On Aggression And Forms Of Its Discharge

When we look at the model of the psyche of some user, almost always the complexity and data overflow of the block representing the discharge of aggression stands out a mile. This contrasts strongly with the societal self-presentation of people, and perhaps with how they think of themselves. Abovementioned model part contains the degree of aggressiveness, the factors that shaped it, and the forms of its discharge. The personal specific features of the individual characterize it very brightly. Not surprisingly, one of psychotherapy’s most informative – in terms of diagnosis – questions is “On what occasion does the client show aggression and in what way does he show it?” And at the same time if we’d look at the content on the Internet, the aggressive part of it (along with porn :)) would also take the lead in terms of volume (or encountering rate). For us, this part of the content is divided into two fundamentally different groups – the direct and indirect forms of discharge of aggression. The first one, featuring the possibility of direct discharge, is the closest to the naturally formed ones, those set in the course of evolutional processes. For informational articles it means graphic descriptions of bodily harm, fully detailed picture of victim, wrecking things, death. Including having detailed depicture of subjects and objects meant for harm, destruction, murder. For example, weapons, military equipment, destruction machinery. For gaming it would be the reenactment of infliction of harm, bloodshed, gore, character murder, etc. For services implying communication – the ability to directly express threat. The second group allows you to discharge the aggression indirectly. It means system of penalties and punishment, feelings of guilt and remorse, suffering, injury to property, sarcasm, accusations of various kinds, moralizing, religious fanaticism in any form. The difference between these groups is easy to tell. If the first one is very specific, in the second one aggression is disguised as various human actions approved by society. Of course, the psychoanalyst in me chooses the direct way and the first group. But it is rather rare. I think that if your service or product offers the possibility of discharge of aggression (which means almost any product), you have to understand how your users are used to discharge it. I think most of the audience discontinue using the product exactly because of the inconsistencies of their ways and those they get at the resource (portal, game, etc.). The “wrong”, namely, punishable by society (family, state) method of discharge is followed by punishment. If the user gets involved in such a process, unconsciously he’ll start feeling tension, waiting for punishment. The comfortability of this service would plummet. For example, the US Democrats would feel uncomfortable with demonstration of a direct threat, weaponry. People with strong republican views respond poorly to sarcasm. In some European countries you can not beat someone, but can get them ostracized. In others police involvement and punishment at the slightest provocation are strongly encouraged. The map detailing these ethnic groups’ diversity is a topic for another day. I think that if we set our mind on exploring aggression and its discharge as applied to the target audience, the answer would not be hard to find. Then you’ll just have to seek and find a solution to the optimal method for discharging for the given setting. And not just ban everything just “to be on a safe side.”