Shameless comedy: investigating shame as an exposure effect of contemporary sexist and feminist rape jokes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article adds to the conversation of controversial feminist humour by moving away from debates as to whether rape jokes can be funny or feminist and instead examining how they may impact feminist women and female sexual assault survivors. Beginning with a brief discussion of shame’s characteristics and uses, this work investigates various critical status difference factors including the kind of rape joke (sexist or feminist), the gender of the comedian, the composition of the audience, the social setting, and the level of trust, to determine how rape jokes create or alieve shame in female feminist audience members. By studying contemporary rape jokes from comedians including Daniel Tosh, Dave Chappelle, Jim Jefferies, Wanda Sykes, Amy Schumer, and Heather Jordan Ross, through an affective lens, this research shows that whereas sexist rape jokes told by male comedians to a mostly male audience may force women to experience shame (whether intentionally or unintentionally), feminist rape jokes told by female comedians are more likely to eliminate or prevent shame.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it