Outbursts of Anger: Understanding and Defusing Automatic Reactions

This image is not meant to excuse shouting or violence. It helps us identify opportunities to take action before things get out of hand. If we wait until the very last moment to call for self-control, we place all the practical responsibility on the moment when choices are most difficult. Understanding what happens beforehand opens up more possibilities: recognizing rising tension, expressing disagreement earlier, or interrupting an interaction in a protective manner.

I also distinguish between feelings and behavior. Anger can signal that a boundary has been crossed. It does not give you the right to cross someone else’s boundary. This distinction can sometimes be liberating: you don’t need to suppress all anger to learn how to express it in a way that doesn’t hurt others. There’s a difference between feeling an inner fire and handing the keys to your house over to the flames.

Anger took over before you could even put into words what was wrong. A few minutes later, the words you spoke seem excessive. You promise yourself you won’t do it again. Yet, in a similar situation, the same pattern repeats itself.

Between “I swallow it all” and “I explode,” there is a space that needs to be rebuilt. It often begins before the crisis actually strikes.

Anger can signal that a line has been crossed, an injustice has occurred, or frustration has set in. It does not justify violence. Understanding a reaction and accepting its consequences are two aspects that must go hand in hand.

It is helpful to clarify what “explode” means: raising one’s voice, insulting someone, breaking something, threatening someone, or forgetting part of the scene? The level of danger and the need for support vary.

If someone is at risk of being injured, the priority is ensuring their safety and seeking appropriate assistance. Working through memories comes after ensuring their safety—not instead of it.

The obvious trigger isn't always the starting point. A day without a break, several unspoken disagreements, or the feeling of not being heard can lead up to the escalation.

Then a detail takes on immediate meaning: “They’re making fun of me,” “I don’t exist,” “I have to defend myself now.” These are avenues for exploration, not explanations to be imposed.

Identifying this initial change offers more possibilities than waiting for the situation to reach its peak intensity. An agreed-upon pause, a non-threatening distancing, or a request made earlier can become goals for the session. These must be tailored to the actual dynamics of the relationship.

If certain reactions are linked to traumatic memories, EMDR therapy may be considered in an appropriate clinical setting. EMDR is not a universal treatment for anger. An evaluation may also lead to medical care, emotional regulation skills, or specialized support for violent behavior.

The guidelines for PTSD include, among other things,risk assessment and safety measures when the individual or those around them may be in danger. NICE, PTSD guidelines.

In his *Ethics*, Spinoza encourages us to understand the emotions rather than treat them as anomalies foreign to human nature. I am drawing here on a philosophical approach: seeking causes and relationships is more helpful than passing a definitive judgment on a person. This is no substitute for a clinical evaluation or for taking responsibility for one’s actions. Spinoza’s *Ethics*, translated by Saisset.

These meanings must be explored, not assumed. They may be related to history, the current context, or a combination of these factors.

My note in my journal would be: “Saving a few seconds sometimes means finding a door.”

We aren't necessarily looking for a character who is always calm and smooth, like a spa brochure. We're looking for a transition between emotion and action. This transition can include:

Growth can also be recognized by the ability to reflect on what has happened without downplaying it, without accusing the other person of having provoked the action, and without condemning oneself to repeating it.

After an outburst of anger, two reactions may alternate: blaming oneself for everything or explaining why the other person provoked it. Neither of these is enough to develop a different response.

A constructive interpretation seeks to describe the sequence accurately while maintaining accountability for one’s actions. You may have been hurt by a remark and still be responsible for a threat you made afterward. Recognizing both dimensions allows you to address the situation without denying or justifying either.

We can go back to the beginning of the conversation—what you understood, the feelings that arose, and the moment when your options narrowed.

The goal is not to create a perfect account. Some people remember the ending most clearly, while others recall the details that came before. Areas of uncertainty remain points to consider, particularly when there is a sense of a breakdown in communication or a significant loss of control.

Here's a question that might help: What was the message you wanted to convey before the reaction took over?

Recognizing this intention does not make aggressive words necessary. It allows us to find a way to communicate the need that does not cause further harm and does not allow the initial problem to be overshadowed by the consequences of the crisis.

A break can be helpful when it is understood as a temporary interruption intended to preventthe situation from escalating. It can be experienced very differently if it takes the form of walking away as a form of punishment, an imposed silence, or a prolonged refusal to resume the discussion. The meaning of what is being proposed must therefore be clarified outside of the moment of tension, when the relational context allows it.

The work may involve:

This isn’t about asking those around you to manage your anger for you. Everyone must be able to maintain their own safety and set their own boundaries. When violence is involved, specialized resources may be necessary; an informal agreement between partners is not enough to address a dangerous situation.

We can also look at what makes taking a break difficult:

These expectations can stifle the exchange. A discussion that is interrupted isn’t necessarily lost, and a response given under pressure isn’t necessarily a resolution. Learning to allow time to pass between a disagreement and resuming the conversation can be part of the process.

Apologizing may be important, but repeating apologies loses its impact if nothing changes regarding the incidents in question. Meaningful redress involves acknowledging the effects on others, not demanding immediate forgiveness, and providing the necessary support.

The people around you don't have to tell you that you're a good person in order for you to reflect on your behavior.

EMDR therapy, when appropriate, does not replace this process of learning to take responsibility in the present. Reducing the emotional burden of a memory can contribute to the healing process, but relational behaviors must also be examined and adjusted.

The goal is to build a life in which disagreements can exist without you or those around you having to constantly worry about what will happen next. This approach requires a framework that is clear enough to support change and define its boundaries.

During a video call, we can work on what you perceive, what you understand from the scene, and what you do next. The format should allow us to speak freely, without being caught up in an ongoing conflict.

Success isn't about never getting angry again. It can mean recognizing anger sooner, setting boundaries without being aggressive, and taking concrete steps to repair what has been damaged.