The Ballerina Farm controversy has taken an odd turn. In addition to Hannah Neeleman speaking out about the controversy, the journalist who wrote the original profile on the family wrote a follow-up article in which she framed her unexpected conclusion on the whole matter.
Hannah and Daniel Neeleman are the married couple behind Ballerina Farm, which has 8 million followers on TikTok. On their social media channels, they share their life as parents of eight children, ages 12 and under, and farmers in Utah. Hannah takes care of the eight children while also cooking meals from scratch for the whole family daily. Viewers have been left in awe of her videos in which she milks cows, collects eggs, and makes homemade butter while looking after eight children.
However, recently, the family became embroiled in controversy over an article from The Times in which Megan Agnew highlighted her odd experience interviewing the family. Although she had intended to have a one-on-one conversation with Hannah, her husband largely took over the interview and failed to allow his wife to speak without interrupting or correcting her. Meanwhile, the story Agnew pieced together of Daniel's relentless pursuit of Hannah, refusal to wait for her to finish school to marry, and unwillingness to let her have medicated births, among other things, led to many questioning if Hannah actually did choose this farmer-wife lifestyle.
Following a social media storm of viewers expressing concern for her, Hannah finally broke her silence.
Hannah Neeleman's response is predictable
Hannah addressed The Times article in a TikTok video. Additionally, she followed up by writing her own version of her family's story, telling a much different story than The Times. In her TikTok video, Hannah had the response many expected she would. She claimed the article was "an attack" on her and her family. She suggested that the reporter went into the interview with a personal agenda, resulting in a biased article. Hannah denied that she was "oppressed" as the article painted her and explained how much she loved her husband and her role as a wife, mother, and businesswoman.
On top of her response, Hannah added an "Our Story" section to her website to tell their story in her own words. Her story is vastly different from the one painted in the article, especially concerning how they met and married. Daniel told The Times himself that Hannah rejected him initially and avoided his advances for six months before he used his father's influence to orchestrate their first date. However, in her story, Hannah describes her meeting with Daniel as love at first sight, saying she immediately "knew" he was the one. She mentions they quickly married without acknowledging her initial reluctance or desire to finish school.
Hannah admits wanting to wait to have their first child until she graduated, but she and Daniel left it "in God's hands," and she became pregnant right away. Instead of mentioning any of her sacrifices, she claims that Daniel sacrificed his athletic career to support her.
Many are taking her statement and story as the end of the entire matter. While viewers should take her statement into consideration, it's hard to say her video changes things when we should've all seen it coming. Hannah is a woman who has eight children with Daniel, and all of their business ventures are tied together. Their entire social media platform is about this big, happy family image. Given that there were signs she couldn't speak freely to an interviewer, obviously, no one was expecting her to come out publicly slamming her husband.
Again, her perspective is important. However, it doesn't explain many things, such as why she had to whisper things to the interviewer when her husband wasn't present, why her husband gave her an apron when she asked for a birthday trip, and why her husband didn't allow her to have epidurals when she was in labor. Unfortunately, Agnew isn't helping to answer any lingering concerns.
The Times reporter reverses her stance
Shortly after the initial The Times article went viral, Agnew penned a follow-up titled "My day with the trad wife queen and what it taught me." While the first article expresses some concern over Hannah's sacrifices and how her husband hovered around the entire interview, the follow-up suggests no need for any concern. In fact, she reaches a relatively simple conclusion. Essentially, she claims that the numerous individuals expressing concern and sympathy and speaking out about the controversy are all just people who are "threatened" by Hannah's lifestyle.
Yes, she basically pulled the "you're just jealous" argument. It didn't take long before the numerous, thoughtful commentaries on the Ballerina Farm controversy were drowned out by dozens of users taking Agnew's stance. Lately, the entire controversy has turned into shaming any woman who had an opinion on the issue and calling them jealous, threatened, and hateful individuals who need to leave Hannah alone.
However, I've seen many takes on the Ballerina Farm controversy, and almost no one has expressed any criticism of Hannah's lifestyle or choices. In fact, many even acknowledged that she seemed happy and probably loved how her life turned out. At the same time, many wanted to point out that she didn't have to make all those sacrifices. After all, she was the one who told the interviewer that giving up dancing was like giving up a piece of herself. She acknowledged some elements of sadness in her story, so why are we suddenly expected to say, "No, it's 100% happiness."
Furthermore, why is it wrong to suggest that Daniel could have been more respectful and understanding of his wife? Regardless of how happy she is, Hannah shouldn't have to secretly have an epidural because her husband demands unmedicated births. Even though it worked out in the end, we shouldn't normalize a man continuing to pursue a woman who has rejected him to the point of pulling strings at an airport to get a date with her.
Ultimately, I agree that no one should be harassing or threatening this family or trying to speak for Hannah. At the same time, we need to remember this is a family with 8 million followers on social media who are putting forth a very narrow view of what a "traditional" family should look like. They draw many benefits from being on social media and having a platform to share their views. Hence, it's to be expected that people will have thoughts and opinions on what these people put out into the world. Additionally, if these people can put their view into the world, others can point out alternatives to their viewpoint.
Women and girls should hear both sides of the story. They should listen to and consider Hannah's view that sacrifices are necessary to have something "great." However, they should also listen to others who want to remind them that they don't have to sacrifice their hopes and dreams to be a wife and mother. Hannah could've gotten married and had kids down the line while also achieving her dream of being a professional dancer. She could be a stay-at-home mom and traditional wife while having a say in their home renovations and how she gives birth. The problem with these conventional family influencers isn't their lifestyle; it's that they try to normalize things like women making sacrifices and men not always treating their wives as equals.
No one is jealous, threatened, or hateful about how these influencers live their lives. All we are doing in talking about these influencers is spreading the critical point that you can be religious, conservative, or adhere to traditional gender roles while still also following your dreams, having a voice, and having a very loving and healthy relationship.
Comments