What we propose has nothing to do with suppressing anger. The concept of conflict management consists of using intelligence instead of unbridled emotion. Suppressing would be preventing the free flow of destructive emotion. Managing conflicts consists not of blocking, but of directing, channeling, sublimating, so that emotions come out, flow freely, but in the direction that best suits us with a view to future results.

My youth was lived on the beaches of Ipanema and Leblon. Since we were boys, we learned not to fight against the current. If the current caught us, we should not fight it, swimming towards land. The result would be fruitless. We would end up exhausting our strength and die drowning. Every good open water swimmer knows that if you fall into a current, you should swim with it, outwards, go around, and only then swim towards the beach. This is also the case in human and affective relationships.

When I was younger, my hair was rebellious (thank goodness it was just the hair). For years, I changed hairdressers, looking for a solution, but all attempts to dominate those strands with my own will were frustrated. Until one day, an older professional told me not to fight my hair. There's no point in combing it back, because that's not its nature. Give in to the tendency of the strands and brush them forward first. Then down. And only then, backwards. I did that and I was perplexed! The hair accepted my command and behaved as I wanted.

Sometimes, you have to know when to give in. Don't repress yourself, but rather apply leadership strategies.

I read a lot about dog training to raise my Weimaraner daughter. The best method to get a dog to do what you want is to captivate it, and not to wrestle with it, shout at the poor thing, let alone punish it or beat it. Somewhere I heard the phrase: man is a dog with an opposable thumb. The trainer was referring to how easy it is to induce a man to do what his girlfriend wants, as long as she knows how to apply positive reinforcement leadership. And also because men, like dogs, can't think of more than one thing at a time!
We all want to be in control. Well, the most rational way that provides better results is not to play hardball or vomit emotions haphazardly. When you understand that whoever says what they want, hears what they don't want, your words and actions become more intelligent.

Imagine a huge stone, stable on the edge of a ravine. The stone is our emotional state. While it is there, stopped, it gives us the impression that its stability is perennial. However, its position is susceptible to rolling downhill. Just a small touch, perhaps with the tip of your index finger, to make it lose its apparent stability and descend destroying everything. This is our emotional state. One moment you are happy and cheerful; the next moment - for some eventuality - you become furious or saddened.

However, if the stone starts to oscillate, in the position in which it is, just a finger on the other side is enough to prevent it from falling. This is how our emotional state works.

Just one finger is enough to prevent a disaster, as long as it is applied at the right time, before the triggering. Do you remember the story of Peter, the Dutch boy-hero? He saw a crack in the dike and put his little finger in to prevent the force of the water from increasing the hole and ending up breaking the dam. Just one finger, a child's finger, was enough to prevent a tragedy.

If you can detect a threat of an emotional outburst just an instant before it breaks out, it will be very easy to avoid the tantrum, just put your finger in the gap in the dam.

I learned this with my Weimaraner. Dogs, like humans, always signal in the second before what they intend to do next. If your tutor takes too long to send a diversion command, the dog runs off, for example, to cross the street! But if the human notices an instant before and triggers the command (stay or no or any other), the educated dog, who has not yet started the action, obeys.

Book: Ángeles peludos (ES)
Book: Anjos peludos (PT)
Book: Change the world, start with yourself

Wanting to justify your actions by blaming some circumstance or person is not a consistent excuse. You will react according to your education, your neuroses, fears, and expectations. To exemplify this, I created the following parable:

Once, a Hindu Master wanted to show that emotional reactions were not due to the events that triggered them, but rather to what each one already carried within themselves. He handpicked three disciples, whose personalities he knew well. He ordered the three to come to the front of the class and kneel before him. He gave each one a strong slap. The first one was indignant and withdrew in anger, saying that the Master had no right to assault him in front of the class. The second one became sad and cried. The third one said, “Thank you, Master!”
The stimulus had been the same: a slap. But the reactions of the three were different: anger, sadness, and gratitude. What is the explanation?
It is that each one responded with what they had within themselves. Whoever had anger, reacted with anger. Whoever had sadness, reacted with sadness. Whoever had gratitude, reacted with gratitude. The important thing is never the fact itself. It is the pretext, it is the excipient[1] to externalize what each one has in their character.

When someone bumps into you and spills your coffee, the primary cause of your coffee being spilled was not the bump, because if you were drinking tea, you wouldn't have spilled the coffee. Every time life gives you a bump, you will spill into the world whatever you have inside your mug.

[1] The excipient is a pharmacologically inactive substance used as a vehicle for the active ingredient.

From the book Change the World, Start with Yourself,
Professor DeRose, Egrégora Books.