Technical Aggression and Active Acceptance.

Technical aggression is not stubborn or static insistence, or dangerously directionless or haphazard flurry. Active Acceptance is not resignation.

The balance of aggression with acceptance. The need to force something aims to control something outside our control. Forcing a gain of control, a push vs counter-push, or a pull vs counter-pull, butting heads, straining elbow pits, or otherwise desperately holding onto diminishing control. Not to be confused with gaining control by other means; through grace, deception, and flanking. Control is good, forcing control isn’t.

Extreme opposite; complete acquiescence makes us a victim to anything as we fight for nothing. If there is no resistance at all, we get rolled. It’s how we resist, and to what point before acceptance.

We should ask ourselves in moments:

Are we forcing this? Or are we convincing, negotiating control. Control should be what we gain while they are concerned with other fronts. Like we frequently talk with submissions, control over our partner should be gifted in defense of something else. Our control fills the vacuum behind their shifted effort elsewhere.

Are we just letting ourselves get rolled on? Or are we strategically allowing the inevitable passthrough before it’s forced upon us, saving our effort for flanking. We don’t resist in futility, leaving nothing for the counter. We quickly assess the path of least resistance and aim for it.

Our aim:

Be aggressive, but technically over forcefully. Blind and blunt force entrenches, builds bad habits, slows growth and injures. Technical aggression builds grace.

Resist just enough that they overshoot or overcommit, stumble and fumble over themselves, leaving room for our flanking seize of control. We flank moving forward and flank falling back, seizing gifted control with either.