Psychology , Performance , and Social Context of Laughter in Azerbaijan Folklore

Social context often drives the performance of laughter in cultural situations. As a metaphor, laughter provides not only an exchange of integrative information among the community members, but also the enactment of aggressive relations in the society. These characteristics may be seen clearly while observing metaphors related to the performance of laughter in the Azerbaijani socio-cultural environment. In the study of humor, content is usually analyzed but the performance of behavioral cues such as laughter is neglected, although it can shed light on the meaning of the communication. To understand folk behaviors and texts related to the laughter, I argue that special attention needs to be given to behaviors as well as texts communicated in a social situation. This study reveals that the jokes causing laughter are accepted and perceived by the male and female audiences differently. Women's laughter receives disapproval in the Azerbaijan cultural context regarding sexuality. Men take such laughter to be a threat to their


Introduction
When you approach laughter from the point of view of sociocultural relations, you will soon find that its metaphorical meaning in the social environment is wider than linguistic content. Although laughter is characterized as the designation of concrete behavior from a terminological point of view, this definition specifies a polysemantic event in a socio-cultural context. To study the polysemantic content of laughter in the communication process, its social context and its implementation in folk texts must be examined in detail (Oring & Jones, 1987, p.108;Oring, 2016, p.XI;Yusifli, 2014, p.44).
To appreciate the social essence of laughter in Azerbaijani society, we must first refer to the joke environment linked directly to the male group. This means that the jokes in Azerbaijan are generally updated in this male environment and therefore "they encode various information on the interests and attitude towards the reality of the male collective" (Stanley, 1992, p.97). In a word, the jokes told in the male environment support their "idioculture" (Fine, 1979, p.734) as a gender group.
The article explores the interaction of folklore and social stereotypes. To better appreciate the cultural semantics of laughter in the social environment, special attention has been paid to its social context. Psychoanalytic, semiotic methods, and performance theory were mainly used in the analysis of folklore and ethnographic materials. Descriptive and comparative methods were also used during the study in accordance with the requirements of the study.

Jokes and socio-psychological complexes
Jokes in the Azerbaijani environment are mainly updated at two points: They are used as a proverb (model) to justify people's attitudes to various events and facts. Men of about the same age group, gathered for various reasons, tell jokes for fun or laughter. Most often, especially in the male environment, it is observed that people use jokes as a proverb (an appropriate model) to express their attitude to various facts of life.
I remember when they brought me to the operating room, I laughed all the time. The professor asked me why I was laughing. I replied with a joke: "Once Khoja Nasraddin became seriously ill; he began to laugh and joke. People are surprised. Khoja, when you were always sick, you made a fuss. You are seriously ill now, but your heart rejoices. How do we understand that? Moll answers them: "When I got a little sick, I raised silence to attract everyone's attention and deceive the disease. Now I am seriously ill and do not see any reason to cause a protest. What does it mean to start screaming these days?" Now my situation is the same as that of Khoja Nasraddin, and for me, there is no other way but to laugh (Yusifzade, 2010, p.167).
As we have seen, a person uses a joke to express emotions in a tense situation and Khoja Nasraddin shows a way out of this situation (Eyupoglu & Gokalp, 2018, p.612). And at the same time, the joke told in such a situation fulfills the function of easing the emotional stress that has arisen for oneself (Dundes & Hauschild, 1983, p.249). Telling jokes in the social environment as a statement to express your idea is most likely to be found in men of the same age group or in the process of communication between the oldest and the youngest. Although obscene expressions are not used in jokes told by elders to younger children, in the process of communication between people of the same age group, this obscene language is widely used. It should be noted that expressing one's own idea based on jokes in the communication process is behavior of particular importance. In short, the laughter embodied in jokes told by a male group of the same age is designed to ease tense situations that can cause serious conflict. In general, the updated communication within the male group contains dramatic tension. Since this tradition, widespread in the social environment of Azerbaijan, should be implemented in the context of acute conflicts. It is known that the zoological conflicts, such as cockfighting, fighting between dogs or male camels during traditional festivals can be considered as a metaphor for conflict between men (Dundes, 2005, p.353).
Although jokes weaken the likelihood of conflict between men, they cannot eliminate them at all. Unexpected negligence can turn them into a conflict generator. To shed light on the reason for this, we would like to refer to an example. It has been observed on several occasions that when a person tries to present his unpleasant situation as positive, he is told such a joke: One day, a poor man comes home, tells his wife that the "bey" talked. His wife asks: what did the "bey" say to you? The poor man says that when I arrived in a cart, I was standing in the middle of the road. He said to me: get off the road.
As we have seen, in the concrete situation, the real event is transferred to the world of jokes. In this case, the joke turns into a metaphorical sign of reality through laughter. In such a situation, "bey's" humiliating conversation with the poor in the joke plot is projected into the humiliated situation of a person in reality. Therefore, while the communication process, instant neglect can cause a confusing situation for the opposite side and create conflict. The conflict creating the potential for jokes used in this way was also observed by the very socio-cultural environment. It is no coincidence that the person who tells a joke in such situations uses expressions such as "joking separately" or "it is only a joke". The main objective in this case is to prevent the transfer of a conflict in a joke with a specific conflict in the social.

Researching of the study with examples
Studying the mutual relations between the social environment and the joke in Azerbaijani society, I would like to draw your attention to an interesting question. The use of humorous texts during communication in public life usually does not occur with the initial knowledge of the parties. Use laughter to create jokes, while the process of communication in appropriate situations occurs only after the process of close knowledge. It should be noted that when people are going to tell jokes, they should be familiar with their sensitive aspects; otherwise, it may cause a tense situation between them. Therefore, laughing together is one of the key indicators of friendship in Azerbaijani society. It is no coincidence that in order to express intimacy in their relationship with someone, men attach particular importance to a joke with him. And the lack of intimacy in relations with others is expressed in the form of "I'm not joking with him." Phraseology "joking with someone" specifically expresses the level of relations between certain people, aimed at laughter and fun. This attitude allows these people to laugh at objects that are considered forbidden in everyday life. Namely, in the circumstances created by these relations, jokes are more relevant.
One of the issues is to notice Azerbaijani society is that laughter creates serious anxiety in the surrounding people; in this case, the reason for the laughter is unknown. This social complex has also been projected into folklore. Therefore, the search for meaning in an updated laugh based on an unknown reason is envisaged in Azerbaijani folklore and literature in a specific way (Garadarali, 2013, p.32;Gasimova, 2017, p.257). To explain our idea, let's read the tale "The Skull": The Padishah asks the vizier to buy a fish and cook it. The vizier cooked the fish and when they start to eat, the king also asks him "if it is a male or a female." As the Padishah said, the fish started laughing Padishah was surprised, -What does that mean, Vizier? Why does the fish laugh?
The vizier replied: -I don't know, my Padishah.
Padishah said: -You have to find the reason.
The vizier then begins to look for a man capable of understanding the secret of the fish. A child with amazing abilities explains this secret as follows: "Do you know why the fish laughs?" The Padishah has a daughter with forty slaves and all of them are boys. The fish laughed at the fact that he was sad, that for his daughter, ten male slaves, who claimed to be girls, spent time with her, but without worrying about the sex of a fish. Later, to escape disgrace, the Padishah decapitated all the male slaves posing as girls with his daughter (Rustamzadeh, 2012, pp.184-187).
For us, the anxiety created by the laughter of the fish must be understood as a symbolic expression of the socio-psychological complex in the text of the tale. As history shows, the reason for the laughter of the fish is that the daughter of Padishah is knocking with slaves in women's clothing. It was revealed that the immoral behavior of a woman, involved in the influence of a person in society, causes an ironic attitude towards this man. And the "fish laugh" in this text, revealing the unpleasant situation with Padishah's daughter, based on the search for meaning in this laugh, informs us of a serious obstacle in society regarding laughter. In other words, men are extremely sensitive to laughter, the cause of which is not clear to them, and strive for this phenomenon directed against them. The ironic nuance of laughter in this case is curious. This means that laughter makes people reconsider their position in society.
For example, in the fairy tale "Alexander in the Bird's Tongue," the mother-in-law orders Alexander to light a fire to wash his clothes. But the mother-in-law does not know that Alexander speaks and understands the language of birds. Meanwhile, Alexander saw a couple of pigeons talking to each other: When Alexander understood the language of the bird, he laughed. That is, I will be a paddy, and my mother-in-law will pour water into my hand. When he laughed, his stepmother was bewildered, as if he was laughing at her. She took the mark of fire and struck on the lower back. She did not feel sorry for him, because she was a mother-inlaw. She said bitch, are you kidding me? In your mother's house? "You make fun of me today, and tomorrow you will make fun of me." Let your father come, I will tell him, and I will leave this house" (Rustamzadeh, 2012, p.173).
As we have already seen, the laughter of the fairy tale hero causes serious concern to his mother. And she begins to look for more information in this laugh. Looking for a reason for laughing, the stepmother doubts that her private places may have appeared, and that is why her adopted son laughed? In short, an unknown laugh makes the mother-in-law look or various imperfections in her clothes. Even the mysterious and useless laughter of the fairy tale hero makes the mother-in-law think about sexual violence against her adoptive son (this version appeared in the text as "play a trick on him").
The anxiety caused by laughter that occurred for reasons unknown to those around them is an integral part of real life, which is expressed metaphorically in folklore. One of these tales is "Hunter Pirim": One day, the Hunter Pirim saw a white and black snake kissing. The Hunter Pirim is sorry for the white snake and as he was jealous of the black snake, when he was intended to kill the latter with an arrow, he wounded the white snake by mistake. And King Padishah invites Hunter Pirim in his place. On the road, the Hunter Pirim describes the sight that he saw of the snake taking him to the Padishah of snakes. This snake told the Hunter Pirim that "if the Padishah of snakes is aware that it has affected your honor, he will forgive you immediately." Really when he narrated the event for the Padishah of snakes, the Padishah showing sensitivity to the question of honor decided to attribute it. At the request of Hunter Pirim, the Padishah of snakes gives him a ring allowing him to understand the language of all animals and to have everything he wants. One day, the Hunter Pirim hears the conversations between horses and he laughs. His wife saw him laugh and asked "Why are you laughing?" For a while, he wanted to reveal the secret, but one of the snakes, standing on his tail on the road, remembered that if he revealed the secret, he would die immediately. When the Hunter Pirim returned home with his wife, he encountered an event. In a courtyard, the rooster calls the hen. When the hen opposes her request, the rooster said: "... It doesn't matter to me, I will invite another hen. You know, I'm not the Hunter Pirim to implore the woman. At that moment, Hunter Pirim who understands the tongue of the rooster asked him how to force the woman to change her mind. In response to this question, the rooster said that when you are at home, you will beat her and then tell her to leave the house". Really, the Hunter Pirim beats his wife, takes her out of the house, and in the end, the woman promises that she will not ask him anything. But in a few minutes, she forces him to reveal the secret of laughter. The Hunter Pirim reveals the secret and tells it to his wife and at this moment the wolves tear it up and eat it (Seyidov, 2005, pp.6-15).
To reveal the psycho-semantics of laughter in this tale, you must draw your attention to another version. In this version; When the Hunter Pirim asks the Padishah for snakes to spit on his mouth, he responds to the Hunter Pirim: "you can't keep it secret". The Hunter Pirim says, "I won't disclose it to anyone". The Padishah repeats itself three times, but is not satisfied with it. At the end, the Padishah spits on his mouth. When he leaves the house, he sees that he understands the language of locusts, birds, and ants" (Rustamzadeh, 2006, p.240).
In this version, the wife forces the Hunter Pirim to reveal the secret: Hunter Pirim asks his wife to call the mullah. When his wife goes to call the mullah, Pirim encounters an event: "A rooster runs behind the hen. He is unable to reach him and catches another hen. Even if it's shameful, I'm sorry, he copulates with this hen. And then said: I am not a hunter-like husband as a Hunter Pirim. There is no difference for me on which hen I will climb." After these words of the rooster, Hunter Pirim divorces his wife (Rustamzadeh, 2006, p.241).
To define the relation between laughter and the level of various psychosocial relationships in the community, we consider it useful to take this fact into account in the whole context of the plot. The Hunter Pirim is presented in the tale as a person sensitive to questions of honor. The Hunter Pirim suddenly became angry when he saw the raped white snake, which is why he is trying to kill the male snake. But although he mistakenly hurts the white snake, daughter of the Padishah of snakes, the latter has decided to reward him. As specified in the story, the main reason for rewarding the Hunter Pirim is related to his attitude towards the question of honor. In fact, attaching importance to the question of honor by the Snake Padishah is linked to the importance of the male community. Thus, in Azerbaijani society, women are considered the honor of men and to avoid being the target of reproaches in this community, men seriously control the behavior of women in their environment. This sensible attitude towards the question of honor has a profound influence on the creativity of the heroes of society. The sensitivity of the Azerbaijani man to the question of honor was also transformed into a hero of the take. Although his daughter was injured, the Snake Padishah decided to reward Hunter Pirim because of his concern for his honor. As you know, the other psychological complex of the male social environment was reflected in this situation: attentively observing the question of honor in society is revealed in this case as the necessary condition to gain honor between men. This psychological complex existing in society calls for implementing the wishes of Hunter Pirim by the Padishah of snakes, because, in this situation, the Hunter Pirim and the Padishah of snakes share the sensitivity of the same psychological and social environment in matters of honor. The Padishah of snakes, being influenced by the psycho-social complex of society linked to the sensitive attitude towards the question of honor, contrary to his will, accepts to spit on the mouth of Hunter Pirim, which allows him to understand all the secrets of nature.
As the tale proves, spitting on the mouth of the Hunter Pirim, the Padishah of snakes hesitates to provide him with all the secrets of nature. In reality, this hesitation is a metaphor for psychological anxiety to be kept secret in the male environment. Despite the fact that Padishah of the snakes told him repeatedly that he would not be able to keep it secret, the Hunter Pirim persists in this case. In this case, "the pin" is a symbol of keeping a secret. Thus, you may encounter a lot of symbolic equivalence of a word/secret and a saliva in society referring to other facts. For example, it is recognized that sometimes different people express their idea of any problem in the same way and in this case, we use the language "when they spit in the mouth". The expression "spit in someone's mouth" means to share the same secret, to have the same idea of something. In addition, there is another expression specifying "a man who will not go back on his promise" with the direction of keeping his promise in the community. In this case, the act of spitting appeared as a metaphor for saying. There is also the expression "he is not clever enough to keep words in his mouth" used among people about the person who is unable to keep secret. In this sense, in the tale "Hunter Pirim", the semantics of letting him enter a secret by the king of snakes sitting in his mouth is found here more clearly. This means that by the action of sitting with the same semantics in comparison with a word, the Hunter Pirim is left in the secret of nature by the king of snakes. During the transfer of this mystery, the anxiety born of its maintenance is indeed the psychosocial anxiety of the male environment linked to secrecy. It is no coincidence that the person who is unable to keep a secret uses an insulting expression "henpecked". It should be noted that the other aspect of the socio-psychological complex of men was expressed in this tale: the Hunter Pirim faces a risk of disclosing the secret, namely when he remains in contact with his wife. The woman uses many methods to obtain the secret from her husband Hunter. At the moment, men leaving their wives in secret are characterized from the episode "hen and rooster". As he saw in the plot mentioned above, the rooster, without taking into account the hen taken to him, demonstrates his phallic power compared to another chicken. When his leg-over relationship with a hen is over, the rooster expresses the mockery of the male community by saying: "Remember well, I am not the Pirim for you". The expression of the mockery and irony of the male group against the Hunter Pirim in the context of the demonstration of the phallic power of the rooster to the chicken finds its origin in the traditional culture of the perception of the deprivation of masculinity in the cases where men let women enter their secret from the point of view of sociocultural conditions. In a word, "keeping the secret" is seen in culture as one of the basic metaphors of masculinity in the community, as having phallic power, capable of protecting one's honor, etc. In the cultural environment, which is based on the opinion of the male community, the fact that women cannot keep secrets is associated even with their biological deficiency. Among the people there is a saying that "a woman cannot keep secret that she has no esophagus". In the opinion of the male community, it is understood that as if the women had no esophagus and that their inability to keep secret was strictly linked to this fact. The future of men leaving their wives in secret is also reflected in many folk texts. In a text "do not leave the woman in your secret", one of the words said by Bahlul Danende, one of the heroes of the East is the following: "The man who opens his mystery to his wife is miserable (Rustamzadeh & Farhadov, 2012, p.332). And in the text "Do not count on the shah and do not open your mystery to your wife", the same hero of the joke expresses the meaning of the word he sold: "The man who leaves his wife in his secret is miserable " (Rustamzadeh, 2012, p.338). In fact, as folk texts show, the male community explains its "obligations" before society (Tiger, 1984, p.130). The challenges posed by men in the community prohibiting letting women enter their mystery is not an approach reflected only in folk texts. Even social life also contains more challenges of this type which play an important role in the formation of relationships between men. Now let's pay attention to the issue of laughter in the text of the fairy tale mentioned above. As shown in the story plot mentioned above, a man's laughter in front of the woman creates fertile conditions to reveal the mystery among women considered important to the male community. That is to say, the irrelevant laughter of a man in front of a woman means that the transfer of a secret is kept among the male community. There is an expression, notably from this approach in the male community: "A man who laughs in front of a woman will laugh only once in his life" (Azarlu, 1994, p.17). In the Azerbaijani community, there is such an expression: "The real man is not very laughable and he does not cry as a rule" (Azarlu, 1994, p.22). Not only in the metaphorical world of folklore, but also in the facts of ethnographic life, are respected people generally described as dark and unsociable people. Even then, such insulting expressions are used about men who laugh more like "laughing like a wife" or "whitening teeth like a cat". In a word, laughter is perceived in this community as a behavior that relaxes the severe position of men and causes damage to their masculinity. On the other hand, in Azerbaijani society, the burst of laughter from women is not considered positive behavior. But in the cultural context, the negative attitude towards the laughter of men and women is distinguished from each other by their psycho-semantic point of view: if the burst of laughter of women is linked to the danger of transmitting the message sexually attractive to people around, to men -this laughter is linked to damage to their masculinity. In this sense, the laughter of the Hunter Pirim is also a behavior causing damage to masculinity which is characterized by the transfer of secrecy from the male community to women. Thus, the Hunter Pirim violating the ban on laughter being considered important for men violates the condition of keeping the mysteries secret. From this point of view, laughter is one of the behaviors determining the boundaries of masculinity in society. In this case, laughter (laughter from Hunter Pirim), as expressed by some specialists, does not personify the semantics of ancient mythical and magical behaviors, on the contrary, it is perceived as stereotypes linked to the damage caused by laughter with male rigor in society.

Laughter and social communication
One of the psycho-cultural reasons for the tension of male participants in an enterprise consisting mainly of women is related to the fact that the ego manifests itself more seriously and in a mode of self-defense with women. Any rude and insulting word addressed to a man in men's business and if women join him can cause completely different emotional reactions in Azerbaijani society. Although a rude word alone provokes an emotional reaction with less tension, in a male environment, especially in communities that include women, the harsh word spoken to a man when a woman joins can cause a rather serious emotional reaction. The cultural environment always supports the female image in the context of harsh conditions to confirm masculinity. It is no coincidence that when the Ottoman Sultan Selim, attacked the Safavid State in 1514, saw the battlefield empty, he wrote a letter to Shah Ismail Khatai to incite him to battle: For the glorious sultans and the mighty Khagans, the country is like their wife and whoever has a little personality, a little courage will not tolerate the aggression of another person. Nevertheless, for several days, my brave soldiers have entered your country, but there is no sign of you, you are hiding so that I do not know about your existence (Vilayeti, 1998, p. 151).
It stems from the attitude of men towards women as a way of recognizing themselves in the Azerbaijani community. The ego of masculinity reacts against the external influences of close women in self-defense and in the male environment in attack. In this sense, feeling more at ease in a place where there are no women, that is to say in male companies, is indeed the act of self-defense of men. By this method, the ego of masculinity goes to a different regime of self-expression. The transition to the environment of vulnerable expressions, aggressive attitudes, and open and secret fights for a job takes place at the same time as the holding of female company. In addition to the funeral ceremonies, you can regularly encounter real and symbolic conflicts in the male companies grouped together as a result of the exit of the female enterprise in Azerbaijani society. This conflict can go as far as physical confrontations, alongside symbolic conflicts, such as the competition of two ashugs, cockfighting, etc. Even there is such a joke that "A man whose marriage passes without a fight is not a man" or "A marriage which passes without a quarrel is not a marriage". In a nutshell, fighting for position, protecting oneself against any attack that can occur at any time and counter-attacking at the right time is a major model of psycho-cultural behavior on the team. Telling anecdotes in an environment predominant by the contentious psycho-cultural attitude and laughing in this environment with all the participants is an event with particular semantics (Takovski, 2019 p.151;Campbell, 2019, p.143).
Organize a humorous society in a state dominated by a tense and controversial conflict psychology in a male environment, united for various reasons (this conflict is due to behavioral stereotypes determined by the culture of the ego of individuals, and not personal hostility). It is understood as an "agreement on renunciation" of the aggressive attitude of this environment directed at each other from a psycho-semantic point of view. In this case, the vocabulary of the male company, adapted to a pleasant laugh, changes, and the descriptions are aimed at events that go beyond cultural norms. In the jokes told to the male group to make them laugh, all the participants gathered around the same interest, and special attention is paid to jokes. Without going into a series of jokes, we can admit that the plot of jokes told in this environment is related to women who cheat on their husbands, men who experience sexual weakness along with women, parents who do not establish the right relationship with their children, with men in a state of shame in a society of frivolous women, etc. As the researchers noted, these anecdotes describe stereotypes of the male environment on women (Bronner, 2005, p.29). Laughing at the collective in the environment in which these anecdotes are discussed means a message to the collective that "the problem is not related to me". In this sense, collective laughter is a behavioral act confirming the collective psychological complex. In such an environment, the common denominator of psychological complexes and interests of the male environment is revealed. In other words, laughing with a group means complicity with psychosocial complexes.
While telling jokes in the men's business in order to have time, all participants have the opportunity to tell a joke. Following the observation of the process of telling jokes in a male company, we can come to the conclusion that telling a joke in this company is associative in nature. In other words, each joke told in this environment recalls other jokes with similar content. Although each participant who laughs with the group at a joke reacts the same way with the group, they do not try to tell a joke. He explains it by the fact that he does not have the capacity to tell jokes. In this situation, avoiding anyone telling the joke whose plot is already known to them provides us with unusual information about the nature of the environment mentioned. Such a question arises: why do some people who know very well the object of a joke refuse to tell it in an environment, explaining it by the absence of its capacity to tell jokes?
The character of a joke environment is that this environment is transformed into a business that has become sensitive in a laughing context, looking for a reason to laugh. If a joke does not fit the environment and ultimately does not meet the business needs for laughter, the joke storyteller can become the target of that laughter. Typically, the failure of the expected community reaction results in disappointment from the joke storyteller. Consequently, the person thinking that he does not have the capacity to tell anecdotes joins this environment with his own laughter, but opposes the status of a storyteller, which obliges him to have artistic skills. This fact proves once again that the male group is dominated mainly by the acute dramatic psychological effect. In this sense, the male group's "joke company" is a media of the psycho-cultural conflict disguised by choosing to laugh with the group.
Failure to satisfy the laughing interests of such a group by telling a text can expose the cashier himself to laughing. To avoid such a severe attitude, the participant declaring he incapable of telling anecdotes, refuses to tell a joke that he knows very well. As the researchers have pointed out, telling a joke allows the cashier to reveal his intelligence in an obvious way, to prove his skills, and to have fun with sufficient hearing. If the joke he told is not ridiculous, he runs the risk of being in a confused situation (Leveen, 1996, p.31). In this sense, the anecdote narrator is a person who deposits his ego investment for the success of the anecdote (Prange & Vitols, 1990, p.629). But sometimes the male business responds to a joke that does not cause laughter with a conditional smile. The main reason here is to save the narrator from disappointment. This probability, that is, the confused situation of the joker narrator and the need to deliver disappointment, once again confirms the presence of an acute dramatic effect in the male company.

Conclusion
Culture contains many statements and concepts related to laughter. An analysis of these facts proves that "laughter" in the context of social contacts is a definition that distinguishes between aggressive and exiled behavior, and not just "positive relations". To avoid such a collective attitude, people must always coordinate their behavior with traditions. In a word, ironic laughter is one of the cultural forces that guarantee the sustainability of culture. One of the psycho-cultural complexes that are widely observed in Azerbaijani society is the process of "searching for meaning" in laughter, carried out by an unknown cause of the people around the community as an ethnographic fact. The search for meaning in this type of laughter also left deep traces in Azerbaijani folklore. In a word, laughter together with the community in society and laughter only in the community represent various socio-psychological complexes. It should be noted once again that laughter only in a collective stimulates both the inferiority complex in culture and laughter caused by reasons unknown to the collective that compel others to look for various shortcomings.
Laughing loudly and laughing at men correspondingly by women and men in the Azerbaijani community are considered anti-moral behavior. Research has shown that the non-acceptance of a woman's laughter in the cultural context is associated with a sexually attractive message given by this laughter to the male environment; and much laughter comes from a perception of behavior that harms the severity of masculinity.