Discourse analysis on online gender-based humor: Markers of normalization, tolerance, and lens of inequality
Abstract
Language is one of the most powerful means through which sexism and gender discrimination are perpetrated and reproduced (Menegatti and Rubini, 2017). The study examined the contrarian features of gender-based online humor in relation to the mainstreaming of gender and development (GAD). Discourse analysis was used as a method in examining discourse markers of online gender-based humor in terms of defaulting jokes as normal, tolerating sexist jokes, and perceiving that inequality in gender is reality. Fourteen (14) participants who are persons in power or authority, persons based on their educational attainment, persons based on their gender roles, and persons from different generational classifications participated in the study which utilized online gender-based-mapper, one-on-one interviews, and FGD-oriented instruments for the extraction and analysis of the research. After the analysis, it was revealed that the normalization of online gender jokes was prevalent in social media. Normalization proceeds as a way of life in making things light in the conversation and making these conversations intending to have enjoyment and entertainment. For tolerating sexist jokes, it appears that the actors in the online set-up manifest the markers for tolerance through “negligence” which seems to be alarming language production and language distribution to as many social media players.
References
Agassi JB (1977) The unequal occupational distribution of women in Israel. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 2(4): 888–894. DOI: 10.1086/493418
Agassi JB (1988) The design of working time and the status of women. In: Agassi JB and Heycock S (eds.) The Redesign of Working Time: Promise or Threat. Berlin: Sigma, pp.249–255.
Agassi JB (1989) Theories of gender equality: Lessons from the Israeli Kibbutz. Gender & Society, 3(2): 160–186. DOI: 10.1177/089124389003002002
Alkiviadou N (2022) Ain’t that funny?. The European Journal of Humour Research, 10(1): 50–61.
Andrew C (2022) Gender bias and creative idea evaluation. Bachelor’s Thesis, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States.
Attardo S (1993) Violation of conversational maxims and cooperation: The case of jokes. Journal of Pragmatics 19(6): 537–558. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(93)90111-2
Ayuningtyas P and Kariko AAT (2018) The slut-shaming phenomenon in social media: A case study on female English literature students of Binus University. In: Kerr T, Ndimande B, der Putten JV (eds.) Urban Studies: Border and Mobility. London and New York: Routledge, pp.347–352.
Baider F (2018) “Go to hell fucking faggots, may you die!” framing the LGBT subject in online comments. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 14(1): 69–92. DOI: 10.1515/lpp-2018-0004
Banet-Weiser S and Miltner KM (2016) #MasculinitySoFragile: Culture, structure, and networked misogyny. Feminist Media Studies 16(1): 171–174. DOI: 10.1080/14680777.2016.1120490
Beckman L, Hagquist C, and Hellström L (2013) Discrepant gender patterns for cyberbullying and traditional bullying—An analysis of Swedish adolescent data. Computers in Human Behavior 29(5): 1896–1903. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.03.010
Bergvall V (2014) Rethinking Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice. New York and London: Routledge.
Bill B and Naus P (1992) The role of humor in the interpretation of sexist incidents. Sex Roles 27: 645–664. DOI: 10.1007/BF02651095
Blumberg RL (1984) A general theory of gender stratification. Sociological Theory 2: 23–101. DOI: 10.2307/223343
Bortoni-Ricardo SM (1985) The urbanization of rural dialect speakers. A sociolinguistic study in Brazil. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics London 1–265.
Brown JK (1970) A note on the division of labor by sex. American Anthropologist 72(5): 1073–1078. DOI: 10.1525/aa.1970.72.5.02a00070
Brown JK (1975) Iroquois women: An ethnographic note. In: Reiter RR (ed.) Toward an Anthropology of Women. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp.235–251.
Campbell S, Greenwood M, Prior S, et al. (2020) Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing 25(8): 652–661. DOI: 10.1177/1744987120927206
Cantor JR and Zillman D (1973) Resentment toward victimized protagonists and severity of misfortunes they suffer as factors in humor appreciation. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 6(4): 321–329.
Cole KK (2015) “It’s like she’s eager to be verbally abused”: Twitter, trolls, and (en) gendering disciplinary rhetoric. Feminist Media Studies 15(2): 356–358. DOI: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1008750
DiMaggio P, Hargittai E, Neuman WR, and Robinson JP (2001) Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology 27(1): 307–336.
Doherty M (2014) Gender Mainstreaming in Development Programming [online]. United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women). Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2015/02/gender-mainstreaming-issues
Drakett J, Rickett B, Day K, and Milnes K (2018) Old jokes, new media—Online sexism and constructions of gender in internet memes. Feminism and Psychology 28(1): 109–127. DOI: 10.1177/0959353517727560
Eisenhart C and Johnstone B (2008) Discourse analysis and rhetorical studies. In: Johnstone B and Eisenhart C (eds.) Rhetoric in Detail: Discourse Analyses of Rhetorical Talk and Text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.3–21.
Elias S and Gurbanova N (2018) Relocating gender stereotypes online: Critical analysis of sexist hate speech in selected social media. In: Kwary DA, Petru T, and Sartini NW (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Phenomena in Multimodal Communication (KLUA 2018), Surabaya, Indonesia, 17–19 July, 2018, pp.272–277. Dordrecht: Atlantis Press. DOI: 10.2991/klua-18.2018.40
Ford TE, Woodzicka JA, Triplett SR, and Kochersberger AO (2013) Sexist humor and beliefs that justify societal sexism. Current Research in Social Psychology 21(7): 64–81.
Gagliardone I (2014) Mapping and Analysing Hate Speech Online [online]. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2601792 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2601792
Garrett E (n.d.) How Humor Works—A Clear Proposal for a Classic Question [online]. Available at: https://philpapers.org/archive/SBHHW.pdf
Hall K and Bucholtz M (eds.) (2012) Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. New York and London: Routledge.
Hassan M (2022) Discourse Analysis—Methods, Types and Examples [online]. Available at: https://researchmethod.net/discourse-analysis/
Jiang T, Li H, and Hou Y (2019) Cultural differences in humor perception, usage, and implications. Frontiers in Psychology 10: 123. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00123
KhosraviNik M and Esposito E (2018) Online hate, digital discourse and critique: Exploring digitally-mediated discursive practices of gender-based hostility. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 14(1): 45–68. DOI: 10.1515/lpp-2018-0003
Kiger ME and Varpio L (2020) Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher 42(8): 846–854. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030
Kopetz H and Steiner W (2022) Internet of things. In: Real-Time Systems: Design Principles for Distributed Embedded Applications. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, pp.325–341.
Kopytowska M (2017) Discourses of hate and radicalism in action. In: Contemporary Discourses of Hate and Radicalism across Space and Genres. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins B.V., pp.1–12.
Labov W (1972) Sociolinguistic Patterns (No. 4). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mahapatra A and Srivastava J (2013) Incongruity versus incongruity resolution. In: 2013 International Conference on Social Computing, Alexandria, VA, USA, 08–14 September 2013, pp.25–32. New York: IEEE.
Martin RA and Ford T (2018) The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Academic Press.
Menegatti M and Rubini M (2017) Gender bias and sexism in language. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.470
Peters N, Holmgreen L, and Oswald D (2015) It’s just a joke: Reactions to and justifications for gender role stereotypes in advertisements. Psychological Research 20(3): 160–168.
Provine RR (2000) The science of laughter. Psychology Today 33(6): 58–62.
Rowland R and Klein R (1996) Radical feminism: History, politics, action. In: Bell D and Klein R (eds.) Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed. Melbourne: Spinifex. pp.9–37.
Saunders M, Lewis P, and Thornhill A (2014) Research Methods for Business Students (6th edn., Greek Language Edition). London: Pearson Education Limited.
Singh K (2007) Quantitative Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp.64.
Taylor Z (2022) “(It) shouldn’t be funny but you can’t help but laugh”: Black Twitter, # TweetLikeThe1600s, and Black humor online. Social Media + Society 8(2): 1–9. DOI: 10.1177/20563051221107631
Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women (OSAGI) (2002) Gender Mainstreaming: An Overview [online]. Available at: https://www.peacewomen.org/node/90256
Copyright (c) 2023 author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author(s) warrant that permission to publish the article has not been previously assigned elsewhere.
Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher right for the first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under:
OA - Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows for the copying, distribution and transmission of the work, provided the correct attribution of the original creator is stated. Adaptation and remixing are also permitted.
This broad license intends to facilitate free access to, as well as the unrestricted reuse of, original works of all types.
_%E5%89%AF%E6%9C%AC1.png){kind=logo}
