
Don’t let your anger persist - julianshapiro
https://www.julian.com/blog/persistent-anger
======
sthatipamala
This post is very timely. Recently I developed some type of "learned
helplessness" where I felt that shitty situations were being thrust upon me
and I was drowning. What I was missing is that I had a lot of agency over
these situations. I could have declined meetings, asked for help, missed
deadlines, or risked disappointing whoever was requesting something from me.

Being angry and resentful didn't solve anything. So instead I asked myself "if
I don't do this thing I don't like, what's the worst that will happen?". The
answer most of the time turned out to be... "nothing."

What remained was what I chose and those things were worth doing whole-
heartedly.

~~~
apatters
Did you try making a _demonstration_ of anger at the parties who were
thrusting these things upon you? This actually can be the correct course of
action sometimes.

~~~
adrianratnapala
This might work, but as human beings we often have better options.

If you just cooly explain why you a request is unreasonable, then that acts as
a rebuke to the requester. And it is one that can't be just dismissed as "ahh,
she's on the rag".

------
d--b
I am taking the exact opposite stance: now I let myself get infuriated at the
very beginning of the first phone call. As much as I hate being angry, I have
come to embrace the efficiency of the attitude.

I think humans get really motivated to do things for mainly 2 reasons: 1.
because they gain something from completing the task (money, self
satisfaction, social status, gratitude, etc.) 2. because it would cost them
not to complete the task.

I noticed it myself: I am working harder for my clients that are more annoying
to me. I want to make more efforts to reward my clients who are not being
douchebags, but the truth is that I have more to gain from being at peace with
the annoying ones that being nice to the nice ones.

It's the same reason why demanding people get upgraded in planes. The same
reason that you can get a table at any reataurant if you're loud enough. Or
that your internet is fixed faster if you shout through your phone.

The question is: is it more unpleasant for you to let yourself be angry or is
it more unpleasant for you to not get what you want?

~~~
estefan
"The squeaky wheel gets the oil." Sad but true.

~~~
ConroyBumpus
Eventually, however, the persistently squeaky wheel gets replaced.

------
partycoder
If you have some exposure to game theory you will learn that consistently
collaborating will not be the best approach in every situation. If people
learn that you consistently collaborate they will intuitively start abusing
that (e.g: force you to play "chicken", "the volunteer's dilemma" or any model
game in which the collaborator loses). That's to start with.

Now, competing doesn't mean losing control of yourself and explode and become
vulgar. It also does not mean having bad intentions and being evil. Whatever
you decide to do, compose yourself and don't let your emotions take over. And
try to keep your motivations well-intentioned.

If you are going through a bad moment... a good tool for introspections and
analyzing your situation is the SWOT chart (4 quadrants: strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, threats). You can express your current situation in
terms of these 4 things, to better understand and identify ways to use your
strengths and opportunities, work on your weaknesses and mitigate threats.

Another important concept is balance. Try to find the imbalances in your life.
What are excesses, what are the things you are lacking... and find ways to
balance things out. Your anger might come out of frustration generated from
these imbalances.

If people give you a hard time, read a book called: "The No Asshole Rule".
Now, those are not the only types of draining people. Just try to not let
people drain you emotionally, at least not for a good reason. If after an
interaction with someone you consistently feel drained, it's time to avoid
that person for your own good.

~~~
amerkhalid
I think in general one should try to be nice to everyone but yes, in my own
experience, collaboration and being nice all the time is probably not the best
strategy. It can be very demanding on one's mental health.

I say it because lately I have found myself engaging in far too many
emotionally draining conversations with a few friends and coworkers. These are
generally negative/depressed/anxious people. Of course, they need someone who
they can talk and lighten their loads but they end up passing their load on
me. After lunch or dinner with these friends, I feel too tired to contribute
anything positive when I am with my other friends or more importantly with my
wife.

One should not be sounding board for everyone but only close friends and
family.

------
mouzogu
Most of the anger I experience or come across from others is borne out of
selfishness. The article makes a good point. Controlling anger is usually in
our best self interest - thereby being a means of tempering our selfishness
for long or short term benefit.

It points to something else which is not discussed as much: Self control. The
amount of times I've seen grown adults and over 60s acting like petulant
children over the most minor inconvenience. I cant help but think that in the
span of your life you have not yet learnt to control your emotions.

Some comments refer to buddhism. Which to me is a form of self control.

Some other comments, point out rightly (imo) that Anger like all emotions
serves a purpose and should not simply be ignored. I think the purpose of
anger is to highlight (but not validate) the differences between our
expectations and reality.

In order to assess the balance between our expecations and reality, you need
self control, I think. Otherwise you can act out of haste.

------
supersan
I learned this lesson by experience. I am partner in a popular marketing site
and so I get a lot people who are interested in JV opportunities from all
around the world. Now I like getting directly to the point (“Hi Max. Tell me
what I can help you with.”) because it saves us time and we both know this is
a JV call so if the other person has a list or opportunity that matches ours,
it's on.

Unfortunately most JV calls I've had start off like a dick measuring contest.
People love to boast how big their business is and how this can be start of a
million dollar partnership, yada yada. This becomes especially infuriating
when the other person is blatantly lying just to impress you. Earlier I used
to get kind of pissed off or started 1-upping them while getting irritated and
angry of what I'm doing with my time. Now I just put the phone on speaker and
do something else saying "sure" or "great" from time to time. Not only does it
save my time, I don't lose my focus after and yes, I close more deals and
create longer relationships. So yes, this don't be a child philosophy is
really great, esp for geeks (like me) who think that the shortest distance
between two points is always the best route.

~~~
melvinmt
This may be an obvious question but what's a JV call?

~~~
analog31
Joint Venture?

Granted my side business is extremely tiny, but I get such calls from time to
time. Usually it's how I can work for free, or give away free stuff, with the
idea that I will somehow cash in on it later.

------
LordKano
I used to work in call centers and I would try to de-escalate angry customers.
When they settled down and were decent in return, I'd do everything I could to
help them. Sometimes, I'd even bend the rules to help out a decent person with
their problem.

If the person continued to heap abuse upon me, I'd do everything by the book.
I wouldn't bend the rules. I wouldn't provide helpful suggestions to help
people get what they wanted from a manager.

Be nice to people and more often than not, they'll be nice to you in return.

LK

------
whamlastxmas
I am probably yelling into the void, but I've adopted a tactic that's made a
big difference in my life. I used to feel personally slighted constantly.
Someone cutting me off in traffic, neighbor too loud, person talking on their
phone loudly in public. It all made me really angry. Sometimes I would
remember these slights for days, weeks, or years.

Then one day, I read about having a "I don't give a fuck" attitude and
applying it to everything in life. I did this and at first of course I was
faking it. Stuff still pissed me off but I pretended it didn't. I would grind
my teeth and tell myself IDGAF. Constantly. Many times a day. IDGAF. I would
smile and act happy and didn't let it show that anything ever phased me.

It's been a few months of doing this really hardcore, and it's honestly made
me not give a fuck to a pretty big extent. I feel like I'm a less uptight guy,
I don't take myself as seriously, I don't let people get to me and I don't let
things stress me out. If someone throws some shit at me, I just go with it.
Laugh about it and give them space if it's not going to resolve itself.
Sometimes I don't have a response to something shitty because my mental gears
are working to not give a fuck when I really do, but that's fine. I don't need
a response to everything. Silence is fine. I don't really give a fuck.

Give it a shot. I don't rub it anyone's face and I would definitely not tell
anyone in person about my attitude because it ruins the facade. It's really
cut a lot of negativity out of my life and I think I'm probably on the road to
being a more likable person.

------
wbillingsley
TL;DR: Wouldn't life be so much better if we all had to be Stepford Wives,
faking our utmost delight and happiness despite whatever misfortune might come
our way, and nary ever committing that most heinous crime of grumping or
letting it be outwardly visible that we're not in the best mood today. Would
that not be a most delightful utopia, o ever-smiling citizen?

~~~
hubert123
maybe it would, seems to me that grumpiness is just as much an act as
happiness

------
leshow
I disagree wholeheartedly, that being happy in the face of being treated like
shit will get you what you want in that type of situation. What is the author
basing his assumptions off of?

~~~
verytrivial
Really? I read this as being more about unproductive anger "cross-talk" \--
being angry with a previous situation or disjoint context and taking it out on
(largely) innocent bystanders, often the very people who could actually help
you now or in the future.

------
debacle
I generally explain to the CSR I am on the phone with when I need to make an
unpleasant phone call:

    
    
        Look, I know this isn't your fault. I know you didn't cause this, but I need to be angry at someone. 
        If you could redirect my call to the right person it would be greatly appreciated.
    

I generally either receive very good service (a thank you goes a long way), or
I get forwarded to someone whose job it is to deal with "problem" customers
and we have at it.

~~~
hiou
Is that like the modern equivalent of a whipping boy?

------
stupidcar
If you accept abuse with a smile, then you're just going to keep on receiving
abuse. The reason companies get away with providing this kind of appalling
customer service is because too many people put up with it out of politeness.

By the time I've been treated like this by a company, I've already made up my
mind to stop using their service ASAP. When I finally get through to an
operator, my aims are:

1\. Get a fix to my immediate problem.

2\. Waste as much of the company's time, money and goodwill as possible.
They've wasted my time by putting me on hold, but every minute I spend arguing
with an operator or, better yet, a supervisor, is time the company is _paying_
someone for, and has an opportunity cost, because they're not speaking to some
other customer.

3\. Piss–off the operator enough that they'll consider quitting their job. I
do feel sympathy for people who work in these call centres, but only the same
way I'd feel sympathy for the soldier of an evil regime. It doesn't stop me
viewing them as the enemy.

Right now there is a metastasised corporate approach to running customer
service that has focussed on cutting costs and outsourcing to the point that
the actual service provided is totally dysfunctional. The result is that if
you have _any_ problem, with _any_ large company, it is a crapshoot whether
you will ever get it fixed. This situation is a _deliberate_ choice on the
part of the companies involved.

This won't change by people being calm and friendly and swallowing their
anger, any more than politics ever gets fixed by people voting for the
marginally less corrupt/incompetent candidate every four years. And anyone who
tells you it will is either naive or dishonest.

This situation will only change through a revolution in consumer behaviour
that makes it too difficult and/or expensive for the companies to continue as
is. Companies that think it's OK to treat their customers like garbage need to
be met with concentrated and directed anger at every opportunity. Giving their
customer services employees such hell that they can't retain them is just the
start of it.

When it becomes impossible for companies to act like this without unleashing a
tsunami of fury from every direction, you can bet they'll change their
approach pretty quickly.

~~~
throwanem
In a former life, I worked Tier 1 for one of America's largest credit card
company. We had a lot more latitude than you seem to realize or care to know.

I once, over ninety minutes and three credit department reps, convinced the
organization to extend additional credit to a woman dying of terminal cancer,
so that she'd be able to afford pain medication a while longer. This was of
course a bad credit risk, in the sense that she had no realistic prospect of
ever repaying her debts, or indeed of living long enough to do so; I don't
know whether you are familiar at all with terminal illness, and I hope for
your sake you are not, but there is often a point at which acceptance and
exhaustion become perceptible in a person's voice, and she had passed it. You
would of course argue that it's of no significance to the company whether such
a person dies peacefully or otherwise, and to a certain extent this is of
course true. What you overlook is that companies, even very large ones, are
made of people, and that those people have agency and will surprisingly often
go very far out of their way in order to help a customer, even if doing so
might carry a personal cost for them. (In the case I describe, it cost me
about $400. I knew it would. Some things matter.)

I also dealt with people who operated under the idea that being unpleasant to
me would benefit them somehow. At least, I assume some of them thought that
way; others no doubt were just nasty people in general. The thing about
serving as the human interface to a company is that we don't stop being human
when we put our headsets on and log in to the PBX, and the thing about
latitude is that it goes both ways.

Recognize our shared humanity despite your entirely reasonable frustration and
behave toward me on that basis, and I'll go to great effort to help you, even
if it costs me something.

Treat me as a disposable vessel for your anger at some imaginary cipher you
cherish of the company for which I work, and you're going to have a damn hard
time getting so much as a late fee waived.

(Oh, and by the way - you're not going to make me think about quitting my job,
and it is a comedy of arrogance that you imagine otherwise. You are 1/150 of
my average daily workload. Do you really think you have power over me? You
have the power to ruin your reputation among my colleagues - we can't say
things like "what an asshole" in account notes, for reasons of professionalism
and liability, but we can convey the same meaning in other words, and we do.
And you have the power to influence my analysis of whether it is worth my
limited time to come to your assistance with whatever problem has prompted
your call. But to imagine you have the power in a three-minute phone call to
materially affect the course of my life and the decisions I make therein? What
astonishing hubris!)

You inveigh against "companies that think it's OK to treat their customers
like garbage", and in that, and that alone, you're not wrong. But you fail to
realize, or perhaps to care, that, when you interact with customer service,
you aren't talking to companies, but to people. You seem to think that
treating those people with cruelty has value. It does not. Such behavior is
both counterproductive and beneath you. It also, in my professional
experience, is much less common than I think you suspect - you really are an
outlier here, and whatever mass movement of which you imagine yourself to be a
part really does not exist. I have to say I feel for you - it must be awfully
lonely to be where you are. But the extent of my sympathy is strictly
circumscribed by the fact that you bring it on yourself.

~~~
dTal
>I once, over ninety minutes and three credit department reps, convinced the
organization to extend additional credit to a woman dying of terminal cancer,
so that she'd be able to afford pain medication a while longer.

>In the case I describe, it cost me about $400

This sounds like an interesting incentive structure. Could you elaborate?

~~~
throwanem
Sure. We were incentivized to maximize a range of metrics, primary among which
was average call length, over successive two-week periods. The value of the
incentive was tied to the degree to which a given operator exceeded the global
average for the call center, and there were some disqualifying conditions such
as an error rate exceeding some set minimum I no longer recall. We had access
to our own metrics on a daily basis, and the value calculation was published,
so tracking incentive value was pretty trivial - this was well before
smartphones existed, so I wrote up the formula as a TI-BASIC program that took
metric values and gave back how much of a bonus I stood to receive in my next
pay packet.

Customer commendations, one of which I received for the call I described,
weren't figured into the incentive metric. (Or, unlike customer _complaints_ ,
into much of anything else; it wasn't a job with a career path, although we
did get nice little laminated plaques, the twenty or so of which I received I
probably still have somewhere.) So I knew that exceeding the center average by
a factor of thirty was going to unrecoverably hose my incentive metrics for
the period, and I knew exactly how much doing so would cost me. But, as I
said, some things matter.

------
agumonkey
Pay attention to your mental balance people. On average it's never a problem,
but when stuck, anxiety can have significant somatic impact, raised secretions
of acid in your stomach, trouble eating (stuck oesophagus valve), lack of
bowel movements, or worse like artery constriction, thus potential increase in
blood clot, which doesn't need more explanations.

------
amorphid
I learned a while ago (in therapy) to decouple anger from action. I can feel
angry, and just not act on it. Without an action to act on attached to my
anger, the anger just mind of melts away. Reducing need feel angry is a
different skill.

------
pickpuck
How do I convey my real, justified anger to The Company instead of a person?

It may not be effective (or fair) to get hostile, but by the time I'm yelling,
it's because I've realized The Company doesn't care about my emotional state,
and this person is another willing participant in a silently abusive system,
even if they're just reading the Company-provided script to get the Company-
provided paycheck. Perhaps too few humans have perfect emotional regulation,
but it's not surprising that some react accordingly.

The people who designed these insensitive systems knew that they would
eventually turn all our hearts cold at no cost to The Company. Julian's
response is to keep being nice to keep his transactional relations as smooth
as possible. The representative's responsive is to vent to their co-workers
about how stupid and mean customers are. Mine is to yell when I'm angry. But
aren't we all suffering from the same flawed system?

At this point in time, it's no one person's fault, and there's little
incentive to fix it, so this probably won't change until emotionally attuned
software can replace customer service reps.

~~~
dqv
>How do I convey my real, justified anger to The Company instead of a person?

By evaluating whether the way you're conveying it would be appropriate in a
public place with a third party observing you. People understand and expect a
certain level of anger when things aren't right, but if your demeanor on the
phone would offend a neutral party observing your call - you have gone too
far. A good way to do this is to imagine how you'd talk to a cashier with
other people in line. If it's drawing too much attention and make the person
next in line uncomfortable - you have gone too far.

------
haalcion3
> When Max picked up the phone, you should have exclaimed, “Hey, Max! It’s a
> pleasure to chat. I would love to hear what you’re up to.” And you should
> have said it genuinely.

Should have, yes, if you really felt that way. And if you can feel that way
geniunely, that's the best.

However, I don't think it's right to lie like that if you don't really feel
that way. You can go a long way being nice without lying.

But, on don't just give up and say, "I'm just not nice." That's a problem, and
if you feel that way all the time, you should go see or talk to someone: a
family member, a friend, a GP doctor, a psychiatrist, or anyone that will
listen and help you figure out the real problem. You might need more sleep.
You might need medicine. You might need a chiropractic adjustment. You might
need to vent. You might need to just spend time with another person. You might
need to be alone in nature.

~~~
Rarebox
True.

I think author's point was that if you're not happy to talk with Max for 15
minutes, you should not agree to the call.

Since you already decided that this endeavor is worthwhile, you might as well
enjoy it.

------
tomcam
I grew up angry because I was unsafe and couldn't defend myself. Strong
motivator. My children grew up safe in nice neighborhoods because of it. Being
powerless as a kid led directly to starting my own businesses. It was the
surest way I could buy safety. It allowed me to build up a buffer against the
rest of the world.

~~~
tonyarkles
I grew up not unsafe, but in a messed up and pretty unpredictable environment.
Now I help dysfunctional engineering teams get better :).

~~~
tomcam
Great use of your experience!

------
deepGem
I agree with most of what is said here. What has personally helped me is to
know the limits of patience and to walk out of the scenario as soon as those
limits cross. In the quoted instance, I would have never waited for 35 minutes
on the call . I would have cut the call in 10 regardless of the expected
outcome.

It's better to judge what kind of a situation you are walking into and set
expectations accordingly. For instance, in Bangalore I know that it is normal
for people to be late for meetings. Traffic is bad, your previous meetings
don't end on time etc. So I'll be prepared for a 15-30 minute wait. Beyond
that I'll just cancel and move on. I failed do this on an interview and it was
just an unpleasant experience. The interviewer was pissed and so was I. We
just wasted the next 30 minutes.

~~~
cdubzzz
So if you have something you need to accomplish, and you can't do it in the
ten minutes you allow for your interaction, what do you do?

The classic example in the US is the silly cable plans here that give
"promotional" rates for a year or two and then double or triple in cost
automatically. What would you do in this situation if it would take, say, 45
minutes on the phone to get what you need?

~~~
deepGem
I presume they won't tell you the wait time upfront. In such a case, calling
the cable company will be my secondary activity on a headset while watching a
movie or something of that sort. I'm just saying that I'll be prepared for the
wait.

------
somberi
Question: Do you ever feel angry or outraged?

His Holiness: Oh, yes, of course. I'm a human being. Generally speaking, if a
human being never shows anger, then I think something's wrong. He's not right
in the brain. [Laughs.]

Ref: Dalai Lama's website where it quotes his interview in the Time Magazine -
[http://www.dalailama.com/messages/transcripts/10-questions-t...](http://www.dalailama.com/messages/transcripts/10-questions-
time-magazine)

I found this book useful: "Destructive Emotions: A Scientific Dialogue with
the Dalai Lama" \-
[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26332.Destructive_Emotion...](http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26332.Destructive_Emotions)

~~~
StavrosK
Seeing "his holiness" out of context, isn't it a bit of a useless title?
Anyone can be "his holiness" (unless it's a woman), depending on what anyone
believes in. I was confused why you're linking to an interview with the dalai
lama for something the pope said.

------
drivingmenuts
Funny (by that I mean not-funny-at-all) thing I've discovered about myself:

It's a hell of a lot easier to let go of my anger when it's directed at
someone else, but when it's directed at me, I hold on to that anger with both
hands, tooth and nail.

------
stevenkovar
To me, anger is easiest to dissolve when you take a step back—physically if
necessary—and observe the situation.

More often than not you'll find there was a communication breakdown somewhere,
and you can resolve that breakdown instead of react to where the
miscommunication led.

The real danger is burying anger to save face, as is common in many cultures.
Taking it home with you, or passing it to someone else. Resolve _why_ your
brain feels dissonance and something that angers you can be dealt with
rationally and simply.

------
EGreg
I realized the same thing about fear.

I was in an elevator and thought something scary happened ... But then the
elevator normally opened on a floor and I realized it was nothing.

Or you hear a scary sound by the door -- but then see it was nothing.

You thought that something was due Monday but now realize it's not.

You can make a mental shortcut to STOP feeling fear right there. Yes you will
still have the brain chemistry for a bit, but you can snap back into being
productive and relaxed.

------
exodust
> _We often think, If I 'm blatantly angry, they'll understand that I'm
> unhappy with the situation._

I think he misses the mark with this idea. People don't strategically get
angry. Nobody chooses anger in advance as a means to influence change or
broadcast a dislike.

Anger is immediate, real-time. Precisely why it's so difficult to control. As
we get older, we learn to moderate and channel this energy rather than letting
the fire hose spray in all directions.

My thoughts on anger are this: don't suppress it or ignore it. Acknowledge it,
then do your best to channel it. If that means firmly telling John what you
think of his company's service in no uncertain terms - without being rude -
then this is a good outcome. Even use an elevated tone. Such tones are useful,
we have them in reserve for when an injustice happens. Nothing wrong with
that. John can handle it, he's not a precious flower ready to crumble because
of an unhappy client.

Feedback is important. Let's not aim for a world where everything is a "thumbs
up".

Being extra nice to "John" for the sake of "not being angry" is counter-
productive and doesn't help anyone.

~~~
dqv
>People don't strategically get angry.

Yes they do. And it's not uncommon. The overwhelming majority of the angry
calls I got were /not/ genuine anger. At least it wasn't anger about anything
I or the company was doing. It felt like, more often than not, people needed
an outlet, so they directed that energy towards someone who is paid to "be
nice no matter what".

------
ksec
It is VERY hard. Some may even call it bad temper. Some call it self control.
But sometimes I think some system are in place as if they were there just to
make you angry. In tech terms, these UX are bad. And it is exactly this reason
we can innovate, and someday an idea was born from this frustration into a
startup. Other thing that easily set me off is Hypocrite. I would much rather
they admit they are a asshole. And I am fine with that.

Thinking back now I think I have grow up with a little bit more patient,
rather then spending time to get angry, I just spend time doing something else
worthwhile. Hypocrite I can ignore, but someone put me in the wrong, is still
something i cant over come yet. I tried to let time fix it. But the anger
still creeps in once I sit down and not doing anything as if evil is trying to
seduce me into darkness.

Many mention here the power to control your anger as Intelligent and smart. I
am not sure if those are the correct word to use. I think they are wise, which
I think is something different to Intellect.

I am using the word "I think" here a lot, because i am not sure if any of
these of sure, so correct me if I am wrong.

------
agentgt
I have wondered if retaliatory or impatient anger has any correlation with the
ability to delay gratification. There is a famous study that showed how
delayed gratification is somewhat a good predictor of success and intelligence
[1].

Now I'm not for suppressing anger but I have seen many times how not being an
ass generally gets what you want. That being said you can sort of combine the
two if you have two parties which is what my wife and I do frequently with
customer service aka "good cop, bad cop".

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experimen...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment)

------
mholt
This reminds me of the self awareness tools codified by the Arbinger Institute
in their book, Leadership and Self Deception, where they describe how to "get
out of the box." I also highly recommend The Anatomy of Peace by them.

------
conjectures
Many good points in the article. However, anger suppression is not always
rational. If others are aware they can treat you badly and you'll smile and
carry on, there is little incentive for them to treat you well. If they __are
aware __you have a self-destructive policy that will also impose costs on
them, they may modify their behaviour.

More on game theory, anger and the ultimatum game:
[http://paulwgoldberg.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/game-theory-
and-...](http://paulwgoldberg.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/game-theory-and-
anger.html)

------
stcredzero
_We humans are really bad at controlling our emotions. This post won 't help
with that._

I'm reading this as: "Now putting on my asbestos long johns and awaiting the
internet mobs."

------
pjwal
tldr; Golden Rule

Such a basic premise, that is absolutely impossible to master.

------
projektir
I'm not too happy with the framing of this post. It's rather guilt-trippy
(this is highly common in self-help these days, sadly), and, as most such
advice, it relies on making you feel bad in overt ways rather than making a
good argument. But I'm also getting a strong manipulative vibe here.

The author makes unfounded claims and then calls the reader a child if they
don't agree with the author.

The terms "asshole" and "jerk" are being thrown rather liberally. You're not
an asshole or a jerk if you want to end a conversation.

People who do not immediately reciprocate are not automatically takers with no
concept of generosity.

Anger is not "childlike". It's an emotion, like many others. I've seen it
plenty in older people. Some people could use more of it. Some people have too
much of it. This is true for virtually every emotion. Shutting it down instead
of calibrating can cause problems. Most of this is irritation, not anger,
anyway. Passive-aggressiveness often occurs when it's not possible to release
emotions properly. At the end of the day, we're not Vulcans, but some
environments practically demand that we express no strong emotions of any
kind, which is not without side effects. We should work with what we are, not
what we like to pretend to be, and I think emotions have been getting a lot of
bad rap lately.

Emotions are of informational value in and of themselves and most of us do not
express them as a means to an end. We express them because we feel them.
Whether or not we should be feeling a particular emotion is a more interesting
discussion. And the effect such a thing will have on other people depends a
lot on the situation and the culture...

The language just creeps me out.

> "John" sounds patient and caring. He actually wants to help.

> He won't go above and beyond when it turns out his ex-cofounder is someone
> who can help you.

> You know, the self that is good at getting what it wants from others.

> And you should have said it genuinely. Even if you're feeling miserable.
> With your sudden warmth, Max is appreciative that you’re making his hustle
> easier, and he goes out of his way to tell you what he can do for you at the
> end of the call.

I do not find it a great thing if someone is in a poor mood, thinks I'm a
waste of time, but then tries to mimic genuine warmth without actually feeling
it in order to get what they want and maximize their use of time. I'd much,
much rather they brush me off as fast as possible.

There's a word that describes people like this but I'd rather not use it. I'm
OK with "not valuing my time" if it means I remain genuine. I do not want to
live in a world of masks. I _expect_ people to occasionally be irritated,
cold, and otherwise not on their best emotional performance. I expect it even
more if I am indeed at risk of wasting their time. Them being irritated and
such is a cue to me to understand what's going on, if they are masking it, how
can I tell? Emotions are information.

I find it much more productive to expect people to express emotions and learn
to understand them, empathize with them, as well as tolerate them. The people
don't have to construct elaborate masks, and I don't have guess as to what
everyone's feeling.

This doesn't seem like a good source of emotional advice to me.

------
PravlageTiem
Western culture is so obsessed about suppressing anger at all costs. Like each
person is a nuclear weapon that needs to be aggressively contained or else the
entire fabric of civilization will collapse.

Anger exists for a reason and it exists for good reasons. The manifestation of
anger means some model you are holding onto is no longer in sync with reality
and that resynchronization costs more than your time preferences will allow.
(Using the authors scenario, your expectation was for a reasonably timed phone
call, not a 35 minute wait.)

It's not that anger is wrong. The anger is correct. The expectation was wrong.
The West automatically assumes all instances of anger are permanently wrong,
and this child-like ritual prevents one from appreciated the value of anger as
a compulsion that tells you in no uncertain terms that your expectation is
completely out of whack and you need to either cut your losses or
resynchronize the expectation.

Anger becomes fuel for remodeling reality once you understand what is is
trying to tell you. Putting taboos up around it prevents this realization,
which in turn, creates people who are trained to perpetually cling to false
models of reality out of fear of violating the taboo.

~~~
zallarak
Disagree - it's not just western culture.

“Protect yourself from anger for its beginning is insanity and its end is
remorse.”

\- Ali (Islam)

"When anger rises, think of the consequences."

\- Confucius (Chinese Philosophy)

~~~
seizethecheese
Surely every culture will have anti-anger norms and literature. The parent
comment is claiming that in western culture we take it to an unhealthy
extreme.

~~~
sanmon3186
I am an easterner who spent a few years in USA. In the beginning, I sort of
liked how people seemed in control of their emotions in situations which would
make me _visibly_ angry. No one displayed their anger/frustration to the
extent I am used to. This may be anecdotal but with time I observed that deep
inside they lingered these emotions more than I would do, which as you
implied, is unhealthy.

------
Kenji
Some people only understand the language of anger. It really depends on the
individual. Some people understand you when you're acting calmly 100% of the
time. Others need to be reminded that what they're doing actually bothers you
and the only way to get through to them and applying pressure is being loud
and angry. But those are usually the people you souldn't be doing business
with anyway.

~~~
barsonme
I think what you're getting at is _assertiveness_, not anger. Assertiveness
expresses urgency (and perhaps frustration) without hostility.

It's the difference between:

> ... I've been hung up on 3 times in the last 30 minutes, please transfer me
> to your manager ...

and

> ... Being hung up on 3 times in the last 30 minutes is bullsh*t, transfer me
> to your manager now! God, why can't you guys get this right? ...

or something similar.

~~~
HarryHirsch
With company process this reasoning does not work. Emotions are a human
concept, but companies are entirely about money. When you need to extract the
security deposit out of your apartment complex that quite perceptibly has a
policy of cheating the tenants out of as much as they can there is precisely
no difference at all between "I'll send you the demand letter now" and "I'll
send you the demand letter YOU MOTHERFUCKERS!!1!". The only thing that counts
is that they receive one at a serviceable address. At least that has been the
experience.

A case can be made that the poor sods working for the cheating company are in
fact enabling it, consequently their lives should be made hard for colluding.

------
derefr
Complete tangent: what's up with the word spacing in the submission title
here? It's abnormally thin.

~~~
userbinator
I see boxes, so those definitely aren't normal spaces. But they made me
click...

~~~
didgeoridoo
Unicode thin spaces maybe?

THIN SPACE Unicode: U+2009, UTF-8: E2 80 89

Doesn't seem to be happening anymore...

------
hiou
This is gross. Maybe don't be an asshole because you are hurting someone by
doing it? Terrifying that a human being needs to think about the world in such
a self centric way.

~~~
jshevek
I agree. The advice in this blog post seems to only encourage people to be
more calculating and fake, rather than patient or empathetic.

~~~
twblalock
If assholes faked politeness, the world would be a better place. Their inner
state of mind does not affect anyone -- only their actions do.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Well... think about a glass that's full. When someone bumps it, it spills.
What does it spill? _Whatever was in it._

When we get bumped, we spill. If we're full of anger or bitterness, we spill
anger or bitterness.

If assholes faked politeness, their inner state of mind would not affect
people as often. But it still would affect people. What's inside comes out at
least some of the time.

~~~
ktRolster
Well said.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Thanks. I stole the glass analogy, but I'm not sure of the origin...

