Relational Humor and Identity Framing in the “Virgin vs. Chad” Meme Format

Extremist narratives combine two relational dynamics: the in-group is portrayed as both socially superior and simultaneously victimized by an antagonistic out-group, which legitimizes hostility or defensive solutions. Despite their relevance, such narratives remain comparatively understudied. To date, little research has examined how extremist narratives are represented through memes, and particularly how humour operates within memetic forms. This article develops and tests a three-layered analytical framework for examining humour in extremist digital cultures. The framework integrates insights from narrative studies, multimodal discourse analysis, and humour theory to capture how memes condense antagonisms, stabilize symbolic contrasts, and calibrate affective positioning. The Virgin vs. Chad meme format is used as a case study due to its binary archetypal structure and recurrent circulation in Spanish far-right meme ecologies. The study draws on 1225 posts on X (May–August 2024), from which 17 memes employing the format were selected for in-depth qualitative analysis. The findings show that the format performs symbolic compression by staging binary oppositions between in-group and out-group identities, typically valorizing figures associated with nationalism, masculinity, and epistemic certainty while delegitimizing those linked to progressivism, pluralism, or emotional expressiveness. These meanings are stabilized through repeated visual and typographic conventions, including character archetypes, split-panel layouts, and indexical stylization. Humour arises through devices such as irony, reversal, exaggeration, and incongruity, which render these oppositions as recognizable contrasts. By integrating insights from humour theory, narrative framing, and multimodal discourse analysis, the article contributes a methodological model for examining how memes condense and circulate antagonistic distinctions in online political ecologies.