Women managers are particularly encouraged to phrase their orders in soft terms like "Could you please...?" because otherwise we may be see as harsh, demanding, and the unforgivable "acting like a man". Some of us struggle with this. A lot.
Telling someone "Do X by Friday" or even the slightly softer "I need X by Friday" doesn't open the door to reasonable objections. "Would you like to" implies that discussion is expected but unilateral refusal is probably not.
Of course, if someone systematically shows that their reaction to being softly asked is not reasonable, one should stop softly asking them.
I think the opposite. Nothing personal, but I've used the deferential style for years and the ambiguity and false deference can cloud things.
Person X may not want to do task Y. They might be more interested in their current task. They might not think it's their responsibility. If you don't want to discuss it, don't leave the door open to discussion.
"Person X: drop everything and work on task Y. Thanks."
If someone blows up at me for being direct, I'm going to PIP them and move them off my team and out the door.
I disagree. "Could you please" implies that. "Would you like to" is in fact a solicitation for the other parties preference, and opens the door for refusal. Politeness is important, but if the request is too passive then it can change the meaning.
Obviously, there are ways beyond the mere statement that can indicate whether it really was an open question or just a softly worded request (body language, tone, general context). I am by no means blind to such things.
However, it's important to distinguish when a particular usage of language is just wrong, regardless of its popularity. There are far to many ways of putting a request politely without blurring the intent or coming off as passive-aggressive.
But then I'm British and apparently we're odd like that :)
As for being seen to be acting like a man - seen that way by who, unforgiveable according to who, and do they actually matter?
I can't say I've heard someone complaining their female manager was acting like a man, or saying they wish their manager would be more feminine. I hear people quite often wishing their managers would be more decisive though.
When I was a senior manager in a Fortune 100 company in the South, I was taken aside by one of my peers, who advised me that I should "speak more deferentially" to my male peers and staff BECAUSE I was a woman. It just would not be acceptable for me to act like any man's equal.
When I was a software engineer in SF, my Indian manager took me into a conference room with his American manager, and told me that I should always, always frame any request to any team member as a plea for them to do a favor for me. No matter what I was asking, no matter who they were, whether in person or email or on Slack.
You ask do these people actually matter? Yes, they were my peers and bosses.
For the latter, men can get told that too. Some management theories almost elevate the worker above the manager and a belief that clearly asking people to do things is "aggressive" can apply regardless of gender.
But my point is that we should accept diversity, and the intersectional interactions that will come from it.