Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jill McQuown <j_mcquown@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
Subject: Re: Anyone having a Tupperware party?
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 19:07:41 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <vsponu$f2fi$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vsfjoc$1q007$5@dont-email.me>
 <9042e51c7560132bfecc5ea0b9a2fab0@www.novabbs.com>
 <vshlrm$366u$1@dont-email.me> <67ec5f7d$0$849533$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
 <d253ba6e37333ce170dcbd31baa38815@www.novabbs.com>
 <67ec8857$0$2783$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <vskl6t$36q55$1@dont-email.me>
 <vspk5c$f2fj$3@dont-email.me> <70ZHP.131995$Xq5f.71434@fx38.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2025 01:07:43 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f4f622360777038cf4227b99b301a7f9";
	logging-data="494066"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+j+9Z2dHZ9P8HefnQ2O6Y/w25s5QS2KqQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CwpyWGaaKV3Ymvk/X5FEnnKiccs=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <70ZHP.131995$Xq5f.71434@fx38.iad>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250404-6, 4/4/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3664

On 4/4/2025 6:26 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2025-04-04 5:49 p.m., Jill McQuown wrote:
>> On 4/2/2025 8:36 PM, Carol wrote:
> 
>> No one is *obligated* but one does feel pressured.  I worked with a 
>> woman who sold Pampered Chef products on the side.  She was always 
>> approaching people at the office with the catalog.  Pampered Chef 
>> products were way overpriced.
> 
> My wife went to a clothing party back in the 1970s and she bought a 
> couple nice Tshirt type tops. She finally scrapped one about two years 
> ago. It was definitely good quality.
> 
Good quality.  Good for her. :)

>> Back in those days parents were always bringing in order lists for 
>> things their children were supposed to sell to raise money for 
>> something for their school.  Wrapping paper, cookies, candy, etc.  The 
>> company I worked for at the time finally decreed they were not allowed 
>> to do that.
> 
> I worked in an all male environment so that stuff was limited. There 
> were two guys with girls in Brownies and I reluctantly agreed to buy 
> some of those shitty cookies even though I don't like them at all. Then 
> one day I try to flog something for my son's school fundraiser. Some of 
> the other guys bought some but not the two guys who had been selling 
> Girl Scout cookies. That solved my problem with what to do about Girl 
> Scout cookies.
> 
> 
I did wonder why it wasn't the kids who were doing the selling rather 
than the parents.  Okay, let's not get into a discussion about how kids 
couldn't go door-to-door because the boogie man down the block might get 
them.  There are other ways to sell, including setting up stands outside 
of grocery stores (I thought that's what the Girl Scouts did.)  These 
kids shoved the duty off onto their parents; take this sales sheet to 
work.  Do our job for us.  The general feeling was, if you bought from 
one parent you had to buy from another so as not to appear to biased. 
That's why the management told them to stop selling crap for their kids 
fundraisers at the office.  It certainly didn't teach the children 
anything about how to handle sales/orders/money if their parents did the 
work for them.

Jill