Exactly, if you are more prone to sunburn, wear more sunscreen. Same as handling your own feelings.

And yes, feelings are completely in your head. Things happen in the world and your mind reacts a certain way. Nobody else knows how you will react nor do they have any control of your consciousness.

> Exactly, if you are more prone to sunburn, wear more sunscreen. Same as handling your own feelings.

If you could "handle your feelings" as easily as putting on sunscreen, literally every psychotherapist would be out of work.

> And yes, feelings are completely in your head.

Anything you will ever perceive is "in your head". You don't control a lot of it. "Positive thinking" doesn't cure depression or schizophrenia.

> Nobody else knows how you will react nor do they have any control of your consciousness.

Human reactions are actually fairly predictable. Being rude, arrogant or condescending is generally off-putting. Some amount of control can be exerted as well, for instance, it will almost certainly be impossible for you to not briefly picture a TINY PINK ELEPHANT after having read this sentence.

It's not about easy or hard, the point is that it is under your control.

If your emotions are subconscious and you yourself aren't fully in control then how could you possible blame someone else for them? If it's that simple to be affected then you could just as easily affect yourself back to the state you want to be in, hence it is a circular argument without basis.

The world happens. You react. Equip and train yourself to react differently if you don't like the outcomes.

Predictability does not mean causation, especially when it is not accurate 100% of the time and therefore subjective. Sure, when you yell at someone, they might become upset. But another person might not care at all. So are you now causing both anger and apathy in these individuals with the same statement? Or is it that they react as individuals instead and it's really under none of your control?

> It's not about easy or hard, the point is that it is under your control.

My point, if that hasn't been clear by now, is that your emotions are not under your control. Your physical reactions may or may not be.

> If your emotions are subconscious and you yourself aren't fully in control then how could you possible blame someone else for them?

People stimulate each other's emotions with their behavior, some behavior can certainly be measured to to elicit certain emotions. If I follow your argument, clearly people are in control of their behavior and they are also responsible for it (agreed). So, under certain circumstances, it should be possible to "blame" them, though I'm not focusing on that.

Your "solution" boils down to: "If you're so sensitive and not in control of your emotions, just go away." That's fine, but not every community needs to have such "low" standards.

> The world happens. You react. Equip and train yourself to react differently if you don't like the outcomes.

An online community is not "the world", we get to design such environments. In "the world", there are tigers and lions, but you wouldn't argue to set them loose on main street just to make people stronger and more vigilant, would you?

> Predictability does not mean causation, especially when it is not accurate 100% of the time and therefore subjective.

That's a pretty weak argument though, in "the world" you always have to go by approximations, even in science we struggle to remove subjectivity completely.

> Sure, when you yell at someone, they might become upset. But another person might not care at all.

Let's say I had the desire to punch a random person in the face, there's certainly an off-chance that some masochist would love to have this happen to them. It's clearly a subjective reaction. Yet, it's not acceptable to go out punching people, don't you agree?

> So are you now causing both anger and apathy in these individuals with the same statement? Or is it that they react as individuals instead and it's really under none of your control?

I must appeal to your common sense. If some behavior of yours causes, for example "50% anger, 30% apathy, 19% annoyance and 1% joy" across a selection of subjects, then the chance that any of it is not negative is 1%. Yelling at people probably isn't so far off from that, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN? Sure, I can't predict with 100% certainty what the reaction will be, but if something is 99% bad, it'll better have some strong upside for me to accept it in my community. Yelling at people doesn't have that upside, it's generally frowned upon, so it's reasonable to not allow it. Of course, most people generally understand and follow that without it having to be made a rule.

I'm not sure what you're arguing because we're not discussing probabilities or socially acceptable behavior. We're talking about cause and effect, of self control over actions and feelings. The standard is that you should have personal responsibility and control your emotions, the highest standard there is.

Yes, there are obviously certain patterns of behavior and you shouldn't punch people, however it is completely within their control what they feel and do about it. They can choose to hit back, or ignore you. Just because everyone reacts with anger to something does not mean you must. It only means that it's a common reaction, nothing more, and has nothing to do with control over that action itself. They choose to do something, you can choose differently, even if you're 1 in a million. What about that is confusing?

Either you believe you have the will to control your emotions and actions or you don't. And if think you don't and it's really that simple to affect your emotions without any mental control, then you must also accept that you can impart that same effect by just doing different actions and making yourself feel differently.