Is Confrontation Another Word for Disagreement?

I’ve been in a few circles recently and the word confrontation came up several times.  I was confused by the context and asked the women (yes all women) for examples of what they were referring to.

What I heard back was shocking to me.

Each of them explained that they didn’t want to offer their opinion which was different from the people they were speaking to (usually men, yet not always).  Somehow disagreement has morphed into confrontation without my knowledge.  Even when I asked more questions, like isn’t what you are sharing simply a different opinion?  Or a different point of view?  Or in a few of these conversations, simply asking for what you want?  They all affirmed that this was true, yet to them it seemed confrontational.  Which they didn’t want to be, or perceived to be.

In these times when I simultaneously hear that people want to be authentic, or their true selves, I wonder how these ideas are both existing at the same time?  And what is the impact of this duality?

Is it possible that taking your space and sharing what’s absolutely true for you is counter to your concern that any disagreement is approached as a confrontation?  Possibly this is one of the reasons that people are feeling so confused and anxious.

Even when someone is navigating a new relationship --exploring if a partnership might blossom, people (these, again, have all been women so far) explain that they don’t want to say what’s so for them too soon.  They want to ease into these kinds of conversations, holding back sharing the things that are important to them, until the perfect time shows up.  However, I have also coached people who never find the perfect time for speaking up --even a year into a relationship, for fear that they (the other person) won’t like what they have to say. Not speaking up becomes a habit, or pattern.  More likely they don’t have the confidence in how to share their thoughts, hopes and desires, and even if they do, maybe aren’t willing to really sift through what each person wants in this (or any other relationship), for fear that they aren’t on the same page.   I can only imagine the pressure that builds in this kind of relating.  Ultimately a pattern develops where this continues because now there is something at stake which is losing the relationship altogether.

I certainly understand the biological need for partnership, yet true partnership requires honesty.  It requires showing up and taking up your space.  It requires you taking full responsibility for your happiness and delight and advocating for your own needs to be met.  Rather than having the experience that getting some of what you want is better than nothing at all.  Which could be true.  I encourage a thorough exploration of what needs are met and at what cost in order to choose that, rather than just be resigned in some sort of idea that it would be impossible. 

There is a way to do that that is anything but confrontational.  Marshall Rosenberg (developer of NVC) taught us that sharing yourself with another and giving them an opportunity to contribute to your life is a gift to them.

It is an invitation to be seen, and to take a deeper dive into seeing and understanding the person you are with.  This kind of dialogue offers the exquisite possibility of true connection, companionship, intimacy and sacred relating.  The skills and practice of Nonviolent Communication (NVC) offer this to us.

The practice of NVC asks us a few things; to see the humanness of the other, to insist that everyone’s needs are met equally and to forget any idea that there is a right or wrong.  NVC asks us to be curious about the other, and hold them with care.  And from that place negotiate what kind of relationship (and agreements) you will make.  It also asks us to have the same consideration for ourselves.  To accept your own humanness and value. 

From this place then, even if the conversation is awkward, you are staying true to yourself and attempting to meet your needs, rather than pretending or clinging to some idea that your needs will be met, when truly many of them aren’t.  Remember the agreements you make with people are simply a strategy to meet needs.  If a particular person doesn’t want to do something that you do, then your exploration is internal. At what cost’ does relating to this person have —meaning, is it serving you in some way(s)? Are many needs met, so one in particular unmet isn’t a big deal?  Are the unmet needs easy to meet in other relationships or activities that don’t require participation by this person?

There is a way to disagree while seeing the divinity of another and yourself.  No one has to be wrong in order to make clear choices with each other.   Accept the choices, feel the feelings, mourn the loss of a dream, or celebrate the possibility that the dream you have is the same for the other.  No confrontation, just curiosity and care.

There is a bit more for me here.  I am an elder woman who has also been afraid to show up fully for a good deal of my life.  Both not actually knowing what that meant and/or not knowing myself well, I have some regret about the ways I gave myself away. I feel sad that 40 years later, this still happens in the young generation.  Now that I am older, I have (mostly) given that up, creating relationships that are honest, tender and sweet.  I celebrate myself in ways that were not on my radar all those years ago, I want this for all the younger women because it is so much more pleasant to have this now.  I wish I had the support, wisdom and capacity to create this for myself before. 

Any way that I can guide or support women (and men) who long to be seen and show up fully as themselves I am here to help you make that happen with grace, tenderness and fierce commitment to it being possible.  Please ask.