Anger Against Natural Reactions as Though They were Purposeful Communications
There is a difference between me having my own thoughts and feelings and me communicating my own thoughts and feelings to you through my intonation.
You might say that I should modulate my intonation better to hide my thoughts and feelings in order to make it clear that I am not intending to communicate them when they are negative.
I say that you should learn to ask the question of whether or not I am intending to convey negativity, not only because it will help you regulate your own feelings, but also so you can base your own thoughts on better information, whether I intend the communication or not, which will give you basis for different conclusions, insofar as you believe that you should base your next thought or feeling on what you think I intend to communicate with you (that is, whether you are going along with a certain prescribed formula of conversation with me at this time).
Holding back my natural reactions is different from not intending communication. Like holding in a sneeze, holding back my natural reactions might be harmful, especially over a long time. Purposely not communicating something that I have reason to withhold is a communication of itself in a way that simply reacting does not speak to. There is an unnatural control device in anger at a person's natural reaction, even if anger at their purposeful communication would be warranted, due to that communication's misplaced conveyance.