Why are some people allowed to stand up for themselves and others not?

[Leavesofautumn]

To put it another way, why is it that when some people speak up for themselves, or put their foot down and say "no more", they get taken seriously, and when other people stand up for themselves, they get seen as troublemakers and get bullied even more, dismissed from their jobs etc?

I'm not talking about big political movements or protest groups or anything like that. I'm talking about individual people standing up for themselves at work, or with people they know in their lives etc. Everyday stuff.

It's double standards.

Yep.
Along with some people can get away with complaining, other people get told they are moaning.

I think very often it's the way its done.

Someone who says 'I don't like that and I would like this, this and this to happen' is more likely to be taken seriously than someone who just says 'No, I don't like that. I don't want that to happen'.

It's so much easier to either say yes or 'no because ...' to the first person than start trying to work out what would make the second person happy.

I would dearly like to know what the secret is

Me too

This. And when someone who usually gets on with things complains about something in a reasonable way, their words carry more weight than someone who's always complaining.

Wish I knew as I'm good at standing up for myself but get labelled troublemaker etc.

I'm not one of those people who's always complaining. I pick my battles. I'm usually quite neutral at work, but as soon as I stand up for myself, ooooh no it's suddenly all my fault.

Because there is a fine line between coming across aggressive or assertive. Because some people are good with words and they can convey the message more appropriately. It’s in the message delivery, not the content.
These are what I have personally been told. I take it on board but do have ‘issues’ and struggle to adapt my tone/bitch face/harsh (but factual) responses 🤷‍♀️

I think it can depend how much they put people on the defensive (ie are they blamey, overly aggressive), or in some cases if they are arguing justifiably about things that people can be brittle and defensive about (eg highlighting another group's privilege, however politely they try to do it)

Are the first group men and the second group women by any chance?

Actually no, not in my case, although I can see that sort of thing would happen all the time. There is the whole thing about women being seen as difficult for things which men would consider normal. But no, in my case it's mainly been female bosses.

I think it usually comes down to whether the person 'standing up for themselves' is perceived as

a) having the ability to follow through on the boundary they are setting (eg if you say 'I would like to be spoken to with respect and if that doesn't happen, I will be leaving this company' but you can't actually afford to leave, some people will simply disregard the boundary) and

b) being sufficiently valued by the person they are standing up to that the enforcement of the boundary would represent a significant loss (eg if you are an excellent worker, then you have more negotiating power than if you are a mediocre one).

Well, context is everything.

Do you play chess, OP?
Marvellous game! It’s all about strategy and behaviour.

Even as a pawn you can win the game. Because that’s all it is, it’s all a game.
I go to work, do my job, go home. My main (and only) concern is ME: my actions, my behaviour, my impact. Others can’t make me feel or do anything, it’s just me.

What you’re asking in your OP is how can I control others. The answer is you don’t. It’s futile. The only thing with your control is yourself.

Ooh Buddha I Iike your style. I've found that I get taken more seriously now I'm older. I am more confident and will speak out. I'm not a trouble maker and make myself clear without conflict.

Confidence. You've either got it or you haven't I'm afraid.

What you’re asking in your OP is how can I control others. The answer is you don’t. It’s futile. The only thing with your control is yourself.

There is a very appealing logic to this point of view. It isn’t a bad way to conduct your emotional life if you have a tendency to let your worries sidetrack you. But the reality of social interactions is a lot more complicated than that. We all know that one person who can persuade anyone to do anything, and the person who seems to have useful connections everywhere, and the person who does a fantastic job but whose face seems to erase itself from others’ memories almost on sight.

I would love to have the knack of talking people round to what I want. But I don’t. And despite what we were taught in the 1980s it’s not as simple as ‘aggressive-manipulative-assertive-passive’. I think it’s essentially about power and hierarchy and about how, if you challenge the position you’ve been put in, some form of unpleasant social retribution is certain.

Meh it’s group think. Don’t try to understand it. If someone is mistreated in a group most of the time the group reacts poorly unless they are the seat of power in the group. It is animalistic behaviour.

Well, see this is the problem this time around, because I am a bit older now and therefore felt more confident about speaking out. I went into the mode of slightly older woman calmly and professionally insisting on not being asked to do a couple of unreasonable things, in that way that I've always seen women do throughout my life, the ones who always seemed to get their way. But no, it still didn't work. It still got turned around back on me. So maybe some people are just allowed it and some people aren't.

So what was the consequence of your refusal, OP?
@DoIWantThis thanks :)
@DatasCat did I understand you correctly, do you think that challenging things will invariably result in unpleasant social retribution?

I agree with @amicissimma and @JenniferBarkley , and then completely with @ReneBumsWombats "Context is everything". So, if you are talking "generally" then they are right. If you are wanting to have a moan about something that has happened at work and want some outside perspective on it, then you'd have to give the context (which is fine if you don't want to, but it you are being cryptic people have no idea what the situation was, and how you handled it and how the Manager handled it).

I think a lot of it depends on the stance of the person that you’re talking to.

I had a manager who seemed to lack confidence in her abilities (not sure why, she was more than qualified for the role). If I questioned her about a proposed change I got accused of being aggressive. In similar situations with other people that has never been the case.

assertiveness v aggression can be a fine line but having thought about this I do think that the difference depends on the person receiving the message - and that can be variable depending on how they’re feeling on that day at that time.

I left that job before I got labelled as a troublemaker because that really wasn’t what I was, but the relationship between me and my manager felt like it was going downhill fast.

Depends on the relationship you have with the person on the receiving end of you standing up for yourself. If you're their friend or someone they consider an equal, the complaint carries more weight than if the person is not considered an equal.