First of all, credibility. Sheryl's words have made it so far because she has succeeded in her career and is trying to explain to others what she thinks you should do to get where she is. The author of this letter hasn't experienced success and therefore shouldn't have enough of an idea what it takes to succeed to agree or disagree with Sheryl.
Second of all, I don't think the author of the letter even knows what Lean In means. It seems like her interpretation of the definition is to lean in to your work and grind through 80 hour weeks such that you don't have time to take care of yourself, be happy, or even do your own household chores. I haven't read Lean In personally but my impression was that the definition was more along the lines of ignoring all of the existing gender bias and having the self-confidence to set goals and go for them.
Perhaps the goal you set is to be happy, or to do your laundry once a week, or to stay fit, or to have a happy relationship. Your goals don't need to be corporate/career ones. I don't think the goals of the letter's author necessarily contradict Sheryl's points.
Sandberg is credibly the COO of Facebook, but TIME didn't give her the cover to appeal to the 7 people who will hold that job between now and FB's eventual bankruptcy in 2047. Or the 70 people who will compete for it, or the 7000 people who will be in similar positions across the Fortune 100. She's being held up as a model of success, for the average person to emulate. It is very much an open question how many people would consider life like hers well-lived.
That the difference is glossed over so blithely makes me skeptical.
Sheryl has an opinion, the letter's author has an opinion, I have my own opinion. We are all free to share our opinion.
I am weighing in because I care immensely about women in tech and feminism and disagree with the point of view portrayed in the letter.
Am I not allowed to share my opinion because I haven't read the book she's violently disagreeing with? Just because I haven't read the book doesn't mean I haven't seen Sheryl speak numerous times and don't understand her point.
Perhaps she's experienced some level of success, thanks for correcting me/acknowledging the hole in my argument, but I think it's safe to assume that she hasn't experienced the same level of success as Sheryl.
First of all, credibility. Sheryl's words have made it so far because she has succeeded in her career and is trying to explain to others what she thinks you should do to get where she is. The author of this letter hasn't experienced success and therefore shouldn't have enough of an idea what it takes to succeed to agree or disagree with Sheryl.
Second of all, I don't think the author of the letter even knows what Lean In means. It seems like her interpretation of the definition is to lean in to your work and grind through 80 hour weeks such that you don't have time to take care of yourself, be happy, or even do your own household chores. I haven't read Lean In personally but my impression was that the definition was more along the lines of ignoring all of the existing gender bias and having the self-confidence to set goals and go for them.
Perhaps the goal you set is to be happy, or to do your laundry once a week, or to stay fit, or to have a happy relationship. Your goals don't need to be corporate/career ones. I don't think the goals of the letter's author necessarily contradict Sheryl's points.