From a straightforward emotional-tension perspective, I expect that an asexual person would not laugh, or at least would laugh less than an average sexual person. This is so because the asexual person can be assumed to have little or no tension about sexual matters generally, including about masturbation (e.g., no unused sexual arousal floating around, no masturbation guilt); after all, the asexual person has never had sex before and has no interest in it. Thus, there should be no emotional connection to this sexual activity and thus little psychic energy available to be discharged.
From a cognitive (i.e., incongruity) perspective, I expect that the asexual person would also have little self- relevant imagery of grasping an erect penis—either his own (if a man) or a partner’s. So, this information—an image of a man grasping a penis—should not be particularly personally relevant and would not readily come to mind; thus, it is not readily “cognitively accessible.” Of course, the asexual person may have imagined a scene such as this out of mild curiosity, or seen an image before (e.g., on the Internet), but it should be less readily accessible to an asexual person, relative to, say, a sexual man with a fair bit of masturbation experience.
However, using an analysis based on the benign-violation model, an asexual person without masturbation experience may still understand that grasping one’s penis in public is a violation of an important social rule. They would also understand that the dentist has sanctioned it, and hence it is a benign violation. Thus, if knowledge of these two contradictory ideas occurs simultaneously, an asexual person may still appreciate this joke.{If humor that causes laughter is more associated with emotional tension than other forms of humor (e.g., puns and other incongruities), then this joke may elicit only mild appreciation in asexual people. It may evoke a pleasant cognitive shift, a recognition of a strange incongruity being somewhat resolved. Thus, sexual people may laugh; asexual people may just smile?}
However, it is important to consider whether mere knowledge of these two contradictory ideas is sufficient in this case to cause humor appreciation, including laughter. As mentioned, perhaps this joke works best, if at all, for those who very easily conjure up an image of a man holding his erect penis (e.g., a man with a fair bit of masturbation experience).{So, yes, women (particularly those without much experience grasping a penis) may also not appreciate this joke.} Relative to a sexual person, an asexual person without such experience may be less cognitively “ready” to conjure up this image. Keep in mind that jokes often work very quickly and require proper timing in order for them to evoke appreciation (e.g., laughter). So, if the key elements of this joke—knowledge that public masturbation is occurring but that it is a benign instance—are not brought into consciousness very quickly, this joke is not likely to work. Moreover, people with sexual experience (and masturbation experience, specifically) have likely ruminated about what is and what is not “proper” sexual behavior (including their own sexual behavior), and thus the idea or image of public masturbation may be readily known and hence readily accessible as a “violation.” Thus, the likelihood of being able to access this information quickly and hold it in mind simultaneously with the other key element of this joke—that this instance is merely a benign violation—is probably increased by sexual experience.
Let us inject even more complexity into this analysis. As mentioned, humor may be facilitated by a variety of tensions and motives, not just sexual ones. Additional tensions are based on anger or fear. Freud and others have argued that sarcastic humor, for example, utilizes the release of these more aggressive and fear-based tensions and motives. Thus, if someone is angry or resentful toward others (or perhaps just a bit scared of them), he or she may discharge this anger- or fear-based psychic tension by belittling them through sarcasm or other forms of aggressive humor. This type of humor puts enemies “in their place,” or at least makes them less scary because they look silly, and not threatening. There is often anger- and fear-based tension associated with “out-groups,” groups to which we do not belong or that are different from us. Relatedly, some theorists have championed “superiority” theories of humor, usually first associated with Thomas Hobbes (1840), who argued that self-esteem is often enhanced when experiencing the misfortunes of others. Thus, by a downward social comparison, we achieve a loftier place because someone else is belittled. More recently, social psychologists have co-opted elements of superiority theory to help explain some of the processes involved with the formation and defense of the social identity of a group. Humorous put-downs of an “out-group”—the group to which we do not belong—are sometimes enjoyable because they allow our group to achieve “positive distinctiveness,” a sense of superiority that we, as a group, have a special distinction that sets us apart, and even above, other groups (Ferguson & Ford, 2008; Ruscher, 2001). Ethnic and gender-based (“sexist”) jokes and put-downs are partially explained in this way (Ferguson & Ford, 2008).
How might this type of humor relate to asexuality? Some asexual people may have resentment toward and fear of the (majority) out-group—sexual people—just as some sexual people may have anger or resentment toward asexual people. Relatedly, our very sexualized society often places pressure on asexual people to have sex, perhaps causing tension in some asexual people, if not outright resentment of sexual people. If so, and if the Viagra joke somehow evokes an effective, belittling, and embarrassing image of a sexual person—a man being forced to grasp his erect penis in a dentist’s office—one might argue that this joke could make an asexual person laugh.
Summary
The ability of the Viagra joke, as in many sexual jokes, to create humor appreciation (i.e., laughter) may involve the use and release of sexual tension. The effectiveness of this joke may also involve the quick accessibility of imagery related to a hand grasping an erect penis, along with, perhaps, this act being viewed as a benign violation of a social rule. As sexual people (particularly men with masturbation experience) should have the most sexual energy and tension, and the most experience associated with these images and ideas, this joke is especially relevant to and likely to be appreciated by them (compared to asexual people). However, there are many unknowns and complexities when it comes to understanding humor, and it is possible that some circumstances (e.g., resentment of sexual people) may evoke humor appreciation for sexual jokes in asexual people.
My reasoning on asexuality and sexual humor in this chapter has been very speculative. The relationship between asexuality and sexual humor might be best described as an “empirical question”—that is, something that is unknown and needs to be studied.
Finally, I think a broad conclusion that should be drawn from this chapter is that sexuality is a pervasive part of most people’s lives and is associated with considerable tensions and odd, even twisted, social rules, so much so that sexual content pervades one of the most important tools we use to negotiate social life: humor. Interestingly, if it turns out that asexual people do appreciate, even laugh at, sexual jokes (and I expect that many do), this may say more about our sexualized society and how everyone—sexual or not—is caught in its web of influence than it does about any hidden sexual motives of (self-identified) asexual people. Thus, the answer to the question posed earlier in this chapter—if a person who identifies as asexual laughs at a sexual joke, does this mean that he or she is sexual?—is
CHAPTER 13
Just Because
Have you been patiently reading along, but also wondering when I was going to address directly what you perceive to be the heart of the matter: the
