(I fully acknowledge the possibility that I have encountered this idea in the work of others, though I cannot remember ever hearing or reading of it before. As always, I would appreciate any information about earlier appearances of this idea.)

I will label the phenomenon as "Accomodation Rage", and will define it as the angry reaction, whether internalised or not, that a human has whenever an essentially human characteristic must be suppressed or eliminated because of the requirements (or supposed requirements) of living in a society of other humans. The Rage can arise or be exacerbated by events in an individual human's life span, or can be assumed to have developed over generations, centuries or millennia of human compromise with the ever-expanding control imposed by an ever-more-complex society. In short, when the basic human animal must do something (or avoid doing something) that conflicts with or inconveniences its original design, that animal experiences Rage at some level.

Television producer/writer Chuck Lorre touched on the idea in his Vanity Card #189 (a one-second flash of text at the end of most of his television episodes, this one first broadcast in October 2007, at the end of the "The Hamburger Postulate" episode of The Big Bang Theory). It addressed the issue of anger and how arrogant critics made an issue of his (Lorre's) anger, as if it were socially unacceptable. His defense, in part, was that "If you're even barely engaged in this world, anger manifests itself constantly."

I suppose the simplest example would be the requirement of clothing that is not necessary for protection from the elements. No other animal, outside of Park Avenue Poodles and chimpanzees working in Television, wears clothing for purposes of modesty. For most humans, opportunities to shed some or all of their clothing are seen as welcome and relaxing -- vacations at the beach, summer days when only the "naughty bits" are covered, bubble baths and long showers, skinny-dipping, and so forth.

Intermediate examples might include the gut-tightening when one suppresses the urge to pass gas (fart) in public, or the never-realised resentment about having to use deodorants and anti-perspirants so as not to offend others with one's natural "essence", or the irritation of having to obey traffic laws even when ignoring them would be perfectly safe.

Perhaps the most significant example is the regulation of sexual behaviour. It seems obvious to me that much of what is popularly called "adolescent angst" results from the rise of wonderful feelings and urges, and the immediate (or even pre-learned) understanding that these feelings and urges are subject to state control, and must be suppressed, delayed and even in full adulthood, very narrowly channelled. If one views our ancestry as "animal", then considers how far we are from experiencing our full heritage as originally programmed into our species, Rage seems a quite understandable reaction.

This is not to say that people living in society should not follow any rules nor make compromises on their original birthrights. The point here is that society needs to consider the Rage, be aware of its potential for harm, and modify the requirements for social "membership" so as to minimise the loss of basic human qualities.