This practice speaks to all the decisions we make about people and experiences on the basis of inadequate information.  We decide that "this person is unfriendly" or "this challenge is going to be too difficult" based on small bits of information about which we overgeneralize, not even suspecting how prejudicial our thought process is.  And, ultimately, the judgments we make reveal more about us than they do about the subject of our judgment.  This thought has been expressed by others in simple sayings, such as "when you point one finger, there are three fingers pointing back at you," and, "if you spot it, you've got it."

So, the judgments we make are – to a great extent, anyway –  "about us," and when we own them as such, this helps us stay open-minded, creating potential for better experiences.  More importantly, it also gives us an opportunity to learn about aspects of ourselves we might not like to admit are there.

 

The same principle applies to our emotional reactions.  This isn’t to say that some emotional reactions aren’t completely normal and organic.  There’s no need for me to analyze why I felt sad when we had to put the family dog down, for example.  What is at issue here are overreactions and reactions which aren’t appropriate to what is actually happening.  For instance, if you feel rage because someone didn’t hold a door open for you, there is something happening internally which is “about you,” and which deserves attention it will never receive until there’s that recognition and that ownership. 

The stereotypical ugly example of not owning one’s reactions is the parent, teacher or relationship partner who acts out ragefully and then says “see what you made me do?”  In subtle ways, we’re all saying “see what you made me do?” about one thing or another in our lives, and it’s important to catch ourselves when we do, so we can integrate whatever is causing the reaction and evolve towards greater tolerance and equanimity.