Am I being too sensitive?

bitch slap this whore....

I can always count on you, Bear.

Don't wait until you want to garotte her. Quietly state your case. Be firm but pleasant.

Unfortunately, both the pace of the meeting and the abruptness of said comments make this difficult. Let me try to illustrate:

Person A: Maybe it would be better to use purple flowers.

Person B: No. What you're saying doesn't make any sense. We'll use lavender flowers. Now about this other thing...

I could make my case that purple and lavender are more or less the same thing, and that differences in this context are irrelevant, but the conversation has already moved on or wants to. It's such a minor thing, not worth dwelling on otherwise. The only thing that makes me want to argue is the dismissive tone that was taken.

Now, don't get me wrong, I can be blunt and direct and have no problem stating my case and continue to do so in every meeting. I'm confident in my ideas and I make my case strongly. It's when I'm "thinking out loud" that I get the shutdown -- and it pisses me off.

FreeDuck- I have worked with one of "those". People like that are a stiff pain in the butt. I think that in the case of dealing with such a personality, it is important that you "choose your battles", or you will spend precious time bickering over nonsense. Don't sweat the small stuff. She'll think that she is getting over on you, and will become complacent and smug. Then when something important comes along, fight her tooth and nail.

You must be right, phoenix. Picking my battles feels like the right thing to do. I guess I need to make sure that resentment doesn't build up enough to cloud my judgment. Sometimes I come out of these meetings unable to look at her directly. Eventually I settle down and can play along as if nothing happened.

I realized that this is similar to the situation I had several years ago with "the bit flipper" only to a much lesser degree. The Bit Flipper was like this too, except all the time, so it was easier just to hate him. This person is someone I actually like and respect and enjoy working with, I just don't enjoy her in these meetings.

Could it be some kind of misplaced assertiveness on her part? I know that you are both females in a male-dominated field -- maybe she's had to force a certain kind of combativeness to make herself heard in her career thus far. Or maybe it's just her natural tendency but was encouraged.

At any rate, if she's a friend, I could see instigating some sort of conversation about being women in your field and seeing where that goes. It'd be tricky, but *might* yield dividends as you get to talking about communication styles et al. If you complained about Bit Flipper that might drive the point home, but could be risky, too.

At any rate, I totally understand what you mean. The issue, as far as I understand it, was a big one early on in my relationship with E.G. and we had to hammer that out. (He's since said that our conversations about that have helped his teaching a lot.) Basically, as a scientist, he approaches things in a binary fashion -- right or not-right. It doesn't matter if not-right is 99% right -- it's not 100% right. This would drive me crazy, because he would be explaining something, I'd think I'd see where he was going, I'd suggest something ("Oh I see, you mean ___?"), he'd say "no," I'd mentally erase that line of thinking and go back to square one, and then by the time he was finished explaining it'd turn out that I was VERY, very close when I ventured a guess. Now he knows to say, "that's the right idea, but there's this other element..."

Kind of long-winded, but main point is that I think she may be speaking in the male-scientist idiom, and you're thrown for a loop because she speaks more normally the rest of the time. (Plus because that idiom is annoying as hell...)

Interesting.

I recently went through something similar to this freeduck. Actually, I've been in that kind of situation a lot in the past, and it's only been in this last few weeks that I feel I've found a way to work around it.

Me, personally, when something like what person B would do would happen, I'd usually just drift with the flow, for the reason you said that addressing it seemed to indicate I was disagreeing, or starting an argument. It would make me feel…oh…dismissed sometimes, the quick negation, then swiftly moving on.

Something apparently has fallen into place with me lately, because the last time this happened, I said in a low tone "May I speak for a moment"?....and then I just waited….Someone eventually said "Well, sure" I think if I said "may I speak for a moment" and then just did, I would have been interrupted again….the waiting took people aback, and then, making "them" basically say, "Yes, you have the floor" gave me the time needed to state a complete thought.

In this case, I had a "Why are we doing this question" which, was listened to…then, in what I saw as an attempt to regain the freight train momentum, my person B said, basically…"Because…."and then tried to go on driving the bull dozer.

"Hold on" I said…pausing for just one second (those pauses really can be powerful) "I believe it's within the scope of our work here for all of us to really know why we're working for this goal. Why exactly SHOULD this be so important"?

To be honest free duck, I haven't felt so respected in quite some time as I have felt in the last few weeks. Since then, I'm using those pauses to make people understand that I won't be "brushed off".

When you speak of wasting time, or the meeting wanting to move on…does everyone want to move on, or just person B?

I have found that people who want to rush get things done no faster than people who take the time to allow for 30 seconds extra of discussion.

Now, I wouldn't do this in a meeting, but imagine this…Imagine you're in a meeting, and need to ask, clarify, contribute, etc. look at the second hand on a clock, and then speak out loud your thoughts in an unrushed manner…when you get done, look to see how much time has passed. I'm betting no more than 30 to 45 seconds. Now, think of this…will 30-45 seconds cause your project to fall apart because of lack of time?

Maybe you could ask for a moment….then take it.

Excellent point, chai.

There's sometimes a fine line between assertiveness and aggressiveness. I'm fine with assertive people, and tend to be one myself, but aggressive people rub me the wrong way. Soz mentioned misplaced assertiveness, but it sounds like it's bordering on aggression. I agree that it sounds like the platform of these meetings is bringing out a trait in her management style that she may well want to curtail.

Unless there's a chain of command within the leadership group and she's the person in charge, it to the benefit of the entire group to pull her back. I don't mean that you should be confrontational necessarily, but maybe using your own thought above, "Sometimes I come out of these meetings unable to look at you directly. Eventually I settle down but I'd rather not have our meetings turn into what appears to be a power play on your part."

I definitely like Chai's approach and did something similar at a local government Board of Trustees meeting the other night. It worked like a champ. What might have been a confrontational exchange was very well received.

I think I would stop her when she did that in the meeting and point out that there are other people on the committee and all have a right to be heard. Take it off the details (specific issues) and address the larger one (not listening to others). You can do this in a non-judgemental way, I'm sure.

If she wants to run this alone, perhaps she should be doing it alone.

It's not a matter of whether she's right or wrong on all these issues; it's her social behaviour which needs tweaking. She's being extremely disrespect of all the others in the group.

Why she's doing it is irrelevant; you're not a therapist, so it's not your job to straighten her out (not that you intended to), but you are a member of that committee and have a right to be heard.

I totally agree with you mame that the "why" she does something is irrelevant..no one is her therapist, and the goal is just to open up communications and not feel dismissed, or your thoughts unimportant. Person B doesn't have to like it, but they need to give you that consideration regardless of how it reminds her of her relationship with her father.

I don't know about stopping the meeting and addressing the fact that "everyone has the right to be heard"....although that's obviously true, I could see how that would backfire.

If B wanted to be obnoxious, he/she could say "No one else is complaining, does anyone else have a problem here?" Even if they agreed with you, they probably wouldn't say anything.

If that happened, it only gives person B the opportunity to create a bad guy. Asking for a moment, then waiting for the ok, insures you won't be interrupted. Psychologically, you've made the others in the group all good guys, they feel good about themselves because they so great, allowing you to have a moment.

Related to the "I'm not going to be a therapist, I just want to have this be a productive work day" I'd personally keep it about how I wish to have the floor. Dragging others into it might complicate the entire thing. Heh, it might end up seeming like an impromptu group intervention.

Just out of another meeting so I haven't gotten a chance to read all of the responses but this (^^) is dead on. And I do think it's the male-scientist idiom. Also, the fact that she is older makes me think she's developed this style because of that.

I was thinking about it and one of the things that bothers me the most is that it hurts my pride in some way, I guess, because it makes me not want to admit if I am wrong about something. I like to be able to say, "oh, I see what you mean, yeah you're right" but if I get miffed by a certain tone I can't seem to get that out.

Off to read the rest of the replies.

Good suggestions, Chai. I think that would be a good way to handle one of the chosen battles, and when I do choose to fight the battle it usually works out fine because when I've got it all worked out in my head I can be very convincing very quickly.

I know what you mean about the "why" not being so important, but I guess it's important to me because it helps me not take it personally. If I think the "why" is that she thinks I'm inferior then I'm never going to get past it. If I think the "why" is that she has learned this over years of working as a very competent female in a male-dominated field, then I can let it roll as more her problem than mine. Does that make sense?

Personally, I like the quiet, pause for a moment, request the floor approach that Chai advocated but if the meetings are less formal, is it possible to simply query "why" it doesn't make sense?

Then maybe add a blast of humour?

You'd likely to have to interrupt, as she appears to bulldoze right through onto other matters, but my gut reaction to what I've read, is that this is what I would do:

"Sorry, Janet, "why doesn't purple make sense?"

I might use self effacing humour at the very end, once she explained "why," if I thought it might smooth things, so long as my point wasn't lost and it didn't become just about me nitpicking...

If I were conceding her point, I might say something like

"Thanks, Janet...that does make sense, it's just that you were so (maybe I'd say " sooooo") dismissive, and really, I just hate mauve (I think I'd pronounce it "mawwwve" (with a smirk) and then move quickly into

Anyway, about this other thing...you were saying...?

Yeah, there are ways to deal with it. I think I'm just pms-ing and taking everything too personal right now. Deep breaths... it's not about me...

FreeDuck--

You get annoyed with yourself when you're not at your best.

Time to share the aggro with offensive co-workers. You deserve to shift the aggro--and perhaps prune the aggro and even dismiss the aggro.

The problem with dealing with each event on an individual basis is that you will have to continue doing it rather than somehow bringing up the general issue which is she is not listening and according respect to the others.

Janet, we are all part of this committee and have something to add. I think we should listen to everyone who has a comment to make.

This takes it from the lavender vs purple issue to all future issues.

Not knowing this woman (or you, for that matter) or the group or the company, I can't say how you can best do this, but isn't it preferable and more effective to deal with the larger issue than each individual issue? You want to pre-empt this from occurring each time something comes up, don't you?

Or maybe you could take her aside privately after the meeting or at some other time and raise this with her.

and then bitch slap the whore... :wink:

You may be right, Mame. I guess I'm just trying to avoid making this a personal issue. And I'm also not entirely convinced that I don't contribute to the problem by taking it personally in the first place, if you know what I mean. Like I may be giving off vibes of irritation, making her more combative, etc...