This is something I've been wrestling with for the last day or so, prompted by the Angry Girl post and the Tone Policing one. On the one hand, I think I get it. Focusing on the way someone is speaking rather than the what deflects from their argument. It can be - it IS - a silencing tactic. Sometimes people don't have the luxury of emotional distance from a topic.

BUT (I like big ones and I cannot lie)...

This seems to be the opposite of real life. In real life, we don't like to engage with angry or overly emotional people. In fact, we are recommended not to engage. To walk away. To stop and wait until we are calm before discussing things that are important to us. That is what facilitators are for. That is the basic concept of 'time out' in parenting. It is how we are taught (and I believe) conflicts are resolved - to calm down ourselves, and not let the other person calm down too.

Because when people are emotionally invested in something, it doesn't matter how legitimate that anger is to anyone else; it is very real and very legitimate to that person. Yet as difficult as it may be, they must calm down and gain enough emotional distance to discuss calmly before bringing their issue to someone if they want to be heard.

Is the difference online vs real life? Am i missing something here? Anger is as valid a feeling as any other, but I think that it has no place in a discussion. It should be worked through before attempting to talk about something, right? Right?