Indignation encyclopedia topics

Background

From the germ of its conception, IndigNation was intended to be a series of LGBT-themed events that would be relatively more sedate in nature, intellectual and aesthetic if possible, to render itself in stark contrast with the frenzied carnival atmosphere of the largely gay Nation parties which were held for 4 consecutive years prior to and suddenly banned in 2005 (see the article Singapore public gay parties). These sides of the gay and lesbian community had not had much attention since the success of Nation, and with the government demonising gay parties of late, there was a risk of rising homophobia. The LGBT community needed a morale-booster which at the same time could also be an opportunity to correct skewed impressions that Singapore's mainstream society may have had of the LGBT community as one only interested in partying.

Furthermore, as part of Singapore's economics-driven liberalisation drive, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had promised in August 2004 that indoor talks would no longer need licences from the police, and the gay community felt that it was time to test this promise and use the opportunity thus afforded.

Choice of name

Up to a week before the start of the pride month, the event still did not have a name. Then one night, a motley group of 4 gay individuals, who sat past 11:30pm in a prata shop near Rowell Road sipping coffee and tea while one of them struggled to eat some fat-encrusted mutton, was hit by a bolt of inspiration and came up with a shortlist of candidates. Brainstorming further whittled down the choice to a final 2 and it was eventually decided that the celebration should be called "IndigNation", rather than "InsemiNation". The latter label was preferred by all 4 but thought to be terribly unwise.

Criticism

Some detractors argued that a name like "IndigNation" made it sound as if the pride month were purely a testy response to the banning of the Snowball and Nation parties. The argument was not without merit, though it cannot be denied that the pride month was at least indirectly a response to the negative portrayal of the LGBT community as a result of the government's justifications for the prohibition. Other gays were indignant about the brusque way in which the charity Affect05 concert, featuring homosexual couple-cum-pop duo Jason and deMarco, was rejected, and the heavy censorship of the periodical Manazine.

Equally importantly, the gay community felt that it was necessary to reiterate that LGBT Singaporeans were also part of the nation, and not to surrender the word "nation" to the discretionary and exclusive use by the State.

Credits

The greatest credit for the celebration has been attributed to Clarence Singam. Singam had the original inspiration, and spent months either persuading various people and groups to organise events for August 2005, or if they were already planning an event, to link it with the pride month. At times, it seemed hopeless when things moved at a snail's pace and the event was almost scrapped 2 weeks before it began; at other times frustration reigned when groups pulled out unexpectedly. But Singam, bolstered by Charles Tan, Alex Au and Russell Heng, persevered and gradually won others over by his sheer determination and optimism.

Credits were also due to the owners of Xposé Bar & Restaurant, Mox Café and Utterly Art who let the organisers use their venues free-of-charge, and to Kelvin Wong and Charles Tan for archival videotaping. Kudos were heaped upon other organising team members like Ethan Lim and Nick Lum for enduring much stress, and to Vernon Voon, Miak Siew and Tin for chairing individual sessions.

Advertising

To build community, public and media interest in the pride month, advertisements were placed in all the major local LGBT websites and gay entertainment venues. Various groups like SGBoy, Samekind.com, ADLUS, Safehaven, Oogachaga and PLU3 provided promotional links from their webpages. Alex Au's Yawning Bread site orchestrated and tied it all together. The enthusiasm and support garnered enabled sufficient events to be held stretching from 28 July till 26 August 05.

The PLU3 and Yawning Bread websites ran the blurb: "This year, there'll be no Nation Party in Singapore. Instead, there'll be IndigNation, a collection of events to celebrate Pride Month. IndigNation is a gay community response to the unreasonable ban on parties for gays and lesbians and heavy censorship of publications serving this community. The events in the IndigNation calendar are contributed by various organisers to Singapore's Pride Month. It is a demonstration of the initiative and spirit of grass-roots civil society that the authorities say they want to encourage, but then go out of their way to suppress."

Events

Cerita budak-budak

IndigNation raised its curtains on 29 July 2005 with an exhibition of openly-gay artist Martin Loh's illustrations for children at the Utterly Art gallery, 208 South Bridge Road, #02-00, Singapore 058757. It was held from Thursday, 28 July 2005 to Sunday, 7 Aug 2005 and was entitled "Cerita budak-budak", which means "Children's stories" in Peranakan Malay. The organiser-in-charge was Kheng Hock (utterlyart@pacific.net.sg).

Loh, known for his male erotic and Peranakan paintings, was venturing into the genre of book illustrations for the first time. His work - colourful, naive fantasies - was used to illustrate the book Malaysian Children's Favourite Stories. Besides being on display for public appreciation, Loh's paintings were also for sale, at prices ranging from several hundred to over a thousand Sing dollars.

Visit the exhibition website

Same-sex Love in Classical Chinese Literature

The first lecture of Singapore's inaugural gay pride month was conducted by Dr. Tan Chong Kee in Mandarin at 7:30pm on Tuesday, 2 Aug 05 at Xposé Bar & Restaurant, 208 South Bridge Road, #01-00, Singapore 058757. It was entitled "Same-Sex Love In Classical Chinese Literature". It's historical significance was that it was the first time a government-approved public lecture on homosexuality had taken place in Singapore. The organiser-in-charge was Clarence Singam (cszhou@pacific.net.sg).

Dr. Tan, who had conducted extensive research into Chinese civilisation, challenged the notion that same-sex love was contrary to Asian culture. He traced and explored various ancient classical Chinese texts on same-sex love to demonstrate that same-sex love had been an integral part and parcel of Asian life.

There was initial concern on the part of the organisers whether they would face any trouble with the licensing authorities despite Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's promise in August 2004 that indoor talks would henceforth no longer require a police permit. The promised proved to be real. Where in 2004 and all the years prior to that, any talk with gay themes was routinely banned, in August 2005, Dr. Tan's lecture was held without interference, although undercover policemen did attend to monitor the situation. In fact, Dr. Tan's talk, "Same-sex Love in Classical Chinese Literature" was originally prepared for the Lovers' Lecture Series in March 2004, but not delivered then because the government rejected the application for a permit. Effectively, through IndigNation, the ban on that particular lecture had been reversed.

Other sources of angst surrounding the historic talk were the fact that Dr. Tan was scheduled to leave the country that week for good, and that Tin who chaired the lecture had to leave halfway because his grandmother had suddenly suffered a minor stroke that night.

Brief comments about the talk posted on the Singapore Gay News List (SiGNeL) were:

"Learnt a lot from his talk."
"Having listened to the many examples of same-sex love that Dr. Tan had pointed out in his talk, I started wondering how is it that even those of us with a strong Chinese consciousness are not aware of this rich history most of the time."
"Chong Kee really knows his stuff."

A lengthier review was provided by Charles Tan, who recounted that Dr. Tan's talk drew an estimated crowd of 80 people, packed into a relatively small venue. Even though the event started half-an-hour later than advertised, the audience was attentive and broke into laughter whenever Dr. Tan amused them with humorous anecdotes. His talk drew on well-respected Chinese texts including sources from novels, biographies, excerpts from poems, and official books to validate his point. Presenting his talk chronologically by era and dynasty, Dr. Tan demonstrated how same sex love in China stretched back to the earliest periods in its civilisation and how widespread it was, with a prevalence among emperors, intellectuals and commoners alike. It was never considered criminal nor taboo. The lecture touched upon the evolution of homophobia which can be traced back as early as to the Song dynasty when revered scholars introduced "sexual morality" and reinterpreted Confucianism. This was further aggravated and reintroduced by the invasion of the Western imperialists at the end of the Qing dynasty. In the question-and-answer session, participants followed up with questions on the prevalence of drag, definition of male beauty, strength of the quoted text in withstanding scrutiny, pervasiveness of male prostitution, and social structures inherent in ancient China which allowed same-sex love to flourish. At the end of the talk, Dr. Tan clarified that the aim of his talk was to dispel the fallacy that traditional Chinese values forbid same sex love and that we should recognise that homophobia was a predominantly Western concept.

See more photos of the event:
Download an audio recording of the event by Christopher Tan in 3 parts:

Contra/Diction: A night with gay poets

Singapore's first public gay poetry-reading session was held at 7:30pm on Thursday, 4 August 2005 at the Utterly Art gallery, 208 South Bridge Road, #02-00, Singapore 058757. It was catchily entitled "Contra/Diction- A Night With Gay Poets". The organiser-in-charge was poet Dominic Chua.

The event was advertised on local LGBT websites thus: "It is time we recognized that gay people make significant contributions to life and society in Singapore. Much of our arts scene would come to a standstill if not for these gay men and women. And yet many of our most talented performers have had to remain closeted or ambiguous for fear of having their livelihoods threatened. But things are changing. Come for a night of poetry where some of our openly gay and upcoming poets read you the beautiful words they have penned birthed from within the ecstatic, the agonies and even the mundanities of their lives. Wine and snacks will be served."

In contrast to Dr. Tan Chong Kee's lecture, the poetry recital required a permit, because it was not classed as a talk but as an arts event. Even so, the Media Development Authority expedited the permit despite a very late submission of the application. The MDA gave their approval little more than 24 hours after receiving the e-mailed request.

Charles Tan, in his review, recounted that the last-minute rush to obtain a license for the staging of “Contra/Diction - A Night with Gay Poets” in no way diminished the quality of the performance that included an acoustic set of folk rock songs, acting and poetry reading. If anything, it lent it an air of breathless anticipation. This was one poetry reading that could not wait to happen. The evening, which attracted a capacity crowd of about 70 spectators, started out with Shirlyn and Jack belting out acoustic covers of well-known tunes such as "Tom’s Diner" (originally by Suzanne Vega, though sung with an alternative set of lyrics); and the Indigo Girls' "Closer to Fine", that had the audience fully enthralled, relaxed and in the mood for more introspective and mature readings, which were made all the more pleasant by snacks and wine that were passed around, bathed in the dim comfortable lighting in Utterly Art.

Alfian Sa’at and Ng Yi-Sheng opened the evening with a series of contrasting pieces. Ng’s pieces, done slam poetry style, were animated readings which saw him gyrating his hips and exploding in fitful outbursts. Sa'at was far more restrained but equally effective, delivering his poems, including the poignant "Anthem", in that familiar slow drawl of his. The other poets who read their poems to an appreciative crowd included Sabrina Koh, with “November” and “Her Timeless Replies”, Dominic Chua, with “All will Turn Back to Pumpkin, Mice, etc.” and “Midnight Swim for Two”, Zhuang Yi Sa with “Imagining You” and “Drift”, Bernard Koh with “National Service”, and Adrianna Tan. Another published Singaporean poet, Cyril Wong, unfortunately did not get to read as he did not submit his name for the licence application. However, his poems “Point of Arrival” (accompanied by Daniel Tung using sign language), “To Meet Your Sky” and “A Bluer Sky” were read out by his peers.

See more photos of the event:

Double-bill lecture

After a brief lull of one week to allow the noise of the State-organised National Day celebrations to subside, IndigNation resumed on Tuesday, 16 August 2005 at 21 Tanjong Pagar Road with a double-bill event.

Same-sex Love in Classical Indian Literature

The first of these was entitled "Same-sex Love in Classical Indian Literature" by Sheo S Rai, life-partner of Singapore poet, Cyril Wong.

In his review, the organiser-in-charge of the event, Clarence Singam, wrote that Rai kicked off the event with his talk to a crowd of more than 90 people at Mox Bar and Café. The IndigNation organisers were indebted to Rai for responding to the challenge of speaking on this topic. It had been quite a challenge finding a speaker because not many in Singapore seemed to have researched the topic in any detail. Rai however stepped up to the plate quite admirably to undertake the research and present the very enriching talk. Rai’s talk was based on classical texts from the Indian sub-continent starting from as far back as the Mahabharat and the Kama Sutra. It was quite assuring to hear that LGBT people had existed in every epoch of Indian history as shown by the texts of those periods. For the audience and particularly the Indian gay men and women there that night, it was an amazing experience to be able to hear that gay Asian people were truly a people with roots - that they were celebrated by the ancient Indians, the Moghul emperors and even the mystic Sufis; that they were not some corruption of Western colonial influence but that same-sex love, both male and female, had been celebrated throughout in the histories of their ancient civilisations. Instead it was the arrival of the British that brought homophobia into Indian society.

Where Queens Ruled! - A history of gay venues in Singapore

The second portion of the double lecture was delivered at about 9pm the same day at Bianco, one floor above Mox Bar and Café by Dr. Russell Heng. There had been much anticipation of the talk, in large part due to the academic credentials of the speaker, but also because there was intimate knowledge of the subject by many members of the audience.

The event was advertised on local LGBT websites thus: "Today we head to the internet and a cluster of clubs, saunas and Maxwell Market to be with one another. But where did gay men and lesbians go before? What was gay life like 40 years ago? Where exactly did queens go to reign? Come and hear activist, academic and out gay man Russell Heng share his walk through gay history in Singapore. Mox will be serving one-for-one house pours and specials on jugs."

Heng had actually been shuttling in and out of the country on speaking engagements. However, he still took the time and opportunity to present the talk with no hesitation whatsoever despite the additional work he had to do, being offered neither remuneration nor even a small gift.

Clarence Singam, in his review, explained that Dr. Russell Heng's talk on contemporary local gay history followed the one by Sheo S. Rai only after a short hiatus. As was to be expected of an event that was cobbled together by a loose collection of people from any community, the organisers had to make a last-minute shift of venue to Bianco as the power point connections were not working in the original venue at Mox. But the glitch gave the audience time to mingle and socialise, which really was what a community is about. Heng commenced his talk by saying that his discourse was one of “living memory” - a recollection by gay men and women who were still very much with us. He pointed out the need to excavate memories of days long gone by briefly illustrating how same-sex love was quite openly mentioned in ancient Javanese literature. He pointed out that while much research had been done on same-sex love in classical Chinese literature and increasingly on Indian literature, the issue had hardly been researched in terms of ancient South-East Asian literature. Heng then commenced his talk with none other than Bugis Street. He traced the evolution of the social interaction of cross-dressers with “real men” at Bugis and explored some of the rules for that interaction. He then proceeded to take the audience on a tour of Orchard Road with its gay cafes and bars followed by a rendezvous along some famous cruising spots. Having Heng flash photographs of venues long torn down at familiar sites evoked once again a sense of history and nostalgia. Gay and lesbian people were not an aberration of the 1990s but had been there in the country from the very beginning even before independence. Heng demonstrated cogently how the evolution of gay spaces mirrored the evolution of the Singaporean gay community itself - from venues where gays and lesbians just hung out without any clear sense of community to contemporary places that carried with them a strong sense of identity and community. He noted also how sometimes some of the venues came about because entrepreneurs (e.g. the owner of Niche) were just willing to take a risk and test a boundary, which in the end turned out to be unproblematic. In the case of Niche, it was just a matter of allowing same-sex dancing which till then had been viewed as out-of-bounds by gay-friendly clubs. Without Niche’s willingness to take a step to explore this possibility LGBT people might even today be dancing in mixed-sex groups using the opposite gender to mask the fact that the group really was a bunch of gays or lesbians.

See more photos of the event:

Solitary Desire

The second art exhibition of IndigNation, entitled "Solitary Desire" was held from Wednesday, 10 August 2005 to Tuesday, 16 August 2005 at Art Seasons/The Box, 5 Gemmill Lane (off Club Street), Singapore 06926. The organiser-in-charge was Germaine Wong (info@artseasons.com.sg).

It was a 2-artist joint exhibition, featuring works by Ong Jenn Long and Steve Chua, both young, emerging talents. Ong's works gave a sense of mystery, evoking the audience’s imagination through the clever execution of light and shadows. The seductive visual style of his works tempted the audience to examine the subject closer and left it entirely to their interpretation. Chua's graphic design background was significant in his works as they reflected modern day consumerism and the effect of commercials. His intention was, in Chua's words, to "focus and deal with the notion of desire / image / identity", and the effect of consumerism upon the self.

Visit the exhibition website

Safehaven forums for gay Christians

Sex and the Christian gay person

Singapore's first widely-advertised public talk for gay Christians was held at 7:30pm on Thursday, 18 August 2005 at the Free Community Church, 100A Eu Tong Sen Road, #04-02/04 Yangtze Building (connected via Pearl Center). The organiser-in-charge was Gary Chan (shpastors@yahoogroups.com).

It was advertised thus: "In a world where there are so few models and much suppression of open discussion, it is pretty hard to figure out just how Christian gay and lesbian persons should live as sexual beings? Is only sex after marriage permissible? But we aren't allowed to marry! How do I re-connect with my body, which I have rejected all these years? I feel guilty each time I feel sexual. Is sexual experimentation acceptable? And then what about relationship models - is monogamy the only option? What about recreational sex for the single gay person? If sex is not just for procreation, why not just recreate? Come and hear our panel of straight and gay persons (which include a retired bishop and a newly married gay man) share their views and answer your questions."

Alphonsus Lee, in his review, wrote that the forum started off with a sing-along session of hymns and pop gospel. The panel comprised 5 individuals - a straight man who had been married for 50 years and who with his spouse had stood up for gay people at much personal cost, 2 lesbians and 2 gay men.Each of the panelists had different perspectives on sexual ethics ranging from "sex is no different from drinking tea" to "sex is a sacred institution via which God can be experienced". The discussion became quite vibrant whenever panel members shared honest and heart-felt personal opinions on sexual practices. Several topics were discussed in rapid succession, such as whether the Bible supported practices of monogamy or polygamy, whether men were more able than women to separate the act of sex and emotional intimacy in a relationship, and whether an open relationship was acceptable. There was a rather languid agreement and acceptance of the panel's opinions, but the general lethargy was broken by one panel member's sharing of a bible study session. He said that it was easy to see the manifestation of God in the intimate sharing between two partners through sex, but it was much more difficult to accept that there could be an equally intimate sharing between two strangers through sex in a sauna. However, the panel member pointed out that in his experiences at a sauna, there have been instances where he had encountered a willingness between strangers to give respect and tenderness in the act of sexual sharing, and that it was possible to glimpse God in that act. He went as far as to say that perhaps Jesus can manifest himself even via the person one encounters in a sauna. A pointed question was also raised on what sex meant to the individual. The forum had quickly concluded that sex was NOT merely an act of procreation nor solely an act of pleasure, so the important question was: What does sex really mean? Was it a way to know God? If God had given us every part of our existence, and each played an equally important role, why does sex wield a powerful motivation in our lives? The answer is simple: Sex is the deepest, most sincere and intimate form of communication between two persons. While the pleasurable aspects of it are often deemed sinful and taboo by the church, the healing and bonding that takes place in the act of sex is often neglected or diminished. We are called to celebrate this purest form of communication as Christians responsibly and with due respect to the welfare of the persons we share it with.

Exploring Paul, homosexuality and the Romans

Safehaven's second lecture for gay Christians was held at 7:30 on Friday, 19 August 2005 also at the Free Community Church. It was conducted by the Center for Reflexive Theology and entitled "Exploring Paul, Homosexuality and the Romans - An Intensive Workshop on Biblical Interpretation." The organiser in charge was Tuck Leong (tuckleong@gmail.com).

It was advertised thus: "The issue of what St. Paul taught about homosexuality has become one of the most divisive theological issues of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The Center for Reflexive Theology (CRT) is pleased to announce a series of lay workshops on methods of Biblical interpretation using Paul’s statements on homosexuality in Romans. We will start with a textual analysis of Romans in August exploring what the text of Romans itself says. In following months, the CRT workshops will focus on an historical analysis of ideas and concepts that influenced St Paul, followed by a contemporary reading of Paul and ending the series with a summary of various approaches to Paul’s view of homosexuality. The objective of the workshops is not to defend or speak against homosexuality but to explore how to approach an ancient text so that it can remain relevant to the 21st century. Come and be enriched."

The Quarterly

IndigNation's first forum on Singaporean issues, not necessarily gay ones, targeted at the general public was held at 7:30pm on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 at Bianco, 21 Tanjong Pagar Road. It was conducted by Alex Au and entitled "The Quarterly - A Singaporean Conversation. 40 Years of Independence: The National and The Personal." The organiser-in-charge was Charles Tan.

It was conceived by Au as a dialogue open to all citizens about what it meant to be Singaporean and was the inaugural session of what was to become, as the name implied, a quarterly affair.

The talk was advertised thus: "Singapore was born from contention. Our short period in Malaysia 1963-1965 was marked by racial tensions and riots. Has this made our society oversensitive to contentious social issues and identity politics? Do we overreact to differences of opinion? Does our history warp our perception of cosmopolitanism that we only see ethnic cosmopolitanism and no other dimension, rendering us blind to the social forces of the future? What have been the chief social issues in Singapore since 1965? How has the government responded to the challenges they raised? How do we ourselves see these issues through the filter of our memories (if we have lived through them), or through the filter of what we've been told (if we're too young to remember). How have they made Singapore what Singapore is today? We will talk about ethnicity, language, the baby bust, immigration and other broad issues, how and why they happened and how we have been personally affected. This will be as much a conversation as a talk - a collective sharing of memory and viewpoints, exploring what it means to be Singaporean, on the occasion of the Republic's 40th anniversary. More about The Quarterly: This is not a forum about being gay. It’s a forum about being Singaporean and what gay and lesbians have to say about nationhood in matters important to both straight and gay people, issues that burn our Singaporean hearts. It is about building a place we can call home."

There were noticeably fewer people at IndigNation's fourth week event than at the Rai/Heng double-lecture. While organised by People Like Us 3, an effort was made to include straight people in the audience. Several came and spoke at length, too, as the entire discussion was about Singapore and not about being gay. Perhaps the LGBT community had an inkling from the advertisement that the seminar would not focus primarily on gay issues and this reduced the turnout. Whatever the reason, Au put up a remarkable performance and must have spared no effort in preparing for the inaugural forum of the series. The range of topics was intentionally broad. Actually "broad" is an understatement - it covered almost every controversial issue under the sun, and then some, about Singapore except for gay rights. But the latter topic was intentionally reserved for future fora. There were contributions aplenty from members of the floor, especially Ng Yi Sheng, who apologised for hogging the mike, and Dominic Chua. At the end of the 2-hour forum, the entire room rose to sing the national anthem "Majulah Singapura", a symbolic gesture to signify the gay community's loyalty to Singapore.

See more photos of the event:

S.A.D. AlieNation

The first private party of IndigNation was held at 9pm on Thursday, 25 August 2005 at CoccoLatte, 76 Robertson Quay, #01-09, The Gallery Hotel, Singapore 238254. It was the brainchild of the management of CoccoLatte, a bar patronised in part by the gay community. The organiser-in-charge of the event was the artistic director and business partner of the establishment, Nick Charnley (nick.charnley@gmail.com).

S.A.D. (Singapore Affective Disorder), CoccoLatte's regular mid-week party was conceived and promoted as the alter-ego of Singapore's most well-known gay bar-cum-disco, Happy. The alternative venue presented "AlieNation" on a S.A.D. night as its contribution to the IndigNation celebrations. The party was advertised on Coccolatte's website thus: "As part of IndigNation and Singapore Gay and Lesbian Pride Month, S.A.D. (Singapore Affective Disorder), is proud to present "AlieNation". S.A.D. is a monthly mid-week party held at CoccoLatte. It might best be described as a polysexual night since it's open to people of "many persuasions" even though it is essentially gay. S.A.D. entertains anybody and everybody who comes with an open mind and an open heart and is ready to have fun. S.A.D. DJ's are from the U.S., UK and Singapore. Expect an eclectic mix from the likes of The Smiths, Soft Cell, Joy Division, Happy Mondays, etc. with original video work and live guest appearances by such celebrities as 'The Japanese Housewife'...there will be a guest appearance by a surprise celebrity at approx. 11pm. Entry to S.A.D. AlieNation is free and drinks are usually 1 4 1. See the website www.veritygold.net/sad for further details."

Celebrity DJ Chris Ho was at the helm to spin a well-balanced mix of feel-good hits. Unfortunately, owing to unforeseen circumstances, the event's highlight, a video-projected spectacle, had to be cancelled. Taking its place was a dramatic entry by artistic director Nick Charnley, wearing a large marshmallow-like head reminiscent of a Roswell runaway, in keeping with the night's theme. His pet dog wearing pink wings accompanied him, to the audience's delight. The event was attended by a mixed crowd of gay and straight pub-crawlers.

Boys

The only gay-themed drama performance run of IndigNation entitled "Boys" took place nightly at 8pm from Thursday, 25 August 2005 to Sunday, 28 August 2005 at Bianco, 21 Tanjong Pagar Road, #04-00 (above Mox Cafe). Tickets could be purchased from www.gatecrash.com with prices for adults at Sing$30 and students at Sing$28 with a complementary free drink at Mox. Discount passes were offered to members of the audience who had attended the previous IndigNation talks held at Mox and Bianco, sans the free drink however. The director of the play and organiser-in-charge was Richard Chua (mail@richardchua.name). Picture and progress notes were made and archived on a website

to chart each actor's journey, this being their debut effort, before the season opened. Despite initial problems in securing funding, on account of its homosexual theme, the play was finally performed as scheduled.

"Boys" was a new Chinese-English bilingual theatre project by Richard Chua, undertaken after Lover's Words - a play about heterosexuals in a homosexual society. It was an extension of Chua's belief that life should be led honestly and truthfully. In his quest to further meditate on love between people (in this case, between 3 boys aged 20-plus), he embarked on the project to push his collaborators to work in a space where they had nowhere to go, but to clean. Cleaning was an essential task that would bring these boys to the next phase of eternity. The story was about love - love that seemed to be defined differently by different people, with different perspectives, resulting in different outcomes. Each boy had a love story to tell.

It was generally felt by the audience that the 3 actors put up an admirable performance, considering that it was their maiden attempt, but that the play as a whole was too short, surreal and lacked an engaging climax.

6ixXX!

The closing event and grand finalé of IndigNation was a private party entitled "6ixXX! - The Sixth Annual Adlus Bash" held at 7:30pm on Friday, 26 August 2005. It was organised by Adlus

, Singapore’s LGBT outdoors and sports group.

It was advertised as promising "...an Xciting, Xtreme, Xperience...No hotbod beefed up body is needed for this party (though it would be nice) just come in your berms, let your hair down and have a great time. Keep that night free!" The charge was Sing$10 per person for food, with the first drink free. Subsequent drinks cost $2. The organiser-in-charge was Nick Lum (nwl@pacific.net.sg).

The police tried to be tougher with Adlus' sixth anniversary celebration as compared to all the previous IndigNation events because of concerns that it would be another public gay party. However, Lum, the organiser, argued that it was a "BBQ-cum-potluck dinner similar to countless ones held every weekend at the East Coast Park, etc.", so a Public Entertainment Licence should not be required. The police eventually relented.

Alex Au, in his review, wrote that as befitting Adlus, an outdoors and adventure club, their sixth anniversary celebrations were centred on a barbecue and an evening in a beach-side chalet. The location they chose was perfect, and a little cheeky too. The barbecue pit they rented was at Pasir Ris, off Elias Road which was wonderfully quiet, yet breezy. There were about 50 people around the single pit, but there was still more than enough food and drink. Everybody seemed to know each other and the casual informality was refreshing. At about 10 pm, the group transferred themselves to the townhouse-type "chalet" they had rented about 300 metres away from the barbecue pit. It turned out to be a surprise, being part of The Home Team's (i.e. the Singapore Police Force's) resort compound. In the weeks prior to this event, the police had written to Adlus saying that a Public Entertainment Licence was mandatory, but the group managed to convinced the authorities that it was a private party for Adlus members. Even so, Adlus hung up a huge rainbow flag on the chalet's front verandah. No one else passing by could possibly have missed it. More participants continued to arrive way past 10, yet there was still food to spare.

At the chalet, a birthday cake was brought out, alcohol flowed, and banter got livelier. A little game was played at 11pm and won by Anne Cheng who was voted the most sporting personality. The socialising went on late into the night, with a small group going out in search of supper at 4am.

Related celebrations

Other gay discos such as Happy picked up on the "Nation" suffix used by the organisers of the Pride Month and held their own private National Day celebrations, with equally witty names like "DetermiNation".

Conclusion

IndigNation was very satisfying for both organisers and participants. With only shoestring resources, but lots of enthusiasm from many LGBT groups and individuals, not merely those involved in People Like Us 3, it reaffirmed their sense of community and pride. It was generally felt that the celebration a great success. It was not just a series of events but also a set of tests for the LGBT community and for Singapore as a whole.

The other challenge was whether it would be able to garner media publicity. The latter was a proxy for the government's attitude to gay initiatives. For example, it was noted by many during August 2004, that while the foreign media were reporting on the Nation.04 party, not a word was mentioned in the local media.

For IndigNation, things were different. There was quite positive coverage in both The Straits Times and Today newspaper at the start of the pride month, and a week later, another report in Today for the poetry recital.

The third test was applied, not to the government and the media, but to gay and lesbians in Singapore. The organisers adopted the policy of allowing all events to be photographed or videographed. In most events, even the audience could be photographed, and no announcement on this would be made. It was felt important to treat IndigNation events just like other public events in Singapore, for there could be no meaning to "pride month", if the participants were not out and proud. It was heartening that almost everybody seemed undisturbed by being photographed, testifying to the maturity and confidence of the Singapore gay and lesbian community.

Much of the texts, photographs and video footage of IndigNation have been archived at Pelangi Pride Centre for public access and to preserve a record of the historical event.

Start of a Singaporean LGBT tradition

The success and significance of the first IndigNation in 2005 encouraged its organisers, People Like Us 3, to make the event a tradition to be henceforth celebrated every year.

See the programme and reviews for:

IndigNation 2006

IndigNation 2007

External links

PLU's IndigNation website
A more profusely illustrated version of this article on SgWiki:
Videos of past IndigNation events on YouTube:

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia © 2001-2006 Wikipedia contributors (Disclaimer)
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Last updated on Friday October 03, 2008 at 23:35:45 PDT (GMT -0700)
View this article at Wikipedia.org - Edit this article at Wikipedia.org - Donate to the Wikimedia Foundation

Anger

Anger is an emotional state that may range from minor irritation to intense rage. The physical effects of anger include increased heart rate, blood pressure, and levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline. Some view anger as part of the fight or flight brain response to the perceived threat of pain. Anger becomes the predominant feeling behaviorally, cognitively and physiologically when a person makes the conscious choice to take action to immediately stop the threatening behavior of another outside force.

The external expression of anger can be found in facial expressions, body language, physiological responses, and at times in public acts of aggression. Animals and humans for example make loud sounds, attempt to look physically larger, bare their teeth, and stare. Anger is a behavioral pattern designed to warn aggressors to stop their threatening behavior. Rarely does a physical altercation occur without the prior expression of anger by at least one of the participants. While most of those who experience anger explain its arousal as a result of "what has happened to them," psychologists point out that an angry person can be very well mistaken because anger causes a loss in self-monitoring capacity and objective observability.

In the world of humans, the unique use of codified symbols and sounds -written and spoken language, pain or the threat of pain can be perceived from written and verbal sources. Humans may not perceive an immediate physical threat, but pain can be felt psychologically. Due to humans' capacity to imagine the distant future, the threat of pain can also arise purely from the imagination, and not be based on anything happening in the immediate present. In humans, anger often arises when another human being is perceived to violate expected behavioral norms related to social survival. These violations break social or interpersonal boundaries, or may be ethical or legal violations.

Modern psychologists view anger as a primary, natural, and mature emotion experienced by all humans at times, and as something that has functional value for survival. Anger can mobilize psychological resources for corrective action. Uncontrolled anger can however negatively affect personal or social well-being.

While many philosophers and writers have warned against the spontaneous and uncontrolled fits of anger, there has been disagreement over the intrinsic value of anger. Dealing with anger has been addressed in the writings of earliest philosophers up to modern times. Modern psychologists, in contrast to the earlier writers, have also pointed out the possible harmful effects of suppression of anger. Displays of anger can be used as a manipulation strategy for social influence.

Etymology and Conception

The English term "anger" originally comes from the term angr of Old Norse language; a language that was spoken by the inhabitants of Scandinavia and their overseas settlements during the Viking Age, until about 1300. According to the linguist Anna Wierzbicka, the exact conception of anger can vary from culture to culture. For example, the Ilongot language of Philippines does not have a term exactly corresponding to the English term "anger." In this language, the closest term expressing the concept of "anger" is liget (glossed as ‘energy, anger, passion’).

This term plays a crucial role in the culture and life of Ilongots and has a competitive character related to envy and ambition. Wierzbicka explains the distinction between the English anger and the Ilongot liget more explicitly as follows:

X feels anger—
(a) X thinks: R did something bad
(b) X doesn't want such 'bad' something to happen
(c) X feels badly toward R because of that 'bad' something happening
(d) X wants to do something bad to R because of that
X feels liget—
(a) X thinks: I don’t want people to think that they can do things that I cannot do
(b) I want to do something because of that
(c) I don’t want to think:

“Someone will feel something bad because of that”

“I don’t want to do it because of that”
(d) X feels something because of that
(e) X can do things because of that which other people can’t.

Modern psychology

Anger is viewed as a natural and healthy response that has evolved to enable us to deal with threats. Three types of anger are recognized by psychologists: The first form of anger, named "hasty and sudden anger" by Joseph Butler, an 18th century English bishop, is connected to the impulse for self-preservation. It is shared between humans and animals and occurs when tormented or trapped. The second type of anger is named "settled and deliberate" anger and is a reaction to perceived deliberate harm or unfair treatment by others. These two forms of anger are episodic. The third type of anger is however dispositional and is related more to character traits than to instincts or cognitions. Irritability, sullenness and churlishness postures are examples of the last form of anger.

Anger can potentially mobilize psychological resources and boost determination toward correction of wrong behaviors, promotion of social justice, communication of negative sentiment and redress of grievances. It can also facilitate patience. On the other hand, anger can be destructive when it does not find its appropriate outlet in expression. Anger, in its strong form, impairs one's ability to process information and to exert cognitive control over his behavior. An angry person may lose his/her objectivity, empathy, prudence or thoughtfulness and may cause harm to others. There is a sharp distinction between anger and aggression (verbal or physical, direct or indirect) even though they mutually influence each other. While anger can activate aggression or increase its probability or intensity, it is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for aggression.

Physiology

The external expression of anger can be found in facial expressions, body language, physiological responses, and at times in public acts of aggression. The facial expression and body language are as follows:

The facial and skeletal musculature are strongly affected by anger. The face becomes flushed, and the brow muscles move inward and downward, fixing a hard stare on the target. The nostrils flare, and the jaw tends toward clenching. This is an innate pattern of facial expression that can be observed in toddlers. Tension in the skeletal musculature, including raising of the arms and adopting a squared-off stance, are preparatory actions for attack and defense. The muscle tension provides a sense of strength and self-assurance. An impulse to strike out accompanies this subjective feeling of potency.

Physiological responses to anger include an increase in the heart rate, preparing the person to move, and increase of the blood flow to the hands, preparing them to strike. Perspiration increases (particularly when the anger is intense). A common metaphor for the physiological aspect of anger is that of a hot fluid in a container. According to Novaco, "Autonomic arousal is primarily engaged through adrenomedullary and adrenocortical hormonal activity. The secretion by the andrenal medulla of the catecholamines, epinephrine, and norepinephrine, and by the andrenal cortex of glucocorticoids provides a sympathetic system effect that mobilizes the body for immediate action (e.g. the release of glucose, stored in the liver and muscles as glycogen). In anger, the catecholamine activation is more strongly norepinephrine than epinephrine (the reverse being the case for fear). The adrenocortical effects, which have longer duration than the adrenomedullary ones, are modiated by secretions of the pituitary gland, which also influences testosterone levels. The pituitary-adrenocortical and pituitary-gonadal systems are thought to affect readiness or potentiation for anger responding."

Neuroscience has shown that emotions are generated by multiple structures in the brain. The rapid, minimal, and evaluative processing of the emotional significance of the sensory data is done when the data passes through the amygdala in its travel from the sensory organs along certain neural pathways towards the limbic forebrain. Emotion caused by discrimination of stimulus features, thoughts, or memories however occurs when its information is relayed from the thalamus to the neocortex. Based on some statistical analysis, some scholars have suggested that the tendency for anger may be genetic. Distinguishing between genetic and environmental factors however requires further research and actual measurement of specific genes and environments.

Causes

Most commonly, those who experience anger explain its arousal as a result of "what has happened to them" and in most cases the described provocations occur immediately before the anger experience. Such explanations confirm the illusion that anger has a discrete external cause. The angry person usually finds the cause of his anger in an intentional, personal, and controllable aspect of another person's behavior. This explanation is however based on the intuitions of the angry person who experiences a loss in self-monitoring capacity and objective observability as a result of their emotion. Anger can be of multicausal origin, some of which may be remote events, but people rarely find more than one cause for their anger. According to Novaco, "anger experiences are embedded or nested within an environmental-temporal context. Disturbances that may not have involved anger at the outset leave residues that are not readily recognized but that operate as a lingering backdrop for focal provocations (of anger)." According to Britannica Encyclopedia, an internal infection can cause pain which in turn can activate anger.

Philosophical perspectives

Antiquity

Ancient philosophers argued that anger can be only experienced by humans: animals cannot become angry because they lack reason. Ancient Greek philosophers, describing and commenting on the uncontrolled anger, particularly toward slaves, in their society generally showed a hostile attitude towards anger. Galen and Seneca regarded anger as a kind of madness. They all rejected the spontaneous, uncontrolled fits of anger and agreed on both the possibility and value of controlling anger. There were however disagreements regarding the value of anger. For Seneca, anger was "worthless even for war." Seneca believed that:

The disciplined Roman army regularly defeats the fury of the Germans.... In sporting contests, it is a mistake to become angry ..., and in response to personal injury, the only relief for great misfortunes is to bear them and submit to their coercion... If the misfortune is unbearable, then suicide should be preferred to rage.

Aristotle on the other hand, ascribed some value to anger that has arisen from perceived injustice because it is useful for preventing injustice. Furthermore, the opposite of anger is a kind of insensibility, Aristotle stated. The difference in people's temperaments was generally viewed as a result the different mix of qualities or humors people contained. Seneca held that "red-haired and red-faced people are hot-tempered because of excessive hot and dry humors." Ancient philosophers rarely refer to women’s anger at all, according to Simon Kemp and K. T. Strongman perhaps because their works were not intended for women. Some of them that discuss it, such as Seneca, considered women to be more prone to anger than men.

Medieval era

During the period of the Roman Empire and the Middle Ages, philosophers elaborated on the existing conception of anger, many of whom did not make major contributions to the concept. For example, many medieval philosophers such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Roger Bacon and Thomas Aquinas agreed with ancient philosophers that animals cannot become angry. On the other hand, al-Ghazali (also known as "Algazel" in Europe), who often disagreed with Aristotle and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) on many issues, argued that animals do possess anger as one of the three "powers" in their Qalb ("heart"), the other two being appetite and impulse. He also argued that animal will is "conditioned by anger and appetite" in contrast to human will which is "conditioned by the intellect.

A common medieval belief was that those prone to anger had an excess of yellow bile or choler (hence the word "choleric"). This belief was related to Seneca's belief that "red-haired and red-faced people are hot-tempered because of excessive hot and dry humors."

Modern times

The modern understanding of anger is not much more advanced than that of Aristotle. Immanuel Kant rejected vengeance as vicious because it goes beyond defense of one's dignity, and at the same time rejected insensitiveness to social injustice as a sign for lack "manhood." Regarding the latter, David Hume had argued that since "anger and hatred are passions inherent in our very frame and constitution, the lack of them is sometimes evidence of weakness and imbecility." Two main differences between the modern understanding and ancient understanding of anger can be detected, Kemp and Strongman state: One is that early philosophers were not concerned with possible harmful effects of the suppression of anger. The other is that recent studies of anger takes the issue of gender differences into account. This does not seem to have been of much concern for the earlier philosophers.

The American psychologist Albert Ellis has suggested that anger, rage and fury has partly roots in the philosophical meanings and assumptions humans interpret transgression through. According to Ellis, these emotions are often associated and related to the leaning humans have to absolutistically depreciating and damning other peoples humanity when their personal rules and domain are transgressed.

Religious perspectives

Anger in Buddhism is defined here as: "being unable to bear the object, or the intention to cause harm to the object." Anger is seen as aversion with a stronger exaggeration, and is listed as one of the five hindrances. The Buddhist spiritual saints, such as Dalai Lama, the spiritual Guru of Tibetan monks, sometimes get angry. However, there is a difference; most often a spiritual person is aware of the emotion and the way it can be handled. Thus, in response to the question: "Is any anger acceptable in Buddhism?' the Dalai Lama answered:

"Buddhism in general teaches that anger is a destructive emotion and although anger might have some positive effects in terms of survival or moral outrage, I do not accept that anger of any kind as a virtuous emotion nor aggression as constructive behavior. The Gautama Buddha has taught that there are three basic kleshas at the root of samsara (bondage, illusion) and the vicious cycle of rebirth. These are greed, hatred, and delusion--also translatable as attachment, anger, and ignorance. They bring us confusion and misery rather than peace, happiness, and fulfillment. It is in our own self-interest to purify and transform them."

Medieval Christianity vigorously rejected anger as one of the seven cardinal, or deadly sins although some Christian writers at times regarded the anger caused from injustice as having some value. Saint Basil viewed anger as a "reprehensible temporary madness." Joseph F. Delany in the Catholic Encyclopedia (1914) defines anger as "the desire of vengeance" and states that a reasonable vengeance and passion is ethical and praiseworthy. Vengeance is sinful when it exceeds its limits in which case it becomes opposed to justice and charity. For example, "vengeance upon one who has not deserved it, or to a greater extent than it has been deserved, or in conflict with the dispositions of law, or from an improper motive" are all sinful. An unduly vehement vengeance is considered a venial sin unless it seriously goes counter to the love of God or of one's neighbor.

In Hinduism, anger is equated with sorrow as a form of unrequited desire. The objects of anger are perceived as a hindrance to the gratification of the desires of the angry person. Alternatively if one thinks one is superior, the result is grief. Anger is considered to be packed with more evil power than desire.

The Qur'an, the central religious text of Islam, attributes anger to Prophets and believers and Muhammad's enemies. It mentions the anger of Moses against his people for worshiping a golden calf; the anger of Jonah at God in a moment and his eventual realization of his error and his repentance; God's removal of anger from the hearts of believers and making them merciful after the fighting against Muhammad's enemies is over.. In general suppression of anger is deemed a praiseworthy quality and Muhammad is attributed to have said, "power resides not in being able to strike another, but in being able to keep the self under control when anger arises.

In Judaism, anger at the sight of wrong done is holy. If the anger kindles into passion, it will become however conducive to strife. According to the Hebrew Bible: "He that is slow to wrath is of great understanding, but he that is hasty of temper[A. V. "spirit"] exalteth folly...A wrathful man stirrers up strife: he that is slow to anger appeases strife...He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty...Be not hasty in thy spirit to be angry; for anger rests in the bosom of fools." In the Book of Genesis, Jacob condemned the anger that had arisen in his sons Simon and Levi: "Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel"

Of God or gods

In many religions, anger is frequently attributed to God or gods. Primitive people held that gods were subject to anger and revenge in anthropomorphic fashion. The Hebrew Bible says that opposition to God's Will results in God's anger. The Hebrew Bible explains that:

God is not an intellectual abstraction, nor is He conceived as a being indifferent to the doings of man; and His pure and lofty nature resents most energetically anything wrong and impure in the moral world: "O Lord, my God, mine Holy One... Thou art of eyes too pure to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity."

Christians also subscribe to the God's holiness and his anger in the sight of evil. This anger, they hold is not inconsistent with God's love. They also believe that the wrath of God comes to those who reject Jesus.

In Islam, God's mercy outweighs his wrath or takes precedence of it. The characteristics of those upon whom God's wrath will fall is as follows: Those who reject God; deny his signs; doubt the resurrection and the reality of the day of judgment; call Muhammad a sorcerer, a madman or a poet; do mischief, are impudent, do not look after the poor (notably the orphans); live in luxury or heap up fortunes; persecute the believers or prevent them from praying;...

Coping strategies

According to Leland R. Beaumont, each instance of anger demands making a choice.. A person can respond with hostile action, including overt violence, or they can respond with hostile inaction, such as withdrawing or stonewalling. Other options include initiating a dominance contest; harboring resentment; or working to better understand and constructively resolve the issue

Ancient philosophers

Seneca addresses the question of mastering anger in three parts: 1. how to avoid becoming angry in the first place 2. how to cease being angry and 3. how to deal with anger in others. Seneca suggests that in order to avoid becoming angry in the first place, Seneca suggests that the many faults of anger should be repeatedly remembered. One should avoid being too busy or deal with anger-provoking people. Unnecessary hunger or thirst should be avoided and soothing music be listened to. To cease being angry, Seneca suggests "one to check speech and impulses and be aware of particular sources of personal irritation. In dealing with other people, one should not be too inquisitive: It is not always soothing to hear and see everything. When someone appears to slight you, you should be at first reluctant to believe this, and should wait to hear the full story. You should also put yourself in the place of the other person, trying to understand his motives and any extenuating factors, such as age or illness." Seneca further advises daily self-inquisition about one's bad habit.. To deal with anger in others, Seneca suggests that the best reaction is to simply keep calm. A certain kind of deception, Seneca says, is necessary in dealing with angry people.

Galen repeats Seneca's points but adds a new one: finding a guide and teacher can help the person in controlling their passions. Galen also gives some hints for finding a good teacher. Both Seneca and Galen (and later philosophers) agree that the process of controlling anger should start in childhood on grounds of malleability. Seneca warns that this education should not blunt the spirit of the children nor should they be humiliated or treated severely. At the same time, they should not be pampered. Children, Seneca says, should learn not to beat their playmates and not to become angry with them. Seneca also advises that children's requests should not be granted when they are angry.

Middle ages

Maimonides considered being given to uncontrollable passions as a kind of illness. Like Galen, Maimonides suggested seeking out a philosopher for curing this illness just as one seeks out a physician for curing bodily illnesses. Roger Bacon elaborates Seneca's advices. Many medieval writers discuss at length the evils of anger and the virtues of temperance. John Mirk asks men to "consider how angels flee before them and fiends run toward him to burn him with hellfire." In The Canon of Medicine, Ibn Sina (Avicenna) modified the theory of temperaments and argued that anger heralded the transition of melancholia to mania, and explained that humidity inside the head can contribute to such mood disorders.

On the other hand, Ahmed ibn Sahl al-Balkhi classified anger (along with aggression) as a type of neurosis, while al-Ghazali (Algazel) argued that anger takes form in rage, indignation and revenge, and that "the powers of the soul become balanced if it keeps anger under control.

Modern times

According to R. Novaco, anger is an emotional response to provocation. R. Novaco recognized three modalities of anger: cognitive (appraisals), somatic-affective (tension and agitations) and behavioral (withdrawal and antagonism). In order to manage anger the problems involved in the anger should be discussed Novaco suggests. The situations leading to anger should be explored by the person. The person is then tried to be imagery-based relieved of his or her recent angry experiences.

Modern therapies for anger involve restructuring thoughts and beliefs in order to bring about a causal reduction in anger. These therapies often comes within the schools of CBT (or Cognitive Behavioural Therapies) like modern systems such as REBT (or Rational Emotional Behavior Therapy). Research shows that people who suffer from excessive anger often harbor and act on dysfunctional attributions, assumptions and evaluations in specific situations. It has been shown that with therapy by a trained professional, individuals can bring their anger to more manageable levels.

The therapy is followed by the so-called "stress inoculation" in which the clients are taught "relaxation skills to control their arousal and various cognitive controls to exercise on their attention, thoughts, images, and feelings. They are taught to see the provocation and the anger itself as occurring in a series of stages, each of which can be dealt with."

Suppression

While the early philosophers were not concerned with possible harmful effects of the suppression of anger, modern psychologists point out that suppression of anger may have harmful effects. The suppressed anger may find another outlet, such as a physical symptom, or become more extreme. John W. Fiero cites Los Angeles riots of 1992 as an example of sudden, explosive release of suppressed anger. The anger was then displaced as violence against those who had nothing to do with the matter. Another example of widespread deflection of anger from its actual cause toward a scapegoat, Fiero says, was the blaming of Jews for the economic ills of Germany by the Nazis.

As a strategy

As with any emotion, the display of anger can be feigned or exaggerated. Studies by Hochschild and Sutton have shown that the show of anger is likely to be an effective manipulation strategy in order to change and design attitudes. Anger is a distinct strategy of social influence and its use (i.e. belligerent behaviors) as a goal achievement mechanism proves to be a successful strategy.

Tiedens, known for her studies of anger, claimed that expression of feelings would cause a powerful influence not only on the perception of the expresser but also on his power position in the society. She studied the correlation between anger expression and social influence perception. Previous researchers, such as Keating, 1985 have found that people with angry face expression were perceived as powerful and as in a high social position. Similarly, Tiedens et al. have revealed that people who compared scenarios involving an angry and a sad, attributed a higher social status to the angry character. Tiedens examined in her study whether anger expression promotes status attribution. In other words, whether anger contributes to perceptions or legitimization of others’ behaviors. Her findings clearly indicated that participants who were exposed to either an angry or a sad person were inclined to express support for the angry person rather than for a sad one. In addition, it was found that a reason for that decision originates from the fact that the person expressing anger was perceived as an ability owner, and was attributed a certain social status accordingly.

Showing anger during a negotiation may increase the ability of the anger expresser to succeed in negotiation. A study by Tiedens et al. indicated that the anger expressers were perceived as stubborn, dominant and powerful. In addition, it was found that people were inclined to easily give up to those who were perceived by them as a powerful and stubborn, rather than soft and submissive. Based on these findings Sinaceur and Tiedens have found that people conceded more to the angry side rather than for the non-angry one.

A question raised by Van Kleef et al. based on these findings was whether expression of emotion influences others, since it is known that people use emotional information to conclude about others’ limits and match their demands in negotiation accordingly. Van Kleef et al. wanted to explore whether people give up more easily to an angry opponent or to a happy opponent. Findings revealed that participants tended to be more flexible toward an angry opponent compared with a happy opponent. These results strengthen the argument that participants analyze the opponent’s emotion in order to conclude about their limits and carry out their decisions accordingly.