“…22 Based on their verbal and nonverbal responses to open-ended questions about the episode, Condit contends there is a "disproportional pleasure for oppositional and dominant readers" in which oppositional reading imposes "oppressive quantities of work." 23 Condit concludes, therefore, that one of the key factors constraining audiences from shaping "their own readings, and hence their social life" is "the ratio between the work required and pleasure produced in decoding a text." 24 Condit's conclusion is flawed, however, because it is based on a one-dimensional conception of pleasure that devalues "the pleasure of oppositional reading" by coding it as "work."…”