passive aggression vs full on aggression

Candie wrote: »

I catch myself at it, and I hate it about me, though I do try not to be.

I don't know where it comes from but I really wish I was better than that, but as it turns out, I'm not.

Passive-aggressiveness isn't nice when unprovoked (very spiteful) but sometimes it's the best way to deal with someone who is being an ass-hat to you. Getting angry and shouty with them will just give them satisfaction, being calm with them yet showing you won't take their sh-t, will drive them mad.

I've absolutely no doubt you fit into the second category!

Just agree with me or go home...that used to be me....particularly with my political beliefs. I still am in debates on said topic. But socially I am more understanding as I get older. I have a natural aggressive streak. I am obstinate.

I distrust passive aggressive people. They make both terrible bosses and terrible employees. I am either assertive directly or logically impassive and unmoved. If you cannot win don't submit or go at it sideways, endure. Stick to your needs and principles, that is life.

Passive aggressive behavior is generally indirect expression of hostility, such as through procrastination, stubbornness, sullenness, or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible.Those types of people often find it difficult to make decisions in good time or often at all and procrastinate. It's about doing as little as possible to get what the person wants. Which means they usually don't get it. It's usually catty and marked by a negative personality.

In a workplace or from a client etc it's damaging towards productivity. When a person refuses to work toward a mutually agreed upon goal or to mutually agreed upon rules but in fact attempts to sabotage said goal. On the surface they may attempt to look productive but are often in fact lazy, catty and negative. It's terrible if a boss is passive aggressive or an employee. They get nothing done. They cause drama. They are suited to neither role in the work place and so put themselves apart in an isolating way. I seen it again and again. They might be chronically late for work or uncommunicative etc.

Malicious compliance is one example. But it can be used positively one example is the work to rule example in industrial action.

Social undermining is another one. Disguising criticism behind a veil of pleasant ambiguity so you cannot answer. As I said they make neither a good employee nor a good boss. They are generally poison to a group. People who are like this a lot usually find themselves isolated.

They usually procrastinate can't make decisions want to get what they want with little personal effort, have a negative attitude and want to exaggerate and over complain about personal misfortune. They never apologize nor admit wrong doing.But this is usually part of it because they are usually uncertain of what it is they actually want. Or they know they can't have what they want and can't let go. But on the other hand, it can be used conscientiously as in the work to rule example or peaceful protests. We are all guilty of it to some degree. It can be used positively sometimes. In a negative sense though not only is it supremely frustrating for both parties involved, but it's also incredibly unproductive to the passive-aggressive person because his or her needs aren't actually ever acknowledged or addressed.

There is something witholding about the interaction and you are told there is not to your face yet expected to let the person keep up the feigning of sincerity so you can be made to look ridiculous. These people have an underlying fear and avoidance of direct conflict, yet a feeling of powerlessness and helplessness. Yet they cannot let someone who IS good at these things take over. They withold intimacy or information or use sarcasm. They want to try and provoke confrontation in the other person first.

It's topping from the bottom basically. They are neither assertive nor passive nor impassive and usually never end up getting what they want.They find people who enable them. People who give in. But that in the end does them no good.They learn that powerful and volatile people cannot be approached directly, but it's OK to lie to them, or keep secrets to get what you want or go about it indirectly while that person tries to figure out what is going on.

People who are avoidant and afraid of conflict are more likely to be passive-aggressive, as are people who are low in self-esteem and self-confidence they don't feel they have permission to have their feelings. The 'passive person' off-hands powers to others The 'assertive person' maintains a good balance between understanding his or her own needs, and accommodating the needs of others. The 'aggressive person' is power hungry and ego-centric. He or she has little or no regard for other people's desires or opinions and wishes to meet their goals regardless of any hurt feelings.

Directness or being assertive is not neanderthals beating each other up it's sincerity balance and consideration.

But as with everything. It has it's place. It's useful I would imagine in business to delay products to withhold sales to boost demand sometimes. The fashion world does that sometimes. It's a passive aggressive technique. But between people it usually means the passive aggressive person's goals/aims/feelings are never acknowledged.

Whenever passive-aggressive people are brought up I'm always reminded of this Dylan Moran bit:

Saralee4 wrote: »

I don't know which is worse. It depends on the type of aggression involved in the 'full on aggression'. Sometimes people just rant but they don't actually take their aggression out on anyone else, say like a man who missed a penalty for the local team and he throws his shirt on the ground or something. I get that, its just a release of anger and disappointment. When the anger is directed at someone and in many cases the wrong person, is where it gets messy.

Passive aggressive is kind of scary in that it just builds and builds and sometimes if you go to deal with the passive aggressive person, you get even more tangled up because they wont deal with the issue.

Neither one is good but just learning how to deal with your anger and accept that everyone gets frustrated and angry sometimes and that its a normal emotion. I find assertive people less angry because they are not holding things in. Something annoys them, they deal with it and usually realise it was a misunderstanding or bad communication, you resolve it and move on.

I am currently on work to rule in a family context.

Conflict avoidance does not resovle conflict. It makes it worse.

Problem is the matriarch is indifferent to when people are angry with her. SHe doesn't care. So she carries on doing what she wants.

So nothing changes.

She resents babysitting she does things like "forget" to give the child medication for a weekend. Despite a reminder and an email with instructions so that the parent was left to take the child to A & E four days later.

Late for a school pick up by 40 minutes, despite being asked ONCE to do one.

Always late. Sometimes doesn;t show and pretends that the conversation was different and hides behind early senility.

Sarcasm, not hearing....I could go on and on...

Very good at the optics so nice to me in front of the right people, but when no one is looking.

She is going to get a PHIL SPECTOR wall of silence and liguid nitrogen breezes from this direction.