"You're so passive-aggressive"

[Expat]

I have noticed for some time that a few people here - dolphin certainly, I think ArchonAlarion, and I guess Allie (at least - I don't recall other precise examples now) - seem to have the most dislike for people being what they call "passive-aggressive".

So, what do you think that means - if anything - in socionics terms? What is it that those "passive-agressive" individuals have - or lack - that puts those individuals above (and certainly some others) off so much?

[Cheesy]

Maybe it's a lack of Se and not valuing it.. It could be a little simplistic but maybe Se polrs have difficulty in saying straight up what they're annoyed with in the fear of having an open conflict with people.

I think passive aggressiveness has mostly to do with a lack of assertiveness, I also think that assertiveness could be a manifestation of Se at its best, meaning that people say things in a straightforward open manner. They believe in what they say and are not afraid to express it.
Passive aggressive people are not confident enough to express their feelings openly. It could be linked with Se but to be honest it probably has a lot more to do with a person's behavioral patterns and developing bad coping strategies more than anything else.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Good question. I've typically seen it manifest in ENTj's as sixth function seeking/valueing. That is, they are seeking/valueing a form of assertiveness in themselves but as they don't really possess the skills to assert themselves by their own means, that is, standing on their own feet so to speak, in a typical Se manner, that they look to compensate by going about it in different ways.

This can be passive aggressiveness, aligning with those who may be regarded as powerful people to try to create a network of authority for themselves, attempts to sow the seeds of discontent towards those they see could be rivals to their own position, or desire of a position.

On the whole I view it as an illusion of power, authority, assertiveness when perhaps the illusion is created because in reality they know they don't have it. But it's a good job of creating power, but, and perhaps I digress, they're aware the 'bubble' could burst, so they focus on it more.

In contrast, I know an LIE who I see as someone who doesn't exhibit the traits I mention (which some others either rightly or wrongly posit to you). This one I know comes across as rather 'humble'. (possibly a poor choice of word without my further elaboration).

I would say it's a form of Se valueing, to be honest I don't think it's a healthy form of it's manifestation.

Hmm, i'll try and think about this later and possibly make another post in addition to this one. It's possible i'm not doing what's in my head on the subject justice in comparison to what I write in this post.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[ragnar]

So, what do you think that means - if anything - in socionics terms? What is it that those "passive-agressive" individuals have - or lack - that puts those individuals above (and certainly some others) off so much?

Concerning the term "passive aggressive": Guess we're talking a trichotomy here between individuals who're
1. aggressive
2. passive aggressive
3. passive.

I'd guess 1 correlates with socionics Se, 2 with Fi and 3 with Ni? This would correspond to stereotypes of aggressive male ESTp vs passive or passive aggressive female INFp.

But how this plays out socially may perhaps relate to conversational positioning more than anything else, as Diana hinted at. This positioning may still correlate with the combination of socionic types of the conversationalists , I guess.

[ArchonAlarion]

The passive aggressiveness seems to mostly come from the Ne sub Se polr people. They slither away from conflict, indirectly attack you, make biting remarks hiding behind some sort of "wit", etc. It puts me off when its constant, tedious, and obviously reactionary.

I can say and think that someone is acting passive aggressive if I want to and I do not need your permission, buddy.

You're not proving anything Expat, beyond your own stubborness, haughtyness, and false confidence that you're the lord of the manor over this forum.

This, this thread, is an example of passive aggressiveness. You are obviously trying to discredit me and I'm sick of it.

[implied]

I have noticed for some time that a few people here - dolphin certainly, I think ArchonAlarion, and I guess Allie (at least - I don't recall other precise examples now) - seem to have the most dislike for people being what they call "passive-aggressive".

So, what do you think that means - if anything - in socionics terms? What is it that those "passive-agressive" individuals have - or lack - that puts those individuals above (and certainly some others) off so much?

i'm not really sure, but i dislike passive aggression as well. what i really dislike is when people attempt to insult you or dislike you, but can't come right out and say, "screw you, i can't stand you." instead they hide it behind the guise of "what, i didn't mean anything!"

[marooned]

I think based on forum history, that dolphin and Allie's past behavior could be called passive aggressive...

I've thought this as well. And I think that sometimes the people who complain the most about others being passive-aggressive struggle with it themselves.

The passive aggressiveness seems to mostly come from the Ne sub Se polr people. They slither away from conflict, indirectly attack you, make biting remarks hiding behind some sort of "wit", etc. It puts me off when its constant, tedious, and obviously reactionary.

I've sometimes thought when people accuse others of being "passive-aggressive" on the forum they seem to be 'passive-aggressively' accusing them of not being Se valuing (and I don't think it's necessarily related... for instance I work with someone who I think is probably LSI, and who is also in my opinion passive-aggressive). Passive-aggressivity is sometimes type-relevant I think, but sometimes it's just the standard "being assertive" thing that a lot of people struggle with (which i struggle with as well). Not to mention, there are a lot of different sorts of behaviors that can be construed as "passive-aggressive" and perhaps it even has some quadra relevance, but it just ends up being context dependent a lot. For instance, sometimes I think the person making the accusation is being passive-aggressive while the one they're accusing wasn't being so at all.

Edit: Well, actually I think that passive-aggressivity can probably annoy Se DS the most. And character assassinations of the sort "omg, you're so passive-aggressive!" meant as some insult to defame the other person seem largely Beta. Now I feel I've painted the white elephant white.

i'm not really sure, but i dislike passive aggression as well. what i really dislike is when people attempt to insult you or dislike you, but can't come right out and say, "screw you, i can't stand you." instead they hide it behind the guise of "what, i didn't mean anything!"

I can probably see myself doing that kind of thing, while simultaneously not liking it when others are passive-aggressive. I would much rather people just say they hate my guts openly because then at least I'll know. But at the same time, I seem to not be able to make such remarks myself, and my feelings of "like" and "dislike" in regards to people can be very fuzzy... When they are strong and clear I'm may be afraid to tell people I like them, or to say I don't like them because I'm mostly concerned with how this will affect things later, but sometimes secondarily because I don't want to hurt people. This perception inflates my importance in the universe, of course (otherwise it wouldn't hold up so well).

[ArchonAlarion]

Tbh I don't even care about this, lol. I don't actually mind the people I call passive aggressive, and irl largely prefer it over "overt" aggression. It was more an "obective" state I was referring to, not neccessarily that I actually had a big deal problem with it (with the exception of SubT, who really was annoying me)

In fact, people might even call me passive aggressive.

So, to anyone who I called passive aggressive: I apologize. Sincerely.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

I'd like better passive aggression rather than direct aggression. At least I can just safely ignore the person (in the frist case), whereas the second type can much more easily end up with fist-fighting or something similar.

[implied]

I can probably see myself doing that kind of thing, while simultaneously not liking it when others are passive-aggressive. I would much rather people just say they hate my guts openly because then at least I'll know. But at the same time, I seem to not be able to make such remarks myself, and my feelings of "like" and "dislike" in regards to people can be very fuzzy... When they are strong and clear I'm may be afraid to tell people I like them, or to say I don't like them because I'm mostly concerned with how this will affect things later, but sometimes secondarily because I don't want to hurt people. This perception inflates my importance in the universe, of course (otherwise it wouldn't hold up so well).

oh, i probably do it, too. fwiw i'm the same way about not being able to tell people i like them overtly. maybe our own strategies enforce us wanting someone else to be clear about how they feel about us, whatever that is.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[FDG]

It's kind of hard to get into a fist fight over the internet

Oh, I didn't think it was meant to refer exclusively to the internet. In that case, I'm afraid I can't even recognize passive aggression, lol

[Lotus]

I don't know about "reactionary" or what you mean by that, but yeah, that kind of crap is extremely annoying. It's all insinuations, little sideways remarks, nothing that anyone just comes right out and says. They do it, imo, to suggest without having to defend themselves. They give you nothing to attack, nothing to counter, just little hints here and there. Maybe you find that the people who do it to you are Se polr, but the people who have done it to me at some point or another have been Allie, dolphin and Steve, none of which are Se polr.

So, how many “little sideways remarks” have I made to you? Whenever I have a problem with someone I tend to not be able to hold myself back from saying everything that comes to mind. And this has been no different with you. Honestly, every time we've clashed I've practically written essay-length replies to you detailing everything that I feel you're doing complete with my reactions to it. I cannot recall a single time I've said nothing but a “little sideways remark” without elaborating further than necessary to get my point across.

And anyone who's conflicted with me knows this is true. I don't make little hints unless it's supposed to be a joke—but even then, it is obvious what I mean by it. My style of humor isn't blatant-in-your-face-obvious, so maybe someone will misinterpret it as passive-aggression. I don't know, but I consider myself to be pretty clear about what I think and feel. And if I'm not, I would certainly clarify if asked.



@ OP: I would think most people dislike passive-aggression when it is used in arguments. The reasons for this, Maria summed up perfectly.

i'm not really sure, but i dislike passive aggression as well. what i really dislike is when people attempt to insult you or dislike you, but can't come right out and say, "screw you, i can't stand you." instead they hide it behind the guise of "what, i didn't mean anything!"

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Lotus]

Allie: Things like calling me "unrealistic and abstract" without any kind of basis whatsoever because you think that will make me seem less ESI. Never giving any backing to accusations of the sort, just dropping them as though they mean something.

I've never said anything about you to make you “seem less ESI,” okay? I couldn't care less about whether you seem ESI to people or not. And I can't believe how hypocritical that statement is. Just now, you group me into people you believe are passive-aggressive without even giving a second thought over whether I am or not. Also, quoting two words I've used to describe you outside of their original context—i.e., essay-length posts where I've cited exactly where you're being unrealistic—is incredibly misleading. And to top it off, please tell me how exactly me expressing my opinion of you is a form of passive aggression when I clearly tell you exactly what I mean by it and how I feel about you. Never have I “toned down” for fear of not being able to back up what I say. Don't pretend otherwise.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Lotus]

No, it's really not. Maybe you want to believe it's that way, but you're completely wrong. And if anyone's bullshitting, it's you.

Anyway, I'm not going to engage in this again. Because clearly all you care about is getting the last word (re: every thread where we've argued) and I'm not going to waste my time trying to make sense to someone who wants to pretend their little mental world is synonymous with reality.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[aestrivex]

The passive aggressiveness seems to mostly come from the Ne sub Se polr people. They slither away from conflict, indirectly attack you, make biting remarks hiding behind some sort of "wit", etc. It puts me off when its constant, tedious, and obviously reactionary.

so you would see me as passive aggressive? how do you justify that?

[anndelise]

I ran across this while looking up how the phrase 'passive-aggressive' is often used to describe what kinds of behavior. I thought I'd post this in case anyone else wanted to smile.

From The Straight Dope: What is "passive-aggressive?"

What is "passive-aggressive?"

May 30, 2003
Dear Cecil:

What exactly does it mean to say that someone is "passive-aggressive"? I hear this term used frequently, usually with reference to a coworker, child, parent, etc, who is being a pain in the ass. Surely there's a more rigorous clinical definition than that.

— Frank Caplice, Chicago

You might get some argument there, Frank. It's true that if you look under "passive-aggressive personality disorder" (PAPD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the older editions--more about that below), you find the syndrome solemnly described as a "pervasive pattern of passive resistance to demands for adequate social and occupational performance." But once you delve into the history of the term, you realize that--at least in the eyes of its critics--it's mostly useful as a high-flown way to call someone a pain in the ass.

The term "passive-aggressive" was introduced in a 1945 U.S. War Department technical bulletin, describing soldiers who weren't openly insubordinate but shirked duty through procrastination, willful incompetence, and so on. If you've ever served in the military during wartime, though, or for that matter read Catch-22, you realize that what the brass calls a personality disorder a grunt might call a rational strategy to avoid getting killed.

After the war the term found its way into civilian psychiatric practice and for many years was listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, the bible of the mental health trade. According to the revised third edition (DSM-III-R, 1987), someone had PAPD if he displayed five or more of the following behaviors: (1) procrastinates, (2) sulks or argues when asked to do something he doesn't want to do, (3) works inefficiently on unwanted tasks, (4) complains without justification of unreasonable demands, (5) "forgets" obligations, (6) believes he is doing a much better job than others think, (7) resents useful suggestions, (8) fails to do his share, or (9) unreasonably criticizes authority figures.

You may say: I know a lot of people like that. Or even: I'm that way myself sometimes. Exactly the problem. From the outset skeptics argued that passive-aggressive behavior is an ordinary defensive maneuver and shouldn't be considered symptomatic of a mental disorder. Reacting to such criticism, the authors of previous versions of the DSM had defined PAPD narrowly: in DSM-III (1980), they'd said PAPD shouldn't be diagnosed in the presence of any other disorder (you can see how depression might contribute to procrastination or sulkiness, for example). The idea apparently was to curb careless use of the term--though shrinks weren't likely to say somebody was mentally ill if he was just a PITA, if he had some other psychiatric problem, they'd throw in PAPD too. Sure enough, after DSM-III diagnoses of PAPD declined sharply, to the point that some researchers felt the category should be abolished. Others, however, thought the exclusivity criterion was unnecessarily limiting and persuaded the editors of DSM-III-R to drop it. PAPD diagnoses shot back up. Conclusion: If we define PAPD rigorously, almost nobody has it; if we define it loosely, just about everybody does.

Recognizing that the definition as then formulated wasn't working but uncertain how to fix it, the compilers of DSM-IV (1994) dumped PAPD from the list of official disorders and relegated it to an appendix. The most telling complaint, in my opinion, was that merely being passive-aggressive isn't a disorder but a behavior--sometimes a perfectly rational behavior, which lets you dodge unpleasant chores while avoiding confrontation. It's only pathological if it's a habitual, crippling response reflecting a pervasively pessimistic attitude--people who suffer from PAPD expect disappointment, and gain a sense of control over their lives by bringing it about. Some psychiatrists have suggested that PAPD be merged into a broader category, called negativistic personality disorder. Diagnostic criteria: passive-aggressive plus (a) mad at the world, (b) envious and resentful, (c) feels cheated by life, and (d) alternately hostile and clingy.

We'll let the specialists work out the details. For now, though, we lay folk should strive to use the term "passive-aggressive" more precisely in everyday life. Say for instance that a coworker cheerfully agrees to refrain from a specified uncool act, then does it anyway. Is this passive-aggressive behavior? No, this is being an asshole. Comforting as it can be to pigeonhole our tormentors with off-the-shelf psychiatric diagnoses, sometimes it's best just to call a jerk a jerk.

— Cecil Adams

[Lotus]

Anyone who cares to can look up the threads and read for themselves. Let's see how many times a thread about Allie's type becomes her talking about ME when I post in it? How about, nearly every single time, and never because I say anything about myself.

Uh huh. So it's okay for you to go out of your way to discuss me—which you seem to do at any opportunity my name comes up—yet you get defensive when I even reply to you with your name mentioned? What, is it only okay to talk about me, Diana? Is that all you're comfortable with? Jesus Christ, get a life. If you can't handle me talking to you about you, then don't mention me at all.

In the future, if you have something to say about me, I ask that you PM me directly. I'm not cluttering anymore threads going back and forth with you. And if that's an issue, then I'm going to assume that you only care about arguing when it's public, rather than any genuine beliefs behind what you're saying. Because tbh, I hate “flame threads,” and if there is some issue you need to clarify I'd rather it be settled directly between us.

[FDG]

You see? I was right. It's better when people are passive-aggressive - at least you don't waste time arguing, and you can go do something more fun and forget about it.

[ragnar]

a thread about Allie's type becomes her talking about ME

I find your exchanges very interesting. They seem like a socionics tutorial, in a way.

[Lotus]

You see? I was right. It's better when people are passive-aggressive - at least you don't waste time arguing, and you can go do something more fun and forget about it.

:( Yes, I need to be reminded of this more often.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[anndelise]

Just another interjection...

I don't believe passive-aggressiveness is a type thing.

Passive-aggressiveness is typically used in referring to someone who has a form of negativity showing up in their behavior, but not necessarily in their words nor direct decisions.

There are numerous variables and factors that can come into play when we perceive, (or at least believe that we perceive) someone as being passive-aggressive. When we look into each individual case of passive-aggressiveness, we'd have to look into how the supposed aggression is showing up.

Sometimes the perceived negative behavior stems from
* conflict of interests
* lack of understanding
* lack of knowledge
* lack of communication
* miscommunication
* misunderstandings
* forgetfulness
* fear
* avoidance
* resistance
* anger
* resentment
* projecting
* feeling pressured
* * * ie to respond a certain way, say certain things, do certain things, believe certain things, agree to certain things, comply with certain things, etc
* etc.

Sometimes the perceived negative behavior coincides with a seemingly positive acceptance or agreement. Sometimes, however, there wasn't actual agreement to comply. (see 'feeling pressured' part above)

I'm sure that we can look at any person on this forum and point out signs of possible passive-aggressiveness. I mean, one of the common themes of this forum is attempts to pressure someone into complying with believing certain things…in this forum's case it could be pressuring someone into complying with a typing (self or other), complying with methodologies, complying with definitions, complying with 'acceptable' behavior, etc. This pressure doesn't always come in a direct form, and can often be perceived as such by even minor comments, posts, and/or threads.



With that said...
*pulls up a chair*

[ragnar]

Passive-aggressiveness is typically used in referring to someone who has a form of negativity showing up in their behavior

Guess people use the phrase differently. To me, passive aggressive behavior is more about harboring grudges and planning revenge - classical stereotype "catty" behavior.

The two opposite behaviors: Aggressive is more about direct and open confrontation, while passive is simply to ignore the issues completely.

I got this definition from a psych student many years ago (I think).

[anndelise]

Guess people use the phrase differently. To me, passive aggressive behavior is more about harboring grudges and planning revenge - classical stereotype "catty" behavior.

The two opposite behaviors: Aggressive is more about direct and open confrontation, while passive is simply to ignore the issues completely.

I got this definition from a psych student many years ago (I think).

Well, technically, PA has more to do with seemingly open or complying with something, but then behavior contradicts that seemingly openness or compliance. For example, a boss telling a worker to do the paperwork. The worker is expected to comply to the boss' demand/order. But the worker doesn't want to do it, so they do it poorly, or procrastinate, or flat out don't do it "oh, sorry, i forgot about it", etc.

The problem comes in interpreting someone's behavior and why that behavior. Some people call something 'passive-aggressive' when they interpret the behavior as being intentional behavior...as in the worker above intentionally did a poor job on the paperwork, or intentionally put it off until the last minute, or intentionally didn't do the paperwork and is 'lying' about having forgotten to do it.

Other people refer to fraud's...i mean freud's...concept of the subconscious speaking up. ie, the worker didn't really want to do, so the subconscious spoke up and showed in the worker's behavior (poor job, procrastinating, forgetting).


If a person is harboring a grudge, then chances are their behavior will show that. Harboring a grudge can be an active or passive thing. So the behavior can be under intentional and/or subconscious speaking up.

Planning revenge is an active thing. This part would fall under the intentional behavior.

In day-to-day kinds of examples, though, it usually has to do with some form of conflict of interests or communication issues.

But it's not called passive-aggressive unless the behavior is perceived as negative as well as not matching the words or decisions expressed.



(note, there may be other things that i'm not aware of at this time. however, these have been the things i've seen most commonly and have stood out)

[JuJu]

You get defensive when I question your type, and start trying to say that I'm some other type instead.

It's true.

it's funny that's how ppl argue here. "sooooo... i herd you are INFj!!!"

the forum members who do this are generally the ones who don't understand Socionics yet... i.e. the ones who espouse crazy typings like Dane Cook is ENFp, not ENFj.

[ArchonAlarion]

Dane Cook is an infantile.

[JuJu]

soooo... you have had sex with Dane Cook, have you? (How the fuck would you know his erotic attitude??)



Let's be serious here... Fe... Fe... Fe.

The reason you're not getting Socionic typing yet is b/c you're not paying attention to the most basic (and palpable) stuff in it, e.g. a person's leading elements. Instead you're trying to type using everything but a person's leading elements, or so it seems, as above.

When you learn what the leading elements are--how they manifest and what they feel like--your typings will become accurate... Until then, they will continue as they are.

[ArchonAlarion]

Sex with Cook is sex by the book.

Infantile, caregiver, aggressor, and victim are general attitudes that apply just as much to other relationships as romantic ones. People even act their style to attract mates. I see alot of Alpha NT's acting infantile and alot of Alpha SF's acting like caregivers outside of romantic relationships, for example.

So when I say "infantile" I mean the kind of behaviors exhibited classically by Ne-ers, namely crazy tangents, incongruity, utter randomness, zany analogies, generally acting like a helpless buffoon etc. Do you really see Cook conflicting with ISTp's?

Its obvious to me that he is an Ne infantile, so idk what to tell you.

[marooned]

but but but I just watched some Dane Cook videos and he looks Se valuing to me! maybe he's a Beta wildfire.

[crazedrat]

wow this argument between allie and diana is like watching two soccer moms insult eachother while smiling

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[JuJu]

Its obvious to me that he is an Ne infantile, so idk what to tell you.

sorry, you are wrong.

[Slacker]

People use "passive aggressive" similarly to how they use "ironic". They know it means something but they don't understand just what, but throw it around anyway.

To those who would misuse the term: passive aggressive is when when people stall, procrastinate, work very slowly, or otherwise intentionally clog up progress by doing nothing or working slowly. So they don't specifically do anything, but they're still able to get what they want - they keep something from happening that they don't want to happen.

[ArchonAlarion]

Lol then I'm passive aggressive

Well I'll only do that to annoy someone as a joke, so not really.