Yeah, I do this for the fun of it...

[reynardo]

How the hell is one supposed to be angry properly? I tend to simmer for ages, and then explode - with the usual and expected debris and blast radius. I've tried for years to deal with this in the various anger-management ways, (bring the problem up before it becomes a problem, explain how something is making you feel, use specifics not generalities) but every now and then someone or something still gets me totally pissed off.


Some of it has a lot to do with behaviour. I'd been taught for years to put the other person first, to consider other people's feelings and to put myself out for other people. That to have negative emotions is a bad thing to do. It means that when I do get angry, I'm often not very good at controlling it or stopping it from making me miserable for quite a while, which then makes me tired, which makes the anger harder to control... For a long time I would take the blame, apologise for things that were not my fault (yeah, I still do that) just to stop or avoid the fighting. Nowadays I try very hard not to, because I've had that used against me to where a boss or a so-called friend has taken the guilt I felt for things I wasn't responsible for and made me the scapegoat for their screwups.

And some of it has to do with being very tired, as I have been since I started working, and being utterly disappointed about not getting the house, and being pissed off with not having a car, and lots of other things that make getting angry about smaller things into big angrys.


Which leads to the second query. Which is better - leaving replies to email for 24 hours because one might think again about them, but as a result not sending them and leaving feelings unexpressed, or being totally honest about being angry but at the same time possibly fuelling an escalation?

Comments

[skwerlbuddy.livejournal.com]

You poor thing... Are you sure we're not related?

[reynardo.livejournal.com]

I think we are. Who else would be so good at mothering but the mother of the tree-rat.

[turnberryknkn.livejournal.com]

Anger's a hard thing to deal with.

Luck.

[ladyreo.livejournal.com]

It depends, would you feel comfortable with yourself if certain things were not said? In my opnion, sometimes things need to escalate. Being silent can just let the problem continue, as escalation is merely the other person trying to deflect blame and guilt. Though sometimes staying silent is better because the issue is trivial and letting it slide is not that bad. What would make you feel worse, in the end?

[malada.livejournal.com]

My manager wrote me up for having "anger management problems."

Sweet little me?

Oh course, getting four hours of sleep and being hauled into work did little for my attitude.

Every now and then *everyone* gets pissed off. The best we can do is find the most appropriate way of venting the volcano.

And every once in a while, a good explosion is worth it.

-m

[waitingman.livejournal.com]

Anger Is An Energy... so Johnny Rotten once said. I have the same problem - putting other people first until it becomes impossible to do any more & you tend to explode at someone who, while they may have pissed you off, doesn't deserve the stored-up dynamite that goes off in their face. Then you just feel guilty afterwards for not controlling your temper, or "managing your anger", which annoys you & the whole cycle can easily start again. If you find a solution, let me know... Energy Never Dies... It Just Changes Form...

[thunderfoot23.livejournal.com]

I have trouble with anger too... Not used to even having it at all because when younger I used to go berzerk, so after a while I locked it all away. So now I'm trying to find some kind of middle ground and not managing so well...

I've often regretted sending emails without proper consideration. But you also _really_ need to get stuff out of your head. So it's best to write them and then not send them for a few days and either edit them later or preface with "this was what I wrote when I was feeling bad the other day, now I feel more like this about it instead".

[shadow-5tails.livejournal.com]

The trouble with putting other people first is that you have every right to express your dissatisfaction with something that's causing you harm or distress, just as everyone else does. Thing is, our feelings are a lot more immediate to us, and by definition subjetive, which seems to lend itself to extreme reactions - either I put the other person first to the expense of myself, or I get so caught up in the flow of emotion that the other side's argument/feelings/cause for upset start becoming hard to see. There has to be a middle ground in there, but it seems rather hard to find!

I think if you're putting the various anger-management techniques to use, you're doing a damn sight better than some of us - and dearone, you're only human. You're allowed to be thoroughly pissed off at things sometimes. It's been a bastard of a week for you, from the sound of things; it's not surprising that your reserves are a little lower than usual. *hug*

As regards the e-mail, personally I think that people have a right to know if what they're doing is pissing you off - I'd argue that few go out of their way to upset others unless there's a grudge or somesuch at play, in which case there's an issue there that should have been dealt with in and of of itself. Given my inability to do anything in a timely fashion at the moment, I tend not to get the initial rant into an e-mail, but rather wait a day or two and reply with a note pointing out that x left me feeling y, to the point that I didn't want to reply at the time for fear of saying something we'd both regret. The alternative that thunderfoot23 suggests, the "this is how I felt at the time; I now feel like this" approach, is useful provided that the people you're dealing with can understand the difference between the initial reaction and the current feeling. Sadly, I know a few who can't deal with the idea that they've upset a friend at all, let alone that initial knee-jerk rush of emotion.