“You cannot control what happens, but you can control your reaction to it.”
I woke up this morning realizing that this was another of the ideologemes created to keep us from analyzing structures or thinking politically. You can develop strategies and learn what are now called “social skills,” and over time you can even change as a person. But no, you cannot control your feelings about something and the way you may react psychically. And the actions you can or cannot take may be limited by this, and you have to take those into account.
“You cannot control what happens, but you can control your reaction to it.” This is the new equivalent of “Ignore them, they only do it because they love you, pretend it does not affect you and they will go away” and “Rise above it, dear.”
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 
Note: at the same time I am against the idea of life getting in the way of things. Yes, there is always a non work life, and you make and take time for it.
It is odd to me that the same people who think you should be able to control all of your reactions, also feel you should not be able to control your work day, or put things in perspective.
I can’t even control my physical reactions, let alone the psychic. In certain situations, which my rational mind recognizes as normal or non-threatening, my autonomic nervous system nonetheless starts insisting on getting ready to fight or flee. Am I “controlling” this reaction because I breathe and don’t give in to it? Maybe. But I am still very aware of the racing heart, etc., however calm I look. I have a highly rational, even “cold” brain in a highly reactive body. Recognizing this dichotomy is useful, but the idea of “control” is less helpful than the notion of observing and staying present.
I used to pretend things didn’t bother me. That was “controlling my reaction.” It’s useful to be able to pretend when you don’t want to have a meltdown in front of others, but to one’s self? I think not. The somatic reaction always tells the truth about how you really feel.
I like the idea of mindfully observing my reaction, though. Then I can fully acknowledge it. “Oh, I feel a resentful punch in the stomach kind of feeling, that I get when this particular kind of thing happens.”
The thing is, somatic “truth” isn’t the whole truth. Example: recently I spoke, as a community member, at a local zoning board hearing. This is in many ways less stressful than teaching: fewer people, no need to be seen as expert, no need to keep seeing these people later. Nonethless, my heart raced and my body registered signs of anxiety. I think the triggers were that it was a “new” situation (not a classroom; audience consisting mostly of men my age or older). Rational mind said, “It’s very like teaching, these people are not hostile, speaking up is important,” and I had no doubt that I wanted to be there and say my piece. In my mind I was not even slightly nervous. Body had other notions. So mind had to sit with body and use that frail instrument. I think it’s a bit like being hopped up on caffeine is for other people—you can be jittery without real anxiety. I have no doubt that Z’s Reeducator would have wanted me to examine my feelings in this situation, but I know that this is the result of living with a high-volume nervous system and has little to do with feelings. I know feelings when I have them.
You can control your actions, but the reaction is the reaction. And only a reaction.
Feelings and emotions or nervous system reactions are not the same thing and this appears to be a point many miss.
And here is another false truism related to that one: “When you become ‘healthy,’ so will the relationship.”
It will NOT and this makes you responsible for the other peoples’ behavior and the interaction — it is all because YOU are not ‘healthy’ … and it presupposes you cannot leave ! ! !
It is actually antithetical to being responsible only for yourself, because here, the measure of you is how other people behave to each other.
“If you were better, they would not hit each other and you,” and so on. Ridiculous.