"No One Wins a Fight"

“No One Wins a Fight”

“No one wins a fight.”  In the school of hard knocks, I continue to learn the incalculable wisdom of Howard Thurman’s words.  Each fight leaves all participants wounded; no one escapes unscathed.  Righteous indignation hardly salves pain and wounds.  Who wins if everyone is injured during a verbal or physical altercation?  Is it more important to be right than to live in right relationship?  Regardless of the issue, is it worth risking the relationship?  These questions presume you highly prioritize relationships and seek their continual growth and health.  Allowing that people deal in good faith with you, you stand to gain more from a relationship that appreciates over time than winning a machine gun dialogue which wounds anyone within range of your words. 

Legal dramas on television and within movies depict a very false reality.  Litigation never occurs as quickly as Hollywood pretends.  It is very time-consuming and costly.  The range and complexity of emotions are the most expensive aspects of legal proceedings.  They consume an incredible amount of a person’s talent, thinking, energy and focus; all of which could be used for more meaningful purposes.  Lawsuits engender long-term resentments as no one appreciates being sued.  Civil complaints always leave bitterness as plaintiffs and defendants receive the lawsuit as a personal indictment of character.  Any daily episode of The People’s Court substantiates my argument.  Relatives and friends usually remain unwilling to forgive a lawsuit.  Years pass before reconciliation is possible if it ever occurs.  Hence, there are no real winners and losers when people who experience a breakdown in communication, trust and respect resort to fighting whether legally, verbally or physically.

A few years ago I was dismissed summarily from a doctoral degree program because my initial advisor retired and understandably refused to mentor me afterwards.  His successor in the department experienced multiple difficulties with faculty colleagues and administration.  Not surprisingly, he obtained a position at another institution.  The remaining person in the department brilliantly cloaked her dislike and animosity toward me.  Through various duplicitous tactics and deceitful conversations, she effected my dismissal from the program.  I responded by engaging a three-year and hard fought battle to remain in the program.  My appeal letters began with the Associate Dean and ended with the President of the University.  I even wrote the co-chairpersons of the Board of Trustees.  In the end, the box of copies of my letters and supporting documents weighed nearly three pounds and included hundreds of pages.  Additionally, I spent considerable time and bore equal expense consulting with attorneys to ascertain the strength of my case.  I discovered in a comprehensive search of education law cases that courts will not intervene in such matters on behalf of an aggrieved student.  Judges are unwilling to question the decisions of graduate faculty as it relates to whether a person remains in a doctoral program. 

That dreadful and draining experience taught me the wisdom of Thurman’s saying.  Regrettably, my formidable ego sustained my lengthy engagement in this fight.  In retrospect, I realize how damaged I left the ordeal.  The school sided with the faculty member whose shenanigans yielded my dismissal from the program.  None of the lawyers would take my case as they did not deem it was profitable.  In fact, a leading national civil rights firm was adamant in its refusal.  I had to accept a terminal masters degree as a consolation prize for the two years of doctoral coursework, preparation for certification examinations and dissertation proposal that I completed.  Had I not persisted in this ego feeding frenzy, I could have seen how wasteful this fight was.  I should have transferred to another school and found another advisor.  Ironically, in the time I spent fighting to remain in that doctoral program, I could have earned my degree somewhere else.  I am unaware of the toll of the loss of productivity and reputation that other persons in this battle suffered.  Actually, I do not need to know.  Yet, I am most conscious of the energy and effort I wasted in sustaining this fight to ingratiate my ego.

Within marriage and close familial relationships, harsh words cause irreparable and collateral damage.  They live forever in the minds and hearts of both speakers and listeners.  These indelible words cannot be taken back.  Once spoken, they are eternal.  Even the person who grabs the upper hand in verbal jousting suffers if his or her words tear the relationship apart.  Is the loss of relationship worth the fleeting emotional satisfaction of a few stinging and poisonous words?  Silence before speaking is an effective antidote.  Thinking before speaking often prevents many unnecessary, unhelpful and harmful words.  Assuredly, thinking before speaking foils the possibility of miscommunication and misinterpretation.  Clarity between the ears usually results in a correct receipt of the words that cross the threshold of the lips.  Likewise, thinking before responding creates the setting for more fluid conversation and less miscommunication.  Fluid, mutually respectful conversations that grants equal speech and listening with “I” statements and clarifying questions tend to decrease significantly the chances of fights which no one wins.