SUBMISSIVENESS OR PASSIVITY… HMM?
My phone app that gives a bible verse of the day stated this: Titus 3:1: Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work. It got me thinking about the varying cultural ideas of submissiveness and how or if it differs from the notion of passivity.
I asked a few friends what they thought about the differences between passivity and submissiveness after a few minutes of researching the question on Bing. Some, like me were stumped when even considering the differences. Others referred to religious beliefs. Some mentioned distinctions between eastern & western cultures to contrast the subleties in the two words' meanings. Some mentioned it in reference to gender relations. Here's what they had to say, with some minor tweaking on my behalf.
"When you're passive you pick your battles but when you're submissive you pretty much submit to every demand." - F.A.
"Being submissive is a lifestyle. The way Asian, Arab, or Muslim women of eastern cultures are viewed as docile gives the connotation that they're submissive. It is now a choice to be submissive in our (American) culture. Being passive is a choice, too. But passiveness is lazy. People who embrace a passive mindset are weak. There is no place for passiveness unless you are making an active decision to be weak." - N.F.
"Passivity: You are unwillingly doing something. Submissiveness: you are willingly doing it." - JC
"The perception of the two words is key. Both are acts of allowing. Growing up in church, you learn its morally right for women to submit to husbands. Submissiveness has more to do with one person being superior/controlling." - M.A.
"Submissiveness kind of conveys the idea that someone is controlling you. The connotation of passive is more of a carefree nonchalant thing." - M.T.
"It wouldn't be much of a difference really. To be passive is to submit to others." - D.W.
"Aren't they both the same? Could it be that passivity is about a person letting things go but still harboring it? Submissiveness is a person obeying every command." - M.O.
Thanks everybody who took the time to answer my question :)
In my opinion, submission is about contentment in having guidance from a person/people you esteem admirably. A healthy amount of courage, self-respect, and respect for another are all required to be able to securely trust that the person who assumes the role of a leader in your life, won't betray you or exploit you. Submission is about being open-minded and fearless. There is unity and safety in submission. Passivity on the other hand is about concealing discord in order to feign an air of harmony in social settings. Passivity is about avoiding the truth and being foundationless or unanchored with beliefs and personal integrity.
I see myself as submissive. At the core of my being, my willingness to submit to authority has kept me out of trouble with the law and with authority figures. I can attribute my academic success to my contentment in willingly following orders and instructions. I am super eager to deliver exactly what is asked of me if I feel safe doing so. Growing up around very strong-minded individuals has allowed me to feel secure in trusting the judgment of others. Submitting to household rules, the wishes of parents, family members, and teachers afforded me healthy recognition. Because I obey, I am liked by those who offer me guidance. This is something I have always valued.
I like stepping back and letting the more dominant people run the show. I choose to assert myself by submitting to the will of others. This is not to say that I like being controlled against my will. I have to willingly acknowledge that following my leader in a situation is a morally good thing for me to do, according to our shared values.
I feel useful and helpful when I submit to the authority of respected, trusted leaders in my life precisely because I don't care much for being a control freak. I honestly do not want to be in charge of making all the decisions and conducting the show in my personal affairs involving others. Am I competent and capable of leading others if I must? Yes! I am an assertive woman and will take charge if I am amongst more people who willingly choose to be submissive. In those instances, as someone who values good guidance and direction in group settings, I will humbly step forward and assert myself as the leader.
But being that I am overall humble, fluid in nature, open-minded, and curious about others' interests and the way they like to do things, I prefer to let other people lead. I do see myself as submissive and I enjoy actively allowing others to dominate situations if my life isn't threatened, and if the overall goal is to just have some fun.
I have been passive before in life but it is not a quality I saw as admirable. Passivity showed weakness: my inability to outwardly assert what I really wanted and needed out of a situation. Passivity was an assault against my emotional well-being. I didn't know how to stand up for myself or let my voice be heard. Whether I trusted or respected a person, or not, passivity made me feel like I had to follow other people's ways because I couldn't defend my own beliefs, individuality, or identity. Passivity came from a place of choicelessness and defenselessness. I was going along just to get along. Passivity had me weak and voiceless.
Finding my voice let me see that while I do trust that others can lead me to safe, enjoyable, nurturing places, I can still speak out or remove myself from situations that no longer make me feel respected or valuable.
Submission to authority of another requires trust in the integrity of your leader. Trust is established through questioning, through honesty, and through all those good characteristics that build healthy, functional bonds. Passivity doesn't allow you to care about any of that.
Passivity is rooted in apathy. Passive people want to feign getting along. They would rather not question the character, motives, and intentions of the dominant figure that chooses to lead them. People who assert themselves are not an apathetic people. Assertive pople care deeply about their own well-being, which is why they are able to trust the moral character of their leader. If they lacked assertion of their beliefs and if they intentionally avoided questioning their leader's moral character, they would be being passive. They would not actively be responding to or resisting anything. They would not be choosing to follow guidance from a deep-rooted sentiment of trust. They would actually be self-destructing because they would not be standing in firm convictions of their values and beliefs.
Submission requires an honest analysis of beliefs, ideals, morals, and values: things that ring true in the core of a human being's soul. When you submit, you do it from a place of love, trust, passion and respect. Submission comes from the heart. Passivity doesn't even scrape the surface of these things because it avoids them altogether!
Here are some more links that tackle the differences between the subleties of the two!