Reply to What is the appeal of Glennon Doyle

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "What is the appeal of Glennon Doyle"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I used to find mommy and inspirational bloggers to be a guilty pleasure - like Glennon Doyle, Brenee Brown, etc. But now I just can't really get anything out of it because it's so clear they are messed up personally. [/quote]

I never got the enormous appeal of brenee brown, probably because she reminds me of many other ph.d.'s in the psychology field and personally she always struck me as thin skinned,  defensive and insecure. She seems to have softened but star quality and the enormous national stage she commands? Baffled. I think personally she probably struggles with it too...I have known other clinicians and faculty/researchers who are so wise, warm and charismatic. Life is funny, these things don't always square.
[/quote]

I can't with Brene Brown either. Ugh. [/quote]

A few points: Brene Brown is a social worker, not a psychologist.  She also has a Ph.D. and a legitimate faculty appointment at an actual university.  Finding her style grating is a matter of personal preference, but it's not the same as someone like Glennon Doyle, who has no robust credentials in anything while putting forth the illusion of expertise.  That may be part of her charm, in the way that some people find Sarah Palin or Kim Kardashian charming: they're complete BS artists.  It's one thing to find people like that entertaining, but thinking they provide actual expert advice in things that matter is troubling.  Hard pass.[/quote]

But whether their advice is actually "expert" or not, if someone finds it helpful, what does it matter? What's the actual harm?[/quote]

You don't see an issue with people following the advice of someone with no legitimate credentials on a topic?  Plenty of things can "seem" helpful that actually aren't.  Our country has a weird fixation with ignoring actual experts and thinking they know best, to no one's benefit.[/quote]

Especially if they are their “authentic” self to readers while actually rewriting their own history. There have been numerous indications on multiple websites that Glennon’s history is not what she says it is.[/quote]

Sure, if they're giving advice on psychiatric meds or something. But aren't most of these people touting things along the lines of "be true to yourself" and GRATITUDE? I share the cynicism, but it's not like that's deep enough to require credentials.[/quote]

I was the poster who said I did not get the appeal of Brown, did not know she was not a psychologist, thanks for clarifying. I think early in she looked to me like she was not all that self aware.. I totally get that she actually has creds but oddly this is part of what grated because her response to critique was so unlike what I  would expect of a colleague. I'm thinking specifically about her response to Adam Grant who questioned implementing some of her tenants about "authenticity" in the workplace. I can look for the link,  but [b]she sounded defensive and she seemed offended for even being challenged. She seemed pissed about having to define her terms. This is what  professionals and colleagues in the field do though, they challenge and ask questions about your work and your thinking.[/b]

Additionally I was confused because  shame in her work was never tied to any of the larger issues they would be in broader  theory or clinical work (like looking at the unique relationship between shame and narcissism, or how to work with shame in treatment, or research regarding different common pathways on how shame develops, etc) but i also realize she was writing self help and she has to significantly water down her research for public consumption and this probably is a huge conflict/pia for her too.

So basically i suspect she was really just working her sh"t out as she went along versus having done the work. Which I guess is how it goes,. I found it hard to watch though. There’s no shame researcher who maybe had a better handle on their personal shame? Maybe not, I don't know. I agree...the personality issues of some of these high profile writers can't help but be  revealed and this is what happens when you write so personally. And then the fame fuels your issues further and you write personally about it some more, etc. I have not decided if that suggests they are brave and creative or actually naive and a bit too attention seeking/grandiose. Maybe a bit of all of it. [/quote]

I'm the PP who pointed out Brene Brown's credentials and only just now saw this.

As to the bolded, she may have been exhausted by the mansplaining.  I know how academics operate but christ, the mansplaining and condescension can be SO hard to take, day in and day out.  She also doesn't study shame in the clinical context, e.g., narcissistic personality disorder, so why would she go there?  Different people specialize in different things.

The larger point is that she has academic chops that Glennon Doyle does not have.  At all.  So, while people might find both irritating, it's an important distinction to make.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics