> Hate is harsh...
>
> > > I don't get angry enough.
> >
> > Why is this a problem?
> > I mean, controlling our anger is very good, but reflecting it against yourself is bad.
> >
> > Anger and a lot of other things are our basic instincts; think of them as a source of energy - as a nuclear reactor is; if you don't control them, the result may be a nuclear explosion, but if you repress them or reflect that energy against you, it's like swallowing the same bomb. The right thing is to "control" this energy letting it flow outside ourselves by consuming it (in a sport activity, in our daily work, etc...)
> >
>
> Hmmmmm. While I understand the psychological *theory* behind the Freudian concept of "repressed anger," and the "need" for it in particular to be vented as a "cathartic release," I'm not sure I actually buy the idea. Anger, to me, appears to be one of those feelings that is either On, or Off. You do have a certain degree of choice in the matter of how you express it (Primal Screaming??). But you cannot "reflect anger inward" against yourself and cause depression that way, as if repressed anger, not given a form of release, will end up consuming you with self-hate. Guilt over anger comes from a sense of being out of control, however temporarily, whenever the rage hits.
>
> I think one can get frustrated or irritable, which can cause an visible outburst of anger; or the person may equally suppress his anger, bring it under control, and exert it in a fashion to spur activity. Some people may have a temperament prone to feeling angry and have trouble controlling it: but I have noticed that if they give free reign to their feelings and have an outburst in public, it often makes them even MORE extremely angry... and then guilty afterward for saying or doing things they hadn't intended to. Where is the supposedly cleansing catharsis in THAT?
>
> So I really don't know how people who do think they have a "problem with anger" would respond to Amanda's complaint that you, Don, "don't get angry enough"!
>
> Wolfspirit

Thank you, Wolfspirit-- You've expressed my feelings on the matter very nicely. Some more things I would like to add:

As I believe I have mentioned, I have been living "anger-free" for about ten years now. In that time, I have only lost my temper maybe twice (I can think of two examples, and I tend to remember them-- one example is five years old and I remember it clearly). According to most theories of "repressed anger", I probably should have murdered entire communities in each of those outbursts. ;-) However, neither of them was any worse than a "normal" outburst like what I had before I stopped my anger. In fact, they were much more subdued. Only one involved any form of physical violence, and even then, it was against an inanimate object. So, based on personal experience, I think the concept of repressed anger building up is horse-hockey.

The other thing I would like to say is that the way the point came up when Amanda and I discussed it should have given me some context as to what she meant. She did say that I should be angry more, but she also said later (a day later) that she is only a 20 year old woman trying to deal with the situation as well as she can, and failing sometimes. She feels she often does not say things the way they should be said. But anyway, before telling me that I need to get angry more, she said that I was too passive and let people walk all over me at times. Examples she gave: A coworker (and university friend) throws little rubber page turner things at me sometimes. It annoys me, but I have not said anything to him about it. My roommates sometimes watch TV without wanting to see anything in particular, and just flip around and catch only bits and pieces of things, when sometimes there is something on that I want to watch. I never ask them to just let me watch it.

Anyway, I think I've said enough on the subject for now. Mostly, I'm trying to show you guys that Amanda is not as bad as I might make her out to be at times. I think you know that, though. :-)

Don