Passive Agressive Behavior - Historum

**Rasta** · July 2nd, 2010, 08:17 AM

I think passive agressive behavior is destructive to society at large. It is a character trait that attempts to ignore central issues, or coat them with a hollow mask of "politeness". Perhaps I notice this because the area where I live in the US (upper midwest) passive agressive behavior is a fairly common tactic for dealing with problems.

What is passive agressive behavior?

Quote:

Passive–aggressive behavior, a personality trait, is passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following through with expectations in interpersonal or occupational situations. It is a personality trait marked by a pervasive pattern of negative attitudes and passive, usually disavowed resistance in interpersonal or occupational situations.
It can manifest itself as learned helplessness, procrastination, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness, or deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible.

So what are the symptoms of passive agressive behavior?

Quote:

Ambiguity or speaking cryptically: a means of engendering a feeling of insecurity in others
Chronically being late and forgetting things: another way to exert control or to punish.
Fear of competition
Fear of dependency
Fear of intimacy as a means to act out anger: The passive aggressive often cannot trust. Because of this, they guard themselves against becoming intimately attached to someone.
Making chaotic situations
Making excuses for non-performance in work teams
Obstructionism
Procrastination
Sulking
Victimization response: instead of recognizing one's own weaknesses, tendency to blame others for own failures.

A passive-aggressive person may not have all of these behaviors, and may have other non-passive-aggressive traits.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive...ssive_behavior

I think that passive agressive behavior is pronounced in some cultural traditions because traditionally some cultures have promoted an unhealthy atmosphere that prevents members from expressing feelings in a productive manner. Ultimately, this results in a break down in communication, as people don't really say what is on their mind, and thus are never truely able to work through their problems.

Instead, problems are swept under the rug, feelings are repressed and start to fester. I think this is sad, because this type of behavior stunts our ability to actualize ourselves as individual human beings.

At least with openly agressive behavior, there is no vaneer of falsehood masking one's true feelings.

So how does this effect society at large? How does this effect our interactions on a forum?

To be sure, we don't want every single bit of human interaction to resort to mud slinging and name calling. On the other hand, a dishonest society never solves any problems. More than that, they enable the problems to proliferate.

What is more important in society at large? Is it better to hold our feelings to ourselves and not express our thoughts which may sacrifice our honesty, and may cause problems to enlarge? Or is it better to be honest at the risk of offending someone else?

Idealy, in a perfect world, everybodies beliefs would not conflict. That sucks, but that will never happen.

grizzly · July 2nd, 2010, 08:35 AM

don't see to much of that in the south, unless your in high school.

**Rasta** · July 2nd, 2010, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by microsoft1122

don't see to much of that in the south, unless your in high school.

Yeah. I think there is more of a tradition to "speak your mind" in the south. I have noticed this too.

**vera** · July 2nd, 2010, 09:14 AM

Hmm, seems to me most of human "negative" behaviour is included in that list of possibilities. It's like the possible "side-effects" of the birth-control pill, or a pregnancy - unlimited list including just about anything.

So are we all engaging in it most of our life in various situations?

**Rasta** · July 2nd, 2010, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vera

Hmm, seems to me most of human "negative" behaviour is included in that list of possibilities. It's like the possible "side-effects" of the birth-control pill, or a pregnancy - unlimited list including just about anything.

So are we all engaging in it most of our life in various situations?

I think you can still speak your mind and remain tactful. Though I think it is also good to be able to reckognize these patters so they don't interfere with the individual's growth as a human.

I think that is the most tragic result of this behavior.

Horrific examples can be sited such as Jeffery Dahmer. He was raised in an extremely conservative atmosphere which repressed his ability to express his feelings, which of course resulted in a nasty habit.

**vera** · July 2nd, 2010, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasta

I think you can still speak your mind and remain tactful. Though I think it is also good to be able to reckognize these patters so they don't interfere with the individual's growth as a human.

I think that is the most tragic result of this behavior.

Horrific examples can be sited such as Jeffery Dahmer. He was raised in an extremely conservative atmosphere which repressed his ability to express his feelings, which of course resulted in a nasty habit.

Yes, I do believe you are right. That is called being assertive, no? Speaking your mind and standing your ground while not being aggressive?

One of the worst behaviours I have encountered in junior managers is when they sit through a decision-making problem-solving meeting with you, agree on a course of action with you - and then do not do it. So when you check and discover it, and ask "why?" you get: "Well, it is not possible to do this!" This is so maddening! I mean - you were there, participated in the decisions, why in the name of all that is holy did you not say so at the table?

Is that something along the lines of what you meant?

Lady_Cassandra · July 2nd, 2010, 09:53 AM

I admit when angry I can become quite passive-aggressive. I admit it may not be the best way to deal with an issue but on the occassions I felt provoked enough to strike back these tactics left me feeling a certain amount of satisfaction for awhile afterwards. Usually in the end however once I thought a bit more about the situation I was left feeling guilty and not so good about how I "solved" the issue.

**Rasta** · July 2nd, 2010, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vera

Yes, I do believe you are right. That is called being assertive, no? Speaking your mind and standing your ground while not being aggressive?

One of the worst behaviours I have encountered in junior managers is when they sit through a decision-making problem-solving meeting with you, agree on a course of action with you - and then do not do it. So when you check and discover it, and ask "why?" you get: "Well, it is not possible to do this!" This is so maddening! I mean - you were there, participated in the decisions, why in the name of all that is holy did you not say so at the table?

Is that something along the lines of what you meant?

Yes, I think that would be a good example. In this case, it would seem that they are trying to avoid conflict in the short term (by not bringing it up) even if they know it will be a problem in the big scheme.

**Rasta** · July 2nd, 2010, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady_Cassandra

I admit when angry I can become quite passive-aggressive. I admit it may not be the best way to deal with an issue but on the occassions I felt provoked enough to strike back these tactics left me feeling a certain amount of satisfaction for awhile afterwards. Usually in the end however once I thought a bit more about the situation I was left feeling guilty and not so good about how I "solved" the issue.

It was the way I was raised. I admit that I can resort to passive agressive behavior at times. In some cercumstances, it can be quite harmless. In others, it can be very detrimental. I think part of it is knowing when to "pick your battles".

**vera** · July 2nd, 2010, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasta

Yes, I think that would be a good example. In this case, it would seem that they are trying to avoid conflict in the short term (by not bringing it up) even if they know it will be a problem in the big scheme.

Yes, and I find that people expect for some reason that their disagreement would mean conflict, instead of the necessary transparency in sharing critical information. I would have never made a conflict out of it, but just taken the difficulties into account for the solution, searched for a different process, accommodating the people instead of forcing them to do something impossible or unnecessary.

I understand that this is a result of a lifetime of experience with those who DO make a conflict out of such situations, but some managers with this approach are totally unteachable. The one I was talking about is a great guy and all - only not as a fellow member of a working team!