Loren Terveen

a question came up in MSFT's New Future of Work #NFW2020 about the role of anger in the workplace. My fantastic colleague Tawanna Dillahunt highlighted, as she generously has before, that only some people have the privilege of being angry at work. I think about that often.

This is not new at all. But it still takes work to be the person to bring it up to a panel and a remote audience and in the context of lots of folks in powerful positions in powerful organizations.

I mentioned this yesterday, but I (personally) still feel uncomfortable dealing with *anyone* expressing ANGER in a work context. Again, for me personally, it isn't productive, and (I believe) not necessary for me to feel that something needs to be done / changed.

Lots to think through. First point is the pernicious stereotype itself. If a white man and a Black women say the same critical thing but he is perceived as smart and thoughtful (or whatever) and she is perceived as the angry Black women, that's harmful. I think you agree w/ that.

For the second, I'd recommend trying treat the concept of anger as a deeply social, contextual, non-neutral state. We don't all have the same right to be angry, and people who do include, for example, Black women who have been discriminated against for centuries in the US.

So even though you might feel that you don't have a need to be angry (in the workplace, or other contexts), that might also just reflect your position in the world. That may not reflect your colleagues' positions in the world and we should give space for different experiences.

I'm not an expert on this and am wary of speaking on behalf of others groups. But I also think pointing it out is important, especially to folks who are senior good people who can be allies for others. (ie you!)