Thank you for your feedback. I agree that it's always a good idea to check what we are bringing to the table.

There were a few things that inspired this post, when I wrote it. First, I had been given a team that could no longer work at all with their cross-functional partners because all the communication was anger and escalation. Second, I had been instructed then, and since then, by my leaders to behave in ways that they would: to demand what my teams needs to be successful. I felt uncomfortable with both of those approaches (escalation and demand), so I changed the dialogue, and my teams are working really well with their partners.

With regard to the notion of masculinity and femininity, I was also reading a book at that time, by Sally Helgesen, in which she writes "Every one of our public fields of endeavor - business, government, medicine, law, technology, urban design - has been shaped by the ideals, images, values, and language of the warrior. The warrior is the traditional male hero who charges into the battle with the aim of dominating and winning, and in the process defines and strengthens himself." And as I read that again, now, I take your point in that it's a traditional male role or approach, but not necessarily something that can be applied to anyone who identifies as masculine.