reserach paper
marelo
67691961.pdf
220
* School of Psychology, Howard College Campus, University of KwaZulu-Natal.
Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to Jarred Martin, School of Psychology, Howard Col- lege Campus, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X540001, Durban, 4000, South Africa. Email: [email protected]
International Journal of Men’s Health, Vol. 10, No. 3, Fall 2011, 220-239. © 2011 by the Men’s Studies Press, LLC. All rights reserved. http://www.mensstudies.com jmh.1003.220/$15.00 • DOI: 10.3149/jmh.1003.220 • ISSN/1532-6306 • eISSN/1933-0278
JARRED MARTIN*, MSOCSCI, and KAYMARLIN GOVENDER*, D.LITT. ET PHIL.
“Making Muscle Junkies”: Investigating Traditional Masculine Ideology,
Body Image Discrepancy, and the Pursuit of Muscularity in Adolescent Males
In this paper, we investigated the relationship between traditional masculine ide- ology, body image discrepancy, self-esteem, and the pursuit of muscularity in a sample of school going boys. Constructs were measured using the Traditional Masculine Ideology Scale, Lynch and Zellner’s Body Figure Drawings (1999), Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Inventory, and the Drive for Muscularity Scale. Ques- tionnaires were administered to 508 boys, from Grades 10, 11, and 12, at a pub- lic single-sex high school in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Analysis revealed significant positive correlations between traditional masculine ideology, the pur- suit for muscularity, and body image discrepancy. Indian school boys experienced body image discrepancy more severely than their Black and White counterparts in the sample. Further, there was a significant use of muscle supplements and steroids by school going boys.
Keywords: body image discrepancy; hegemonic masculinity; pursuit of muscu- larity; school going boys; steroids
Raewyn Connell (1987, 1994, 1995, 2000, 2001a, 2001b, 2002) asserts that hege- monic masculinities transform male bodies into symbolic tools. In this respect becom- ing, and remaining, a “real man” is dependent on the contextualized subjective and normative meanings of masculinity(ies); meanings which are cultivated within the in- tersecting perceptual and evaluatory judgments of diverse morphologies which make the pursuit of localized dominant masculinities desirable amongst men and boys in a particular milieu. Cognizant that muscularity is a “defining feature” (Pope, Phillips, & Olivardia, 2000, p. 50) of traditional hegemonic masculinities; the present study builds on findings which have shown a significant association between masculine body image, psychological well-being, and conformity to traditional masculine ideology.
Unlike previous research, however, this study examines what perceptions of tradi- tional masculinity hold for the body image discrepancy, self-esteem, and behavioural repertoires, in South African school boys. Research has demonstrated that young adult males have the highest incidence of body dissatisfaction and desire for greater muscle mass (Lynch & Zellner, 1999; Tager, Good, & Bauer-Morrison, 2006) compared to other cohorts. Moreover boys who participate in power sports1 have presented with higher rates of steroid use, dysmorphic concern, and depression (Cafri, van der Berg, & Thompson, 2006). Such findings carry implications for the role of school boy rugby in South Africa; particularly where the traditional masculinity of corporeal dominance endorses the pursuit of a muscular mesomorphology and awards status within the school social hierarchies (Robertson, 2003; Swain, 2000, 2003; Tager et al., 2006).
Accordingly, in the South African school boy cultural milieu, this study aimed to ex- amine how males who endorse traditional masculinity think about their body image as a measure of self-worth as well as the consequent schemantic, psychoemotional and be- havioural elements of conformity to traditional masculine ideology.
THE MALE BODY: THE PRIMARY AGENT OF HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY
In social spaces masculinities operate as forms of systemic social arrangements and gender relations (Connell, 1995). Hegemonic masculinity is “the masculinity that oc- cupies the hegemonic position in a given pattern of gender relations” (Connell, 1995, p.76). Connell refers to Gramsci’s (1973) idea of “hegemony” to describe masculini- ties ascending to dominance through culturally accepted norms and values which are tacitly complied with by men and women in the pursuit of the patriarchal dividend. This suggests that hegemonic masculinities are malleable, rife with difference and con- tradiction as they jostle with “lesser”2 masculinities and femininity(ies) for power (Con- nell, 1995, 2002).
This is most evident in social practices such as sport, labour, and sexual relations that illustrate, “The materiality of male bodies … as a referent for the configuration of so- cial practices defined as masculinity” (Connell, 1995, p. 59). Given the male body’s centrality in the individual and collective manifestation of masculinities (Davis, 2003; Donaldson, 1993; Govender, 2006, 2010), Connell coined the term body-reflexive prac- tices (1995, p. 51), which attempts to operationalise the masculinization of male (and female) bodies as agents and objects of gendered practices. This suggests that particu- lar morphologies only acquire meaning-in-context, for example, in competition on the sports field. For South African school boys, performances of athleticism, dominance, and toughness are key to (re)producing social context and subjectivity that is mascu- line (Govender, 2006; Messerschmidt, 2000; Morrell, 2001; Phillips, 2006; Ratele, 2007).
221
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
1 These sports necessitate or place emphasis on muscle mass, size, and are excessively physi- cal in nature (Grieve, 2007). Examples include rugby, American football, wrestling, bodybuild- ing, and power-lifting.
2 Connell proposes that there are three nonhegemonic masculinities: subordinate, complicit and marginalized—accordingly characterized by how each one positions masculinity in gender relations (Morrell, 2001).
The imperious culture of rugby makes it the quintessential social practice upon which hegemonic masculinity can be displayed. Ratele et al. (2007) showed how school boys who play rugby develop a “jock” identity thereby attaining a hegemonic status which elicits and demands respect from other boys. Similar studies in the United Kingdom have illustrated the close link between traditional masculinity and competitive sport in British school boys (Connell, 1995; Swain 2000, 2003). The present study builds on the above work by taking into account the utilitarian symbolism of the muscular meso- morph for school boys.
Warren Susman asserts that “one of the things that makes the modern world “mod- ern” is the development of consciousness of the self” (Susman in Luciano, 2001, p. 3). This echoes Connell’s body-reflexive practices, Giddens’s (1991) “body projects” and Crossley’s (2001) “reflective embodiment”; which argue that males construct, perceive, and evaluate their bodies in an attempt to anchor a sense of “self.” For this reason hege- monic masculinities problematise body image construction in boys; as boys’ reflexiv- ity becomes constrained within the boundaries of a hegemonically masculinised social space, regulating their behavior according to social standards of traditional masculin- ity.
The central critique of Connell’s (1995) hegemonic masculinities has primarily come from discursive analysts who maintain that males negotiate a myriad of contextual and contradictory identity positions at a social and subjective level that is far more psy- chodiscursively nuanced than Connell gives credence (Blackbeard & Lindegger, 2007; Frosh et al., 2002; Moller, 2007; Wetherell & Edley, 1997, 1999). Connell’s (2001a) re- buttal is that scholars who adopt a solely discursive perspective fail to see the formu- lation of hegemonic masculinity as a thesis which posits “gender relations are also constituted in, and shape, non-discursive practices such as labour, violence, sexuality, [and] child care … ” (p. 7).
In sum, the male body is both a means and an end in hegemonic masculinities. Vital to this masculinity is the necessity to prove the standards through bodily appearance and performance (Shefer, Ratele, Strebel, Shabalala, & Buikema, 2007); and so males with the mesomorphic soma position themselves as dominant in a particular social hierar- chy (Lindegger & Maxwell, 2007; Phillips, 2006). Males who do not satisfy the ideals are branded weak or effeminate (Connell, 1995, Govender, 2006, 2010), and experience anxiety about their body image (Wienke, 1998). In pursuit of the ideals, males may en- gage in risk behaviors, such as extreme dieting, steroid use, and over-exercising, in order to be seen as a “real man.” It is in this environment that the male body is both problem and solution.
Masculine Morphology
Hegemonic masculinities which graft to the bedrock values of traditional masculin- ity have classically exalted masculine males which ooze machismo as the body ideal for boys. Research has highlighted the putative male somatoform in social media and discourse is the mesomorph: an assertive, energetic, lean and muscular man (Leit, 1997; Leit, Pope, & Gray, 2001; Luciano, 2001; Mishkind, Rodin, Silberstein, & Strigel- Moore, 1988; Wienke, 1998). The burgeoning industry geared towards the male body and its (com)modification has propelled the emergence of a mass3 media, as an influ-
222
MARTIN & GOVENDER
3 Coined in this study to refer to the specific media which portray hypermasculine bodies as a cultural ideal and incite males to pursue increased muscle mass.
ential force, which informs males’ perceptions of masculine morphology by creating an aura of anxiety and self-consciousness over appearance. The mass media does not sim- ply market muscularity, but attaches degrees of social confidence, mastery and mas- culine prowess to diverse musculatures. Ergo, body image discrepancy represents both a physical incongruence between body reality and body ideal but also a potential dis- comfort with the personal and social connotations attached to that incongruence. High- lighting the contemporary omnipresence of the message that “buffer is better,” Lynch and Zellner (1999) found males in their 60s and 70s do not experience the marked body image distress that their younger counterparts do. Furthermore since the democratic emancipation of South Africa in 1994, and the subsequent pushes for female empow- erment in the workplace, South African men engage the mass media in a context of in- creasing gender equity (Walker, 2005).
Women, by entering the workplace in quantitatively and qualitatively different ways, are reconstituting the realm of work; ensuring that it no longer is the showground to enact, trial, and attest one’s machismo (Pope et al., 2000). In the South African context, Morrell (2001) identified “reactive” or “defensive” masculinities which seek to “turn back changes in order to reassert their power” (2001, p. 26) post Apartheid. In this re- spect Morrell (2001) highlights the high incidence of gender violence as an illustration of the sardonic “doing” of masculinity by male bodies to (re)claim superiority over women.
Body Image and Self-Esteem
Cafri et al. (2006) assert that adolescent boys employ three socio-cognitive processes when viewing bodies: internalization, appearance investment, and appearance com- parison; which enable the social comparison and value judgment of their body (Grieve, 2007; McCreary & Sasse, 2000). Adams and Govender (2008) found that “the process of learning to obtain masculine self-fulfillment is characterized by a boy’s recognition of his inadequacy” (p. 553). In this vein, Leit (1997) found that boys who are continu- ally exposed to more muscular bodies through the media will experience their bodies as less attractive and puny: having a negative effect on adolescent boys’ views of mas- culine body image (Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006; Cafri et al.; McCreary & Sasse; Pope et al., 2000); and increasing body dissatisfaction (Grieve).
Perceived shortcomings in musculature predispose some males to pursue increased muscularity to compensate for the distress over their masculinity (Olivardia, 2001). Research supports a strong positive correlation between perceived shortfalls in mus- culature and low self-esteem (Bartsch, 2007; Bohne, Keuthen, Wilhelm, Deckersbach, & Jenicke, 2002; Cafri et al., 2006; Grieve, 2007), in addition to anxiety regarding masculinity (Olivardia, 2001). Furthermore, the link between body image discrepancy, depression (Margolies, 1999; Oosthuizen, Lambert, & Castle, 1998; Sobanski & Schmidt, 2000), as well as suicidal ideation and attempted suicide (Kittler, Menard, & Phillips, 2007; Pope et al., 2005), has also been evidenced.
The Pursuit of Muscularity
In a society where the boundaries of bodily health have become eschewed, the line between moderation and obsession in obtaining muscularity has become blurred. The radical pursuit of muscularity can be characterized by excessive weightlifting (Mc-
223
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
Creary & Sasse, 2000), extreme dieting (Grieve, 2007), perceptions of body size inad- equacy (Grieve, 2007), dysmorphic concern (Jorgensen, Castle, Roberts, & Grath-Mar- nat, 2001), and illegal substance use (prohormones, ephedrine; Cafri et al., 2006); all of which impedes regular social functions (Pope et al., 2000). Leit, Gray, and Pope (2002) propose that the pathological drive for muscularity is clinically manifested as muscle dysmorphia, a subtype of body dysmorphic disorder (Hitzeroth, Wessels, Zungu-Dirwayi, Oosthuizen, & Stein, 2001). Muscle dysmorphia is a pathological cog- nitive-behavioral preoccupation with increasing muscularity to compensate for per- ceived muscular inadequacies (Hitzeroth, 2001; Olivardia, 2001; Pope et al., 2000).
In school environments there are indications that American school boys who partic- ipate in power sports, which can be likened to rugby, have a greater propensity to pur- sue muscularity and to use ergogenic (performance-enhancing) substances (Cafri et al., 2006), as well as develop muscle dysmorphia (Grieve, 2007). This is comparable to the results of a South African study which found that in a sample of 28 bodybuilders 53.6% presented with muscle dysmorphia (Hitzeroth et al., 2001).
Research conducted on muscle dysmorphia and body dysmorphic disorder appears to be promising given the high degree of association found with pursuit of muscularity (Cafri et al., 2006; McCreary & Sasse, 2000); but interestingly, little research has been generated in South Africa on the pursuit of muscularity and its relation to certain be- havioral outcomes in adolescent cohorts (Meyer & Govender, 2009). This study ad- dresses this caveat in a sample of school boys attending a middle class high school.
AIMS
The primary purpose of this study was to assess the pursuit of muscularity in school going boys and its relation to traditional masculine ideology in a public single-sex high school. A secondary aim was to investigate the relationship between traditional mas- culine ideology and the subjective experience of body image discrepancy. Two ancil- lary aims entailed an examination of the correlation between body image discrepancy and self-esteem, and the relationship between adherence to traditional masculine ide- ology and key demographic variables such as “race”4 and age.
METHOD
Participants and Sampling
A purposive sample was constituted of 508 adolescent boys (from grades 10, 11, and 12) from a high school in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. This school was selected as it is a single-sex male school with a culturally diverse student body; and although the school encourages a variety of different academic, sporting, and cultural activities in its learners, rugby is a central feature of school life, tradition and reputation. Importantly this environment serves as a prime site in which boys can compare their bodies.
The boys who participated were between the ages of 15 to 19 years old. This age co- hort was selected on the basis that: (1) these age groups represent the transformational
224
MARTIN & GOVENDER
4 The use of term race is not meant to reflect a stable classification system. It is used in order to reflect the manner in which such a term is integrally bound up in constructing daily life in Apartheid and Democratic South Africa.
period in which boys undergo a number of physical and psychosocial transitions into becoming men; and (2) these cohorts were receiving increasing attention in South African adolescent literature because of their vulnerability to risk behaviours.
Measures
Biographical Questionnaire. To supplement the psychometric measures a thirteen item biographical questionnaire was constructed. Four questions requested informa- tion about monitoring and altering muscularity; three questions pertained to relevant bi- ographical information about the participant. A further three questions are oriented around subjective anxiety over body image appearance. Two questions inquired about rugby and sport participation, as social practices related to the performance of mas- culinity. One question asked about equating muscularity with self-worth.
Body image discrepancy. A measure for body image discrepancy in boys had been adapted for the purpose of this study. The male figure drawings were adapted from Lynch and Zellner (1999, in Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006), and the questions were ad- justed from Pope, Phillips, and Olivardia (2000). The revised measure sought to gauge the boys’ subjective perceptions of their bodies and normative beliefs regarding body image. Bartsch (2007) has proposed that should discrepancies emerge between per- ceptions of the actual self and ideal self it is likely to provoke anxiety about body image.
Conformity to hegemonic masculine ideology. The Traditional Masculine Ideology Scale (TMI) is focused on evaluating participants’ adherence to traditional ideals about men (McCreary, Saucier & Courtenay, 2005). The TMI is a 5-item scale which suc- cinctly measures the core hypothetically derived subscales of masculinity which in- clude: risk taking, self-sufficiency, physical toughness, emotional restrictedness, and avoidance of femininity. Participants rate their responses on a 4-point scale from not true at all (1) to very true (4; for item one); and not at all important (1) to very impor- tant (4; for items two-five). Scores are averaged into a single index with higher scores indicating more traditional views of masculinity. Cronbach’s alpha for the present study was situated at 0.551.
Self-esteem. The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSES) measures the global sense of self-esteem of a respondent (McCreary & Sasse, 2000). The RSES is a 10-item meas- ure in which participants are required to rate their responses to positive and negative statements on a 4-point scale (McCreary & Sasse), ranging from strongly agree (4) to strongly disagree (1), with items 3, 5, 8, 9, and 10 reverse scored. Scores are averaged into a single index in which higher scores indicate higher levels of self-esteem. Cron- bach’s alpha for the present study was situated at 0.82.
Pursuit of muscularity. The Drive for Muscularity Scale (DMS) was developed in order to measure the attitudes and behaviours related to increasing muscularity (Mc- Creary & Sasse, 2000). The DMS provides the opportunity to asses the behavioural outcomes associated with the pursuit of muscularity, verified by a positive correlation (r = 0.24, p < 0.001) between frequency of weight training and higher DMS scores (McCreary & Sasse). Furthermore, higher DMS scores appear to have an association
225
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
with poorer self-esteem in boys, evidenced by a negative correlation (r = -0.41, p < 0.001; McCreary & Sasse). The measure is composed of 15 items which allows par- ticipants to respond to each item on an adapted 5-point scale from never (1) to always (5). Scores are averaged into a single index in which higher scores indicate a higher drive for increased muscularity. Cronbach’s alpha for the present study was situated at 0.9.
Data Collection
Data was collected during the 50 minute Life Orientation lesson for each class of grade 10, 11, and 12 boys, in their respective classrooms. This occurred over a period of a week. Participants received standardized instructions regarding the completion of the survey in each session. They responded to the questionnaire in an anonymous ca- pacity. Upon completion, the answer booklet was placed in a sealed envelope by indi- vidual participants and collected by the researchers.
DATA ANALYSIS
Data was analyzed using the statistical package SPSS (version 15.0). Descriptive sta- tistics (frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations) were used to analyze biographical data and some data from the psychometric measures. Pearson’s correla- tion coefficient (r) was run to test the linear association between masculinity, body image discrepancy, self-esteem, and the pursuit of muscularity. Correlations were also employed between biographical items and the psychometric measures. Multiple re- gression analyses were also used as a technique to establish which of the biographical items and psychometric measures served as the strongest correlates for the pursuit of muscularity in adolescent males. One-way ANOVA procedures were run using age and “race” as independent variables respectively, and the pursuit of muscularity, body image discrepancy, and traditional masculine ideology as separate dependent variables. Post hoc Scheffe tests were used to locate the source of significance at different levels of the independent variable. Chi-square tests of independence were used to test the associa- tion between selected nominal variables, namely, “race” and steroid or supplement usage, as well as rugby participation and steroid or supplement use. The criterion for significant testing was at the 5% level.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
To guarantee participant autonomy an information letter was supplied to the partici- pants and the parent/guardians to communicate the purpose of the research, the volun- tary nature of the study, and the right of participants to withdraw at any time during the study. Informed consent forms were also supplied to participants and the parent/guardians. Only participants who had returned both sets of forms and replied in the affirmative participated in the study. Furthermore, participant anonymity and con- fidentiality were ensured through the use of response booklets which did not require the names of participants; and numerical coding was used to manage the booklets through data collection and analysis. On completion of the study, findings were made available to the school for any interested participant, parent or staff member to view.
226
MARTIN & GOVENDER
RESULTS
Profiling the “Muscle Junkies”
Descriptive analysis revealed that the age of the sample varied between 15 and 19 years, with the majority of boys (39.0%) being 17 years old, 12.2% of boys were 15 years old or younger, 17.1% were 18 years of age or older and 31.7% were 16 years of age. According to grade an equal number of grade 11 (35.6%) and grade 12 (35.6%) stu- dents constituted the sample, and 28.7% belonged to grade 10. The major “race” com- position of the sample was dominated by Whites (41.7%), followed by Indians (27%), Blacks (24.6%), and Coloureds (5.5%). The majority of the sample (83.1%) indicated they participated in competitive sports, and 39.2% of boys in the sample played rugby. Interestingly, 73.6% of boys in the sample believe that having a larger musculature was tied to enhanced feelings of self-worth. Related to this were 70.7% of responses indi- cating that boys were sometimes distressed and anxious about their concerns over their muscle appearance, and 64.6% indicated they sometimes avoided having all or part of their body seen by others. A substantial portion of the sample indicated that they took care of their physical appearance (89.9%); and 56.5% of the participants currently held a gym membership. In relation to the amount of time spent each day on physical ac- tivities solely geared towards improving bodily appearance, 45.5% of boys expended 1-2 hours and 43.3% of boys spent less than an hour on such activities. With respect to the use of drugs and supplements taken to gain muscle mass, lose weight, or improve appearance, the boys’ responses showed that 48% (244 boys of the 508 large sample) had only used legal supplements, 37.7% (188 boys) never used drugs or supplements, 12.2% (62 boys) had used a combination of legal and illegal supplements, and 2.8% (14 boys) used only illegal steroids and pills. Comparatively, the boys sampled for this study appeared to have a higher incidence of illegal anabolic-androgenic steroid use (15%) than the adolescent males sampled by Cafri et al. (2006), who found that a total of 9.8% (26 of 269 adolescent males, with a mean age of 14.64) of their participants had used steroids, ephedrine, prohormones, or a combination.
The results in Table 1 indicate the experience of body image discrepancy, calculated from the average difference in choice between body ideal and body reality, for which the mean difference is 1.496. Therefore, the average boy desires a body image that is roughly one and half body figures larger than his current body type. Noteworthy, is that some boys desire a body one (40%), two (33.9%), and even three (9.4%) times larger than their own. In total, 87.3% of the boys desire a somatoform that is larger from their current body. The selection of the male body figures appears to demonstrate a trend for boys evaluating their body reality higher than the normative body, selecting a body ideal higher than their body reality, and the body perceived to be most desired by the opposite sex as higher than their body ideal.
Of importance to this study, the TMI Scale mean situated at 2.706 (SD = 0.515), in- dicated a high investment by the sample in traditional masculine norms; and the global self-esteem of the sample, as sampled with the RSES, was found to be moderate (M = 3.102; SD = 0.522).
A significant proportion of boys’ responses on the DMS identified unfavorable per- ceptions of their body image and desire increased musculature. What is of particular concern is the significant percentage of boys (38.6%) who frequently wished that they
227
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
228
MARTIN & GOVENDER
Table 1 Comparison of Body Shapes Chosen to Represent Boys’ Perceptions of: Body Reality, Body Ideal, the Body of an Average Person Their Age (Normative Body), and the Body Perceived to Be Most Desired by the Opposite Sex, As Seen in Figure 1; As Well As the Body Image Discrepancy (N = 508)
Figure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
BODY REALITY Percent 0.8 0.8 1.6 9.1 18.3 38.4 22.2 7.5 1.4 Mean 5.931 SD 1.286
BODY IDEAL Percent 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.2 7.9 43.5 30.5 15.2 Mean 7.427 SD 1.111
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BODY IMAGE DISCREPANCY Percent 11.4 40.0 33.9 9.4 2.6 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.4 Mean 1.496 SD 1.241
NORMATIVE BODY Percent 0.6 0.2 1.0 10.6 42.5 36.8 6.9 1.0 0.4 Mean 5.396 SD 0.498
BODY DESIRED BY OPPOSITE SEX Percent 0.8 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.2 3.3 35.8 42.1 15.2 Mean 7.567 SD 1.122
Note: Means and Standard Deviations have been rounded off to 3 decimal places.
Figure 1. Male Body Image Drawings, Developed by Lynch and Zellner (1999, in Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
were more muscular, the 27.6% of boys who believed that they would be more confi- dent if they had a greater muscle mass, and the 41.5% of respondents who sometimes thought about taking anabolic steroids. It was also found that another 7.1% regularly thought about taking steroids and 6.7% of boys have persistent thoughts about steroid use. In a similar vein, a clear majority of boys (65.5%) indicated that they believe they would feel stronger if they increased their muscularity, and 61.4% believed they would look better if they gained 10 pounds in bulk. However, only 34.6% of respondents said they would feel guilty if they missed a weight-training session. Comparing the findings of this study to the results of McCreary and Sasse’s (2000) study, it was evidenced that the overall mean for pursuit of muscularity registered in this sample was 2.569 (SD = 0.830), which is slightly higher than the mean for the boys in their study (M = 2.54; SD = 0.82). McCreary and Sasse sampled 197 high school students (96 of which were boys) with a mean age of 18 years.
The chest, arms (specifically the biceps), and legs are three key areas which have come under the spotlight when assessing males’ evaluations of appearance.5 Overall DMS responses indicated that boys were most dissatisfied with their arms (64.6%; M = 3.133), followed by the chest (61.3%; M = 2.866), and then the least amount of dis- satisfaction with the legs (54.5%; M = 2.702). These findings are worrying given that in all three cases over half of the respondents indicated negative views of these three regions.
In light of attitudes towards existing amounts of muscularity and dissatisfaction with certain areas of the body, it was expected that behavioral repertoires would be em- ployed to increase muscularity. DMS responses showed weight-lifting was the most popular (M = 2.911), followed by the use of protein and energy supplements (M = 2.131). Calorie consumption (M = 2.118) and weight-gain or protein shakes (M = 1.972) were not as popular; therefore signifying a lesser propensity to pursue an in- crease in overall weight in the drive for muscularity.
Masculinity, Muscularity and Self-Esteem
In regard to masculinity and muscularity, it was found that the pursuit of muscular- ity (r = 0.268), the belief in large musculature being tied to enhanced self-worth (r = 0.170), and the amount of time spent worrying about muscle appearance (r = 0.199), all appeared to have a highly significant moderate relationships with the adherence to traditional masculine norms at the level p < 0.001. Being a gym member (r = 0.137, p < 0.001) as well as spending more time on physical activities to enhance appearance (r = 0.152, p < 0.001) was also found to have a moderate but significant association to conformity to hegemonic norms. Greater belief in traditional masculine norms was also shown to be significantly correlated to an increase in anxiety and distress about mus- cle appearance (r = 0.094, p < 0.05)
Significant positive correlations were highlighted between traditional masculine ide- ology and three body image factors, namely body image discrepancy (r = 0.134, p < 0.01), a more muscular body ideal (r = 0.250, p < 0.001), and an increase in the more
229
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
5 See the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 2000), Muscle Appear- ance Satisfaction Scale (Mayville, Williamson, White, Netemeyer, & Drab, 2002), and Body Dysmorphic Disorder Examination—Self Report (Claiborn & Pedrick, 2002).
muscular physique perceived by boys to be desired by the opposite sex (r = 0.102, p < 0.05).
At the level p < 0.001, both the belief in more a well-built soma which improved self-esteem (r = 0.157), and a more strapping body ideal (r = 0.407), were significantly associated with larger differences in body reality and body ideal. Furthermore, a neg- ative correlation coefficient (r) of -0.088 was found to be significantly associated global self-esteem at the level p < 0.05.
Lastly, there were a number of highly significant positive correlations between the pursuit of muscularity and body image discrepancy (r = 0.172), gym membership (r = 0.259), the belief in large musculature as tied to enhanced self-worth (r = 0.255), time spent worrying about appearance (r = 0.242), distress over musculature appearance (r = 0.286), avoiding having parts of the body exposed for others to see (r = 0.184), and time spent on physical activities to increase musculature (r = 0.272), all at the p < 0.001 level. Also found at p < 0.001, was a negative correlation of self-esteem and the pursuit of muscularity (r = -0.201). A greater pursuit of muscularity was identified to be correlated with an increase in age (r = 0.139, p < 0.01), participation in rugby (r = 0.144, p < 0.01), and taking care of one’s physical appearance (r = 0.117, p < 0.01).
Age, “Race,” Rugby Participation, and Supplement Use
The ANOVA for the pursuit of muscularity by age was found to have a significant ef- fect (F(3 , 504) = 3.627; p < 0.05). The post-hoc analysis, (Scheffé’s test), indicated that boys who were 18 years or older displayed the greatest pursuit for muscularity (M = 2.7992), while boys 15 years old or younger had the least drive for enhanced muscu- lature (M = 2.3903).
The ANOVA for traditional masculine ideology by “race” highlighted a significant ef- fect (F(4 , 503) = 4.458; p < 0.01). Post-hoc analysis revealed that Indian boys scored the highest degree of conformity (M = 2.8285), followed by Black adolescents (M = 2.7440), Coloured (M = 2.6429), and White (M = 2.6238) participants.
The ANOVA for body image discrepancy by “race” also detected a highly signifi- cant effect (F(4 , 503) = 5.109; p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis found that Indian (2.8285) males, followed by Black (2.7440) respondents, Coloureds (2.6429), and White par- ticipants (2.6238) had the most severe subjective experiences of body image discrep- ancy.
Chi-square tests of independence were conducted to test the association between the categorical variables of “race” and steroid or supplement usage, as well as rugby par- ticipation and steroid or supplement use. The bivariate analysis found that 56.1% of White respondents and 48.2% of Indian respondents had used of legal muscle and ap- pearance supplements, while only 36.8% of Black participants used legal supplements (c2 = 33.754, df = 12, p < 0.001). In terms of the prevalence of illegal supplement and steroid use alone (or in combination with legal supplements), Black participants had the highest incidence (20%), with 14% in White respondents, and 12% in Indian respon- dents.
Having played rugby by supplement use indicated that those who did not participate in rugby had a higher incidence of legal supplement use (53.7%) as compared to those who did play rugby (39.2%) (c2 = 56.837, df = 3, p < 0.001). This analysis also re- vealed that a significant portion of boys (35.2%) who played rugby also used illegal steroids, diet pills, or a combination of both legal and illegal supplements.
230
MARTIN & GOVENDER
Predicting Pursuit of Muscularity
A multiple regression analysis was employed to identify the variables that most sig- nificantly accounted for a male’s pursuit of muscularity (the criterion variable). The independent variables included in the multiple regression analysis are listed in Table 2. The regression model was significant (F(12 , 495) = 14.970; p < 0.01), and accounted for 56% of the variability in the pursuit of increased musculature (R² = 0.562). Not sur- prisingly, the traditional masculinity score (p < 0.001), the body image score (p < 0.001) and the self-esteem score (p < 0.001) made significant contributions to the model.
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study highlight that the personal and social adherence to, and portrayal of, traditional masculine ideology distorts the way boys perceive, perform, and (re)define their bodies, and compromises the formation of an affirmative sense of self- worth.
231
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
Table 2 Multiple Regression Analysis with Pursuit of Muscularity as the Criterion (N = 508)
Model Standardized t Beta Coefficients
TMI TMI score 0.174 4.292***
Body Image BID score 0.170 1.923***
Self-Esteem SE score -0.157 -3.907***
Selective Items from Biographical Questionnaire Rugby participation 0.034 0.841 Competitive sports participation -0.022 -0.548 “Big muscles” 0.152 3.784*** “Time spent worrying” 0.066 1.556 “Distressed” 0.097 2.095* “Avoidance” 0.070 1.584 “Time on physical activities” 0.125 2.804** Takes care of physical appearance 0.055 1.332 Gym membership 0.131 3.078**
*p < .05 (two-tailed) **p < .01 (two-tailed) ***p < .001 (two-tailed).
Traditional Masculine Ideology, Body Image Discrepancy, and Self-Esteem
The findings of this study suggest as Robert Connell has purported: gender as a so- cial structure “involves a specific relationship with bodies” (Connell, 2002, p. 9). Specifically, these study findings imply that boys are succumbing to the representation of muscularly perverse bodies in the mass media; in which the perceptions and atti- tudes taken of both their own body and other bodies are becoming increasingly (de)formed. In support of this was the highly significant positive correlations found between traditional masculine ideology and body image discrepancy (r = 0.134, p < 0.01), body ideal (r = 0.250, p < 0.001), and the body perceived by boys to be most de- sired by the opposite sex (r = 0.102, p < 0.05). What this means is that as the adher- ence to hegemonic masculine beliefs increases, so too does the distance between the subjective body reality and body ideal perceived by boys. It also implies that as boys invest more into traditional masculine ideology, the level of muscularity of their desired body, and the body they believe girls are most interested in, becomes progressively more muscular in appearance. Similarly evidenced in this study, was the striking ma- jority of boys’ desire for the muscular mesomorph body (87.3%; see Table 1), which is in agreement with findings from other research studies (Lynch & Zellner, 1999; Meyer & Govender, 2009).
Significant negative evaluations and perceptions of the musculature of the arms, chest, and legs, by boys in this study are also evidenced. The biceps and chest receive a great degree of attention in media portrayals of male body image (Pope et al., 2000), that il- lustrate a rendering of the masculine body that is ripped, chiseled, lean, tanned, and hairless. The dysmorphic concern with the muscularity of specific parts of the male body is also posited to be a symptom of the recent commodification of the human body from gestalt to disparate body parts which can be individually exercised or surgically nipped and tucked to perfection (Luciano, 2001; Morrell, 2001; Pope et al., 2000).
In addition to the above, a significant positive correlation was found between body image discrepancy and the belief that having a more muscular physique lends itself to experiencing a greater degree of self-worth and confidence (r = 0.157, p < 0.001). This suggests that body-esteem, and more specifically muscularity, is being directly equated to self-esteem.
One of the contradictions in hegemonic masculinity is that in order to aspire to the body ideal one has to not only recognize one’s body reality, but how that body reality is left wanting when compared to the ideal. Hence, in the context of hegemonic mas- culinity, body image discrepancy is the logical first step to body image salvation, and an enhanced sense of self. Not surprisingly, this study found significant negative cor- relations between body image discrepancy and global self-esteem (r = -0.088, p < 0.05), and self-esteem and the pursuit of muscularity (r = -0.201, p < 0.001); thus the more muscular the body ideal the lower the self-esteem, and the lower the self-esteem the more likely the drive for enhancing muscularity will be.
It is this psycho-behavioral dynamic in the quest to improve body image that results in the production of males who Klein (1993) dubs “little big men,” that is, despite the physical extremes they push themselves to become Hulk-like, psychically they still re- main Bruce Banner. These findings add to a growing body of knowledge that points to- ward adolescent males experiencing increased body image dissatisfaction (Grieve, 2007), and low self-esteem (Bartsch, 2007; Bohne et al., 2002; Cafri et al., 2006;
232
MARTIN & GOVENDER
Grieve, 2007), when investing in hegemonic masculinity (Olivardia, 2001), or being ex- posed to muscular bodies in the media (Leit, 1997).
Traditional Masculine Ideology and the Pursuit of Muscularity
The socialization of boys through traditional masculine ideology establishes a pow- erful aspirational standard, and guide, on what requirements have to be satisfied in order to be considered a masculine male. The means by which masculine standards are enacted is through the performance of body-reflexive practices which most readily in- clude the pursuit of enhanced muscularity (Connell, 2002; Olivardia, 2001). This re- search identified an extremely significant positive correlation between traditional masculine ideology and the pursuit of muscularity (r = 0.268, p < 001). Such findings suggest that school going boys perceive muscularity and masculinity as one and the same. Also identified were significant positive correlations between traditional values of masculinity and other psychological and behavioural aspects related to muscularity, which include, the belief that having a more well-built body type imparts a more sub- stantial sense of worth (r = 0.170, p < 001), the time spent worrying about the muscle appearance (r = 0.199, p < 0.01), the development of distress over muscle tone (r = 0.094, p < 0.05), the amount of time dedicated to activities to improve muscle look (r = 0.152, p < 0.001), and gym membership (r = 0.137, p < 0.01).
Olivardia (2001) also found that the drive for muscularity, and symptoms of muscle dysmorphia, appears to be more prevalent in men with more traditional masculine be- liefs. Meyer and Govender (2009) reaffirm this by having demonstrated “a significant positive correlation … between conformity to hegemonic norms and the desire to have a larger more muscular body shape” (p. 31).
In this study, taking care of physical appearance (456 boys), being active in the gym (287 boys), participating in competitive sports (422 boys), and the increasing pursuit of muscularity as boys grow older (F(3 , 504) = 3.627; p < 0.05); point to the male body as the contemporary site for the enactment of hegemonic masculinity. Increased attending to the body by boys could be simply interpreted as a culturally induced nar- cissism. However South African masculinities exist in a state of flux and contradiction (Morrell, 2001; Walker 2005); and in conditions of poverty, disenfranchisement, and es- calating incidences of gender violence, the drive for muscularity plays itself out as part of a reactive masculinity dynamic attempting to assert and stabilize itself (Walker, 2005).
Racial Differences in Traditional Masculine Ideology and Body Image Discrepancy
Results in this study suggest significant differences by “race” in terms of conformity to traditional masculine beliefs. Interestingly, both Indian and Black participants in the sample had a higher degree of conformity to hegemonic masculinity in comparison to their White respondents. This demonstrates what Morrell describes as “masculinities that formerly were oppositional … are now jostling for ascendancy” (2001, p. 25). This finding also possibly confirms that the relevance of the historically dominant White, baaskap6 masculinity, is no longer as superior as it once was (Morrell, 2001).
233
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
6 Refers to the “White supremacy” doctrine over so-called ‘non-White’ people in South African Apartheid ideology.
While research on masculinities and “race,” has been preoccupied with the renegoti- ation of Black and White masculinities in the new South Africa, consideration of Indian masculinities has received much less attention. Therefore, it is of special interest to note that South African Indian boys in this study evidenced with comparatively higher levels of adherence to traditional masculine ideology. Typically Indian masculinity has been viewed as being softer and more effeminate (Govender, 2006); however the find- ings of this study imply that contemporary forms of Indian masculinity are being repo- sitioned as a reactionary formation in relation to the conventional views of Indian males.
Indian participants also appeared to experience body image discrepancy more se- verely than Black and White males in the sample (p < 0.001). These findings could be explained by Morrell’s (2001) position that White masculinity’s overemphasis on phys- ical appearance has paved the way for all other South African masculinities to follow suite.
The Use and Abuse of Supplements and Steroids
The most alarming findings of the study came in the form of significant numbers of boys using muscle supplement products, diet-aids and steroids. The boys sampled in- dicated that 48% of them had used legal supplements and drugs to gain muscle mass, lose weight, or improve appearance. The pursuit of muscularity is no longer something relegated to a fringe bodybuilding subculture, but it is now an aspect of everyday life for adolescent boys.
Research in this area now suggests boys are investing in a range of muscle building agents to improve their build. Although the selling of supplements is legal, Pope et al. (2000) maintains that the endemic use of these products act as “gateways to the use of anabolic steroids” (p. 190).
In this sample a total of seventy six boys (15%) indicated that they had used illegal muscle supplements and steroids, or a combination of both legal and illegal products. Of concern, these figures put the degree of steroid abuse amongst this sample on par with, and in some cases above, the results from other studies in the USA (Johnson, 1989; Terney & McLain, 1990).
Participation in rugby by supplement use revealed a higher frequency of legal sup- plement use (53.7%) in non-rugby players compared to those who did play rugby (39.2%) in the sample. A significant number of boys (35.2%) who played rugby also used illegal steroids, or a combination of both legal and illegal supplements. Rugby, ac- cording to Morrell (2001), “stresses physical confrontation, perseverance, and skill” (p. 23), which is intimately linked to the performance of masculinity for school going boys; and as Ratele et al. (2007) found, rugby is also a means through which the dom- inant identities are established in school boy culture.
The chi-square analysis of “race” and supplement use found that while White and In- dian participants had the greatest use of legal muscle supplements, Black school boys sampled had the highest record of illegal steroid and supplement use. These results could be explained by the fact that a number of legal supplements are thought by naive would-be steroid users to be more expensive than some types of illegal steroids7. Such findings are of importance when the effects of long-term steroid abuse, as well as po-
234
MARTIN & GOVENDER
7 Personal communication with steroid dealers and users who were part of the sample.
tential naiveté about the effects of steroids, hold fatal consequences for the mental and physical health of adolescent boys.
Findings on steroid abuse also give insight into the potential prevalence of muscle dysmorphia in nonclinical, adolescent male samples. Where consistent steroid abuse does categorize as a symptom of the disorder, other emotional and psychological anx- ieties are also prospective symptoms. Ergo this study illustrates that 70.7% of boys were sometimes distressed and anxious about their concerns over their muscle appear- ance and 64.6% indicated they sometimes avoided having all or part of their body seen by others; these could also be indications of the rise in muscle dysmorphia amongst ado- lescent boys.
Significant Predictors for the Pursuit of Muscularity
The results of a multiple regression analysis provided in Table 2 yielded a number of significant predictors for the pursuit of muscularity. Adherence to traditional masculine ideology was the most powerful predictor for the pursuit of muscularity, followed body image discrepancy, and low self-esteem. Furthermore, behavioral regiments such as being a member of a gym as well as spending substantial portions of time each day on physical activities to improve appearance (for example sit-ups), were also identified as significant predictors for the pursuit of muscularity.
Connell (1995) and Turner (1996) outline that bodies are subject to a variety of so- cial and physical labour activities, which include dieting, exercising, fitness regimes, and playing sport, that essentially discipline the (biological and psychological) body into submission (McCreary & Sasse, 2000; Robertson, 2003). This holds particular im- portance in single-sex male high schools where active participation in competitive sport, being fit and part of the macho culture of high school gives a boy access to a higher rank in the hierarchy of school boy culture (Robertson, 2003); which may give legitimacy to a range of extreme behavioural repertoires in the pursuit muscularity, namely, steroid abuse, extreme dieting, and over-exercising.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Despite having found an overall high adherence to traditional masculine ideology by the boys sampled in this study, differences in the degree of conformity were noted be- tween “race” groups, in which Indian boys had the highest levels of traditional mas- culine beliefs. Further research could benefit from more in-depth qualitative studies with Indian adolescent males in relation to their experiences, more broadly, of being male in current day South Africa, and more specifically, of how this informs compet- ing views of body image, muscularity and masculinity in the school context. Within the domain of body image, greater conformity to traditional masculine ideology was shown to yield a more severe sense of body image discrepancy, a perceived body ideal that is increasingly muscular, and the belief that girls desire boys with more muscular physiques. These results hold value for future discussions on how the male body is por- trayed as a masculine ideal in the South African mass media and in social discourses that shape sexual desire. Further, body image discrepancy was also associated with lower levels of self-esteem. In this arena traditional masculine beliefs are constricting and damaging as they enforce and perpetuate a culture of secrecy and silence over talk-
235
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
ing about one’s vulnerabilities and anxieties as a male, and further entrench feelings of isolation and depression. This finding is one representative marker of the so-called “crises” in young masculinities that have been documented in other local masculinity research (e.g., Walker, 2005). The disassociation mechanism, where boys use their eval- uations of their bodies as representative of their self-worth, is related to central char- acteristics of traditional masculinities: nonrelational sexual practices, emotionally detached, a voracious sexual desire and a body image that guarantees them satisfaction.
Conformity to traditional masculine ideology, body image discrepancy, and lower self-esteem also predisposes boys to a greater drive for enhanced muscularity which, we assert, represents one focal point of hegemonic masculinity in our context. This un- derstanding is especially important for school counselors, health professionals, and sports coaches who work with adolescent males, to be alert and cognizant of the rea- sons that would propel boys into pursuing muscularity. In addition to the above, find- ings of the pervasive use of muscle and fitness supplements, and the destructive use of steroids, should be further investigated to explore boys’ motivations for such behaviour, as well as extrapolate “race” differences in steroid abuse. The evident use of steroids by school boy rugby players should also hold interest for authorities to monitor more closely accurate dietetic information that is made available to these boys and regula- tion drug-testing at school boy level rugby.
Limitations
Firstly, this study employed a cross-sectional design, which is non-experimental in orientation, thus problematising the establishment of cause-effect relationships between the constructs under investigation. A sampling limitation is that this sample was drawn from a predominantly middle class, suburban setting. Additionally, the measure for perceived body image discrepancy was adapted from two separate tests and therefore requires more reliability and validity testing. Furthermore the body figures depicted in this measure only vary according to level of muscularity and not other significant di- mensions of body image such as adiposity; and do not account for other body features which may influence boys’ perceptions of body image, for example, a small penis or receding hairline. Finally, the validity of findings could be affected through the sole use of self-report measures in the study as well as the use of a cross sectional study design which only provides a snapshot of masculine culture in our sample. We also acknowl- edge our subjectivity in our choice of survey measures. Our decision to use these es- tablished measures reflects our understanding regarding what should be considered as traditional masculinity, which we assert, is an artifact of social and cultural practices in masculinity research. Given the above, we nevertheless note that the empirical reg- ularities regarding boy’s perceptions of their body image, self esteem and pursuit of muscularity, as evidenced in this study, is cause for concern young males growing up in our context.
REFERENCES
Adams, L., & Govender, K. (2008). “Making a perfect man”: Traditional masculine ideology and perfectionism amongst adolescent boys. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(3), 551- 562.
236
MARTIN & GOVENDER
Bartsch, D. (2007). Prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms and associated clinical features among Australian university students. Clinical Psychologist, 11(1), 16-23.
Blackbeard, D., & Lindegger, G. (2007). ‘Building a wall around themselves’: Exploring ado- lescent masculinity and abjection with photobiographical research. South African Journal of Psychology, 37(1), 25-46.
Bohne, A., Keuthen, N.J., Wilhelm, S., Deckersbach, T., & Jenike, M. (2002). Prevalence of symptoms of body dysmorphic disorder and its correlates: A cross-cultural comparison [Elec- tronic version]. Psychosomatics, 43(6), 486-490.
Bottamini, G., & Ste-Marie, D.M. (2006). Male voices on body image. International Journal of Men’s Health, 5(2), 109-132.
Bownes, T., & Etkin, E. (2009, August). Tough as males. Uncut, 14-15. Cafri, G., van der Berg, P., & Thompson, J.K. (2006). Pursuit of muscularity in adolescent boys:
Relations among biopsychosocial variables and clinical outcomes. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35(2), 283-291.
Cash, T. (2000). The multidimensional body-self relations questionnaire: User’s manual. Re- trieved February 18, 2008, from http://www.body-images.com.
Chadwick, R., & Foster, D. (2007). In transition but never undone: Contesting masculinity. Psy- chology in Society, 35, 27-37.
Claiborn, J., & Pedrick, C. (2002). The BDD workbook: Overcome body dysmorphic disorder and end body image obsessions. Oakland: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.
Connell, R.W. (1987). Gender & power. Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R.W. (1994). Gender regimes and gender orders. In Polity. (Ed.), The polity reader in
gender studies (pp. 29-40). Oxford: Polity Press & Blackwell Publishers. Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R.W. (2000). The men and the boys. Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R.W. (2001a). Introduction and overview. Feminism & Psychology, 11(1), 5-9. Connell, R.W. (2001b). Masculinity politics on a world scale. In S.M. Whitehead & F.J. Barett
(Eds.), The masculinity reader (pp. 369-374). Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R.W. (2002). Gender: Short introductions. Cambridge: Polity Press. Davis, K. (2003). Dubious equalities and embodied differences: Cultural studies on cosmetic
surgery. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Dewing, S., & Foster, D. (2007). Men’s body related practices and meanings of masculinity. Psy-
chology in Society, 35, 38-42. Donaldson, M. (1993). What is hegemonic masculinity? Theory and Society, 22, 643-657. Frosh, S., Phoenix, A., & Pattman, R. (2002). Young masculinities: Understanding boys in con-
temporary society. Houndmills: Palgrave. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. San
Francisco: Stanford University Press. Govender, K. (2006). “It’s not us, they’re spreading AIDS”: Race, school boy masculinities and
perception of personal risk in relation to HIV/AIDS among male youth in post-apartheid South Africa. In G. Stevens, V. Franchi, & T. Swart (Eds.), A race against time: Psychology and chal- lenges to deracialisation in South Africa (pp. 107-152). Pretoria: UNISA.
Govender, K. (2010). ‘Living in a box’: Rhetorical dilemmas in the (re)production of young het- erosexual masculinities. African Journal of Rhetoric, 2(1), 159-178.
Gramsci, A. (1973). Selections from the prison notebooks. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Grieve, F.G. (2007). A conceptual model of factors contributing to the development of muscle
dysmorphia. Eating Disordes, 15, 63-80.
237
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
Hitzeroth, V., Wessels, C., Zungu-Dirwayi, N., Oosthuizen, P., & Stein, D. (2001). Muscle dys- morphia: A South African sample. Psychiary and Clinical Neurosciences, 55, 521-523.
Johnson, M.D. (1989). Anabolic steroid use in adolescent males. Pediatrics, 83, 921-924. Jorgensen, L., Castle, D., Roberts, C., & Groth-Marnat, G. (2001). A clinical validation of the dys-
morphic concern questionnaire. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 35, 124- 128.
Kittler, J.E., Menard, W., & Phillips, K.A. (2007). Weight concerns in individuals with body dys- morphic disorder [Electronic version]. Eating Behaviour, 8(1), 115-120.
Klein, A. (1993). Little big men. New York: State University of New York Press. Leit, R.A. (1997). Self-esteem and body satisfaction in men: Men in pursuit of the ideal body.
M.A. Dissertation, American University, Washington, DC. [Electronic version]. Leit, R.A., Gray, J.J., & Pope, H.G. (2002). The media’s representation of the ideal male body:
A cause for muscle dysmorphia? International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 334-338. Levant, R.F., Smalley, K.B., Aupont, M., House, A.T., Richmond, K., & Noronha, D. (2007).
Initial validation of the Male Role Norms Inventory–Revised (MRNI-R). The Journal of Men’s Studies, 15, 83-100.
Lindegger, G., & Maxwell, J. (2007). Teenage masculinity: The double bind of conformity to hegemonic standards. In T. Shefer, K. Ratele, A. Strebel, N. Shabalala, & R. Buikemia (Eds.), From boys to men: Social constructions of masculinity in contemporary society (pp. 94-113). Lansdowne: UCT Press.
Luciano, L. (2001). Looking good: Male body image in America. New York: Hill and Wang. Lynch, S.M., & Zellner, D.A. (1999). Figure preferences in two generations of men: The use of
figure drawings illustrating differences in muscle mass. Sex roles, 40, 833-845. Margolies, S. (1999). The relationship between body image distortion and depression among
men. M.A. Dissertation, Kean University, New Jersey [Electronic version]. Mayville, S.B., Williamson, D.A., White, M.A., Netemeyer, R., & Drab, D.L. (2002). Develop-
ment of the muscle appearance satisfaction scale: A self-report measure for the assessment of muscle dysmorphia symptoms. Assessment, 9, 351-360.
McCreary, D.R., & Sasse, D.K. (2000). An exploration of the drive for muscularity in adolescent boys and girls. Journal of American College Health, 48, 297-304.
McCreary, D.R., Saucier, D.M., & Courtenay, W.H. (2005). The drive for muscularity and mas- culinity: Testing the associations among gender role traits, behaviours, attitudes and conflict. Psychology of Men and Masculinities, 6, 83-94.
Messerschmidt, J.W. (2000). Becoming “real men”: Adolescent masculinity: Challenges and sexual violence. Men and masculinities, 2(3), 286-307.
Meyer, C., & Govender, K. (2011). ‘Shaping up’: The relationship between traditional mas- culinity, conflict resolution, and body image among adolescent boys in South Africa. Journal of Youth and Vulnerable Children, 6(1), 78-87.
Mishkind, M.E., Rodin, J., Silberstein, L.R., & Streigel-Moore, R.H. (1988). The embodiment of masculinity: Cultural, psychological and behavioural dimensions. In M. Kimmel (Ed.), Changing men: New directions in research on men and masculinity (pp. 37-52). California: Sage Publications
Moller, M. (2007). Exploiting patterns: A critique of hegemonic masculinity. Journal of Gender Studies, 16(3), 263-276.
Morrell, R. (2001). The times of change: Man and masculinity in South Africa. In R. Morrell (Ed.), Changing men in South Africa (pp. 3-37). Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.
Olivardia, R. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the largest of them all? The features and phenomenology of muscle dysmorphia. Harvard Rev Psychiatry, 9, 254-259.
238
MARTIN & GOVENDER
Oosthuizen, P., Lambert, T., & Castle, D.J. (1998). Dysmorphic concern: Prevalence and asso- ciations with clinical variables. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 32, 129- 132.
Phillips, D.A. (2006). Masculinity, male development, gender, and identity: Modern and post- modern meanings. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 27, 403-423.
Pope, C.G., Pope, H.G., Menard, W., Fay, C., Olivardia, R., & Phillips, K.A. (2005). Clinical fea- tures of muscle dysmorphia among males with body dysmorphic disorder [Electronic version]. Body Image, 2(4), 395-400.
Pope, H.G., Phillips, K.A., & Olivardia, R. (2000). The Adonis complex: The secret crisis of male body obsession. New York: The Free Press.
Ratele, K., Fouten, E., Shefer, T., Strebel, A., Shabalala, N., & Buikema, R. (2007). ‘Moffies, jocks and cool guys’: Boys’ accounts of masculinity and their resistance in context. In T. She- fer, K. Ratele, A. Strebel, N. Shabalala, & R. Buikemia (Eds.), From boys to men: Social con- structions of masculinity in contemporary society (pp. 112-127). Lansdowne: UCT Press.
Robertson, S. (2003). ‘If I let a goal in, I’ll get beat up’: Contradictions in masculinity, sport and health. Health Education Research, 18(6), 706-716.
Shefer, T., Ratele, K., Strebel, A., Shabalala, N., & Buikemia, R. (2007). From boys to men: An overview. In T. Shefer, K. Ratele, A. Strebel, N. Shabalala, & R. Buikemia (Eds.), From boys to men: Social constructions of masculinity in contemporary society (pp. 1-12). Lansdowne: UCT Press.
Sobanski, E., & Schmidt, M.H. (2000). Body dysmorphic disorder: A review of the current knowledge. Child Psychology & Psychiatry Review, 5(1), 17-24.
Swain, J. (2000). ‘The money’s good, the fam’s good, the girls are good’: The role of playground football in the construction of young boys’ masculinity in a junior school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21, 95-109.
Swain, J. (2003). How young schoolboys become somebody: The role of the body in the con- struction of masculinity. British Journal of Sociology and Education, 24, 299-314.
Tager, D., Good, G.E., & Bauer-Morrison, J. (2006). Our bodies, ourselves revisited: Male body image and psychological well being. International Journal of Men’s Health, 5, 228-237.
Terney, R., & McLain, L. (1990). The use of anabolic steroids in high school students. Ameri- can Journal of Diseases of Children, 144, 99-103.
Turner, B. (1996). The body and society: Explorations in social theory. London: Sage. Veale, D., Ennis, M., & Lambrou, C. (2002). Possible association of body dysmorphic disorder
with an occupation or education in art and design. The Amercian Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 1788-1790.
Walker, L. (2005). Men behaving differently: South African men since 1994. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 7(3), 225-238.
Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1997). Jockeying for position: The construction of masculine iden- tities. Discourse and Society, 8, 203-217.
Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psych-discursive practices. Feminism and Psychology, 9(2), 335-356.
Wienke, C. (1998). Negotiating the male body: Men, masculinity, and cultural ideals. Journal of Men’s Studies, 6, 225-239.
239
“MAKING MUSCLE JUNKIES”
Copyright of International Journal of Men's Health is the property of Men's Studies Press and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
