Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t get past stupid words like “momastery” and “brutiful”. And that she used to rely way too heavily on caps-lock to make a point. (Maybe she still does?) I don’t doubt she’s done some good in the world and if she makes people feel better, that’s great. I just find her writing style—her whole brand, really—grating and sophomoric.

I completely agree. I wouldn’t ever categorize her as a good writer. Selling books doesn’t equate to good writing.

I can’t get past people who marry, have not 1, not 2, but 3 children and then realize only then they were gay? That’s messed up.

Goodness, you must live a sheltered life. Perhaps she was never on either end of the continuum (fluid seduality), perhaps she was a product of external and internal homophobia, perhaps she just decided she prefers women over men. Having had children is irrelevant. Get out there, PP, and do some reading about sexuality and identity. It's 2022.

NP. I agree with you that people don’t always have perfect options in our very binary society, but having known two people who have done this (come out as gay after years of marriage and kids), I do know it’s REALLY tough on kids. I think part of the problem is that parenting necessarily requires some selflessness (putting your kids well being before your own) and coming out necessarily requires some healthy selfishness (putting your own well-being before that if others, even your immediate family). It’s really hard. I still admire people who are willing to step up and say “this is who I really am” even when they know it will cause fall out.

But it’s messy and hard. I do think we should encourage people to create authentic, honest lives for themselves BEFORE they have kids. It’s not the worst thing for children to watch their parents go through, but it doesn’t lend itself to stability or reliability either, and kids really need that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t get past stupid words like “momastery” and “brutiful”. And that she used to rely way too heavily on caps-lock to make a point. (Maybe she still does?) I don’t doubt she’s done some good in the world and if she makes people feel better, that’s great. I just find her writing style—her whole brand, really—grating and sophomoric.

I completely agree. I wouldn’t ever categorize her as a good writer. Selling books doesn’t equate to good writing.

I can’t get past people who marry, have not 1, not 2, but 3 children and then realize only then they were gay? That’s messed up.

Goodness, you must live a sheltered life. Perhaps she was never on either end of the continuum (fluid seduality), perhaps she was a product of external and internal homophobia, perhaps she just decided she prefers women over men. Having had children is irrelevant. Get out there, PP, and do some reading about sexuality and identity. It's 2022.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t get past stupid words like “momastery” and “brutiful”. And that she used to rely way too heavily on caps-lock to make a point. (Maybe she still does?) I don’t doubt she’s done some good in the world and if she makes people feel better, that’s great. I just find her writing style—her whole brand, really—grating and sophomoric.

I completely agree. I wouldn’t ever categorize her as a good writer. Selling books doesn’t equate to good writing.

I can’t get past people who marry, have not 1, not 2, but 3 children and then realize only then they were gay? That’s messed up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t get past stupid words like “momastery” and “brutiful”. And that she used to rely way too heavily on caps-lock to make a point. (Maybe she still does?) I don’t doubt she’s done some good in the world and if she makes people feel better, that’s great. I just find her writing style—her whole brand, really—grating and sophomoric.

I completely agree. I wouldn’t ever categorize her as a good writer. Selling books doesn’t equate to good writing.

Anonymous wrote:I can’t get past stupid words like “momastery” and “brutiful”. And that she used to rely way too heavily on caps-lock to make a point. (Maybe she still does?) I don’t doubt she’s done some good in the world and if she makes people feel better, that’s great. I just find her writing style—her whole brand, really—grating and sophomoric.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a fan of Glennon Doyle or Brene Brown. BUT I know that lots of people adore them. They fill a need. Just not my need.

My mother in law adores Glennon.

They fill a need, which is to make everything a matter of personal choice and thus not the fault of structural inequities. It's great not to feel helpless, but these woman are encouraging other women to roar and rebel in ways the ruling class finds acceptable, then sit back down.

I can see why someone from an older, MIL generation would like it. It's comfortable. It claims not to be, but at its foundation, it is about preserving the overall status quo with just a few tweaks

How much of her work have you actually read?

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if some people put Doyle into the same category as Rachel Hollis. They do have a similar vibe: they dole out advice based on limited life experience, they’re loud, and they’re thin. And blonde. But the content of what they’re saying is completely opposite. Hollis is trash. Doyle is, well, not trash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a fan of Glennon Doyle or Brene Brown. BUT I know that lots of people adore them. They fill a need. Just not my need.

My mother in law adores Glennon.

They fill a need, which is to make everything a matter of personal choice and thus not the fault of structural inequities. It's great not to feel helpless, but these woman are encouraging other women to roar and rebel in ways the ruling class finds acceptable, then sit back down.

I can see why someone from an older, MIL generation would like it. It's comfortable. It claims not to be, but at its foundation, it is about preserving the overall status quo with just a few tweaks

How much of her work have you actually read?

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that not many posters here have read GD or listened to her podcast. I wasn’t a huge fan, although I had read her books, until I started listening but now I think her podcast is one of the best out there. She would NEVER say “Live Laugh Love” - she is like the antithesis of that. She is all about pointing out structural inequality and frequently calls out her own privilege and a majority of her guests have been women of color. She owns her shit and talks about her flaws frequently (as does Abby and Amanda) and it’s so refreshing to hear someone work through this stuff in real time. She also says she doesn’t have answers, but does have questions. I really value her work.

Anonymous wrote:^^ well she had a major screw up a couple years ago attempting to organize as "safe space" for white women to talk about their privilege. Got called out on it. Rightfully so.

I've read all her books and have heard her speak at conferences. She's entertaining and I love she and Abby together. But she went into that VERY fast, and I don't trust that it will last. I hope it does.
Her initial books were quite funny. Later ones, a little preachy.