This paper looks critically at the Responsive Classroom (RC) program, a social/emotional learning program used ubiquitously in elementary schools for teacher and student training, in the US as well as in Australia, the UK, and other parts of Western Europe. The paper examines empirical studies on RC's efficacy and outcomes, many of which were conducted under the aegis of a single developmental psychology lab and in US schools. The paper critiques the faulty and potentially dangerous assumptions behind these studies, many of which adhere to obsolete ideals about developmentalism and perpetuate a harmful hegemonic positivity. The paper then examines the language and materials published by RC on its Web site, with an eye toward understanding precisely what the curriculum of RC is and what are its potential shortfalls for students and teachers. Finally, the author argues for an incorporation of theory from psychoanalysis and curriculum theory, as well as philosophical critiques of neoliberalism, for evolving a more nuanced view of difficult and emotional behaviors in the classroom. Literary theory is evoked in order to argue for the complexity of human emotion and the danger inherent in glossing over difficult experience. The paper closes with implications for further research into RC and other similar programs.