I wonder whether the Inuit aversion to anger is a cultural adaptation to living in close proximity to others through long winters when sulking off to one's own

I wonder whether the Inuit aversion to anger is a cultural adaptation to living in close proximity to others through long winters when sulking off to one's own room or house isn't possible. In the boiling water and fishing line examples above, it doesn't seem like anger would serve much of a practical, social purpose—it's more important to fix problems, maintain working relationships with friends and family, and continue to survive Arctic conditions. However, modulated anger _does_ serve an important purpose in larger, less tightly coupled societies. Disengaged employees—contractors, fast food workers—are much more responsive to anger or the the threat of anger than to nuanced conversation. I grew up in a household in which yelling and anger were taboo—it wasn't necessary for anyone's work and it detracted from our quality of life. I didn't understand the emotion's utility until I married into a family that owns a small restaurant empire. The empire would crumble without occasional yelling at vendors, government administrators, employees, managers, and so forth. It took years for me to admit that utility, but I'm still not comfortable with it.