of skepticism or resistance to the suggestions/instructions of others.” Simplified, it becomes “The act of regularly refusing to take things at face value.”

Let’s take a quick mini-quiz! Consider this training document excerpt, which offers the following suggestion/instruction:

“Believe in this company and opportunity…read motivational books, self-help books, and Mary Kay’s autobiography.”

Question One: Can we all agree that motivational and self-help books get a big pink stamp of approval in MK? Joel Olsteen fans, you keep hooting like that and the Audubon Society’s going to think that the local Spotted Owl population’s breeding early this year.

Now let me ask you this: Would it be an accurate to describe the Bible as a motivational/self-help book? After all, its verses are widely quoted in director and NSD e-mails, teachings, and speeches. It’s also a major element of life-changing programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous and life rehabilitation classes at homeless shelters – I’d say those uses fall under the “motivational/self-help” benchmarks, wouldn’t you?

Last question: What would you say if I told you that the Bible violently hurls the MK “no negativity” mindset to the mat and comes down on it with The People’s Elbow? Can I show you that the Bible gives everyone (including IBCs!) full permission to “regularly refuse to take things at face value?” If you find yourself saying “NO!” right now, that’s okay – that only means you don’t have enough information. Secure those loose articles and raise your arms because the lap bar’s on its way down!

The first part of Isaiah 1:18 says “Come, let us reason together…”

“Reason” here is defined as “to show to be right or to prove.” That’s pretty different thinking from that of a culture that makes a woman hold a stuffed skunk because she said something “negative,” like voicing the reality of her profits or lamenting the backache that comes with constantly schlepping an ulterior motive. (Note that our beloved Tracy was made to hold the skunk at more than one unit meeting in her Mary Kay days!)

What about Luke 14:28, which says, “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he has sufficient to finish it?”

That’s quite different from the objection overcomer of, “A sharp, intelligent person like yourself can make a decision when she knows the most information about it – that time is now.” And women receive little time to “count the cost,” especially when a recruiter’s pushing to get a signed Agreement within 24-48 hours.

Check out Proverbs 14:15: “The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.”

This verse smashes “Just Bee-lieve!” teachings that crow, “You can trust this company…you will never find a company as good as this one! We have the best opportunity in all the land.” (NSD Anita Garrett-Roe). Are you so simple that you tend to bee-lieve every word?

Last one, folks – this one come to us out of Acts 17:11: (NIV) “Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”

Want to know something nifty? The Bereans had “great eagerness.” Translation? Bee-lief and plenty of it, but they didn’t stop there. They took it one step further by digging deeper and cross-checking what Paul preached against the Word.

Why would they do that? Were the Bereans just being Negative Nellies? Ater all, Paul wasn’t an uneducated hack; he studied under Rabban Gamaliel, a “Pharisee and doctor of the law.” According to JewishEncyclopedia.com, the title “Rabban” was higher than that of “Rabbi” and was given only to “presidents of the highest religious council.” Paul’s accomplishments, education, travels, and trials made him a prime candidate for receiving blind faith and unquestioning devotion, but the Bereans weren’t that gullible.

You don’t have to be, either, friend. In fact, you’d be doing yourself a great justice to give Proverbs 19:2 (NIV) a home on your goal poster, screen saver, or bathroom mirror: “It is not good to have zeal without knowledge.”

And we’re not talking about in-house knowledge that paints MK as nothing less than infallible – you get enough of that already. Dare to step out, take hard looks, and ask hard questions. Besides, if the Bible says it’s okay, then who is your Director or NSD to tell you otherwise?

In the future, if you end up having to hold the rubber chicken at your unit meeting, take comfort in the fact that it’s not because you were being “negative” (unless you happened to be channeling Deadwood’s Al Swearengen while “discussing” things with your NSD) – you were simply refusing to take something at face value. And like the inquisitive Bereans, that makes you “of more noble character!”

Now that’s what I call positive!

Similar Posts:

Tags: , , ,

Trackback from your site.

Comments (15)

  • MLM Radar

    |

    One of the reasons you can be terminated as a Consultant is for NEGATIVISM.

    Terminated as a consultant? TERMINATED as a consultant? Are you kidding? There’s nothing – not one thing – in the Mary Kay Consultant Agreement that allows any Director to TERMINATE any Consultant for negativity. Period.

    The Consultant agreement is between the woman and Mary Kay Corporate. If a woman wants to remain a Consultant and abides by the provisions in her agreement, there’s nothing a Director can do force her out. And if the woman exercises her rights to quit under the agreement there’s nothing a Director can do to force her to stay.

    Shame. Certainly. No rule against shaming. Shun, ignore, mock? No rule against those either. Cajole, entice, seduce? That’s the core of a Director’s unwritten handbook. Proselytize and selectively quote scripture out of context? Abusing scripture is one of the things MK directors do best! Propagandize, brainwash, even lie? Absolutely. There’s no rule against a Director lying to her Consultants to manipulate them. Happens all the time, and MK Corporate doesn’t care.

    But terminate a consultant for negativity? No, the Director is powerless to do that.

    Besides, if a Director could terminate her Consultants for negativity she’d wipe out her unit overnight – and lose her directorship with it. Criminey, a Director already has a hard enough time keeping her unit numbers up. Why would she even think about terminating a consultant, even if she had the power to do it?

    Reply

  • alurker

    |

    The company can terminate a consultant but when you read the agreement, I don’t see how they could terminate a consultant for being negative.

    Reply

  • princess lea

    |

    I can’t even count the times I’ve heard the phrase “Stinking Thinking” thrown around….
    Does that mean when you are being an independent thinker your director thinks you are a stinker?

    Reply

  • Deflated Pink Bubble

    |

    As long as the consultant is ordering product regularly from corporate they won’t terminate her. The only thing that corporate cares about is that people order product from them, bottom line.

    Reply

  • Elf

    |

    I lurk here. Why? Good question. A very close neighbor is rocking the Mary Kay thing. She is driving her free car, proclaiming it is free constantly, and has a steady stream of women coming to her door with small children in tow.
    I came on here as I was researching this incredible free car opportunity but I stay because it is like a train wreck. This consultant or director or whatever she is, is totally in the pink fog. She’s probably at about her 6 month mark. I’ll let you all know how it turns out. Besides the free car, she has nothing to fall back on if, this is as I read here, she really is not making any money.
    Thanks for keeping me from drinking the kool aid.

    Reply

    • MLM Radar

      |

      Besides the free car, she has nothing to fall back on

      She doesn’t even have the free car to fall back on. If she fails to meet production quotas it means she isn’t getting enough commission to spit on. And that means that she not only owes a co-pay, but also has to return most or all of whatever commission she did receive to cover that co-pay.

      The alternative: Watching the repo guy haul that fancy pink car out of her driveway. Yeah, THAT’S going to enhance her so-called business.

      Reply

    • BestDecision

      |

      Elf, what car is it that she’s driving? From that I can give you an estimate of how much she’s making per month.

      Reply

  • Eyes wide open

    |

    Hello Elf,
    Keep lurking and you will find that her car isn’t really free. Unless her unit is making production every month, she has a hefty co-pay to cough up for that beautiful trophy of “success”.

    Reply

  • Deflated Pink Bubble

    |

    That free car is anything but free,. Each month she has to produce at least $4,000. in orders to the company from her and her unit. The car is leased by Mary Kay and if she falls below that production amount she has to make the lease payment… and, Mary Kay actually charges more than the actual lease. So they make money on those cars if the SD misses production. Everything about Mary Kay is a big show with lots of smoke and mirrors.

    Reply

  • Guest

    |

    I lurk because a dear friend has been doing MK for 15 years (15 YEARS!) and still thinks that MK will save her family from the edge of financial disaster. It is painful to see the piles of inventory in her home (collecting dust) and knowing that she went into debt to purchase it.
    She’s in deep (deep into the belief of MK as her families financial salvation), but nothing ever comes of it (no money).
    Lurking here has helped me to learn to deal with her blind faith and belief in MK. It is so hard to see an intelligent woman so blind to the truth.
    Thank you Pink Truth, you’re like Al-Anon for me!

    Reply

    • Deflated Pink Bubble

      |

      She probably has no clue that it is Mary Kay that PUT her family at the edge of financial disaster. It’s sad because when you finally wake up and see that the problem is, in fact, Mary Kay, the psychological trauma is horrific. You wake up to this really dark place where you blame yourself for being stupid. In truth, we were conned and it’s a masterful plan.

      Reply

  • Elf

    |

    It is a small white Chevy. A Cruz, I think.

    Reply

    • BestDecision

      |

      $2,000/month gross income.

      How? Okay, assuming she is a “Premier Club” Director, not a Consultant, driving a Chevy, she has to average a unit production of $8,000 wholesale, which means her gross commissions are about $2,000/ month. Not adding in any personal sale or the expenses her personal business cost her that month, this also doesn’t take into account the expenses she paid as a Director that month (meeting room rent, newsletter, postage, travel, chargebacks, etc.). It also doesn’t show what she paid on federal taxes for that revenue. I’m guessing she probably nets about $1,000 a month max.

      Kinda stinks as part of the “Top 2%” of the company, huh?

      Reply

      • Elf

        |

        Thank you. That is an incredible number (8000) considering no one is buying the stuff at anywhere near a rate to support that.
        I’ll keep you posted. I came here so I don’t drink the pink punch. Thank you.

        Reply

  • Guest

    |

    In Civil Action No. SA-92-CA-0425, Securities and Exchange Commission, Anita Mallory Hall (n/k/a Anita Mallory Garrett-Roe) was named as a Defendant along with her then husband, John Allen Hall, Jr., for violations of the SEC. John Allen Hall, Jr. eventually pled guilty in the federal, criminal charges against him listed also in the civil lawsuit.

    In the Halls’ San Antonio Divorce, Anita Mallory Hall was awarded both residences (in Aledo, Texas and San Antonio, Texas) even though a federally appointed court receiver filed a Petition in Intervention to take those residences to make restitution for the investors’ monies misused by Anita Mallory Hall (n/k/a Anita Mallory Garrett-Roe).

    In The Affidavit of Sammy Hughes, a CPA and investigative accountant for the SEC, as to Anita Mallory Hall et al, it states that “at least $2.4 million of the $10million fraudulently raised by the defendants was transferred or directly deposited into the accounts of defendants Custom Trading International Corporation” (run by John A. Hall, Jr.)
    “approximately $49,500 of investor proceeds were used to make a down payment on defendant Hall’s current residence in San Antonio. On May 31, 1991, …issued a check to Hall’s wife”… (n/k/a Anita Mallory Garrett-Roe)…”in the amount of $24,500 from the ECS corporate account at Bank One, San Antonio, Texas.”

    “Further, my analysis of the ECS account reveals that absent the deposit of investor funds from CTIC, ECS did not have sufficient funds to cover the $49,500 paid to the Halls.”

    Now in San Patricio County, Texas (Sinton courts) Anita Mallory (f/k/a Hall) Garrett-Roe is being sued for divorce by her third husband, Dr. Ronald D. Garrett-Roe for many breaches of fiduciary duties owed to him and for FRAUD against him in many transactions.

    Way to go for the 2013 World NSD for Mary Kay; what a winner and great example for future Mary Kay NSDs…..appears she really learned from John Allen Hall about committing fraud.

    And several Mary Kay directors invested thousands of dollars in this Ponzi scheme; they never got back any of their investments!!

    Best be cautious and beware any dealings with this 2013 World Mary Kay NSD……..betcha Mary Kay corporate has no idea of the SEC civil lawsuit naming Anita as a Defendant nor of the pending lawsuit for divorce against her for more fraud.

    Reply

Leave a comment