Conflict with same-year colleague Forum

[A. Nony Mouse]

Relax, Nony. You're acting crazy.

That is one example of a comment that a woman and a chill, sociable bro would react differently to a person saying.

I feel sorry for the women around you and I'm not surprised they react so negatively to you.

Women are just too emotional. It's why I surround myself with dudes. They're chill. When you have problems, you solve them like a man.

Dude, you need to make clear to me whether this is intended to be sarcastic, because I am an overly emotional woman and my little brain can't handle figuring you out.

[B90]

Relax, Nony. You're acting crazy.

That is one example of a comment that a woman and a chill, sociable bro would react differently to a person saying.

I feel sorry for the women around you and I'm not surprised they react so negatively to you.

Women are just too emotional. It's why I surround myself with dudes. They're chill. When you have problems, you solve them like a man.

Out of curiosity, what city/region do you work in?
I am a female in Boston and I can attest that in my experience the men are just as, if not more, likely to be emotional and most female lawyers I interact with are decidedly unemotional.

[kellyfrost]

Is colleague male or female? Seriously, the answer to this question depends upon gender.

agreed.

OP seems like a guy, but the way I'd approach it def depends on the sex of the colleague

If it's a dude and they're not a complete weirdo, I'd try to grab a beer with them at HH or lunch or coffee or something and hash it through

I feel like you do need to tread a little lighter if it's a girl though, which it sounds like might be the case. if shes real pissed, don't want her to actually start gosipping or saying you're harassing her or something. if it's a chick tbh I'd probably just give her her space like you said

Maybe look at nonys post and stop being so sexist in how you approach people.
Dudes can not be complete weirdos and still not want to hash out issues with a lazy colleague over a beer. Dudes also gossip about colleagues that piss them off.

Women can be addressed by having a beer and hatching it out.

What the fuck century do you live in?
OP should approach the person as a fellow professional and colleague and try to create a mutual plan for moving forward with the project. You really don't want to be known as the person who doesn't share the load on a project. I don't know how this fits into the required pro bono hours - is that what the other person meant by credit?
I've seen many fights about credit when it comes to names on certain litigation. This isn't an unheard of issue.

You make an automatic, incorrect, amd gigantic assumption that this is something negative.

It is simply a real life consideration that would be helpful for OP to take into consideration, male or female.

What century do I live in? My comment is, in no way a reactionary one. Jesus Christ. Quit trying to blow this up into something that it is not.

I think Kelly Frost is the weirdest dude on this forum, but in this case I agree with him and ball. I would approach it from the same angle just to play it safe

[albanach]

OP here - appreciate the insight.

Good news is that there isn't much more work to do for the foreseeable future - we needed to get a filing together for a client and we just finalized it (OK, I finalized one document and other colleague did the other.... 5?).

I don't know what "getting credit" means in this situation because I literally don't talk to the partner or the mid-level on this case and in the rare circumstances I do it's always been in other colleague's presence and I talk them up because they are obviously in charge/running shit to anyone with half a brain.

Tried reaching out to talk via firm IM - no response despite them being listed as online and active so I am being ignored, and I'm not gonna keep pestering and take this into obsessive territory. I apologized without offering excuses, and asked if we could talk to figure out how to handle things going forward. Will let it go for now and hopefully it blows over but this is the first time I've had an... enemy? in a professional setting and it feels weird and shitty.

Is it inappropriate to email the partner, copying the co-worker and highlighting how they took a strong leadership role in the work and were the most significant contributor to the end product. Make it clear you thank your coworker and appreciate their work.

I'm in-house, not at a firm, so the dynamics may be very different. Here though, sharing appreciation with managers is encouraged.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Is colleague male or female? Seriously, the answer to this question depends upon gender.

agreed.

OP seems like a guy, but the way I'd approach it def depends on the sex of the colleague

If it's a dude and they're not a complete weirdo, I'd try to grab a beer with them at HH or lunch or coffee or something and hash it through

I feel like you do need to tread a little lighter if it's a girl though, which it sounds like might be the case. if shes real pissed, don't want her to actually start gosipping or saying you're harassing her or something. if it's a chick tbh I'd probably just give her her space like you said

Maybe look at nonys post and stop being so sexist in how you approach people.
Dudes can not be complete weirdos and still not want to hash out issues with a lazy colleague over a beer. Dudes also gossip about colleagues that piss them off.

Women can be addressed by having a beer and hatching it out.

What the fuck century do you live in?
OP should approach the person as a fellow professional and colleague and try to create a mutual plan for moving forward with the project. You really don't want to be known as the person who doesn't share the load on a project. I don't know how this fits into the required pro bono hours - is that what the other person meant by credit?
I've seen many fights about credit when it comes to names on certain litigation. This isn't an unheard of issue.

You make an automatic, incorrect, amd gigantic assumption that this is something negative.

It is simply a real life consideration that would be helpful for OP to take into consideration, male or female.

What century do I live in? My comment is, in no way a reactionary one. Jesus Christ. Quit trying to blow this up into something that it is not.

I think Kelly Frost is the weirdest dude on this forum, but in this case I agree with him and ball. I would approach it from the same angle just to play it safe

That's nice, you found someone else reactionary and behind the times to agree with you. Doesn't make what you said okay.

[Lacepiece23]

Is colleague male or female? Seriously, the answer to this question depends upon gender.

agreed.

OP seems like a guy, but the way I'd approach it def depends on the sex of the colleague

If it's a dude and they're not a complete weirdo, I'd try to grab a beer with them at HH or lunch or coffee or something and hash it through

I feel like you do need to tread a little lighter if it's a girl though, which it sounds like might be the case. if shes real pissed, don't want her to actually start gosipping or saying you're harassing her or something. if it's a chick tbh I'd probably just give her her space like you said

Maybe look at nonys post and stop being so sexist in how you approach people.
Dudes can not be complete weirdos and still not want to hash out issues with a lazy colleague over a beer. Dudes also gossip about colleagues that piss them off.

Women can be addressed by having a beer and hatching it out.

What the fuck century do you live in?
OP should approach the person as a fellow professional and colleague and try to create a mutual plan for moving forward with the project. You really don't want to be known as the person who doesn't share the load on a project. I don't know how this fits into the required pro bono hours - is that what the other person meant by credit?
I've seen many fights about credit when it comes to names on certain litigation. This isn't an unheard of issue.

You make an automatic, incorrect, amd gigantic assumption that this is something negative.

It is simply a real life consideration that would be helpful for OP to take into consideration, male or female.

What century do I live in? My comment is, in no way a reactionary one. Jesus Christ. Quit trying to blow this up into something that it is not.

I think Kelly Frost is the weirdest dude on this forum, but in this case I agree with him and ball. I would approach it from the same angle just to play it safe

That's nice, you found someone else reactionary and behind the times to agree with you. Doesn't make what you said okay.

Agreed. I'm a male, and the natural inclination may be to treat associates of different genders differently, but that is not okay, at all. Treat everyone the same in a professional environment. This is the type of thinking that dissuades men from inviting females to lunch, drinks, etc. There is no reason why a female associate wouldn't react kindly to you asking her for a beer or drinks to discuss this or an uptight male associate might hold a grudge and gossip to coworkers about you. This sounds like it came from the 1950's.

[Phil Brooks]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

[A. Nony Mouse]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

Yes. It's not about whether the stereotype is negative, it's about the dangers of stereotyping at all. Deal with people as individuals based on your understanding of them as an individual person, don't make assumptions based on gender.

[kellyfrost]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

Exactly, no where do I say how to handle the situation. I am simply saying when an anonymous poster makes a post looking for advice on how to handle a situation, obviously one of the factors is going to be "who is the other person you are dealing with?"

Do you approach your mom the same way you do your dad? Your teenage daughter the same as your teenage son? Your doctor the same as your barber? Your boss the same as his/her assistant? Ect.

[B90]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

That is not a stereotype. That is a factually correct statement. HTH.

[kellyfrost]

Relax, Nony. You're acting crazy.

That is one example of a comment that a woman and a chill, sociable bro would react differently to a person saying.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

Exactly, no where do I say how to handle the situation. I am simply saying when an anonymous poster makes a post looking for advice on how to handle a situation, obviously one of the factors is going to be "who is the other person you are dealing with?"

Do you approach your mom the same way you do your dad? Your teenage daughter the same as your teenage son? Your doctor the same as your barber? Your boss the same as his/her assistant? Ect.

That is not at all the same thing that you said previously. Those are all examples of specific individuals and what you know about them, and is not at all the same as saying you should treat women and men differently based on their gender. I treat my mom and my dad differently because they're different people who I know have different reactions to things, not because my mom is a woman and my dad is a man. (For the record my mom is way less emotional about conflicts than my dad is.)

[kellyfrost]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

Exactly, no where do I say how to handle the situation. I am simply saying when an anonymous poster makes a post looking for advice on how to handle a situation, obviously one of the factors is going to be "who is the other person you are dealing with?"

Do you approach your mom the same way you do your dad? Your teenage daughter the same as your teenage son? Your doctor the same as your barber? Your boss the same as his/her assistant? Ect.

That is not at all the same thing that you said previously. Those are all examples of specific individuals and what you know about them, and is not at all the same as saying you should treat women and men differently based on their gender. I treat my mom and my dad differently because they're different people who I know have different reactions to things, not because my mom is a woman and my dad is a man. (For the record my mom is way less emotional about conflicts than my dad is.)

Agree to disagree. Most importantly, I hope OP is able to resolve this conflict.

[A. Nony Mouse]

No, dude, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

[jrf12886]

Because yes, it absolutely is negative and hugely reactionary to assume you should handle men one way and women another.

What if the stereotype is that women are more emotionally mature than men, and so you should address problems with women honestly whereas should use flattery with men? Would this be "negative and hugely reactionary"?

Yes. It's not about whether the stereotype is negative, it's about the dangers of stereotyping at all. Deal with people as individuals based on your understanding of them as an individual person, don't make assumptions based on gender.

People saying to handle this differently if its a women vs. a man, that's some sexist BS, and I say that as a relatively-non-weirdo guy. OP should treat the other associate as a professional, regardless of that person's gender. I'm with Nony here. She's not overreacting at all.

That being said, I kinda think OP needs to stand up to this other associate. In a law firm, people in your same class are not your boss; they're equals. Never tolerate someone screaming at you unless you have to (because they're a partner or an associate much more senior than you). If someone does that, you should immediately tell them you'll talk to them when they can act civilly. Also, in a pro bono case, usually the partner isn't going to divy up the work as he/she would in a paid case. So it comes to the associates to figure out who will do what. Naturally, some people will take on more work than others due to interest, availability, initiative. If this other associate never spoke to you about wanting to redistribute the work more equitably, then he/she had no right to blow up at you. Instead, he/she should ask you if you would mind taking on a bit more.

[kellyfrost]

No, dude, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I'll reserve judgment on who is right and wrong until OP reports back with how the situation was handled and ultimately resolved. Again, most important is that OP gets this resolved.

[grand inquisitor]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

[Npret]

Maybe OP should have done their share of the work?

[A. Nony Mouse]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

No, not helpful. I'm pretty sure the OP already knows whether they're dealing with a man or a woman, which is irrelevant compared to knowing the actual person and how they react to things/what they get upset about/how they like to communicate etc. I will continue to pillory anyone who thinks the first step in any "dealing with another human being about work matters" flowchart is "(1) is the person a man or a woman?"*

Also KF how the situation gets resolved has nothing to do with who's right or wrong here.

*Unless you are a medical doctor and your work is examining said human being.

[jrf12886]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

Disagree. Would it be ok to ask if the other associate is gay, black, or of a certain religion? It's all predicated on the assumption that OP should treat the associate differently based on a characteristic that is unrelated to work.

[rpupkin]

I'm stunned by the degree of sexism on display in this thread. I completely agree with Nony.

[kellyfrost]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

Disagree. Would it be ok to ask if the other associate is gay, black, or of a certain religion? It's all predicated on the assumption that OP should treat the associate differently based on a characteristic that is unrelated to work.

Please refer to the prior posts and note that no one asking about the things you have listed.

[A. Nony Mouse]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

Disagree. Would it be ok to ask if the other associate is gay, black, or of a certain religion? It's all predicated on the assumption that OP should treat the associate differently based on a characteristic that is unrelated to work.

Please refer to the prior posts and note that no one asking about the things you have listed.

You need to stop being purposely obtuse.

[kellyfrost]

kellyfrost et al's questions are substantially related to an important interest (i.e. helping o.p.). as such, it is appropriate to allow them to consider gender in rendering their advice. pls desist from pillorying them for being helpful. thanks.

Disagree. Would it be ok to ask if the other associate is gay, black, or of a certain religion? It's all predicated on the assumption that OP should treat the associate differently based on a characteristic that is unrelated to work.

Please refer to the prior posts and note that no one asking about the things you have listed.

You need to stop being purposely obtuse.

Alright, I am checking out of this thread. Best of luck resolving your conflict OP. I wish you all the best. I am sorry this thread got de-railed the way that it did. You will know better than any of us how to properly handle your issue, but I hope the ideas expressed on this thread were helpful in brainstroming, reassurance, or at least helping you eliminate some strategies.

[Phil Brooks]

I'm stunned by the degree of sexism on display in this thread. I completely agree with Nony.

For the record I never said or implied that I agree with Kellyfrost's opinion. I asked the question, "What if the stereotype were negative towards men?" just to see if A Nony Mouse's reasoning would be coherent and internally consistent. And I think there is nothing wrong in making that inquiry, because any accusation of bigotry must be bullet-proof in its underlying reasoning.