USING ETHNIC HUMOR TOEXPOSE ETHNOCENTRISM:

JIM HASENAUER* Those Dirty DEGs

Did you hear about the member of the well-known ethnic group wholocked his keys in this car?

It took him four hours to get his family out.(Dr. Victor Ehrlich, St. Eligius Hospital)

THE SOCIAL FUNCTIONS of humor, a complex form of communication, havenot been fully explored. In a pluralistic society, in which contact withmembers of different ethnic, racial and cultural groups is inevitable, the useand analysis of humor offers important insights into intercultural relations.

In ethnically diverse societies, contact between members of different cul-tural groups is frequently accompanied by talk about members of these othergroups. Using interview techniques, T.A. Van Dijk analyzed talk about ethnicminority groups in the Netherlands and in the United States. (1) He arguesthat dominant groups use talk to construct social knowledge about non-dominant groups; i.e., dominant groups test, reproduce and reinforce attitudes,beliefs and values that differentiate cultural groups, stereotype members of non-dominant groups and enhance the value of membership in the dominant group.As such, talk about non-dominant groups is often used to construa racist, preju-dicial and ethnocentric social knowledge about them. While his analysis ofthe interview data is rich, it is interesting that van Dijk's informants producedfew overt expressions of racism. ". . . the general tendency is to express nega-tive feelings in rather 'soft' language, as we have also observed in the use ofsemantic moves such as mitigation and vagueness." (2) He concludes that thereis a "moderation rule" prohibiting overtly racist talk among strangers or acquain-tances, but that it is likely that such talk does take place with friends and femilyHis interview methodology did not overcome the "moderation rule" and, thus,did not allow the collection of much overtly prejudicial talk. In this research,van Dijk encountered a problem that teachers and human relations trainersconfront regularly-how to get individuals to honestly express their beliefs,attitudes and values toward members of ethnic, racial or cultural groups dif-ferent from their own.

*Mr. Hasenauer is an assistant professor of speech communication at the California StateUniversity, Northridge.

351

352 Et cetera WINTER 1988

As a teacher of courses in intercultural communication and as a trainer, Iencounter the same obstacle. This paper suggests that teachers, human rela-tions trainers and researchers can use ethnic humor as a tool to overcome the"moderation nile" in examining everyday talk about nondominant groups. Thisapproach is compatible with Nilsen et al., who have suggested that hiimor canbe used to develop student thinking skills and that "humor-whether it's beinganalyzed, used, or created-forces peoples' minds into modes of thinking thatare investigative, seeking, grasping, and filled with trial-and-error." (3) A par-ticularly powerful application of this insight is in the use of ethnic humor toraise awareness of racism, prejudice and ethnocentrism.

Many university courses in communication, human relations, sociology,anthropology, etc., attempt to broaden students' views by confronting their"taken-for-granted" notions of culture. Similarly, much human relations trainingbegins with self-examinations of one's prejudices. One of the greatest challengesin these kinds of interventions is getting students or trainees to honestly dis-cuss their own stereotypes and beliefs about persons of other cultures. I sug-gest that instructors can utilize ethnic humor to facilitate the open discussionof stereotypes, to illustrate a number of important intercultural communica-tion concepts, and to provide a pro-social tool which individuals might use tocombat racism and prejudice in their interpersonal networks.Circumventing the moderation rule and detoxification

A professional interested in working with prejudice initially faces two con-tradictory tasksfirst, to overcome the moderation rule; then, to detoxify theblatantly offensive nature of most ethnic humor. One technique which facili-tates both goals is to separate the joke (almost invariably a negative characteri-zation) from the stereotype of a particular ethnic group (almost invariably notone's own). In a joke-telling session one evening, a friend introduced the labelof hypothetical "DEGs" (members of Differentiated Ethnic Groups). In myclasses DEGs are the identified target of all ethnic humor. As I explain to mystudents, DEGs have all the characteristics usually associated with other groupsin ethnic humor. At the beginning of each semester, I ask them to record ethnicjokes they hear, but to translate them into DEG jokes so as not to offend otherstudents. I ask them to come to class with at least three such jokes during thethird week of the semester. The joke telling and discussion serve as a kickoffto a unit on Intercultural Communication Barriers and provide material thatis used throughout the rest of my course in Intercultural Communication. Ihave collected these jokes for several years and have found that students whowould never reveal their ethnic stereotypes and prejudices seem willing, in thecontext of DEG joketelling, to provide much useful material, as the follow-ing examples indicate:

Two DEG garbage collectors were in a hurry because they wanted to attenda baseball game. They overfilled their truck with garbage so that when theydrove to the dump they had to hold it down with their bodies. At an over-

USING ETHNIC HUMOR TO EXPOSE ETHNOCENTRALISM 353

pass, someone looked down and seeing them lying on top of the garbage said,"Look at that, throwing away two perfectly good DEGs."

Q. What's the definition of "shame"?A. Abusloadof DEGs going ofT a cliff.Q. What's the definition of a "crying shame"?A. An empty seat.

Q. Did you hear about the DEG athlete who won a gold medal at theOlympics?

A. He had it bronzed.

Fundamentally, ethnic humor is based on stereotyping of outsiders. Theseout-groups take on identity in part because of their differentiation from thein-group. While clearly differentiated from the dominant group, in many cases,one DEG group is not differentiated from another. The very same jokes aretold with only regional variation accounting for changes in the target group.DEGs are often characterized as stupid, dirty, low-class, lazy, worthless,cowardly, ugly, etc. Some particularly noxious racist and sexist humor focuseson DEG females who are characterized as ugly, dirty, or animal-like.

On joke-telling day, students (probably sensitive to the moderation rule) aresometimes reluctant to tell their jokes, so it becomes important for the instructorto establish a joke-telling context. I come prepared to tell jokes to get thingsstarted and I treat the joke-telling as I would a brainstorming session. Whena joke is told, I withhold evaluation; paraphrase the characterization, e.g.,"DEGs are so stupid," "DEGs are so ugly," etc.; and write the characterizationon the board. Like brainstorming, joke telling tends to generate associationsthat lead to new jokes. Students who were initially reluctant begin to partici-pate. I've rarely had trouble collecting a number of jokes that are based on avariety of characterizations.

Q. What do DEG women put behind their ears to attract men?A. Their knees.

A woman saw three DEG junkies sharing a needle when shooting up. Reluc-tant to get involved, she shrieked, "Haven't you heard about AIDS?" Onejunkie responded, "Don't worry, lady. We're wearing condoms."Q. What are the first words of a DEG baby?A. "Attention K-Mart Shoppers."

Analyzing the jokesAnalyzing the jokes begins with a discussion of the perceptual processes of

ethnocentrism, stereotyping and prejudice. I explain that ethnic humor usuallydepends upon and then perpetuates these processes. There is an abundanceof folklore and humor literature that demonstrates the universality of ethnic

354 Et cetera WINTER 1988

humor and how it is based on insider-outsider differentiation. (4) Especiallyuseful is Brislin's application to prejudice of Katz's functional theory of atti-tudes. (5),(6) Prejudice serves its holder in some way. As manifestations of prej-udice, ethnic jokes can be fruitfully examined in terms ofthe functions thatspecific kinds of prejudice might play in the language community Brislin, likeKatz, identifies the adjustment, ego-defensive, value-expressive and knowledgefunctions of prejudice.

The adjustment function of prejudice is based on the rewards available toindividuals when they adhere to group norms. Part of our socialization withina group probably includes adopting stereotypes of members of certain out-groups. We are valued for maintaining those characterizations. When a groupof individuals engage in ethnic joke telling they are, among other things,enhancing their status by demonstrating their adherence to group norms andvalues.

Listening to family stories and jokes about DEGs may be one of a child'sfirst socialization experiences in in-group/out-group differentiation. Childrenprobably repeat these jokes without understanding the ethnic charaaerizationsinvolved. Participating in ethnic joke telling may be one ofthe most perva-sive language games involving overt prejudice.

Consequently, if an individual were to balk at another's use of ethnic humoror to assert that it was offensive, he or she might be castigated as not being a"good sport." This kind of consensus maintains in-group cohesion. Those thatcontribute to this cohesion are valued; those who resist are not.

My students often report that they have felt pressured to participate in eth-nocentric or racist language and behavior by their families and peers. In thecontext of training in intercultural awareness, the negative implications of thistype of behavior become clear. Collusion with the perpetuation of ethnocen-tric behavior promotes ethnocentrism. Van Dijk's analysis is particularly usefulhere. He argues that "when White majority group members talk about ethnicout-groups, they do not merely express their personal beliefs and attitudes.. . .They reproduce ethnic opinions of their in-group as a whole, such as sharedstereotypes or prejudices and information they have heard or read from othersources." (7) Virtually all ethnic humor serves this adjustment fiinction.

Often, prejudice serves the ego-defensive function. Ethnic jokes allow us tofeel superior and important at the expense of some non-dominant group. DEGsare the "others" whose negative characteristics legitimize a positive view ofthein-group. DEGs are often characterized as stupid, dirty, worthless, or lazy. Sexisthumor often objeaifies women and racist/sexist humor often attacks a culturalgroup by denigrating females of that group. The following jokes exemplify theverbal aggression implicit in ego defensive prejudice.

Q. Why do DEGs smell?A. So blind people can hate them, too.

USING ETHNIC HUMOR TO EXPOSE ETHNOCENTRALISM 355

Q. Did you hear about the DEG lesbian?A. She liked men.

Q. What do you have when there are six DEGs buried up to their necks insand?

A. Not enough sand.

Q. Why do DEG football teams play on artificial turf?A. So the cheerleaders won't graze.

The universality of ethnic prejudice becomes especially clear to studentswhen they hear jokes denigrating ethnic groups with which they are unfemiliarand about whom they have no negative stereotypes. My West Coast studentswere more confused than amused by a "Norwegian Pencil," which had no leadand two erasers. Most had never encountered prejudice against Norwegians.Similarly, to hear that French and Belgians or Canadians and Newfoundlandersdowngrade each other is astonishing to those who have never made distinc-tions between these groups. The ego-defensive function of ethnic humorrequires that one ethnic group target some other group as the brunt of its jokes.This image-enhancing attack on the other is an important principle of inter-cultural relations.

The value-expressive function of prejudice is rooted in ethnocentrism. Wefind the behavior of others to be strange, abnormal or perverse. We reify ourown values by collectively denigrating the practices of outsiders. Food, hygiene,family size, work ethic, and criminal impulse are all thrusts of certain ethnicjokes. The humor rests in the disparity between "our" way of doing things andthe bizarre behavior of DEGs. Most courses in intercultural awareness attemptto show the contextual coherence of cultural practices. In ethnic humor, manyof the "abnormal" practices of outsiders are untrue or are exaggerations. Thosethat may be true are decontextualized. In light of the insiders' cultural view,DEG practices are judged inferior. The following illustrate this ethnocentricvalue-expressive prejudice.

Q. Why are scientists breeding DEGs for experiments instead of rats?A. They multiply faster and you don't get as attached to them.

Q. What do you call a DEG with six dogs?A. A rancher.

Q. What's a DEG seven-course meal?A. A puppy and a six-pack.

Q. How can you identify the bride at a DEG wedding?A. She's the one with the braided armpits.

Q. What's the difference between a DEG funeral and a DEG wedding?A. One less drunk.

356 Et cetera WINTER 1988

The knowledge flitiction of prejudice is based on stereotyped beliefs. Whatare DEGs like? What kinds of occupations do they hold? What can we expectfrom them? Jokes that fall into this category serve our need to reduce uncer-tainty about these strangers. Some negative stereotypes are applied to almostany out-group while others are particular to certain groups. Consider that someethnic jokes do not translate well to DEG jokes because they are based onspecific rather than general stereotypes. I believe that this is often a functionof the history of interaction between the two groups. The longer the historyof interaction between the groups, the more specific the stereotypes. Kravitzfound this relationship in British ethnic jokes. Jokes about Irish, Jews and Scotswere quite specific; jokes about West Indians and Pakistanis were more gener-alized. (8) My West Coast students provided the following jokes which, basedon their experience, seemed specifically aimed at Blacks and Hispanics.

Q. What do you call a DEG test-tube baby?A. Janitor in a drum.

Q. What do you call 5 DEGs and a white guy?A. A basketball team.

Q. Why didn't the DEGs field an Olympic team?A. Because everyone who could run, swim or jump is already here.Q. What do you get when you cross a DEG with an octopus?A. I don't know, but it sure picks tomatoes.

Clearly, these four functions of prejudice are not totally independent. Thesame DEG joke might illustrate different functions. Jokes are not the only typeof symbolized prejudice. In a classroom or training context, it is easy to movethe discussion from ethnic humor to other forms (e.g., racist talk, ethnic slurs,media images, etc.).

Most DEG jokes will probably be about non-dominant groups in that region.Importantly, there is some ethnic humor told by non-dominant group mem-bers about members of dominant groups. The themes of these jokes are oftenthe difficulty of satisfying the dominant group, their arrogance or how the dom-inant group member was tricked or "made the fool." (9) Such jokes illustratethe two-sided nature of verbal aggression and the role of joking (and other lan-guage games) in maintaining race, ethnic and class relations. The followingjokes, which target the dominant group, show that non-dominant groups alsoconstruct social reality and power relations in talk.

Q. Why don't dominant group members get hemorrhoids?A. Because God made them such perfect little assholes.

Q. How do you know when a planeful of the dominant group has arrived?A. After they turn the engine off, you can still hear the whine.

USING ETHNIC HUMOR TO EXPOSE ETHNOCENTRALISM 357

Does the classroom discussion of DEG humor promote racism and preju-dice? I think not. I believe that students' intercultural awareness is enhancedby the instructor's demonstration ofthe universality of ethnic humor and therelativity of its targets. Some students report that they introduced the label"DEGs" into their own social networks. DEG jokes transcend prejudice againstspecific groups. They reduce the collusion typically involved in ethnic joke-telling. The prejudice itself becomes the focus ofthe joke.

Researchers, teachers and trainers may all wish to elicit examples of preju-dicial talk, but respondents are reluctant to contribute such material. Sinceethnic humor is a pervasive language game that circumvents the rules of polite-ness and moderation, respondents, in the context of joke-telling, are likely toreproduce examples of personal and social prejudice. The term "DEG"(member of a Differentiated Ethnic Group) helps detoxify the offensive materialand allows for the collection of overtly prejudicial talk. Analysis of DEG jokesis useful in illustrating several important principles of intergroup relations. Thistechnique may be especially useful to teachers, human relations trainers andresearchers seeking to identify and remedy prejudice and racism.

NOTES AND REFERENCES1. T.A. van Dijk, Communicating Racism: Ethnic Prejudice in Thought and Talk (Newbury

Park, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1987).2. Ibid., 100.3. A. Nilsen, K. Donelson, and M. Donelson, "Humor for developing thinking skills," Etc.:

A Review of General Semantics, 44 (1987): 63.4. See for example: A Dundes, "A Study of Ethnic Slurs: The Jevir and Polack in the United

States" Journal of American Folklore 84 (1971), 186-203; A. Dundes, "Slurs Interna-tional: Folk Comparisons of Ethnicity and National Character," Southern Folklore Quar-terly 39 (1975), 15-23; S. Kravitz, "London Jokes and Other Ethnic Stereotypes," WesternFolklore 36 (1977), 275-301; C. Davies, "How Do They Tell Polish Jokes in Poland?"The Language of Humor and the Humor of Language Proceedings ofthe 1982 WHIM Con-

ference, Arizona State University (1982); E. Claire, What's So Funny? A Foreign Stu-dent's Introduction to American Humor (New Rochelle Park, New Jersey: Eardley Pub-lishing Company, 1984); P. Dickson, Jokes (New York: Delacorte Publishing Company,1984); J. Dorinson, "The Gold Dust Twins of Marginal Humor: Blacks and Jews,"Maledicta 8 (1984-5): 163-192; C. Davies, "Why Are the Poles and Newfies Filthy andthe Irish and Belgians Merely Stupid?" Contemporary Humor Proceedings ofthe 1984WHIM Conference, Arizona State University (1985): 52-53.

5. R.W. Brislin, "Increasing the Range of Concepts in Intercultural Research: The Exam-ple of Prejudice," in Intercultural Theory and Practice, ed. W. Davey (Washington, DC.Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research, 1979).

6. D. Katz, "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes," Public Opinion Quarterly24 (I960): 275-301.

7. T.A. van Dijk, Communicating racism,- 23.8. S. Kravitz, "London Jokes and Ethnic Stereotypes," Western Folklore 36 (1977): 275-301.9. J. Dorinson, "The Gold Dust Twins of Marginal Humor: Blacks and Jews," Maledicta 8

(1984-5): 163-192.