Submissive or Passive

[ArtifexLignorum]

I like being slightly askew.

I can also understand why doing this task for Her occasionally would be pleasureable. I think this is a very hard set of concepts to articulate. I also think it varies slightly for all of us and that may be why its so hard to pin down.

Yes. yes.

That is exactly the point. There is no simple bifurcation to be opened here.

Yes i enjoy things because She presents them to be enjoyed. Yes i feel the pleasure from the in sides. Yet would not, had She not imposed her wishes to that end.

 

[MsWorthy]

Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

Passive is fun until about dessert time; by then, I'm wishing I could find a wormhole. A consenting submissive with a brain of her own is my preference always.

Hmmmm.... I think I equate "passive" with "stupid", whereas I equate "submissive" with "choice"...which is, I think, "smart"...or is that just stupid of me?

Thank you, Lance, this helped me to see that my choice of words had a negative connotation and were not conveying what I meant to express.

I think this demonstrates the difficulty when simply using the written word to express our concepts. Because, sometimes, words inadequately describe what we are trying to convey.

Words have different connotations for different people. Many are negatively connotated when, in reality, they are neutral. And most people have what I call "hotspots." These are words that carry a negative "feeling" for you and will set you off and create defensiveness when they appear to be aimed at you or at your concept of yourself (I am using "you" in the general sense).

"Passive" is one of these words. I don't associate passivity with anything negative. To me, someone who is passive has a brain, has opinions, and has plenty of backbone. She/he also has self-confidence, knows what she wants and what she will not tolerate. She/he simply does not have her ego tied into everything she says, or any opinion she might hold at one point in time. She seems intuitively aware that people change and at different points in life, one's opinions may change as well. She doesn't need anyone to agree with her to feel that she has a right to feel the way she does, but recognizes that others may have this need.

This type of person is not a doormat, she simply chooses her battles wisely and doesn't feel the need to be "right" all of the time. If a particular point of view is important to someone, she has no need to make it known that she disagrees. She quietly holds her own counsel and allows others to debate with no investment of herself at stake in the outcome.

This type of person is often very nurturing and takes pride in her ability to put others at ease. She can make them feel special for who they are without needing to point out what they lack. She doesn't need the limelight, and often feels shy if she is forced into the center of things. She is happy following her partner's lead but knows that, if the need arises, she is quite capable of stepping up to the plate and taking control - she simply prefers it otherwise.

I have learned much from the "passive" people I have known in my life. I admire their flexibility, their capacity for self-possession, their ability to stand alone, their quiet strength in the face of discord, and their "thick" skin (they seem able to let things roll off rather than holding a grudge), and as I was growing up, I modeled myself after this type.

This is the type of person I was describing as passive, and this is the type of person I prefer as a partner. For me, there is nothing negative in being passive, but sometimes, there is an inherent difficulty in understanding her motives.

This is what prompted my questions.

 

[spankableBelle]

Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

Thank you, Lance, this helped me to see that my choice of words had a negative connotation and were not conveying what I meant to express.

I think this demonstrates the difficulty when simply using the written word to express our concepts. Because, sometimes, words inadequately describe what we are trying to convey.

Words have different connotations for different people. Many are negatively connotated when, in reality, they are neutral. And most people have what I call "hotspots." These are words that carry a negative "feeling" for you and will set you off and create defensiveness when they appear to be aimed at you or at your concept of yourself (I am using "you" in the general sense).

"Passive" is one of these words. I don't associate passivity with anything negative. To me, someone who is passive has a brain, has opinions, and has plenty of backbone. She/he also has self-confidence, knows what she wants and what she will not tolerate. She/he simply does not have her ego tied into everything she says, or any opinion she might hold at one point in time. She seems intuitively aware that people change and at different points in life, one's opinions may change as well. She doesn't need anyone to agree with her to feel that she has a right to feel the way she does, but recognizes that others may have this need.

This type of person is not a doormat, she simply chooses her battles wisely and doesn't feel the need to be "right" all of the time. If a particular point of view is important to someone, she has no need to make it known that she disagrees. She quietly holds her own counsel and allows others to debate with no investment of herself at stake in the outcome.

This type of person is often very nurturing and takes pride in her ability to put others at ease. She can make them feel special for who they are without needing to point out what they lack. She doesn't need the limelight, and often feels shy if she is forced into the center of things. She is happy following her partner's lead but knows that, if the need arises, she is quite capable of stepping up to the plate and taking control - she simply prefers it otherwise.

I have learned much from the "passive" people I have known in my life. I admire their flexibility, their capacity for self-possession, their ability to stand alone, their quiet strength in the face of discord, and their "thick" skin (they seem able to let things roll off rather than holding a grudge), and as I was growing up, I modeled myself after this type.

This is the type of person I was describing as passive, and this is the type of person I prefer as a partner. For me, there is nothing negative in being passive, but sometimes, there is an inherent difficulty in understanding her motives.

This is what prompted my questions.

Now see, in this context i would agree that i am passive...except i don't have a very thick skin, though i don't hold grudges...i am easily hurt and take many things personally, even though they are not meant that way...

But i can quite firmly identify with all of the other attributes of what You describe as passive...and in that context, i would whole hearted agree that i am...

belle

 

[MsWorthy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

Now see, in this context i would agree that i am passive...except i don't have a very thick skin, though i don't hold grudges...i am easily hurt and take many things personally, even though they are not meant that way...

But i can quite firmly identify with all of the other attributes of what You describe as passive...and in that context, i would whole hearted agree that i am...

belle

I think that with some it would appear that they have thick skin because they tend to keep things inside, when, in fact, they are quite tender, as you express.

Thank you, Belle. (would you like a date? *teasing* you sound like my partner)

 

[spankableBelle]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

I think that with some it would appear that they have thick skin because they tend to keep things inside, when, in fact, they are quite tender, as you express.

Thank you, Belle. (would you like a date? *teasing* you sound like my partner)

There are times that the dam breaks and things are not kept inside...hurt and anger and pain all come rushing out in one fell swoop and then it's each man or woman for themselves...

As for the date...thank You for the first smile in the last couple of days...but, to my detriment, i have this exclusive thing that i need, it's a rather novel concept online and well, no one seems to understand how not having it hinders the ability to fully submit and completely trust...but, i guess it's just me...

belle

 

[WillowPuss]

Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

<snip>
To me, someone who is passive has a brain, has opinions, and has plenty of backbone. She/he also has self-confidence, knows what she wants and what she will not tolerate. She/he simply does not have her ego tied into everything she says, or any opinion she might hold at one point in time. She seems intuitively aware that people change and at different points in life, one's opinions may change as well. She doesn't need anyone to agree with her to feel that she has a right to feel the way she does, but recognizes that others may have this need.

This type of person is not a doormat, she simply chooses her battles wisely and doesn't feel the need to be "right" all of the time. If a particular point of view is important to someone, she has no need to make it known that she disagrees. She quietly holds her own counsel and allows others to debate with no investment of herself at stake in the outcome.

This type of person is often very nurturing and takes pride in her ability to put others at ease. She can make them feel special for who they are without needing to point out what they lack. She doesn't need the limelight, and often feels shy if she is forced into the center of things. She is happy following her partner's lead but knows that, if the need arises, she is quite capable of stepping up to the plate and taking control - she simply prefers it otherwise.

I have learned much from the "passive" people I have known in my life. I admire their flexibility, their capacity for self-possession, their ability to stand alone, their quiet strength in the face of discord, and their "thick" skin (they seem able to let things roll off rather than holding a grudge), and as I was growing up, I modeled myself after this type.

<snip>

Ohhhhh I have delayed in posting to this thread until I read this.

This is me .... though, at times, I wish my skin was much, much thicker than it it.
Like belle, I can be easily hurt with the right triggers (which I will not spell out in case anyone uses them to jerk my string at a later time!).

I hesitate to say I was a passive person as it seemed from reading other threads that they were not held in high regard by some when they dared to say anything.

Being passive certainly doesn't mean I am stupid.
I make plenty of choices all the time - most of the time I choose not to argue with a person that I know is talking through their lower body parts just because it would, on the whole, be a complete waste of my time. What is the point of arguing with somebody who swears by all that's holy that black is white ... they said so, and that's that. Whatever I say, whatever proof I can bring to them will not sway them away from their view.

All I can do is work quietly in the background, trying to erode away from another angle until their mind opens just a tiny crack to the possibility that there could be another, equally valid, point of view.


So, MsWorthy (and I am afraid I have forgotten your original question, so will have to go and re-read it and post again) ... I am both passive and submissive.


edited cos I can't spell today ... ok, I can't spell!

 

[WillowPuss]

Ahhhh right - the question:

submitting to please or submitting because of my personal need to do so.

hmmmm - gosh - you people really ask some tough questions, don't you. Ummmm how to put this ....


Ok - I submit to Robuck. He has been my husband for almost 25 years now, but I have only been fully submissive to him since May. I had submissive tendancies, but didn't realise that it was perfectly in order for me to embrace these tendancies. (Too much of the 70's woman power ... we are better than anyone else type thinking, possibly).

When we first got married there was the usual settling in arguments ... 'fetch me a drink' 'fetch it yourself, I'm busy'
Then the kids came along and I seemed to loose my identity a little.
It was also at that stage that I began to realise just how submissive I was and how much it gave me fullfillment.
Fast forward more years than I really want to admit to ... I submit to Robuck because it gives me infinite pleasure to do so.
I do not submit to any other person on this earth. If my adult son 'demands' I fetch him something just because he has seen me do it for his father, he gets a scornful look, a sharp reminder of manners and then has the fact that he has younger legs than me pointed out to him.


Does that answer the question - or should I stay behind class and try again?

 

[ArtifexLignorum]

Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

Thank you, Lance, this helped me to see that my choice of words had a negative connotation and were not conveying what I meant to express.

I think this demonstrates the difficulty when simply using the written word to express our concepts. Because, sometimes, words inadequately describe what we are trying to convey.

Words have different connotations for different people. Many are negatively connotated when, in reality, they are neutral. And most people have what I call "hotspots." These are words that carry a negative "feeling" for you and will set you off and create defensiveness when they appear to be aimed at you or at your concept of yourself (I am using "you" in the general sense).

"Passive" is one of these words. I don't associate passivity with anything negative. To me, someone who is passive has a brain, has opinions, and has plenty of backbone. She/he also has self-confidence, knows what she wants and what she will not tolerate. She/he simply does not have her ego tied into everything she says, or any opinion she might hold at one point in time. She seems intuitively aware that people change and at different points in life, one's opinions may change as well. She doesn't need anyone to agree with her to feel that she has a right to feel the way she does, but recognizes that others may have this need.

This type of person is not a doormat, she simply chooses her battles wisely and doesn't feel the need to be "right" all of the time. If a particular point of view is important to someone, she has no need to make it known that she disagrees. She quietly holds her own counsel and allows others to debate with no investment of herself at stake in the outcome.

This type of person is often very nurturing and takes pride in her ability to put others at ease. She can make them feel special for who they are without needing to point out what they lack. She doesn't need the limelight, and often feels shy if she is forced into the center of things. She is happy following her partner's lead but knows that, if the need arises, she is quite capable of stepping up to the plate and taking control - she simply prefers it otherwise.

I have learned much from the "passive" people I have known in my life. I admire their flexibility, their capacity for self-possession, their ability to stand alone, their quiet strength in the face of discord, and their "thick" skin (they seem able to let things roll off rather than holding a grudge), and as I was growing up, I modeled myself after this type.

This is the type of person I was describing as passive, and this is the type of person I prefer as a partner. For me, there is nothing negative in being passive, but sometimes, there is an inherent difficulty in understanding her motives.

This is what prompted my questions.

It appears that You have answered the initial question here.

Is there another aspect of this discussion on the table as well?

 

[MsWorthy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

There are times that the dam breaks and things are not kept inside...hurt and anger and pain all come rushing out in one fell swoop and then it's each man or woman for themselves...

As for the date...thank You for the first smile in the last couple of days...but, to my detriment, i have this exclusive thing that i need, it's a rather novel concept online and well, no one seems to understand how not having it hinders the ability to fully submit and completely trust...but, i guess it's just me...

belle

I have seen the dam break and know just what you mean. *smiles*

I am glad that I was able to make you smile.

If exclusivity is what you need in your relationship, I would suggest you honor your needs. Monogamy is vital in my relationship; I couldn't have it any other way.

 

[MsWorthy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

It appears that You have answered the initial question here.

Is there another aspect of this discussion on the table as well?

I am trying to distinguish between someone who serves to please (perhaps passive) from someone who serves because she needs to serve (submissive).

I am not suggesting that one cannot be both, obviously one can. I am wondering about the difference and thought it would make a good topic of discussion.

 

[MsWorthy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Submissive or Passive

I hesitate to say I was a passive person as it seemed from reading other threads that they were not held in high regard by some when they dared to say anything.

Thank you, WillowPuss, for taking the risk to post. *smiles*

Being passive certainly doesn't mean I am stupid.
I make plenty of choices all the time - most of the time I choose not to argue with a person that I know is talking through their lower body parts just because it would, on the whole, be a complete waste of my time. What is the point of arguing with somebody who swears by all that's holy that black is white ... they said so, and that's that. Whatever I say, whatever proff I can bring to them will not sway them away from their view.

This is exactly my point. Your ego is not involved in a disagreement and you don't feel the need to prove you are right (if I may presume to speak for you, here).

All I can do is work quietly in the background, trying to erode away from another angle until their mind opens just a tiny crack to the possibility that there could be another, equally valid, point of view.

(italics are mine) This is why I describe this type of person as passive. That term is far from negative to me; it may describe the strongest type of all.

 

[MsWorthy]

Ahhhh right - the question:

submitting to please or submitting because of my personal need to do so.

hmmmm - gosh - you people really ask some tough questions, don't you. Ummmm how to put this ....


Ok - I submit to Robuck. He has been my husband for almost 25 years now, but I have only been fully submissive to him since May. I had submissive tendancies, but didn't realise that it was perfectly in order for me to embrace these tendancies. (Too much of the 70's woman power ... we are better than anyone else type thinking, possibly).

When we first got married there was the usual settling in arguments ... 'fetch me a drink' 'fetch it yourself, I'm busy'
Then the kids came along and I seemed to loose my identity a little.
It was also at that stage that I began to realise just how submissive I was and how much it gave me fullfillment.
Fast forward more years than I really want to admit to ... I submit to Robuck because it gives me infinite pleasure to do so.
I do not submit to any other person on this earth. If my adult son 'demands' I fetch him something just because he has seen me do it for his father, he gets a scornful look, a sharp reminder of manners and then has the fact that he has younger legs than me pointed out to him.


Does that answer the question - or should I stay behind class and try again?

I would keep you after class, but I don't think your husband would like it (pardon my flirting if it offends you, I mean neither of you any disrespect)

On a more serious note:

WillowPuss, would you say that your personality type (passive) helps you to submit because your natural inclination is to please, anyway?

Would you say that you have a need or a desire to submit?
I think this is where I am unsure of the distinction. Can someone be passive (desire to please) and not be submissive? At first pass, it seems the answer is, easily, yes; however, is not submission the desire to please? Or is it ONLY the need to please.

 

[WillowPuss]

I would keep you after class, but I don't think your husband would like it (pardon my flirting if it offends you, I mean neither of you any disrespect)

On a more serious note:

WillowPuss, would you say that your personality type (passive) helps you to submit because your natural inclination is to please, anyway?

Would you say that you have a need or a desire to submit?
I think this is where I am unsure of the distinction. Can someone be passive (desire to please) and not be submissive? At first pass, it seems the answer is, easily, yes; however, is not submission the desire to please? Or is it ONLY the need to please.

oh wow!
another toughie.

I will do my best.
This will, obviously, be only my personal perpective.

I find I have a real basic need to submit to Robuck. It gives me pleasure, and a lot of satisfaction. I feel somehow more complete.

Maybe it is easy for me to submit because of my passive nature ... but I am not sure that it is. Although I am passive, as I said before, I am not too much of a doormat, and if I feel I am being taken for granted, I will not be my usual good-natured 'of course I will do it' self. When I have had enough, I blow ... and when that happens people beware! (Volcanoes have nothing on me, and I have astounded people on more than one occasion!).

Still unsure if I have really answered the question ... so please ask follow ups.

 

[MsWorthy]

oh wow!
another toughie.

I will do my best.
This will, obviously, be only my personal perpective.

I find I have a real basic need to submit to Robuck. It gives me pleasure, and a lot of satisfaction. I feel somehow more complete.

Maybe it is easy for me to submit because of my passive nature ... but I am not sure that it is. Although I am passive, as I said before, I am not too much of a doormat, and if I feel I am being taken for granted, I will not be my usual good-natured 'of course I will do it' self. When I have had enough, I blow ... and when that happens people beware! (Volcanoes have nothing on me, and I have astounded people on more than one occasion!).

Still unsure if I have really answered the question ... so please ask follow ups.

Please feel assured that I know you are not a doormat. I think you, Belle, and my partner are all similar in that it takes a bit to get you to the point of "blowing" but when you do, it is very emotional. I wonder if that is a personality trait. (we must find a better term for this personality type as it seems to carry such a negative connotation)

My partner is not submissive to anyone but me, but she is helpful to others. It is her nature to be so. I find that this type of person resists control if she/he doesn't feel in the mood or isn't given warning that I require something out of the ordinary (not something we haven't done before, just something that we don't do regularly). I was wondering if this resistance was common for all submissives or if it was related to the desire to submit rather than the need to submit.

I do tend to think too much at times *lol* but I am very interested in understanding this. Of course, since I have only had inside knowledge of a few submissives, and they have all been of this type (people-pleasers), I have no way of knowing if this is common with all submissives irl.

Tell me, do you think (and anyone else that cares to answer) that having a desire to please rather than a need to submit makes any real difference in the type/level/depth of submission?

 

[mskittykatt]

<snip>
I find that this type of person resists control if she/he doesn't feel in the mood or isn't given warning that I require something out of the ordinary (not something we haven't done before, just something that we don't do regularly). I was wondering if this resistance was common for all submissives or if it was related to the desire to submit rather than the need to submit.

i'm not sure i can answer this exactly. The relationship i'm in right now is very new as far as practicing D/s outside the bedroom. so maybe for me it's just a startle reaction when he or his attitude change.
i don't physically resist (i've never had a need to) but he can sure see a fire lit in my eyes when i look at him to question, (...did you just say what i think you did?)

Tell me, do you think (and anyone else that cares to answer) that having a desire to please rather than a need to submit makes any real difference in the type/level/depth of submission?

i think there is another part of this we're overlooking.

we are taking things slow and easy as we incorperate D/s into our daily life. so there are times when he's a step ahead of me and i am surprised or startled and offer emotional resistance or fear. (we are lucky to have a natural easy communication) and i can ask for what i want/need to move on from this place and we go forward.

but my initial reaction can also be based on *his* attitude, tone of voice, body posture, or what i see in his eyes. if all his attention isn't focused on me/us and now, then i naturally and quickly question what's going on 'behind the scenes'
if he's not all there inside, then either things will have to wait - we have something to work out together first before we can move forward.
of course the same goes for when he meets the resistance if it's something to do with me - we have to slow down and find out where it comes from.

i don't think the resistance or depth of submission are affected by my passive nature in the rest of my life.

except for lightheartedly when he says where do you want to go for dinner honey, and i say i don't care. he will make me choose anyway!

 

[SweetDreamsofU]

Would you say that you have a need or a desire to submit?
I think this is where I am unsure of the distinction. Can someone be passive (desire to please) and not be submissive? At first pass, it seems the answer is, easily, yes; however, is not submission the desire to please? Or is it ONLY the need to please.

As you have asked if someone can be passive and not be submissive... I would like to be the one to answer with a definite yes.

When reading your definition of what you see as a passive person you described me perfectly... and shocked me in the process as I have not thought of myself as passive. My term has always been "easy going". I am a people pleaser. I like to see people happy... to make them happy.

But, I have no desire to be submissive. In fact, I feel completely opposite. (And though I am passive... I have found ways to control the situations in a non assertive way... a small suggestion here, a voice of logic there. Finding one person in a situation who will listen to me... follow my lead and lead the others.)

Also, my bf is a people pleaser, yet he is not passive at all. And he will only gift me with his submission. It is not something that he shares with anyone else. His need is to submit to me although he desires to please all.

Maybe this will offer another side of things? Or have I confused the issue as I read it?

SweetD

 

[WillowPuss]

My partner is not submissive to anyone but me, but she is helpful to others. It is her nature to be so. I find that this type of person resists control if she/he doesn't feel in the mood or isn't given warning that I require something out of the ordinary (not something we haven't done before, just something that we don't do regularly). I was wondering if this resistance was common for all submissives or if it was related to the desire to submit rather than the need to submit.

<snip>

Tell me, do you think (and anyone else that cares to answer) that having a desire to please rather than a need to submit makes any real difference in the type/level/depth of submission?

ummmm ... Do I resist control?
I don't think so - not control by Robuck.
Sometimes he takes me a little by surprise and I may hesitate. I also have a hearing difficulty, so may ask him to repeat something if I feel I may have misheard. But I don't think I have resisted.

Your second question - I need to submit to Robuck. It is just not a desire, it is a real basic need in me for me to feel whole.
With others, I like to please. I will do all I can to please, but - and here's the basic difference to me - if I don't feel like it, or think they are being a tad unreasonable, I will delay, or simply decline to do what is asked of me. And if they continue to push, I can be as stubborn as they come. Demand and they don't get. Ask nicely, appeal to my good nature ... putty in their hands.

 

[MsWorthy]

As you have asked if someone can be passive and not be submissive... I would like to be the one to answer with a definite yes.

When reading your definition of what you see as a passive person you described me perfectly... and shocked me in the process as I have not thought of myself as passive. My term has always been "easy going". I am a people pleaser. I like to see people happy... to make them happy.

But, I have no desire to be submissive. In fact, I feel completely opposite. (And though I am passive... I have found ways to control the situations in a non assertive way... a small suggestion here, a voice of logic there. Finding one person in a situation who will listen to me... follow my lead and lead the others.)

Also, my bf is a people pleaser, yet he is not passive at all. And he will only gift me with his submission. It is not something that he shares with anyone else. His need is to submit to me although he desires to please all.

Maybe this will offer another side of things? Or have I confused the issue as I read it?

SweetD

Thank you, SweetD, for a different perspective. I always learn something from another point of view. *smiles*

 

[MsWorthy]

Thank you Willow, MsKitty, Artifex, Belle, Des, and everyone else who posted (I hope I didn't miss anyone). Your time and effort has helped me greatly.

edited to add my thanks to Lance, Ebony, Cym, and MorningGirl.

 

[cellis]

I have read this thread several times but have waited to think through my responses before responding.

I can be passive... that does not make me stupid or slow... it just means that I like to look at what is going on around me and assess the situation.

I am not a people pleaser, but I am a nuturer... the epitomy of the "earth mother" at times. I am a listener... that by the very nature of the situation requires a certain amount of passivity.

I do like to please Himself... there a the little things like never running out of Dr. Pepper that I do because I know it pleases him to open my refridgerator and find a cold one waiting for him. Or he may mention a certain food that he likes and I always make sure that I have it when he comes to my house.

I do this because it pleases him and that gives me pleasure. I don't do it because it is expected of me or required. I doubt very seriously that I would derive much pleasure in doing these things if they were required. In fact I can tell you that I would not.

By the same token, I submit to him because I have an inherent need to do so. But only to him... But that submission is generally in the bedroom. Outside the bedroom, we tend to be equals. We have discussions where my opinion is as valuable as his.

 

[A Desert Rose]

All submissives aren't passive, but many are. Many are people-pleasers and will do most anything to make her/his SO happy. Since people-pleasers tend to be very flexible and have relatively few carved-in-stone opinions, they can agree with most/many stated opinions and do not have too many problems completing most tasks set for them.

These people are easy to be around, and I would think, many *dominants (as opposed to "tops") would feel some level of attraction to this "type" of person.

1. How can you tell whether a (self-identified) submissive is actually submissive or if she is just a passive type of person?

2. Must one partner be submissive in a PE, or can she/he be a passive people-pleaser and it work just as well?

3. Does it work fine for you, as a dominant, as long as you get what you need out of a relationship and your partner is happy because she/he is pleasing you?

4. How important is it to YOU that your partner be submissive and not (necessarily) passive?


*I define dominant, here, as one who needs control in a relationship, not just in bed.

bumped for the new faces or those who have new views.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Some interesting responses and discussions..


Catalina

 

[Netzach]

My partner is someone I would describe as passive socially. This doesn't mean he's not intelligent, or opinionated, or that he's not capable of the kind of bitchiness that's all in fun, but his innate tendency is toward gentleness and peacemaking and solving problems rather than seeing them come to conflict.

Frankly, I love that in a man.

I have a definite bloodthirsty streak when it comes to things intellectual, but socially, with friends, I am very low-maintenance and agreeable when it comes to most things. When pushed to the point where I have to assert myself because my sense of justice has been called into the fray, I WILL have my way. 90 percent of the time, I'm game for however my cohort wants it, it's just easier and I like to see what people around me do and come up with.

Few people outside my family can bring that putting the smack down side out in me or have ever done so, but they don't like to play with Ms. Ugly And Authoritative once they have pushed to that point.

 

[Quint]

I'm kind of a bipolar passive. Lots of what MsW (anybody else miss her like mad?) said resonates with me. Yeah, a lot of the time I think I submit because I want to, because I want to please and be selfless and facilitate my partner's happiness.

But sit me down in front of Mario Kart and see how unopinionated and people-pleasing I am. Total jackal mode, baby!