Try, NOT reading between the lines and actually read what was written rather than becoming furiously offended for no apparent reason.
lol I did read what was written, again! I haven't changed my opinion much, though I am considerably less angered now.
I do understand that you found it perplexing why I became so angry - simply as you don't know anything about me - but surely you
can understand that this is a very emotive topic, in which a careless statement, even if not badly intended, can be very triggering.
And I find "Anyone still angry at their parents after 30 without good reason is trapped in adolescent thought patterns" to be careless. What's the point of repeating the default normative opinion in this society regarding parent-child relationships, that it is 'adolescent' (an ironic word to use, in that children and adolescents tend to be more truthful than adults in baring their true feelings, in my experience at least) to be angry unless something that
we can all agree is terrible has happened to you?
If someone is angry with a member of their family, then you should respect that they have a good reason to be. It isn't a lifestyle choice. And that in many cases, it takes a good deal longer than the arbitrary age of 30 to sort things out.
I guess I was also surprised because the ideas you express on so many other threads are very well thought through, and depart from 'conventional wisdom' (quite rightly, because most conventional wisdom is bollocks). But in this case you've given an opinion which to my mind seems aggressively normative. Maybe - probably! - you disagree with that characterisation.
PS I never said that "anyone who doesnt feel this way (angry at their parents) is a psychopath or 'repressed' in some way". I just said 90%

. Either way, I'm not sure I understand what your investment is in railing against this point of view, or in establishing what is 'normal' for people to feel.