quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

I don't think passive aggressiveness is a submissive trait. I actually know more than a few a Dominant men who were irritatingly passive aggressive,

Passive aggressive behavior is manipulative instead of saying what you want directly.

quote:

Adj. 1. submissive - inclined or willing to submit to orders or wishes of others or showing such inclination

quote:

unassertive - inclined to timidity or lack of self-confidence;
subordinate - subject or submissive to authority or the control of another;

quote:

2. Willing to carry out the wishes of others: amenable, biddable, compliant, conformable, docile, obedient, supple, tractable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes



If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

There have been a lot of discussions about male/female dynamics lately. So I thought I'd attempt to cover a similar topic that interests me. Sorry if this gets confusing because it's a multi part question...

A comparison of personality traits:

Are there certain personality traits you see as inherently submissive/dominant?

Are there certain personality traits you see as superior/inferior?(if you think that part is too inflammatory feel free to pick and choose which portions you answer I'm not a stickler for structure)

Are there traits which you see as superior and submissive/ inferior and dominant or are they mutually exclusive?

Do you take someone at their word generally if they say they are dominant or submissive or do you rely on some of those traits to define it for you?

I'm curious if this is something that differs a lot or something people generally have similar views on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

quote:

Passive aggression is a deliberate and masked way of expressing covert feelings of anger (Long, Long & Whitson, 2008). It involves a range of behaviors designed to get back at another person without him recognizing the underlying anger.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitaTruble

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

Childish.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

If a trait is not Dominant, that doesn't automatically make it submissive.
If a trait is not submissive, that doesn't automatically make it Dominant.
There are traits which support independence, self-serving interests, or which are avoidance responses.

quote:

Passive-aggression is like manipulation, and neither are Dominant traits, but that doesn't make them submissive by default.

quote:

Like you, sexyred, I see many Dominants acting passive-aggressive. I also see non-consensual manipulation being used, and when Dominants resort to this getting-over behavior, I find it pathetic and not amusing like they often do. If you are in charge of and in control of another or of a situation, then you wouldn't have to be manipulative. It shows you don't have the power or the authority to act aboveboard, or lack skills of persuasion -- but that doesn't make it a submissive trait.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

There have been a lot of discussions about male/female dynamics lately. So I thought I'd attempt to cover a similar topic that interests me. Sorry if this gets confusing because it's a multi part question...

A comparison of personality traits:

Are there certain personality traits you see as inherently submissive/dominant?

quote:


Are there certain personality traits you see as superior/inferior?(if you think that part is too inflammatory feel free to pick and choose which portions you answer I'm not a stickler for structure)

quote:


Are there traits which you see as superior and submissive/ inferior and dominant or are they mutually exclusive?

quote:


Do you take someone at their word generally if they say they are dominant or submissive or do you rely on some of those traits to define it for you?

quote:


I'm curious if this is something that differs a lot or something people generally have similar views on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

If a trait is not Dominant, that doesn't automatically make it submissive.
If a trait is not submissive, that doesn't automatically make it Dominant.
There are traits which support independence, self-serving interests, or which are avoidance responses.

If you use sexyred1's definition, you are right, that trait is neither dominant or submissive.

However, avoidance, TO ME is inherently submissive behavior.

quote:

<NookieNotes>

quote:

<dreamlady> Passive-aggression is like manipulation, and neither are Dominant traits, but that doesn't make them submissive by default.

Passive-aggression is unconscious manipulation. Not deliberate. Manipulation is a neutral behavior, and can be good or bad, based on what the intentions are. Passive-aggression, as it's used most widely (again, not sexyred1's definition) is a negative cycle of avoidance, resentment, and lying.

quote:

<dreamlady> Like you, sexyred, I see many Dominants acting passive-aggressive. I also see non-consensual manipulation being used, and when Dominants resort to this getting-over behavior, I find it pathetic and not amusing like they often do. If you are in charge of and in control of another or of a situation, then you wouldn't have to be manipulative. It shows you don't have the power or the authority to act aboveboard, or lack skills of persuasion -- but that doesn't make it a submissive trait.

1. Just because one is A DOMINANT does not mean one does not display submissive behaviors. Everyone is a mix. Seeing a dominant (n) acting submissively (adv) does not make them less of a dominant (n), it makes them human. Everyone exhibits both d and s behaviors.

And by saying it is submissive, BTW, I am not equaling it to bad. Dominant is not good. Submissive is not bad.

2. Re: the bold... How is that dominant AT ALL? How is this a leading behavior?
--

I may be experiencing some brain freeze today, but I'm not clear what you're asking. I don't see manipulative behavior as exerting dominance in terms of wielding authority. Dominant behavior would be to take charge and control of situations and of others, whether by mutual consent or by holding an official position of authority, or by being an authority (expert) in one's field.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

If a trait is not Dominant, that doesn't automatically make it submissive.
If a trait is not submissive, that doesn't automatically make it Dominant.
There are traits which support independence, self-serving interests, or which are avoidance responses.

If you use sexyred1's definition, you are right, that trait is neither dominant or submissive.

However, avoidance, TO ME is inherently submissive behavior.

Imho, avoidance to me is similar to procrastination, a sort of limbo state (which could be perceived as passivity in terms of ignoring/playing possum or momentarily being in denial) between the fight/confrontation or flight/actively avoiding (by running or ducking) response. If avoiding confrontation becomes habitual, then passive-aggressiveness is ingrained as a trait.

Since this is not a Dominant trait, it is not necessarily submissive unless indecisiveness is not grappled internally, but seeks external and more authoritative approval. If a person has commitment issues and avoids making commitments, for example, would that make this trait or tendency a submissive one? I see it more as a sign of indecisiveness, fickleness, or a characteristic of someone who doesn't want to give up their independence by limiting their options.

quote:

quote:

<NookieNotes>

quote:

<dreamlady> Passive-aggression is like manipulation, and neither are Dominant traits, but that doesn't make them submissive by default.

Passive-aggression is unconscious manipulation. Not deliberate. Manipulation is a neutral behavior, and can be good or bad, based on what the intentions are. Passive-aggression, as it's used most widely (again, not sexyred1's definition) is a negative cycle of avoidance, resentment, and lying.

quote:

<dreamlady> Like you, sexyred, I see many Dominants acting passive-aggressive. I also see non-consensual manipulation being used, and when Dominants resort to this getting-over behavior, I find it pathetic and not amusing like they often do. If you are in charge of and in control of another or of a situation, then you wouldn't have to be manipulative. It shows you don't have the power or the authority to act aboveboard, or lack skills of persuasion -- but that doesn't make it a submissive trait.

1. Just because one is A DOMINANT does not mean one does not display submissive behaviors. Everyone is a mix. Seeing a dominant (n) acting submissively (adv) does not make them less of a dominant (n), it makes them human. Everyone exhibits both d and s behaviors.

And by saying it is submissive, BTW, I am not equaling it to bad. Dominant is not good. Submissive is not bad.

2. Re: the bold... How is that dominant AT ALL? How is this a leading behavior?
--

I may be experiencing some brain freeze today, but I'm not clear what you're asking. I don't see manipulative behavior as exerting dominance in terms of wielding authority. Dominant behavior would be to take charge and control of situations and of others, whether by mutual consent or by holding an official position of authority, or by being an authority (expert) in one's field.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

Well, I can't for the life of me fathom why this would be a submissive trait.

It's certainly the trait of someone lacking communication skills, but in my experience submissive women are good communicators and aren't in it to play games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Passive -aggressive is defined as "the expression of negative emotions in a calm or detached manner".

That isn't gender specific, nor is it Dom/sub specific.

It is specific to people who cannot handle confrontation.

If a trait is not Dominant, that doesn't automatically make it submissive.
If a trait is not submissive, that doesn't automatically make it Dominant.
There are traits which support independence, self-serving interests, or which are avoidance responses.

If you use sexyred1's definition, you are right, that trait is neither dominant or submissive.

However, avoidance, TO ME is inherently submissive behavior.

Imho, avoidance to me is similar to procrastination, a sort of limbo state (which could be perceived as passivity in terms of ignoring/playing possum or momentarily being in denial) between the fight/confrontation or flight/actively avoiding (by running or ducking) response. If avoiding confrontation becomes habitual, then passive-aggressiveness is ingrained as a trait.

Since this is not a Dominant trait, it is not necessarily submissive unless indecisiveness is not grappled internally, but seeks external and more authoritative approval. If a person has commitment issues and avoids making commitments, for example, would that make this trait or tendency a submissive one? I see it more as a sign of indecisiveness, fickleness, or a characteristic of someone who doesn't want to give up their independence by limiting their options.

I agree with avoidance.

However, passive-aggression, by the definitions I've posted and all of what I've read (with the exception of sexyred1's definition) includes the agreement to go along, then NOT.

Yes, I agree to go out Wednesday to your favorite bar. Then, I do not, because it's always your favorite bar, and never the one I like. I avoid it after agreeing to it.

This, in my view, is different from someone asking me what I'm doing Wednesday night, and me replying, "I don't know yet. What's the latest I can get back to you?"

quote:

quote:

<NookieNotes>

quote:

<dreamlady> Passive-aggression is like manipulation, and neither are Dominant traits, but that doesn't make them submissive by default.

Passive-aggression is unconscious manipulation. Not deliberate. Manipulation is a neutral behavior, and can be good or bad, based on what the intentions are. Passive-aggression, as it's used most widely (again, not sexyred1's definition) is a negative cycle of avoidance, resentment, and lying.

quote:

<dreamlady> Like you, sexyred, I see many Dominants acting passive-aggressive. I also see non-consensual manipulation being used, and when Dominants resort to this getting-over behavior, I find it pathetic and not amusing like they often do. If you are in charge of and in control of another or of a situation, then you wouldn't have to be manipulative. It shows you don't have the power or the authority to act aboveboard, or lack skills of persuasion -- but that doesn't make it a submissive trait.

1. Just because one is A DOMINANT does not mean one does not display submissive behaviors. Everyone is a mix. Seeing a dominant (n) acting submissively (adv) does not make them less of a dominant (n), it makes them human. Everyone exhibits both d and s behaviors.

And by saying it is submissive, BTW, I am not equaling it to bad. Dominant is not good. Submissive is not bad.

2. Re: the bold... How is that dominant AT ALL? How is this a leading behavior?
--

I may be experiencing some brain freeze today, but I'm not clear what you're asking. I don't see manipulative behavior as exerting dominance in terms of wielding authority. Dominant behavior would be to take charge and control of situations and of others, whether by mutual consent or by holding an official position of authority, or by being an authority (expert) in one's field.

Conscious manipulation, for example, behavior modification, is a dominant behavior. It is taking charge/taking the lead.

For example, the first night Pet and I met, I told him that my main kink is behavior modification. He told me then that I could play in his mind. I have renewed that consent approximately every month since. And I have changed his behavior quite a bit, for the better for me, for him, and for his work.

I am saying that passive-aggression is a subsconscious form of manipulation that is used when a person does not have the power to do what they want above board.

It is not neutral, in my opinion. Failure is neutral. You can fail at being dominant or submissive.

To be passive-aggressive, you must KNOW you do not have the power to accomplish what you want, so you take the non-consensual manipulative route, agreeing to something then not following through.

Again, this is not a trait of submissives (noun) but a submissive (adjective) trait.

Am I more clear?

*smiles*

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

Well, I can't for the life of me fathom why this would be a submissive trait.

It's certainly the trait of someone lacking communication skills, but in my experience submissive women are good communicators and aren't in it to play games.

I am not saying it is the trait of sumissives (noun). It is a submissive (adjective) trait.

Two different things. Both submissives (nouns) and dominants (nouns) have submissive (adjective) and dominant (adjective) traits.

For example, a submissive (noun) must behave in a dominant (adjective) manner to lead her children. This does not make her less submissive. It is a trait, not a definition of who she is as a person.

A dominant (noun) may still act submissively (adverb) to his mother (or father). That does not make him any less dominant (adjective).

You see where I am drawing the distinction? Simply saying "I know an X who does not act X" does not actually change the discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

If passive-aggression is not a submissive (adj) trait, then what is it?

Well, I can't for the life of me fathom why this would be a submissive trait.

It's certainly the trait of someone lacking communication skills, but in my experience submissive women are good communicators and aren't in it to play games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes


I am not saying it is the trait of sumissives (noun). It is a submissive (adjective) trait.

Two different things. Both submissives (nouns) and dominants (nouns) have submissive (adjective) and dominant (adjective) traits.

For example, a submissive (noun) must behave in a dominant (adjective) manner to lead her children. This does not make her less submissive. It is a trait, not a definition of who she is as a person.

A dominant (noun) may still act submissively (adverb) to his mother (or father). That does not make him any less dominant (adjective).

You see where I am drawing the distinction? Simply saying "I know an X who does not act X" does not actually change the discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Christ, I've been beaten into submission by a barrage of falling nouns, adjectives and verbs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic
As for passive aggression... it could be seen, on the one hand, as an unwillingness to confront directly, and so submissive... or, on the other hand, as a way of controlling the parameters of the other person's response, and so dominant after a fashion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes


I am not saying it is the trait of sumissives (noun). It is a submissive (adjective) trait.

Two different things. Both submissives (nouns) and dominants (nouns) have submissive (adjective) and dominant (adjective) traits.

For example, a submissive (noun) must behave in a dominant (adjective) manner to lead her children. This does not make her less submissive. It is a trait, not a definition of who she is as a person.

A dominant (noun) may still act submissively (adverb) to his mother (or father). That does not make him any less dominant (adjective).

You see where I am drawing the distinction? Simply saying "I know an X who does not act X" does not actually change the discussion.

Is it really necessary to identify the parts of speech? Do people really not know the difference between nouns, adjectives and adverbs???

quote:

Interestingly... you could phrase things another way and say that someone who generally identifies as a submissive does not act submissively when leading her children... when leading her children, she is not, in fact, a submissive.

quote:

Submissive and dominant describe an interaction dynamic, for the most part. Thus it is possible for the character of that dynamic to change with every new person, and every new situation.

quote:

Maybe the best you can do is to be able to make a good guess at how you might react to a situation or person based on experience.

And if you were isolated and had no contact with anyone, would you even be able to know if you were submissive or dominant???

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Christ, I've been beaten into submission by a barrage of falling nouns, adjectives and verbs.

My apologies. I was intending to clarify.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes



I see the first. *smiles*

The second, no. It's not leading, or taking responsibility. It's not powerful or influential. It is suborning yourself to another's view, then avoiding it.

quote:

Interestingly... you could phrase things another way and say that someone who generally identifies as a submissive does not act submissively when leading her children... when leading her children, she is not, in fact, a submissive.

quote:


I disagree. She is still a submissive. She is just exhibiting dominant traits.

quote:

Submissive and dominant describe an interaction dynamic, for the most part. Thus it is possible for the character of that dynamic to change with every new person, and every new situation.

quote:


I disagree. People are using those words to describe core personalities. Who they are. Therefore a submissive can have both dominant and submissive traits, and behave submissively or dominantly towards others.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes


I assume they do. however, to suggest that because he knows a submissive who does not exhibit the trait has nothing to do with whether the trait is submissive.

And this keeps happening. "I know dominants who do this, therefore it must not be submissive." Again, the words are not related to the point, so I clarify.

*shrugs*