I will pay for the following article Comic Violence in the Advertisement. The work is to be 3 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.

I will pay for the following article Comic Violence in the Advertisement. The work is to be 3 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page. The case for displacement was made early on, wherein it was shown that it is a psychological determinant which is required to harness energies. It was given as a defense mechanism, which would actually redress the anxieties of the viewers, and help them appreciate reality in a better way. They endeavored to make a case advocating catharsis that this displacement helps ease things vis-à-vis anger. This is incorrect because ironically, aggression itself is a venting-out mechanism and is unconsciously used by humans in response to an uncomforting stimulus. Now having a defense mechanism for a defense mechanism is just too perplexing for the cause of this simplistic thesis statement!

Here is where the second issue of ‘anxiety’ comes in question. There are other defense mechanisms apart from displacements which are used by humans to put their anxieties to rest. Freud and other psychoanalysts have added since long to this list, and major mentions include sublimation, rationalization, repression, regression, and actualization etc. Thus, giving total credit to ‘displacement’ as the sole caretaker of anxiety as an emotion is scientifically incorrect. Anxiety itself is not a psychological problem, and many specialists say that it is normal and recommended to have a bare minimum of it at given times. It is actually imminent whenever adrenaline is secreted, and hence its presence is unavoidable. However, the presentation does not appropriately study and tackle the incidence of anxiety itself, what causes it, what may be the remedies. It has been wrongly mixed with ‘frustration’ and ‘fear’ that is prevalent these days after the 9/11 scenario.

‘Slapstick humor’ has sadly been confused with ‘violence’ many times in their presentation. They are very different entities, and cannot and should not be psychologically put at par. Also, its link to likeness (or otherwise) of a brand has not been scientifically established in their study. There has been no research which can directly prove that one is the cause of the other on their part.