I'm re-reading WISNIFG, and am stumbling over Fogging and Negative Inquiry. Fogging is responding to criticism or aggression by agreeing with any portion of it that is true or possibly true. Negative Inquiry is responding to criticism by affirmatively asking for more details about a criticism.

For example:

Wife: You never do anything around the house. Response: It's possible that I could do more around the house. [Fogging] What else in particular do you think I should be doing. [Negative Inquiry]

Another example from a recent post: Wife: You dress like a slob. Response: You may be right that I could dress better. [Fogging] What is it about the way that I dress that you think could be improved? [Negative Inquiry]

My question is, how are these responses assertive? Frankly, they seem weak and unassertive if stated genuinely, and passive aggressive if not. I actually have used these techniques by instinct over the years, but I consider them to be the kind of responses that I'm trying to root out, not practice and encourage even more.

I can see how they are effective if used in the face of good faith criticism offered to you for purposes of improvement (say from a boss in a performance review, or maybe in a response on this sub). Instead of being defensive, you embrace the criticism and seek out more detail. Fine.

But the examples and text of WISNIFG make it clear that the author is recommending Fogging and Negative Inquiry as a supposedly assertive response even to extreme, irrational or outright insulting criticism.

So how is this assertive? Does anyone think that the above responses would actually be helpful? Create tingles? Aren't these responses just buying into Wife's frame? What am I missing?