Apply it to boundaries (let them, then hold yours)

Let them push back, and let yourself keep the boundary anyway — a boundary is what you do, not what they accept.

Why it works

Many boundaries fail because we wait for the other person to agree before enforcing them — which hands them a veto. "Let them" (disagree, be upset) plus "let me" (hold the boundary regardless) relocates the boundary to your own action, where it actually lives. A boundary is about what you will do, not about getting their permission or buy-in.

How to do it

1. State the boundary plainly, then let them have their reaction to it.
2. Define the boundary as your action ("I will leave if..."), not a demand for their behavior.
3. Hold it consistently even without their agreement — the consistency is what makes it real.

Evidence

Applying the framework to boundaries is practitioner advice and anecdotal as stated. The underlying principle — that a boundary is enforced by your own action rather than the other’s consent — is standard in clinical work on assertiveness and boundary-setting. (mechanistic)

Holding a boundary against pushback can be genuinely hard or unsafe in some relationships. In coercive or abusive dynamics, professional support is the right route.

Common mistake

Stating a boundary but waiting for the other person to accept it before acting — which isn’t a boundary, it’s a request they can simply decline.