The subtle war for influence
Feminine-coded aggression tactics: soft control vs. passive aggression
This is the third piece in a series about online interactions that involve elements of control: overt and covert. It was inspired by a reader’s question about the difference between soft control and passive aggression. That question got me thinking about how we use language to describe and distinguish certain behaviours — especially the annoying ones that aim to influence, or more accurately, control another person’s actions. What makes them tricky is that they don’t appear controlling. Instead, they stay hidden behind politeness, reasonableness, or concern.
Influence is a currency in every interaction, whether in personal relationships, workplaces, or online spaces. While some assert power overtly, others rely on subtler tactics to steer conversations and decisions in their favour. These are female aggression tactics which are a form of covert or relational control that operates through subtle manipulation, moral framing, or emotional leverage, rather than overt confrontation or domination.
Female aggression is not restricted to biology. It refers to behaviours that are often socialised in women — indirect expressions of power that maintain control without appearing hostile. Since these tactics are rooted in social norms of politeness, emotional intelligence, and social harmony, they can be harder to notice and confront because they maintain a façade of care and civility.
Two common expressions of this covert influence are soft control and passive aggression. While both are used to assert one’s influence to control the other, they emerge from different motivations and play out in different ways. Understanding these differences is key to recognising and responding to these tactics effectively.
Understanding soft control and passive aggression
I want to preface this by saying that these behaviours are often socialised responses, not calculated strategies. They tend to emerge when someone feels uncomfortable with what another person is saying or doing. Although they’re rarely deliberate attempts to dominate, they are habitual ways of avoiding discomfort, which is what makes them so frustrating to deal with.
These tactics are annoying because they are mostly used unconsciously. The person employing them doesn’t typically perceive their behaviour as threatening, disrespectful, rude, or dishonest yet it can be all of the above. The problem is that these habitual responses allow someone to avoid discomfort without being honest about it, with themselves or the other person.
These avoidant patterns create a mismatch between intent and impact. The person using them stays emotionally protected while the other is left to manage the confusion, tension, or double meaning in the exchange. For people who value honesty and can sniff a dishonest statement from a mile away, covert control tactics can lead to strong pushback, communication breakdown, and disconnection.
Passive aggression is a defensive response to feeling powerless or resentful. It allows a person to resist or undermine another while avoiding direct confrontation. The goal is to indirectly resist, punish, or manipulate without directly confronting the issue so they indirectly communicate their resentment through sarcasm, procrastination, or subtle digs. Here’s an example of a passive aggressive response:
Scenario: A team member is annoyed they weren’t consulted on a decision.
Instead of directly saying, “I wish you’d included me in the decision,” they say:
“Well, I guess some of us just find things out when it’s already too late. But I’m sure you had your reasons.”
Soft control is a proactive strategy used to assert or maintain dominance in a conversation or relationship, often under the guise of morality or fairness. The person using soft control seeks to shift the power dynamic in their favour while maintaining a polite or morally superior stance. Here’s an example of a soft control response:
Scenario: In a group discussion, someone disagrees with a popular opinion about a leadership style.
Instead of openly challenging them, a person replies:
“I totally understand where you’re coming from. I just think if we all took a bit more time to reflect before reacting emotionally, these conversations would be more productive.”
It’s easy to confuse the two because the experience of receiving them is often the same. Both can trigger shame, self-doubt, or confusion, leaving you unsure if you’re overreacting or simply misinterpreting what’s going on. In online exchanges, it’s even harder to tell that your internal reaction is a response to covert control tactics - tone is flattened, and how things come across often has more impact than what’s actually being said.
This is a premium piece for paid subscribers. The rest of this article unpacks how to respond to these tactics without getting pulled into an outrage-fuelled, emotionally draining power struggle. Upgrade your subscription to access the full piece.