It isn't the rationalist ethos. Your emotions should obviously guide you, they're a part of you and important evidence.

What you described is exactly how rationalists think emotions are best wielded: you look at your/a situation and look at how you feel about it. They're your barometers for whether that which you believe to be your goal is actually your goal.

Emotions are misused when you treat factual beliefs as goals: then your emotions get attached to them, in unhealthy and cult-like ways.

Many people believe many quite misguided things.

Rationality is one approach to trying to believe fewer misguided things.

That doesn't make it easy and it doesn't mean that success rates at doing so aren't still wildly variable.

Maybe GP means that satisfying emotional needs could be the rational choice.

What would be the point of rationality otherwise?

It doesn’t decide your goals, it just helps you reach them. The number of strawmen in this thread is far too high.