Dr Zuleyka Zevallos

Sociologist Giselinde Kuipers' work shows the many functions of humour. Cultures sometimes demand obligatory joking to release stress (e.g. during tense social interactions) or through rituals (e.g. carnivale) or specific roles (e.g. clowns) Jokes also enforce social control

A form of 'humour' is ridicule. It exists across cultures (working differently in different contexts) to 'correct' social transgressions. Sometimes, to remind people they've broken a social norm. Other times, to put people back in their place. Laughter reflects social hierarchies

One study shows that during hospital meetings, staff 'laugh down': doctors can openly joke about residents; residents about themselves and nurses; nurses about themselves and patients. Not that they should, but it's manifestation of status: who is 'allowed' to 'make fun' of whom

Humour is also about creating & maintaining social cohesion. A follow-up study of patients show that in more egalitarian settings with high trust, 'jokes' between patients and other hospital staff are more free flowing, but centred on their shared experience. Not 'laughing down'

'Laughter and humor are indeed like an invitation, be it an invitation for dinner, or an invitation to start a conversation: it aims at decreasing social distance' (Rose Laub Coser 1959). If that invitation is welcome (i.e. you're not laughing down) it's less likely to cause harm

Just as it fosters a sense of cohesion, humour also rests on exclusion. Some people get the joke because they belong (the joke is about and for 'us'). These three dynamics of humour (relief, control & cohesion) maintain the status quo. But what about challenging equilibrium?

Well, just with all other behaviours, jokes have intended and unintended consequences. Some jokes aim to be positive ('we belong!') others are used negatively ('you don't belong'). Sometimes bleak humour (e.g. jokes on disaster) can stray into positive or negative territory

#Sociology studies from 1940s onward show the use of humour 'from below.' E.g. during times of political conflict (e.g. Czech people under Nazi occupation) show that jokes mostly focus on morale boosts (ingroup cohesion) rather than 'laughing up' at those in power (the outgroup)

'While the humor of the poor may not necessarily lead directly to rebellions and political revolutions, it does open up a discursive space within which is becomes possible to speak about matters that are otherwise naturalised, unquestioned, or silenced.' (Donna Goldstein 2013)

Humour can reflect a worldview, such as what is considered 'natural' or 'normal.' Jokes about race, sexuality, gender, disability often rest on ideas of morality. Few jokes carry across cultures, but studies show that the few that do, evoke notions of rationality & modernity.

Humour is also historical. Studies show that colonised societies have similar patterns of joking ('tall tales,' mocking class relations, practical jokes) that don't translate into other realms. In other coloniser societies like the Netherlands, jokes are more class-based.

'Joking up' and 'joking down' reflect these complex dynamics, of social belonging, culture and history, even when the joker isn't fully aware of these functions. To know whether our jokes cause harm, taking a little time to reflect on what makes us laugh, is a useful exercise

People who retreat into calls of censorship when they're called out for their jokes might consider why this is. They want laughter on their terms (social cohesion) but are unhappy to be denied laughs they feel they have a right to. They're likely 'laughing down' (social status)