I had the opportunity to talk with a wonderful, dynamic woman this past week—one of only five (soon to be six) Black women pilots who have ever served in the U.S. Coast Guard. (For anyone interested, Aviation for Women will be running a feature story on the women in its May/June 2021 issue.) She and I talked about many issues. But one that stuck with me was the question of which battles to fight—out of the many facing any woman trying to make her way in a male-dominated industry—and which ones to let go.
In truth, it’s a question all of us have to answer for ourselves, especially if we’re trying to carve a unique path for ourselves in the world, or are trying to resist peer or professional pressure to be something other than who we really are. It’s all well and good to say we have to pick our battles, but that doesn’t help us figure out which ones to pick.
We can’t fight every battle. As the woman I interviewed put it, “You can’t die on every hill.” A really important survival skill in a multi-cultural world is learning how to let things roll off your back, whether it’s personal disappointments or ignorant, snarky comments. But there are also times when it’s important to draw a line or boundary; to call out a behavior, attitude, or unjust event in order to keep from materially diminishing your ability to be yourself, or to set some standards for acceptable interactions and prevent future aggression or damage. So how do you decide when to respond, and what response to use?
There aren’t firm and fast rules that make the choice easy. But I start by dividing events into two categories: 1) general comments I find offensive or disagree with and 2) comments, attitudes, or actions that rise to a level of harm that they require a response, or which pose a direct threat to either my own sense of safety or my professional performance and advancement.
I often encounter people, in and out of the workplace, who say things I find offensive or with which I deeply disagree. But whether or not I choose to respond depends on a couple of factors.
And note that I said “choose” to respond. Because it is a choice. Not engaging with people who are looking for conflict is a valid option, and it actually can be a powerful weapon in drawing healthy boundaries. All of us get numerous invitations, on a regular basis—often issued by way of a bullying challenge or demand, or a taunt, pout, snide comment or angry slam—to engage with others’ dysfunctional behavior or unhealthy emotional needs. There is nothing that says we have to accept those invitations. Beyond that, engaging with those individuals isn’t usually productive. They’re not going to change or suddenly become emotionally healthy people. So sometimes, not responding or engaging is the best possible response.
In the workplace, it’s also important to think about the potential consequences of if and how you respond to a comment or incident. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have to think about anything except whether a response was justified. But it’s not a perfect world. So if responding might prompt a boss or colleague to work against our success, or might make it more difficult for us to get the critical mass of team acceptance and support we need to succeed, letting a comment or incident slide is sometimes the better part of valor. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ever respond to an offensive workplace comment or incident. It just raises the bar for what kind of comment or incident requires or is worth a response.
When presented with a disturbing or insensitive comment, I also think about the person’s intent, and how open they might be to any response I might offer. I’ve learned the hard way that it’s a waste of life energy to try to talk to people who don’t have any interest in listening. So if I don’t think the person is going to listen, I’ll often choose to let jokes, incidents or comments slide, responding only by adjusting my opinion and potentially my trust of that person. On the other hand, if I feel as if the person’s comment was unthinkingly insensitive, or they might be open to hearing another perspective, I’m more likely to say something. But I still try to make those responses easy to hear, because my goal is to educate, not punish.
Back in the days when I was not only flying but also working on airplanes, a lot of guys I worked with made insensitive comments. But at least half the time, when I looked for the intent in their eyes and faces, I realized they were clueless as to why the comment was inappropriate. So I’d gently explain that while I realized they didn’t mean any harm, this is how that comment made me feel, or why it wasn’t a good thing to say to a woman. Or I’d just look at them and ask, “Would you have said that if I were a guy?” And when they invariably stumbled and stuttered over the answer, I’d say—without anger—“So, if you wouldn’t say it to a guy in my position, don’t say it.” Not every battle has to be combat, and picking your battles also means picking the approach and weapons you use to respond.
But there are also times when a comment or action needs a stronger response. I tend to lump those into two categories: 1) comments that are patently false, derogatory or aim to rob me or another person of fundamental dignity and respect, and 2) comments or actions that need to be checked because they pose a potential threat to either my safety or my ability to be successful in my job or advance in my career.
Two points worth noting here. The first is it’s much easier to determine what kind of comments or actions rise to that level of required response if you’re clear about what your core values and most important priorities are. Which is to say, the more work you’ve put into becoming self-aware and laying out a vision for what values and elements are most important and meaningful to you in your life and career, the easier it is know which battles to fight. The second is that drawing a firm line doesn’t have to be dramatic. In fact, it’s often more effective to strive to draw our boundaries in ways that allow another person to back down gracefully, or at least strategically. You can always get more forceful, if the first approach doesn’t work. You can’t de-escalate, once you’re gone full-howitzer.
I remember one conversation, years back, in which several people around me were asserting that Black people didn’t take care of their yards. Instead of screaming “How could you possibly say that!!?”—which is what I wanted to do—I said, “You know, I grew up in a very integrated neighborhood. And that isn’t my experience at all. In fact, the two yards in our neighborhood I can think of that were most unkempt were owned by white families. I’m curious. What are you basing that conclusion on?” I framed my objection as based on “my experience,” which provided some space for the others to claim a different experience or perspective, but I also provided evidence for my opinion, and asked what evidence they had in return. Calmly, and unemotionally. Asking questions about what someone’s source is, and asking more questions about the legitimacy of that source, and offering that there IS another perspective out there—and offering evidence to support that alternative view or interpretation—may not change a person’s mind. But it’s more likely to make them slightly uncomfortable with a position unsupported by evidence or fact, or at least aware that there is not universal acceptance of it, than a screamed answer that’s harder to hear and easier to dismiss.
Indeed, if there is one piece of advice almost all conflict management people stress, it’s to keep emotion out of any boundary-related response. And the best way to do that is through documentation and evidence—especially when it comes to workplace-related incidents. It’s not about the person. It’s about the behavior. So document, document, document, in detail, what was said or done. And in responding, focus on those facts. This is what you said; this is what you did; and this is why that’s not okay, and why I do not expect this behavior to be repeated. Calmly. Rationally. Firmly.
I once had to figure out how to deal with a much more senior co-worker who’d come on to me on a business trip. We were going to have to travel together again, and I knew he was more valuable to the company than I was. So I wrote him a letter, documenting the specific behaviors that I felt were out of line, and telling him that while I respected his professional abilities, those behaviors were unwelcome and unacceptable. I also said I didn’t wish to escalate this any further, but that I expected him to respect appropriate boundaries for his comments and behavior on any future trips, and in any future interactions. In short order, I received a very brief note back saying he was sorry for my discomfort and it wouldn’t happen again. Boundary set; problem solved.
Not every person will respond as well to a boundary line. So there are times you have to escalate. But drawing a firm, unemotional boundary based on documentation and evidence puts an offender on notice. Even a lot of ill-intentioned people won’t want to take on the calm but formidable conflict that you’ve now announced you’re prepared for, if they persist. They’ll go in search of easier targets.
Setting firm boundaries is also easier if you’ve built bridges with more supportive people around you. The subject of bridge-building is one I’ll return to in later posts. But for the moment, suffice it to say that we significantly strengthen our ability to set boundaries with problematic people if we’ve built a reputation for competence and flexibility with everyone else. If our co-workers know we can be counted on to perform well and have their backs, and that we’re flexible and good-natured in our everyday interactions with others, that’s investment capital we can draw on to give us additional credibility and back-up support when we feel a need to take a stand. Sometimes, the people we’ve built those bridges with will even take on offenders for us, setting their own boundaries for colleagues’ behavior. And push-back from another man is often more effective than anything we could do on our own.
Drawing boundary lines is still a challenge. But it’s an essential skill to learn, if we want to achieve our dreams and keep our voices from being silenced. How and where we decide to draw those lines is an individual judgement call, and nobody gets it right all the time. But we’re more likely to get it right if we know and are at peace with who we are and what matters most to us. If we have that core knowledge and confidence, it helps us pick not only the right battles, but also the right tools and approaches for fighting them more effectively … with some energy and laughter to spare.
