This examination by Elise Kramer looks at the kinds of rhetorical conversations ordinary people take part in surrounding jokes about rape on internet forums. She starts with the idea that such conversations take on typical, predictable forms, and that they recur seemingly ad infinitum, to the point that it feels almost like a futile exercise. The view that she comes to is that such conversations do not really constitute arguments seeking to determine what objectively is or is not funny. Kramer posits that humor cannot exist without an imagined counter-position to frame itself against, so that in order to find something humorous, one must be able to envision another party which would refuse to find it humorous. So, instead of being real conversations about what humor is, these conversations are sites wherein people enact and naturalize their identities in contrast to other identities, and this is why such conversations appear consistently moralistic.