Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Doge memes are a genre of internet memes, characterised by anthropomorphised Japanese Shiba Inu dog and the deliberate use of the letter ‘m’ to misspell, mispronounce and induce humour. Doge memes are widespread in the Indian meme culture and use native anthropomorphic characters, vernacular languages and text-to-speech software for storytelling, augmenting the original Doge meme’s intentionally peculiar language. Indian Doge memes are marked by their sexual humour and offensive content related to masculinity and the representation of women. Following the works of Wilkins and Eisenbraun as the theoretical basis, the study dives into the exploration of online masculinity in the Indian meme culture through textual analysis of video Doge memes and their comment sections on Instagram. The study examines the nature of digital masculinity in the online manosphere, the depiction of the men and women characters in Doge memes, the nature of dark humour induced in the storylines and its reception by the meme culture.

Keywords

Manosphere online masculinity internet memes meme culture humour studies

Introduction

Digital technology has disrupted conventional modes of communication and revolutionised traditional means of creative expression, content creation and circulation (Highfield & Leaver, 2016). For instance, new media has ushered cultural changes, such as a preference for visual content over text due to high-speed internet technologies. Moreover, during the COVID-19 pandemic, social media was a sphere of power and influence that shaped dominant narratives (Gupta et al., 2022). Thus, in an era dominated by excessive online content consumption, innovative avenues for humour creation, circulation, consumption and participation have emerged, shaping humour communication and identity construction in the digital space (Kunze, 2015; Lam, 2022). Further, technological affordances like the flexibility to replicate content, fit them into concise and brief media formats like memes and consume them across multiple channels and platforms have made humour one of the significant drivers of the online participatory culture in the twenty-first century (Adiga & Padmakumar, 2024a; Marx, 2015). As a result, memes foster online communities driven by humour communication, which can be collectively called the ‘meme culture’.

Internet memes are the results of Web 2.0, which is characterised by ‘cut, copy, and paste’, leading to their content being drawn from multiple (and many a time, unrelated) sources. Such memes are circulated in a decentralised and collaborative meme culture (Leung, 2024). Social media plays a crucial role in sustaining the meme culture by facilitating rapid content distribution and widespread reach. Using humour, memes disseminate cultural ideas through multimedia tools, making them captivating and easily distributable (Highfield & Leaver, 2016; Mielczarek, 2018). Indian investigations of memes explore diverse topics like political communication (Chatterjee, 2020), celebrity culture (Bendukurthi et al., 2024), digital populism and mental health (Adiga & Padmakumar, 2024b), health communication (Kapoor & Behl, 2024) and digital journalism during COVID-19 lockdown (Padmakumar & Adiga, 2024).

Doge is one of the popular genres of internet memes, which has led to its identification as a distinct subculture. Doge meme, or simply ‘Doge’, was created by Atsuko Sato, a blogger based in Japan, who posted a photo of her Shiba Inu breed dog, named Kabosu in February 2010. In the same year, another Shiba Inu picture went viral on Reddit, with the word ‘dog’ deliberately misspelt as ‘Doge’ in the headline. This developed into the purposeful misspelling of sentences in comic sans font above images of Shiba Inu dogs, which first emerged in September 2012 in a Tumblr thread called ‘Shiba Confessions’. Doge did not become viral until Sato’s picture of Kabosu was posted in the thread in July 2013. In the year 2014, Doge became a prominent cultural emblem, becoming so well known that companies began exploiting the meme in their advertisements (Nani, 2022).

Due to its global popularity, the Doge meme continues to thrive in many different versions than the original, integrating local attributes in the culture in which it evolves. For instance, in the Indian meme culture, Doge memes are distinguished by their use of silly animations, content in vernacular languages and the inclusion of background music from both Bollywood and the global hip-hop culture. Text-to-speech (TTS) technology converts literary texts to audio format. It also enables users to adjust the speed, tone and volume. These features have enhanced the use of AI voiceovers for content creation in digital cultures (Bone & Bouck, 2016; Meyer & Bouck, 2014). Speech synthesisers can convert texts from multiple Indian vernacular languages (such as Hindi, Tamil and Telugu) into speech (Rajendran & Kumar, 2018). Thus, the cultural adaptation to the particularities of Indian languages has developed Doge as a unique subculture within the broader Indian meme culture.

Doge is inherently flexible, as it exaggerates the viewpoints of any character placed on top of a Shiba Inu. Doge employs its own grammatical system, which is extensively recognised by the Doge subculture (Nani, 2022). Through grammatical errors, the Doge meme grammar contributes much to its excellence. For instance, in the Indian Doge memes, the word ‘m’ is deliberately misspelt and mispronounced, making it their distinctive feature. Other examples include using the word ‘vro’ instead of ‘bro’ to induce ‘cuteness’ into the characters and generate humour through absurdity and silliness. In recent years, Doge memes have garnered media attention, followed by Elon Musk’s tweets supporting Dogecoin, a form of cryptocurrency inspired by Doge memes (Anton et al., 2024; Zelinsky, 2024). Further, the misspelt Doge meme inspired the naming of a federal department called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), headed by Elon Musk in US President Donald Trump’s second administration, as reported in an article by India Today (Narayan, 2024). Thus, the evolution of the Doge from a silly meme to the name of a cryptocurrency and a US department has further propelled its popularity in the meme culture and contemporary media circles.

The complex correlation between masculinity and the digital space can have sociocultural repercussions (Ging, 2017). For instance, ‘hegemonic masculinity’ can manifest in multiple ways throughout online discussion forums, revealing a wide range of power dynamics, social expectations and ways in which people define their digital identities (Adams, 2023). In this regard, online masculinity can be examined through memes, as they are culturally connected with the practices of participatory culture in online environments (Vickery, 2014). Further, online avenues, including social media, have a role in shaping and strengthening distinct masculine ideas, leading to the creation of a manosphere (Maloney et al., 2024). The manosphere can be defined as a broad network of webpages and online communities centred on the core idea of ‘misandry’, which is a concept propagated by men’s rights advocates to address perceived discrimination against males (Marwick & Caplan, 2018).

The collective term ‘manosphere’ promotes a sense of unity among males who have diverse concerns, ranging from matters linked to legal disputes over child custody to critical evaluations of feminism. As a result, the persistent presence of gender stereotypes, particularly about the portrayal of women, has emerged as a well-recognised and recurring phenomenon in the digital space (Roy & Deshbandhu, 2021). The manosphere not only creates hostility towards women but also creates a hierarchy among men based on the ‘idealistic’ attributes of masculinity. Botto and Gottzén (2023) observe that young men often seek refuge in the manosphere during times of vulnerability, in search of remedies for failed relationships and cultural expectations for masculinity, which may result in a state of confusion over their own identity. In this way, the manosphere capitalises on individuals’ concerns stemming from societal norms around physical attractiveness and sexual prowess, providing remedies for these feelings of inadequacy (O’Malley et al., 2020). As a result, the manosphere fosters the development of shared viewpoints about certain ideas of masculinity or what qualifies as the ‘ideal’ masculine traits and values. Although there are shared ideals within the manosphere, it is not a homogenous group, as observed in the diverse tones, levels of explicitness and levels of encouraged violence found in various sections of the manosphere (Dickel & Evolvi, 2022).

The humour landscape has been traditionally dominated by men, as they are more inclined towards dark comedy, compared to women (Greenwood, 2010; Lockyer, 2011). Therefore, the correlation between dark humour and the manosphere becomes obvious. As a result, the manosphere and meme culture blend naturally, leading to the increased male gaze in humour communication on social media. This is done by utilising gender, ethnicity and class as effective strategies, expressed through comparison, manipulation of shared knowledge, projection of shared beliefs and denigration (Osisanwo & Ilesanmi, 2022). All these factors strengthen the space of manosphere and meme culture through the creation of collective sociocultural tropes. For instance, when minorities are targeted by the dominant groups, the hegemonic sociocultural values are reinforced (Lee & Park, 2012). Hence, violence-based gendered humour often addresses the male audience, since men’s engagement with such content is higher than that of women (Manyiwa & Jin, 2020; Yoon & Kim, 2014). As a result, violence-based humorous content endorses the male gaze, further intertwining it deeply with the manosphere.

Dark comedy, a well-established form of humour, involves the use of wicked, cynical and outrageous humour to derive pleasure from mocking even the sacred institutions and beliefs of society. The focus of dark comedy includes ridiculing circumstances that are usually considered ‘tragic’, such as death, disability, pain and suffering, violence and terror and the victims of such tragedy (Bucaria, 2008). Dark comedy includes the graphic depiction of violence, comic transgressions, uncivilised behaviours and ridiculing the human body as a cause of embarrassment, horror or weakness (Collings, 2018). Interestingly, memes often use derogatory humour to ridicule young men, depicting a perceived shortcoming in embodying conventional masculinity (Thompson, 2023). The humour arises from feminising and emasculating the subjects, implying that they do not meet the normal standards of masculinity. These visual depictions and narratives heavily depend on stereotypes and recurring themes linked to societal expectations of gender, thereby reinforcing conventional gender roles through humour (Ging, 2017). All these instances suggest the prevalence of dark humour in the manosphere and meme culture.

From the review, the relation between dark humour, meme culture and the manosphere becomes evident, making their use in Doge memes an interesting avenue for exploring creative communication.

Rationale for the Study

The popularity of humour is increasing in the media and entertainment industry in India, especially in the recent era of heightened digital content consumption. This has led to the emergence of different types of digital storytelling techniques such as videos, vlogging, podcasts and stand-up comedies on video streaming platforms such as YouTube, Amazon Prime and Netflix (James, 2020; Marx, 2015; McKeague, 2018). Further, the tones of online humour are diverse, ranging from the corporate to the vernacular (Marx, 2015). This highlights the significance and relevance of studying humour communication in the digital era. In this regard, the role of meme culture in fostering sexist humour remains underexamined, especially in the Indian context. Further, online humour employs multiple strategies such as satire, absurdism and parody in storytelling, which influences how online identities are shaped (Lam, 2022; Parashar & Tewari, 2020). Thus, examining the nature of humour can help to determine how identities are constructed in digital spaces like the meme culture. Further, exploring online humour can help to understand the sociocultural attitudes of the younger generations (Parashar & Tewari, 2020), which in turn can assist in developing effective humour communication strategies. Humour, being integral to internet memes, remains underexamined in the Global South region, including India (Adiga & Padmakumar, 2024a). As a result, the potential of humour in developing effective meme marketing strategies that resonate with the digital-native young generations (such as the millennials and Gen Z) remains underexamined.

Investigating humour in online communication has become the need of the hour, especially due to the rise in hate speech in recent years (Manor, 2020). However, tackling online hate speech is becoming excessively complex because of the anonymity offered by the meme culture on social media, making memes the major carriers of hate speech in online environments (Woods & Ruscher, 2021). Hence, investigating internet memes becomes important to understand the distinction between humour and hate speech. Further, internet memes as cultural artefacts undergo several modifications into distinct local forms, each with distinctive sociocultural subtleties and objectives. As such, their engaged readings might shed light upon the contexts in which they function, the role of vernacular language, storytelling techniques and the humour strategies they use to address sociocultural issues. Addressing these gaps helps to understand the interlinks between dark humour, the online manosphere and the meme culture, which remain largely unexplored.

Doge, as a distinct meme subculture, has sparked media interest in recent years due to its association with Elon Musk (Anton et al., 2024; Zelinsky, 2024). However, there is a dearth of evidence concerning the characteristics of Doge memes, especially in the Indian context. Examining Doge memes becomes essential for understanding how they foster manosphere, online masculinity and participatory humour in the Indian digital space.

Therefore, the study examines the interrelation between dark humour, meme culture and the manosphere by exploring the dominant frames in the Indian Doge memes. Moreover, the study helps to critically evaluate the grey area between dark humour and hate speech, thereby enriching the field of humour studies. Hence, the research aims to fulfil the following objectives:

To evaluate the nature of dark humour present in the Indian Doge memes.

To explore the perspectives of masculinity in the Indian Doge memes.

To examine the representation of men and women in the Indian Doge memes.

Method

Humour theories formulated by Wilkins and Eisenbraun (2009) are considered the theoretical basis for the exploration of Doge memes. Humour theories of laughter consist of three theories: (a) relief theory, (b) incongruity theory and (c) superiority theory. The relief theory posits that humour and laughter help to reduce tension and stress, leading to psychological advantages like relief from negative thoughts and emotions. In other words, relief theory focuses on explaining how humour helps to relieve stress. The incongruity theory proposes that humour is derived from inconsistencies and contradictions. For instance, one experiences laughter due to the surprise or shock from situations that one least expects. Finally, the superiority theory argues that laughing at ‘the others’ creates solidarity among a common group of like-minded people. Superiority theory highlights the significance of laughter in fostering social interactions by forming solidarity among the ‘superior’ group. These humour theories guide the direction for examining the manosphere in the Indian meme culture.

To analyse the perspectives of online masculinity prevalent in the meme culture, Instagram is specifically selected as the platform for data selection because of its popularity among the youth. Doge memes from the Indian Instagram page ‘Dogesh Cheems Doge’ (@dogeshcheemsdoge_) are considered for the study. This specific Instagram page is selected based on its popularity among the follower base of 152,000 lakh users, as of March 2025. Since Instagram reels are a relatively new phenomenon, many existing studies on internet memes have largely ignored them and probed static memes only. Hence, there is limited research on the exploration of the audiovisual dimensions of internet memes. Therefore, the research limits itself by specifically focusing on video reels, although the selected Instagram page shares image memes as well.

To maintain consistency, a data collection period of 1 year (from 1 May 2023 to 30 April 2024) is considered for the study. To refine the dataset, reels containing more than 30,000 likes are included, and the reels with fewer than 30,000 likes are excluded. By doing so, the validity of the data is enhanced as these metrics ensure that only viral reels with widespread reach and popularity are included in the dataset. The inclusion–exclusion criteria resulted in a dataset consisting of 20 reels from the total population of 206 reels.

The article intends to understand how Doge memes shape the ideas of online masculinity, gender norms and gender representation in the manosphere and the Indian meme culture. To do so, a textual analysis of audio and visual dimensions of Doge memes is conducted to examine the nature of humour. Further, multimedia elements such as language, tones, visuals and concepts that provide insights into societal attitudes are also examined. This method helps to understand the stereotypes and ideological frames in the dataset. To conduct textual analysis, the visual and audio dimensions of the data samples are probed separately to identify recurring thematic patterns. Then, by comparing similar patterns, dominant themes and ideological frames existing across the audiovisual dimensions are identified. This textual method of analysing video memes also helps to identify how humour is constructed across multimedia dimensions.

The comment sections of the selected reels are also analysed to examine how humour is shaped through participatory discussions in the meme culture. This helps to understand how the manosphere is constructed in the meme culture through internet memes and the participatory culture around them. Moreover, analysing comments will also shed light upon possible instances where the meme culture subverts traditional masculinity rather than reinforcing it. Such counter-readings or unintended interpretations will add to the depth of the discussion on online masculinity in the Indian meme culture. By following the aforementioned method, the study aims to probe these research questions:

How is humour induced in the Doge memes?

How is masculinity constructed in the Doge memes?

How are men and women represented in the Doge memes?

By addressing these concerns, the study aims to understand the relevance of humour in the online manosphere and Indian meme culture. The study also discusses the intersectional elements of humour and hate speech, shedding insights into the nature of humour communication on the internet.

Intercoder Reliability

One of the main challenges in qualitative research is the subjective bias induced during data interpretation. Hence, to ensure the reliability of the dataset, a primary coder developed an initial coding scheme based on the codes identified in the literature review and the dataset. In the first round of coding, 12 codes were identified, which included ‘male identity’, ‘gender roles’, ‘representation of women’, ‘ridicule of emotional expression’, ‘normalising hate’, ‘sexist humour’, ‘inside jokes’, ‘social roles’, ‘animals’, ‘phonetic playfulness’, ‘AI voiceover’ and ‘social awkwardness’. Following this, a second coder independently coded the entire dataset, whose size (20 reels) was within the manageable limit and agreed upon 11 codes. Then, to test the reliability of the dataset, an intercoder agreement percentage was calculated using the formula:

Per cent agreement = (Number of agreements / Total codes) \times 100

Since the second coder agreed upon 11 codes against the total of 12 codes identified, the percentage agreement is calculated as:

Percentage agreement = (11/12) \times 100 = 91 .67%

Although this percentage (91.67%) indicates a strong agreement, a meeting was held between the two coders involved in the study to refine the coding strategy, since some codes contained latent meanings that required interpretation. It was observed that disagreement between the coders was regarding the code ‘social awkwardness’ because of conceptual overlapping. Following a discussion, it was decided to merge the code with other existing codes, such as ‘ridicule of emotional expression’, ‘gender roles’ and ‘AI voiceover’. By doing so, the coding disagreement between the coders was resolved, and a refined coding scheme was obtained to conduct the analysis.

Ethical Considerations for Handling Offensive Content

There is a lack of ethical guidelines to critically examine offensive content linked to the manosphere. This has demanded researchers to indulge in ‘self-reflection and transparency’. Moreover, obtaining consent from the manosphere users may not be feasible as the users may fear misrepresentation (Aiston, 2023). However, since the current study examines content from the public domain, the necessity to seek consent for the fair use of Instagram reels does not arise. Further, it is important to balance objective analysis with ethical responsibility while examining offensive content to avoid amplifying harmful narratives or legitimising discriminatory views (Milne et al., 2024). Therefore, researchers must not focus on extreme views disproportionately, which may not reflect the broader audience. Hence, there must be transparency about the selection criteria to ensure fair representation of data. Further, paraphrasing comments must be avoided as linguistic analysis of texts depends on direct quotes. Hence, in this article, the user comments are quoted indirectly to avoid sensationalising offensive content. This is done after anonymising the profile names to protect the privacy of the users. Finally, as engaging with offensive content may take an emotional toll on researchers, they took part in structured debriefing sessions like reflective writing to process the emotional impact.

Analysis and Findings

According to the relief theory, humour serves as a psychological tool to release pent-up emotions by creating an outlet to laugh about socially taboo topics such as sexuality, bodily functions and ageing. For instance, storytellers address culturally sensitive topics and enable the audience to collectively confront them and release repressed anxieties in a socially acceptable way. In one of the Doge memes, a hostel girl indulges in premarital sex using a polythene bag as protection. However, after her marriage, she pretends to be a virgin until her husband discovers pieces of a polythene bag in her reproductive organ, which acts as the punchline of the joke. Thus, the meme uses laughter to relieve repressed anxiety about sensitive sociocultural topics such as premarital sex and virginity. Other instances of relief humour are found in Doge memes that address sensitive topics such as interspecies sex, suicide, extramarital sex and prostitution.

The incongruity theory argues that humour is derived from the perception of inappropriateness, such as an event that deviates from the expected outcome. Incongruity theory suggests humour is derived by connecting a serious concept with something trivial. Wordplay, puns and double meanings often rely on incongruity. For instance, in one of the Doge memes, a father proudly narrates the motivations behind naming his children to a visitor. His daughter, Rani, was named after Ranikhet, where she was born. His second child, Taj, got her name from their trip to the Taj Mahal. As he introduces his youngest, Kohinoor, the guest assumes that the third child was conceived during a visit to the Kohinoor diamond in London. Nodding his head in disapproval, the father clarifies that Kohinoor’s birth was because of an unfortunate accident with a condom brand called Kohinoor. Here, humour is established because of the perception of incongruity, as the final response (Kohinoor condom) deviated from the expected outcome (Kohinoor diamond). As a result, laughter is induced because of connecting a serious concept with something trivial. Incongruity humour can be observed in comments with absurd phrases, which seem meaningless but sound funny because of their strangeness, sound manipulation and exaggerated pronunciation. Further, humour is also derived from incongruous cultural references, as seen in comments where user handles named Kohinoor are involved in self-deprecating humour, questioning whether their name was inspired by their heritage or by an unexpected circumstance.

The superiority theory suggests that humour is generated when one experiences a sense of superiority over the subject of the joke, that is, when there is a hierarchy between the audience and the target of the joke. Superiority theory is often intertwined with societal norms since it can reinforce stereotypes or challenge societal power structures. For instance, in one of the Doge memes, a young girl in Western attire sits on a man’s lap in a crowded bus, only to realise later that she is being molested by him, which is portrayed using humour. Here, superiority is applied through the victim’s discomfort. Further, humour is used in the normalisation of toxic masculinity and the marginalisation of women in public spaces. The humour is derived in this meme through the victim’s distress rather than by challenging the power dynamics. For instance, meme comments engage with humour without critique, as exemplified by many comments consisting of laughter emojis. The narrative is further propagated through the participatory culture through comments where the users tag their friends. Other comments like ‘this meme is for real men only’ place the commenter as intellectually and culturally superior for ‘getting the joke’. This also implies that the one who does not understand the joke or take offence is unintelligent, weak or ‘not a real man’. In this way, superiority is established through gatekeeping and insider culture.

The analysis of the dataset suggests the presence of these frames, along with their recurring frequencies: (a) celebration of toxic masculinity (90%), (b) presence of sexual humour (85%), (c) confinement of married women to the role of housewives (25%), (d) depiction of young women as sexual predators (50%), (e) anthropomorphism of Doge (45%), (f) deliberate mispronunciation of terms using the word ‘m’ (100%), (g) use of TTS software for storytelling (100%) and (h) use of cringe and absurdity to induce humour (60%).

In the visual dimension, the following frames are observed: toxic masculinity (such as normalising chewing pan and muscular body as a desirable feature), sexual humour (involving reproductive organs), married women as housewives (craving celebrity sex), young women as sexual predators (involved in prostitution, premarital sex and extramarital sex), anthropomorphism (face of the Doge juxtaposed with the bodies of various animals, birds and objects) and poor, bad and absurd editing to induce humour. Similarly, in the audio dimension, the following frames are observed: toxic masculinity (through misogynist slangs), sexual humour (such as condom jokes), young women as sexual predators (making orgasmic sounds), deliberate mispronunciation using the word ‘m’, use of TTS software and the use of cringe humour. Many memes display an interplay of frames like deliberate mispronunciation, TTS software for voiceovers and absurdity to induce humour that comes out as silly and cringe. The anthropomorphic depiction of the Doge also induced absurd humour in the visual dimension. Similarly, there is an interplay of the frames, such as toxic masculinity, sexual humour and misogynist portrayal of women in the visual dimensions in the form of dirty jokes.

In terms of the visual construction of masculinity, there is a predominant obsession with toxic masculinity. For instance, in a meme revolving around the honeymoon, the husband is always depicted with a large reproductive organ. In the visual storytelling of Doge memes, the male gaze becomes predominant as women are often depicted as derogatory characters with large breasts. This makes Indian Doge memes the texts of dark humour, which is characterised by uncivilised behaviour and ridicule of human body parts (Collings, 2018). Other instances that reinforce traditional masculinity include promoting the use of chewing tobacco (pan), gambling, polyamory, sex with prostitutes, fathering multiple children, strong muscles and a large reproductive organ as desirable traits of a man. Toxic masculinity is also established through misogynist humour, such as labelling women involved in polyamory as prostitutes.

Doge memes reveal a limited portrayal of women by categorising them into two characters: mature mother Doge displaying Indian virtues, aligning with the traditional notions and young women Doge who lack it. Married women lack professional jobs and are confined to the roles of housewives, wearing red sarees, mangalsutra, bangles and vermillion tilak on their foreheads. Young women are characterised by busty attributes, blond hair, coloured hair extensions, excess make-up, lacking Indian virtues, polluted by influences such as adultery, celebrity sex, premarital sex, extramarital sex, porn consumption and betraying their partner’s trust. For instance, in a storyline about the newlyweds on their honeymoon, the wife is depicted as a chaste woman who gets aroused by the large size of a horse’s male reproductive organ. Such stereotypes about women are widespread in online humour (Roy & Deshbandhu, 2021). Further, Doge memes uphold traditional masculinity through themes resonating with the broader manosphere, such as physical fitness, strong muscles, political power, money, fair skin and authority as ideal requirements to attract young women as romantic partners.

Anthropomorphism also becomes a recurring theme in the Doge memes. Instances include anthropomorphising Doge with the body of a parrot, lion, tiger, tortoise, kangaroo, monkey, wolf, bear, ostrich, crow, bat, hen, donkey, horse, honey bee or deer. Objects such as a fan, air cooler, biscuit packet, sun, moon and mango are also depicted with the face of the Doge. Interestingly, Bollywood actor Salman Khan, often seen as the archetype of hegemonic masculinity, is also depicted with the face of the Doge to induce humour in the storylines.

Humour in the Indian Doge memes revolves around sensitive sociocultural issues such as molestation in a public bus, prostitution in red-light districts, use of condoms in sexual intercourse, premarital sex, extramarital affair at the workplace, political corruption and interspecies sexual intercourse. While this highlights the potential of Doge memes to address complicated issues, the dark humour in storytelling trivialises them. Humour is often derived from these storylines by the use of double-meaning jokes. For instance, the phrase ‘riding a horse’ is used to imply having sexual intercourse. This is also represented using visual humour, depicting a horse with large genitalia and logos of luxury automobile brands (BMW or Audi). Similarly, the term ‘desi girls hostel’ is used to suggest an Indian brothel. The storylines also reference Bollywood actors such as Akshay Kumar, Ranbir Kapoor, John Abraham and Salman Khan, making Bollywood references common in the Indian Doge memes.

The audio frames of the dataset reveal how humour is generated using TTS technology for storytelling. The cheap AI voiceover reduces the production costs of video Doge memes. However, the TTS voiceover makes the narration feel distant as it lacks a cultural tone, interestingly generating humour that is perceived to be ‘cringe’. Further, the deliberate misspelling of cuss words (using the letter M) creates a funny sound due to mispronunciation, making it an integral component of the Indian Doge memes. Thus, AI technology has become an essential feature of the Doge memes and the meme culture in general.

Discussion and Conclusion

Theoretical Implications on Online Masculinity

Doge memes illustrate how the online manosphere copes with the anxieties related to changing gender roles. By policing female sexuality through ‘acceptable humour’, Doge memes promote patriarchal discourse by framing female sexuality as deceptive and laughable, as exemplified in the meme about a woman’s premarital sexual life. Although Doge memes facilitate a space for addressing taboo topics like premarital sex, virginity and infidelity, it is often done from a male-centric perspective that ridicules women’s sexual lives. In contrast, Doge memes propagate a double standard of sexual freedom in the online manosphere, where men’s premarital or extramarital sexual experiences are normalised and celebrated, highlighting a broader gendered power imbalance. Nevertheless, Doge memes enable the online manosphere to provide a ‘safe’ space for emotional release, allowing men to process anxieties about sex, commitment, rejection and masculinity through humour instead of open discussion.

Doge memes reinforce digital masculinity by exaggerating contradictions and inconsistencies in gender roles and sexual norms. By portraying sexism as playful, surprising and unexpected, Doge memes normalise misogyny and discourage critical engagement with the content. For instance, the use of double meanings (as seen in the case of the condom joke) normalises serious topics such as contraception by emphasising a male-centric perspective on sexuality. Despite addressing topics like male dominance, men’s struggles and women’s societal roles, Doge memes make them appear inoffensive as the storytelling relies on unexpected twists rather than confrontation. Further, Doge memes establish ‘in-group’ belonging among the audience, as the online manosphere relies on group dynamics to function. In this regard, Doge memes reinforce an exclusive idea of masculinity and gender norms, such as ridiculing men possessing ‘feminine’ traits.

Doge memes reinforce hegemonic masculinity by upholding gender-based hierarchies and normalising toxic masculinity. For instance, women are often portrayed as the target of the joke, where humour is derived through their discomfort or subjugation (as seen in the molestation joke). This not only trivialises gender-based violence but also reinforces male dominance and entitlement in online discourse. Thus, Doge memes act as a gatekeeping mechanism, where the men’s perspectives dictate the definition of humour, thereby rendering women’s critiques insignificant and masking misogynistic ideologies as ‘just jokes’. In other words, Doge memes position men as ‘dominant insiders’ who decide what is funny and exclude women and others who critique such humour, by labelling them as ‘overreacting’ or ‘not understanding the joke’. This fosters a homosocial bonding among men in the online manosphere, often at the expense of the marginalised groups. Further, the anonymity offered by digital spaces promotes the unchecked spread of misogynist humour, as users need not fear the real-world consequences of their actions. Moreover, platform culture rewards engagement (such as likes, shares and comments) to incentivise provocative and sexist humour to gain viral traction.

Subversion of Traditional Masculinity

Despite predominantly endorsing misogyny and hypermasculinity, Doge memes, at times, illustrate instances that subvert traditional masculinity. Although their numbers are limited, and most of them do not explicitly challenge established gender norms, they nevertheless offer insights into unusual ways in which the Doge meme is perceived, acting as counter-readings in the exploration of online masculinity. For instance, in one of the storylines, a corporate boss is characterised as an emotionally needy man who craves attention on his birthday. Rather than being portrayed as a powerful man who exhibits aggression and confidence, he is depicted as someone who experiences fear, ridicule, humiliation and shame. In another instance, a man involved in a romantic relationship is ridiculed for being helpless, which undermines the traditional notion that men are always in control of their relationships. Although these memes reinforce the stereotype of hypermasculinity through crude humour, they nevertheless challenge the idea that men must always be tough, commanding and emotionally distant. Further, some comments regard sexual jokes involving female family members to be inappropriate, which indicates the limitations of online humour when it comes to traditional family values. Although this does not directly challenge the established gender norms, it nevertheless aligns with the cultural virtues that regard mothers and sisters as those to be revered and protected.

The repeated use of the humorous linguistic phrase Hue Hue Hue (a fundamental feature of the Indian Doge memes) in the participatory discussions represents an exaggerated display of emotion, which is typically associated with femininity and discouraged in traditional masculine norms. Further, the use of absurd humorous phrases in the comment section indicates how group bonding occurs in the online manosphere. Such use of humour for social bonding contrasts with the traditional masculine spaces, where male bonding is expected to be serious. This highlights a form of online masculinity, which is more relaxed and open to playful self-deprecation. Further, the use of offensive and vulgar language in meme culture, such as the repeated use of a distorted expletive phrase in the comment section, indicates a humorous use rather than an offensive intent. Hence, the study acknowledges the fluid nature of internet humour, whose meaning and interpretation vary constantly based on the audience, platform and the broader cultural context.

Legal Distinctions Between Humour and Hate Speech

The presence of offensive humour in Doge memes raises concerns about the thin line between humour and hate speech. In many democratic societies, humour is often granted special legal protection under the purview of ‘freedom of expression’ since they are regarded as a tool for artistic expression and social critique. However, such immunity for expressing humour is not absolute, because humour can cross into hate speech, further inciting violence. In fact, in many cases, hate speech occurs due to the misuse of freedom of expression (Chetty & Alathur, 2018). Hate speech, when veiled through humour can become more influential, widespread and socially acceptable, because of the humour’s potential to amplify messages. For instance, jokes about racism, antisemitism, misogyny and extremism can demoralise marginalised groups by normalising discrimination in public discourse (Zinigrad, 2024). Therefore, the grey area between humour and hate speech adds to the legal complications in combating hate speech, especially in an ethnically diverse country like India, where the cultural distinction regarding humour may vary.

In the Indian Constitution, there are provisions related to hate speech, such as Article 19, which protects freedom of speech and expression, but restricts it to maintaining public order, moral values and decency. Further, Article 51A(h) of the Indian Constitution acts as an implicit counter to hate speech, by advocating for rational discourse and progressive thinking. The primary aim of hate speech laws in India is to safeguard various religious groups from potential conflicts and to punish individuals who disrespect others based on race, religion, gender, disability, language, occupation or other identities (Chetty & Alathur, 2018). However, the Indian legal framework is ambiguous in differentiating the grey area between freedom of expression and the regulation of hate speech, especially on social media and the internet (Singh et al., 2024).

Although the government has taken measures such as making amendments to the Information Technology Act and introducing the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules in 2021 to curb online hate speech, it is facing challenges in enforcing them due to the dynamic nature of online platforms and digital communications. Further, factors such as the vast reach of social media, algorithm-driven content amplification and the anonymity offered by social media, have contributed to the spread of hate speech and intensified existing societal divisions and tensions. Hence, Singh et al. (2024) argue that India’s diverse traditions, sensibilities and humour blur the line between acceptable and offensive speech. Therefore, to address hate speech, there is a need to develop a nuanced approach, which includes legal reforms, digital literacy initiatives and community engagement.

Limitations of the Study

One of the fundamental features (and also the limitation) of purposive sampling is that it focuses on an in-depth exploration of a phenomenon rather than aiming for a broad representation (Campbell et al., 2020). While this makes purposive sampling a suitable strategy for exploratory studies in qualitative research, it also limits the generalisation of the results to the broader population. Nonetheless, purposive sampling aims to gain insights about a specific phenomenon rather than offering a ‘representative sample’ (Robinson, 2023). Therefore, the selection of purposive sampling in the current study resulted in the identification of only those themes that were present in the viral reels. More perspectives may exist in the Indian Doge memes with low engagement, which were not included in the dataset, demanding further investigation. Nonetheless, ‘virality’ as an inclusion criterion has led to identifying dominant perspectives in the Doge memes with high engagement.

Final Remarks

The video dimension in Doge memes plays a significant role in fostering ideas of masculinity through the rustic Web 2.0 tools. The audio dimension, however, contributes to the humour using TTS software, whose generated tone could be perceived as cringe. Nevertheless, this absurdity adds to the overall humour appeal of the meme. The comment section also provides rich details about how humour in Doge memes is perceived by the meme culture and also offers a space to probe counter-readings on traditional masculinity. Overall, the analysis of Indian Doge memes makes the presence of dark humour evident in the Indian meme culture.

The data sample for the study considered Doge memes from a specific vernacular meme page on Instagram. However, the vast range of languages, cultures and online communities within India suggests that meme trends might greatly vary across different regions, each with its unique sociocultural characteristics. Hence, India’s meme culture is much richer and more complex than any single language or platform would suggest. Nonetheless, the study offers a valuable first look at the Indian meme culture and the Doge subculture that remains largely unexplored.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Adams

N. N.

(2023). A triad of physical masculinities: Examining multiple ‘hegemonic’ bodybuilding identities in anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) online discussion groups. Deviant Behavior, 44(10), 1498–1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.2211209

Adiga

P. G.

, & Padmakumar

(2024a). Humor, politics and the global North: A systematic literature review of internet memes. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 28(3), 263–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2024.2335920

Adiga

P. G.

, & Padmakumar

(2024b). Multi-dimensional nature of internet memes: Perspectives in digital populism. In Chennattuserry

J. C.

, Deshpande

, & Hong

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of new populism and responses in the 21st century (pp. 1–6). Springer.

Aiston

(2023). Digitally mediated misogyny and critical discourse studies: Methodological and ethical implications. Modern Languages Open, 2023(1). https://doi.org/10.3828/mlo.v0i0.454

Anton

, Aptyka

, Oesterreich

T. D.

, & Teuteberg

(2024). To the moon with Dogecoin! Disentangling the causalities behind extrinsic and intrinsic motivations for memecoin investments. Journal of Decision Systems, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2024.2348936

Bendukurthi

, Afzal

, & Wani

O. B.

(2024). From celebrity stage to digital space: Mapping Discourse, sensationalism, and virality of Chris Rock vs. Will Smith’s 2022 Oscar memes. Visual Communication Quarterly, 31(1), 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2023.2300774

Bone

E. K.

, & Bouck

E. C.

(2016). Accessible text-to-speech options for students who struggle with reading. Preventing School Failure Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2016.1188366

Botto

, & Gottzén

(2023). Swallowing and spitting out the red pill: Young men, vulnerability, and radicalization pathways in the manosphere. Journal of Gender Studies, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2023.2260318

Bucaria

(2008). Dubbing dark humour: A case study in audiovisual translation. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 4(2), 215–240. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10016-008-0014-2

10.

Campbell

, Greenwood

, Prior

, Shearer

, Walkem

, Young

, Bywaters

, & Walker

(2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206

11.

Chatterjee

(2020). Humour in Narendra Modi memes on new media. South Asian Popular Culture, 18(3), 227–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746689.2020.1815450

12.

Chetty

, & Alathur

(2018). Hate speech review in the context of online social networks. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 40, 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.05.003

13.

Collings

(2018). British dark comedy television and the bodily aesthetics of the ‘proper person.’ Comedy Studies, 9(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2018.1437162

14.

Dickel

, & Evolvi

(2022). ‘Victims of feminism’: Exploring networked misogyny and #MeToo in the manosphere. Feminist Media Studies, 23(4), 1392–1408. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2022.2029925

15.

Ging

(2017). Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4), 638–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184x17706401

16.

Greenwood

(2010). Of sad men and dark comedies: Mood and gender effects on entertainment media preferences. Mass Communication and Society, 13(3), 232–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205430903186526

17.

Gupta

, Jain

, & Tiwari

A. A.

(2022). Polarised social media discourse during COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from YouTube. Behaviour and Information Technology, 42(2), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2022.2059397

18.

Highfield

, & Leaver

(2016). Instagrammatics and digital methods: Studying visual social media, from selfies and GIFs to memes and emoji. Communication Research and Practice, 2(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1155332

19.

James

(2020). Caste, gender, and ‘global Indian-ness’: Spaces of safety in stand-up comedy in global Mumbai. Feminist Media Studies, 22(4), 831–847. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1815230

20.

Kapoor

, & Behl

(2024). Those ‘funny’ internet memes: A study of misinformation retransmission and vaccine hesitancy. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2024.2303582

21.

Kunze

P. C.

(2015). Laughter in the digital age. Comedy Studies, 6(2), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2015.1094945

22.

Lam

(2022). How digital platforms facilitate parody: Online humour in the construction of Hong Kong identity. Comedy Studies, 13(1), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2022.2040805

23.

Lee

C. S.

, & Park

J. H.

(2012). ‘We need a committee for men’s rights’: Reactions of male and female viewers to reverse gender discrimination in Korean comedy. Asian Journal of Communication, 22(4), 353–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2012.681664

24.

Leung

(2024). Re-visiting copyright: Is there a way to tackle selective enforcement and non-contextual algorithmic takedowns? A discussion through the lens of internet meme culture. Information & Communications Technology Law, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2024.2406669

25.

Lockyer

(2011). From toothpick legs to dropping vaginas: Gender and sexuality in Joan Rivers’ stand-up comedy performance. Comedy Studies, 2(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1386/cost.2.2.113_1

26.

Maloney

, Jones

, & Roberts

(2024). ‘I can choose to be a good man even if i got a raw deal’: Neoliberal heteromasculinity as manosphere counter narrative in r/stoicism. Social Media + Society, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241274677

27.

Manor

(2020). The Russians are laughing! The Russians are laughing! How Russian diplomats employ humour in online public diplomacy. Global Society, 35(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2020.1828299

28.

Manyiwa

, & Jin

(2020). Gender effects on consumers’ attitudes toward comedic violence in advertisements. Journal of Promotion Management, 26(5), 654–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1729314

29.

Marwick

A. E.

, & Caplan

(2018). Drinking male tears: Language, the manosphere, and networked harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568

30.

Marx

(2015). Radio voices, digital downloads: Bridging old and new media in the Onion Radio news podcast. Comedy Studies, 6(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2015.1083166

31.

McKeague

(2018). Is vlogging the new stand-up? A compare/contrast of traditional and online models of comedic content distribution. Comedy Studies, 9(1), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2018.1428230

32.

Meyer

N. K.

, & Bouck

E. C.

(2014). The impact of text-to-speech on expository reading for adolescents with LD. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900102

33.

Mielczarek

(2018). The ‘Pepper-Spraying Cop’ icon and its internet memes: Social justice and public shaming through rhetorical transformation in digital culture. Visual Communication Quarterly, 25(2), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2018.1456929

34.

Milne

, Cambazoglu

, Haslop

, & Ringrose

(2024). Researching young masculinities during the rise of ‘misogyny influencers’: Exploring affective and embodied discomfort and dilemmas of feminist and queer researchers. Young. https://doi.org/10.1177/11033088241295844

35.

Nani

(2022). The doge worth 88 billion dollars: A case study of Dogecoin. Convergence: The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies, 28(6), 1719–1736. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565211070417

36.

Narayan

(2024, November 13). How misspelt meme inspired Trump’s powerful Musk-headed DOGE. India Today. https://www.indiatoday.in/world/us-election-2024/story/elon-musk-doge-meme-history-department-of-government-efficiency-vivek-ramaswamy-donald-trump-us-2632705-2024-11-13

37.

O’Malley

R. L.

, Holt

, & Holt

T. J.

(2020). An exploration of the involuntary celibate (incel) subculture online. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(7–8), NP4981–NP5008. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520959625

38.

Osisanwo

, & Ilesanmi

(2022). Gender, ethnic and class as humour strategies in stand-up comedy of Bovi, Kenny Blaq, Akpororo and Basket Mouth. Comedy Studies, 14(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2023.2149207

39.

Padmakumar

, & Adiga

P. G.

(2024). Memes as artefacts of digital journalism: A thematic analysis of Indian COVID-19 memes. In Dahiya

& Trehan

(Eds.), Handbook of digital journalism (pp. 375–384). Springer.

40.

Parashar

, & Tewari

(2020). Locating humour in The Lonely Island: Absurdism and comedy in millennial humour. Comedy Studies, 12(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/2040610x.2020.1850105

41.

Rajendran

, & Kumar

G. B.

(2018). A robust syllable centric pronunciation model for Tamil text to speech synthesizer. IETE Journal of Research, 65(5), 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/03772063.2018.1452642

42.

Robinson

R. S.

(2023). Purposive sampling. In Maggino

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 5645–5647). Springer.

43.

Roy

, & Deshbandhu

(2021). Anxious postcolonial masculinity in online video games: race, gender and colonialism in Indian digital spaces. Gender, Place & Culture, 29(1), 104–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369x.2020.1858030

44.

Singh

, Nath

L. P.

, Mishra

, Jain

, Singh

, & Benedict

S. M.

(2024). Online hate speech in India: Legal reforms and social impact on social media platforms. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4732818

45.

Thompson

J. D.

(2023). Body of evidence: Conspiracy, masculinity and otherness in ‘QAnon shaman’ meme discourses. Continuum, 37(5), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2023.2244203

46.

Vickery

J. R.

(2014). Memes in digital culture. Information, Communication & Society, 18(12), 1450–1451. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2014.979217

47.

Wilkins

, & Eisenbraun

A. J.

(2009). Humour theories and the physiological benefits of laughter. Holistic Nursing Practice, 23(6), 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1097/hnp.0b013e3181bf37ad

48.

Woods

F. A.

, & Ruscher

J. B.

(2021). Viral sticks, virtual stones: Addressing anonymous hate speech online. Patterns of Prejudice, 55(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322x.2021.1968586

49.

Yoon

H. J.

, & Kim

(2014). The moderating role of gender identity in responses to comedic violence advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2014.880390

50.

Zelinsky

(2024). ‘To the moon!’: Elon Musk, Dogecoin, and the political economy of charismatic leadership. Journal of Cultural Economy, 17(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2024.2302177

51.

Zinigrad

(2024). Laughing matters in courts: Humor’s role in normalizing hate speech. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 50(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754241244891

Exploring Online Masculinity in the Indian Meme Culture: A Case of Video Doge Memes

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Rationale for the Study

Method

Intercoder Reliability

Ethical Considerations for Handling Offensive Content

Analysis and Findings

Discussion and Conclusion

Theoretical Implications on Online Masculinity

Subversion of Traditional Masculinity

Legal Distinctions Between Humour and Hate Speech

Limitations of the Study

Final Remarks

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

References