Can Highly Sensitive Persons deal or cope with Passive Aggressiveness?

[The Moss Trooper]

Posted by snoman (here)
I do not like the word Vegan.. it is alien-like.. sounds off. who coined it?

Probably some Vegan.

[Catechism]

Posted by Matthew (here)

Posted by Catechism (here)

Posted by Matthew (here)
The benefit of triggering people:

- When people are enraged they can't think straight
- When people are enraged they make their own bad case against themselves for all to see

Doing this passive aggressively means you don't flair up as being unreasonable or an arse yourself, if you keep your composure and they lose theirs.

Passive aggressive triggering is THE trolling technique. It couples well with Socratic Method Trolling, which is either well-aimed, insincere Socratic questions, or a lot of sincere Socratic questions because they're annoying.

The Larrikin in Australia was reviled and admired in equal quantity , being serious has its moment but to laugh is eternal

I've noticed it's a tradition of the genuine working classes of England to teach each other through constant wind-ups; I can see how that works. People who are like, 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗕𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 are asking for trouble, and the wind-up merchants run rings around.. well, everyone. But like the Australian Larrikin the English wind-up merchant acts in good faith. Reminds me of the concept of Heyoka, and I've often thought of the two sides of mischievousness as Loki vs 'spirit of heyoka'. Spirit of heyoka sounds glorious but really its a bunch of annoying wind-up merchants

You only take the piss out of the people you love, any one else it's called invective

[ExomatrixTV]

Has passive aggressiveness ever been rewarded (being successful) to those who are using these mind-games? ...

If I would use anything near it it would be more like using sarcasm and being hilarious not to manipulate the other but to laugh at the whole situation (including at myself)

• It has some similar tendencies but overall it is meant to have a good laugh which is the opposite what triggered people would do. They are way too serious!

cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳

[Catechism]

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)
Has passive aggressiveness ever been rewarded (being successful) to those who are using these mind-games? ...

If I would use anything near it it would be more like using sarcasm and being hilarious not to manipulate the other but laugh at the whole situation (including at myself)

• It has some similar tendencies but overall it is meant to have a good laugh which is the opposite what triggered people would do. They are way too serious!

cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2Hanulj5heg

[Catechism]

Would you care to elaborate my "Friend" ."To me he was obvious being hilarious ... most know that it is stereo-typing ... and those who assumes it is "fact" is not (y)our responsibility to worry about them "...
Catechism joining date Project Avalon Forum: "April 1st, 2022" <<< that "explains" everything
He will be our practical joker to stir someone up by default". Who is them and (y)our and someone , who are you and why worry ? Don't mug me off please with your hyperbole

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Catechism (here)
Would you care to elaborate my "Friend" ."To me he was obvious being hilarious ... most know that it is stereo-typing ... and those who assumes it is "fact" is not (y)our responsibility to worry about them "...
Catechism joining date Project Avalon Forum: "April 1st, 2022" <<< that "explains" everything
He will be our practical joker to stir someone up by default". Who is them and (y)our and who are you ? Don't mug me off please with your hyperbole

just a funny coincidence "April 1st" and I used the word: "explains" in quotes and added a wink smiley for a reason ... so why do you assume I take it all literary? even if I was (but I wasn't) you are never to be defined being just a joker (nobody is) unless you are so sensitive that it has so much "power" over you ... which it certainly hasn't >>> everybody is so much more than any label we may use on each-other ...

• My comment was pure lighthearted nothing more, as you were making fun of vegans!

[Catechism]

Title was about triggering , apologies

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Catechism (here)
ok but why april the 1st and not to worry about them and being a practical joker , can I take away your shovel ?

do you really do not get it? you still take everything so serious .... really? why???

... you never heard about "April 1st" ??? where people using all kinds of pranks & jokes and you happen to be a new member on that day ... I find that a funny coincidence ... because you were making fun of vegans!

• My comment was pure lighthearted nothing more, as you were making fun of vegans!

[Catechism]

i'm a fool. still love you

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Catechism (here)
i'm a fool. still love you

you know you are not a fool so why say it ... there is a big difference between what you really are and what sometimes can happen in life ... as everybody can have a moment of confusion << no big deal!

[Catechism]

"you know you are not fool so why say it " , you alluded to it

[Catechism]

who is them ?

[Mike Gorman]

The day the Vegans landed was just an ordinary day, people were bustling around the town, buying their meat for the coming weekend, joints of lamb, beef, veal steaks, bacon and sausages for the inevitable fry-up breakfasts, right about 2:30pm we all saw the giant craft hovering over the suburbs, exuding a smell of digested cabbage, and sprout farts, life changed at that time and we have all been striving to adjust to the tofu and watercress sandwiches ever since...

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Mike Gorman (here)
The day the Vegans landed was just an ordinary day, people were bustling around the town, buying their meat for the coming weekend, joints of lamb, beef, veal steaks, bacon and sausages for the inevitable fry-up breakfasts, right about 2:30pm we all saw the giant craft hovering over the suburbs, exuding a smell of digested cabbage, and sprout farts, life changed at that time and we have all been striving to adjust to the tofu and watercress sandwiches ever since...

that's deep

[ExomatrixTV]

• Tucker: This Is The Road To Chaos And Collapse:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=sFR32oNfrDc

[Matthew]

This lady knows where her towel is... what a legend!

How passive aggressive triggering works - but without sarcasm

[DeDukshyn]

I deal with passive aggressiveness by having trained myself to completely emotionally ignore it, even to the point of not being able to see it. If someone has something to say to me, they can say it directly and proudly. Else its not worth my time to even pay attention to it.

I actually tell people that often when I meet them "... If you have something to say, don't be a coward - say it to my face and join me in an adult discussion on whatever is bothering you."

[Apulu]

This brings up a really interesting debate for me. You could pretty much call this post Confessions of a Former Passive Aggressive.

Yep. I've kind of come from that camp. In terms of displays of aggression (perhaps leaving violent aggression asside) there are pretty much only two camps here, huh? There's Tyrannical behaviour, and there's Passive Aggressive behaviour. Or, actually, Passive Tyranny. Thanks Jordan Peterson for that particular categorisation: wish I could find the video that was from...

It took me a long time, in my early twenties, to figure out that both camps were and are equal in their ability to destroy what most of us all want in life. Talking in generalities, of course. You could argue easily, I'm sure, that ultimately tyrannical behaviour is the more destructive, but, we're not talking about ultimate destruction, we're just talking about your average day to day hostilities.

Both camps operate, as far as I can see, on fear. Same thing, differently expressed. Tyranny, and passive tyranny surely, comes from the misguided idea that if a situation is not controlled, bad stuff will happen. That's very often true, and so... I guess... to what extent does the situation need to be controlled?

The whole problem seems to boil down, for any given moment, to having enough awareness (which is HARD to develop), taking complete responsibility for one's emotional responses (HARD to develop), and having the courage to act on what's really true for us (HAAARD).

Whilst this debate is centred around passive tyranny, I'd like to suggest something. Being someone who admits to coming from the passive camp: I would say, do not underestimate the shaking-level fear and dread involved, for some people, in simply speaking up about pretty much ANYTHING, let alone going head first into confrontation.

It's taken me literally decades of confronting that fear to arrive in a place where I feel pretty able to say and do what's right for me in most areas of my life. It was EXTREMELY hard.

Am I saying that's an excuse for being passively aggressive? Absolutely not, no.

It was necessary for me to confront the fear, so, I did. I made a commitment to do that, and completely own my emotional responses. Lucky me. I'm very aware of how difficult that's been. I'm not done yet.

It's necessary to confront aggression sometimes. Sometimes often. To do so without getting caught in the conflict is very tricky, but it's doable. For both 'camps'.

[Johnnycomelately]

Posted by Apulu (here)
This brings up a really interesting debate for me. You could pretty much call this post Confessions of a Former Passive Aggressive.

Yep. I've kind of come from that camp. In terms of displays of aggression (perhaps leaving violent aggression asside) there are pretty much only two camps here, huh? There's Tyrannical behaviour, and there's Passive Aggressive behaviour. Or, actually, Passive Tyranny. Thanks Jordan Peterson for that particular categorisation: wish I could find the video that was from...

It took me a long time, in my early twenties, to figure out that both camps were and are equal in their ability to destroy what most of us all want in life. Talking in generalities, of course. You could argue easily, I'm sure, that ultimately tyrannical behaviour is the more destructive, but, we're not talking about ultimate destruction, we're just talking about your average day to day hostilities.

Both camps operate, as far as I can see, on fear. Same thing, differently expressed. Tyranny, and passive tyranny surely, comes from the misguided idea that if a situation is not controlled, bad stuff will happen. That's very often true, and so... I guess... to what extent does the situation need to be controlled?

The whole problem seems to boil down, for any given moment, to having enough awareness (which is HARD to develop), taking complete responsibility for one's emotional responses (HARD to develop), and having the courage to act on what's really true for us (HAAARD).

Whilst this debate is centred around passive tyranny, I'd like to suggest something. Being someone who admits to coming from the passive camp: I would say, do not underestimate the shaking-level fear and dread involved, for some people, in simply speaking up about pretty much ANYTHING, let alone going head first into confrontation.

It's taken me literally decades of confronting that fear to arrive in a place where I feel pretty able to say and do what's right for me in most areas of my life. It was EXTREMELY hard.

Am I saying that's an excuse for being passively aggressive? Absolutely not, no.

It was necessary for me to confront the fear, so, I did. I made a commitment to do that, and completely own my emotional responses. Lucky me. I'm very aware of how difficult that's been. I'm not done yet.

It's necessary to confront aggression sometimes. Sometimes often. To do so without getting caught in the conflict is very tricky, but it's doable. For both 'camps'.

Apulu, take heart. There is nothing chicken about feeling that you don’t want to hit/strike an aggressor. In my understanding, backed by experience, this is part of changing from an aggressor to one who gets along. Wanting to get along is not enough, you have to earn it back.

[ian33]

my sensitivity level goes up and down, just as the level of aggression online does.
..i have ways of determining when on both counts, using both sides of my brain..when the forecast is for extreme weather and not in mood for such, i stay home
..short answer, i dont have to