Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78 DOI 10.1007/s11199-010-9764-8
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Investigating Hegemonic Masculinity: Portrayals of Masculinity in Men’s Lifestyle Magazines Rosemary Ricciardelli & Kimberley A. Clow & Philip White
Published online: 31 March 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract A content analysis of eight different men’s lifestyle magazines sold in Canada between November 2004 and August 2006 was conducted to explore how masculinities are currently being portrayed in regards to the body, aesthetics and grooming, and fashion. Findings suggest that different men’s magazines represent different forms of masculinity but elements of hegemonic masculinity (culturally normative ideals of masculinity within a structure of social relations where some men are subordinated) are woven throughout. Although the marketed look varies by the magazine, these magazines not only convey the message that appearance can be manipulated—but it should also be enhanced, and that men should engage in bodywork in order to attain the lifestyle they desire. Keywords Hegemonic masculinity . Metrosexuality . Laddism . Male body . Aesthetics . Fashion . Male body image
R. Ricciardelli (*) Department of Sociology, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W., Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada e-mail:
[email protected] K. A. Clow Faculty of Criminology, Justice and Social Policy, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H7K4, Canada e-mail:
[email protected] P. White Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W., Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada e-mail:
[email protected]
Introduction With the increased visibility of the male body, the content of men’s lifestyle magazines has recently gained research attention (e.g., Alexander 2003; Attwood 2005; Benwell 2004; Taylor 2005). Most of this research, however, has investigated publications in the United Kingdom (e.g., Attwood 2005; Benwell 2004) and the United States (e.g., Alexander 2003; Taylor 2005). The present study investigated the content of seven issues from eight different men’s lifestyle magazines available in Canada to examine similarities and differences among the magazines and in regards to the existing literature. Utilizing Connell’s (1987, 2005) theory of hegemonic masculinity, we explored dominant representations of masculinities within each magazine. In addition, based on past research findings (e.g., Nixon 1996; Vigorito and Curry 1998), we specifically investigated portrayals of the body, aesthetics and grooming, and fashion. The findings are discussed in relation to consumerism and risk theory. Hegemonic masculinity signifies culturally normative and influential ideals of masculinity (Connell 1987; Davis 2002; Pringle 2005). As such, masculine hegemony can be viewed as a role, status set, perspective, behavior or personal characteristic. Although not all hegemonic men embody all aspects at once, they may possess particular elements. For example, both a professional athlete and a CEO of a major corporation incorporate differing elements of hegemony. The athlete embodies physical strength, whereas the CEO symbolizes authority and prestige. In this way, hegemonic masculinity is represented via discourses of appearances (e.g., strength and size), affects (e.g., work ethic and emotional strength), sexualities (e.g., homosexual vs. heterosexual), behaviors (e.g., violent and assertive), occupations (e.g., valuing career over family and house-
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
work) and dominations (e.g., subordination of women and children) (Pringle 2005). As these discourses shift over time, so too do the norms of hegemonic masculinity. Scholars have recognized that masculinities are also contested due to generational differences in gender attitudes and practices, as well as structural changes in society (Connell 2005; Connell and Wood 2005). Generally, whenever hegemonic masculinity is challenged, a new hegemonic form emerges (Connell 2005). Hegemonic masculinity actually becomes more powerful because of its ability to adapt and to resist change (Connell 2005). Yet, whatever its form hegemonic masculinity remains an ideal that is not realizable for most men although it represents a benchmark against which men scrutinize their identities (Carrigan et al. 1985; Connell 2005). Not surprisingly, contemporary men report body dissatisfaction through comparison with images of agreedupon standards of body ideals associated with hegemonic masculinity (Lorenzen et al. 2004). Muscularity, Metrosexuality and Laddism Muscularity has varied over time in its importance for hegemomic masculinity (Wamsley 2007). For example, for early fur traders in Canada, muscularity and physical strength were essential elements of their livelihood as they were required to paddle, portage, and carry four to five 90 pound bags from before sunup to after sundown (Wamsley 2007). Jeffords (1993) proposed that America embraced remasculinization—an emphasis on aggression and violence as a means of control—to compensate for feelings of inferiority due to increases in the status of women and losses in the Vietnam War. In light of the movement away from labor intensive jobs, where men no longer gained muscularity working, men have increasingly turned to gym culture and actively work to become more muscular (Pope et al. 2000; Wienke 1998). Pope et al. (2000) argued this trend is indicative of media imagery that has come to emphasize bulging muscles and rock-hard physiques. Pronger (2002) has gone so far as to declare that muscles are the ultimate indicator of masculinity. Even action figure toys have become more muscular over time. For example Pope et al. (2000) explained that when GI Joe figures were first introduced in 1964 they had physiques comparable and proportionate to men in good physical shape. By the 1990s they had evolved to super-human proportions, such that GI Joe’s bicep was almost as big as his waist and bigger than that of most bodybuilders. Muscular models of masculinity also proliferate movies like 300 (2006), Pathfinder (2007), and War (2007). Leading role actors, such as Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, embody dominant muscular masculinity. Just as the thin-ideal is unattainable for most women, bulging and well-defined
65
muscles and washboard stomachs are not easily attainable for men (Davis 2002; Pope et al. 2000). Overall images of muscularity provide a relatively unachievable ideal of how the male body should look (see Pope et al. 2000). A second form of masculinity, which has developed more recently in the 1980s, is metrosexuality (Simpson 1994). Specifically, the metrosexual was first created in the 1970s and is distinguishable from traditional masculinity by his attempts to form non-oppressive relationships with women, children and other men (MacKinnon 1992). Rooted in the gay liberation movement, metrosexuality places less focus on previously dominant manifestations of masculinity and instead emphasizes self-presentation, appearance, and grooming (Segal 1993). Thus, it challenges traditional notions of masculinity while providing alternative venues for men to express themselves (Carrigan et al. 1985; Connell 1993). Moreover, the increasing availability of male grooming products and fashions, combined with the increased expendable income of single adult men, has led to the growth of the metrosexual phenomenon (Segal 1993; Simpson 1994). David Beckham and Brad Pitt are celebrities who epitomize this model of masculinity. Laddism, a third model of masculinity that emerged in the United Kingdom in the 1990s, diverges significantly from the metrosexual. It is characterized by an emphasis on youthfulness, hedonistic consumption, bachelorhood, the objectification of women and sexual conquest (Attwood 2005; Jackson et al. 2001). Laddism has been described as a backlash against feminism and metrosexuality (Nixon 2001), rejecting gender equality and returning to a more sexist and sexualized view of gender (Benwell 2004). Laddism is a model of consumerist masculinity that renounces selfresponsibility and indulges in stereotypically masculine interests, such as sports, cars and video games, as well as more risky health behaviors, such as binge drinking, drugs, and promiscuous sexual practices (Attwood 2005; Jackson et al. 2001). Colin Farell and Marshall Bruce Mathers III (Eminem) exemplify laddism. All these forms of masculinity have emerged as responses to social changes that have occurred, such as the feminist and gay movements (Kimmel 1996). This is particularly evident in late modernity, where life is characterized by considerable unpredictable and unfamiliar risk (Beck 1992; Giddens 1994). These risks can be technological, social or biological, leading to anxiety, uncertainty and instability. Researchers suggest that we are now a risk society (e.g., Ekberg 2007), a society concerned with anxiety and risks, a society where even masculinity is unstable. Media and the Male Body Media representations of the male body, aesthetics, and fashion have changed over time (Bordo 1994; Davis 2002).
66
Prior to the late 1990s, media images of men have focused on the face rather than the body (e.g., Archer et al. 1983). The male body itself was mostly absent (Bordo 1994; Davis 2002). When portrayed, it was limited to action shots and sports (e.g., Davis 2002). In the early 1990s, the male body had moved to center stage (Bordo 1994, 1999; Connell 1987; Davis 2002; Kimmel 1996); as exemplified in Bordo’s description of a 1995 Calvin Klein men’s underwear ad in the New York Times: “[it was] the first time in my experience that I had encountered a commercial representation of the male body that seemed to deliberately invite me to linger over it” (1999, p. 168). Researchers have found that film, television, and print advertisements have increasingly been foregrounding and sexualizing the male body (Connell 2005; Coupland 2007; Gill et al. 2005; Edwards 1997). For example, Gill et al. (2005, pp. 39–40) stated that “men’s bodies are on display as never before, from the muscular heroes of the cinematic action genre, to the ‘sixpacks’ who grace the covers of Men’s Health, and the ‘superwaifs’ of contemporary style magazines.” The increase in media images of men promoted how men could identify through their body (e.g., by their fashion and appearance)—a major shift in the production of dominant masculinities in the West. With the male body more scrutinized and commodified there is a need to have a detailed look at how the body is being represented (Bordo 1999). The issue is particularly topical and pertinent because research suggests that men are increasingly falling into the same appearance-orientated cultural trap that women have experienced for years (Budgeon 2003): striving for unachievable physical attractiveness via fashion, aesthetics or body modifications—as part of the shift to consumer-oriented societies (Davis 2002; Pope et al. 2000). In addition, media representations of the male body have been found to decrease men’s body satisfaction (Barlett et al. 2008; Spitzer et al. 1999). As Featherstone (1991) suggested, the body has become central to consumer culture. However, the body is no longer viewed as solely a biological entity; for some time it has become a socio-cultural construct that is a work in progress necessitating upkeep and care (Shilling 1993). Men are increasingly being held responsible for the shape and appearance of their body—a realm hitherto identified with women (Davis 2002; Featherstone 1991; Gill et al. 2005; Robertson 2006; Shilling 1993). Furthermore, as an object to be manipulated and financially invested in, the body has become connected with identity (Budgeon 2003). How a person presents their body—in terms of style, dress, shape, and size—contributes to their sense of self. In this sense, the body is an ever evolving self-reflexive project and an objectified reality where its current appearance is determined by the narrative of self under-construction (Giddens 1991). Thus, transforming the body becomes about more
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
than transforming how the body looks; it changes the way the body is lived. Past Research on Men’s Magazines Historically, magazines have been marketed to women (Jackson et al. 2001). The few existing magazines for men focused on hobbies or special interests and did not speak to masculinity per se. As late as the 1980s, the prevalent belief was that men were not interested in lifestyle magazines (Gill et al. 2003). This changed, however, with a slick repackaging of hegemonic ideals and patriarchal values in magazines such as Loaded and FHM. New technological, social and biological developments, alongside new social movements (e.g. feminism, gay liberation) fuelled the revisioning of traditional masculinity (Giddens 1994; Gill et al. 2005). Yet the nature of this new man was largely contested, thus generating greater uncertainty and anxiety in men, as masculinity could take many different forms. Lifestyle magazines emerged for men in order to ease their growing anxieties and uncertainties about masculinity, as well as provide some direction about what is manly in late modernity. This newfound popularity of men’s lifestyle magazines continues to this day. Past research has investigated how men and masculinities have been portrayed in current popular lifestyle magazines (Alexander 2003; Attwood 2005; Benwell 2004; Canape 1985; Taylor 2005; Vigorito and Curry 1998). Such studies in America and the United Kingdom have a wide range of foci. Vigorito and Curry (1998) found that, in the United States, men were portrayed differently depending upon the gender breakdown of a magazine’s readership. Magazines geared to male audiences portrayed men more often in occupational roles and magazines geared to female audiences portrayed men more often in parental or spousal roles. Also, not only are male and female audiences encountering differing portrayals of men, but the male subjects actually preferred the images (i.e. men in occupational roles) aimed at men. Frederick et al. (2005) investigated portrayals of masculinity in magazines targeting a male audience and magazines targeting a female audience. They found that magazines aimed at a male audience portrayed a more muscular body ideal than magazines targeting a female audience. Notably, this study is methodologically limited because two of the three men’s magazines analyzed were special interest or hobby magazines about body building (i.e., Muscle & Fitness and Men’s Fitness). Benwell (2004) asserts that irony is an integral component of masculinity in men’s lifestyle magazines (e.g. GQ, Loaded and Arena Magazines) in the United Kingdom. He shows that magazines use irony, in the philosophical sense, as “an ambiguous and continually oscillating movement between various types of masculine
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
identity and between the approval and disapproval therefore … to continually destabilize the notion of a coherent and viable masculine identity” (2004, p. 4). Alexander (2003), on the other hand, analyzed Men’s Health in the United States and suggested that depictions of muscularity combined with financial success work to undermine men’s selfesteem, making them vulnerable to consumerism. Boni (2002), looking at the Italian edition of Men’s Health, argued that the success of the magazine in the Italian magazine market is a reflection of men’s changing gender relations and identities. Moreover he found that the global media represents a single type of masculinity; one that is both hegemonic and globally disciplined. Nixon (1996) explored the advertising changes in men’s magazines –the visual coding of masculinity– to explain the formation of metrosexual imagery within advertising. He found that masculinity, as presented by the models, in ads was assertive, soft and sexualized. Generally, he noted that the styling of menswear in magazines was geared at new younger male consumers and embraced changes in their lifestyle—as such he saw magazines as a reflection of changes in masculinity (1996). Content analyses that have specifically examined laddist magazines (e.g., Attwood 2005; Taylor 2005) have tended to focus on sex and sexuality. Taylor (2005) found that lad magazines in the United States were dominated by information regarding unorthodox sexual behaviours (including non-traditional sexual positions and locations), how to improve one’s sex life, what women enjoy sexually, and the optional use of drugs and alcohol. They did not talk about preventing pregnancy or STDs. Attwood’s (2005) exploration of laddist magazines in the United Kingdom found that hedonism, as well as more explicit portrayals of sex and women were predominant. Overall, there was a preoccupation with sexual gratification outside of committed relationships, such that the boundary between laddist magazines and soft core pornography magazines has become blurred. In another British study, Jackson et al. (2001) examined how changes in the men’s magazine market shape men’s gender relations and identities. Focus groups were used to investigate different opinions and understandings of men’s magazines and the associated changes in commercial culture. Jackson et al. (2001) looked at the discoursive construction of gender, accessed through their verbal discussions with respondents, and found much ambivalence among readers in how they discuss men’s magazines and masculinity. They concluded that any simple analysis of masculinity, including hegemonic masculinity, was not possible (Jackson et al. 2001). Instead, they argued that men’s magazines provide men with a “conceptual map for navigating safely through their contemporary gender anxieties, whether in relation to their health, their careers,
67
their sexual relationships or their place in ‘consumer culture’ more generally” (2001, p. 14). Overall, such magazines were found to symbolize a commodification of the gender troubles men experienced and open a venue for change, all while employing devices—such as humor, defiance and irony—to distance men from any significant commitment to collective or personal change (Jackson et al. 2001). Current Study In the current study, we explored representations of masculinity in men’s life style magazines. In conducting a page-by-page content analysis of seven issues of eight different men’s lifestyle magazines sold in Canada, we examined if different magazines promoted different forms of masculinity and if depictions of the male body, aesthetics and grooming, and men’s fashion differed depending on the form of masculinity promoted in the magazine. Magazines included in the analysis were all men’s lifestyle magazines (e.g., focused on leisure, fashion, and culture rather than hobbies), were in high circulation (e.g., reached a larger audience), and targeted a male audience (e.g., over half of the readers of each magazine were men). Moreover, the magazines chosen provided an excellent opportunity to explore contemporary representations of muscularity, metrosexuality and laddism. Considering the increased visibility of the male body in popular culture we were interested in how masculinities are currently being portrayed in men’s lifestyle magazines. To investigate how masculinity is marketed to men (Featherstone 1991), we focused on representations of the male body, aesthetics and grooming, and fashion. Based on the findings of Bordo (1994), Davis (2002), and Coupland (2007), the magazine content was analyzed according to the core themes of depictions of the male body (e.g., muscular vs. thin), aesthetics and grooming (e.g., designer male cosmetics vs. hair loss prevention products), and fashion (e.g., high-end designer business attire vs. skater wear). Specifically, we wanted to investigate whether magazines that portrayed differing types of masculinity differed in how they handled depictions of the male body, aesthetics and grooming, and fashion. Past research would suggest that we would find a greater emphasis on fashion and grooming in magazines promoting metrosexuality (e.g., Segal 1993; Simpson 1994) than in magazines focusing on body shape and size (e.g., Men’s Health, Alexander 2003). In addition, Attwood (2005) and Taylor (2005) found that laddist magazines, in particular, focused on sexualized portrayals of women. To investigate whether this holds true in magazines available in Canada as well, we specifically looked at depictions of women (e.g., dressed in less than a bikini vs. fully dressed) and general crassness (e.g.,
68
crassness toward women and personal hygiene). Attwood’s (2005) analysis of laddist magazines also found considerable hedonistic consumption. To further this analysis, we investigated how much content the various lifestyle magazines devoted to differing forms of leisure activity, such as sports (e.g., sports star interviews and fan gear) and entertainment (e.g., video games vs. nightclubs), and whether this depended upon the type of masculinity portrayed.
Method Seven issues of eight different men’s lifestyle magazines published between November 2004 and August 2006 (N=56 publications) available in Canada were selected for analysis. The unit of analysis consisted of the entire magazine, from front to back cover, including all advertisements, text, pictures and stories. A purposive sampling approach was used, such that the inclusion of each publication was determined by three main criteria: (1) genre, (2) popularity, and (3) gender of readership. All magazines were men’s lifestyle magazines as opposed to hobby or special interest magazines. Lifestyle magazine was defined as popular magazines concerned with leisure, fashion, culture, health, fitness, tourism and entertainment in general. Only high circulation magazines were included as these magazines reach a larger audience. Circulation was determined by the total number of documented readers (available in media packages provided for each publication—see Table 1). Lastly, magazines were selected that had a self-evident male target audience. From these criteria, the following publications were selected: Details, OUT, GQ, Men’s Health, Esquire, Maxim, Stuff and FHM. FHM, the For Him Magazine, ceased publication in Canada in March of 2007. OUT, an overtly gay magazine, was included to provide insight into gay masculinities (Jackson et al. 2001, p. 66). Demographic characteristics of the readers of each publication (available in media packages provided by each publication) can be seen in Table 2. A thematic approach was used to examine portrayals of masculinity with themes determined through a semigrounded theoretical approach (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Although grounded theory drove the data collection (e.g., the categories of analysis and scope of the research were developed and discovered inductively from the corpus of data (i.e., the magazines) rather than deductively from grand theory with predetermined variables), the analysis was guided by theories of hegemonic masculinity and risk society (Glaser and Strauss 1967). To ensure all coding categories were exhaustive and mutually inclusive one magazine from each publication was analyzed prior to the main analysis to determine emergent
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
themes. From this analysis, a table was developed to ensure standardization of coding for use by each independent researcher when analyzing each magazine issue (see Tables 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7). Within each issue of each magazine, each page was coded using this table based on the most salient feature of that page. If two different features were equally apparent, the page was categorized into those two different features. After the core variables and major themes were identified, less relevant data were omitted from the analysis (i.e., selective coding). Thus, although magazines were analyzed in their entirety in order to give provide an overall understanding of how masculinity was being presented within each different magazine, themes that were not evident in multiple issues of a publication were later omitted from the analysis. Both images and text were analyzed in this fashion; articles were coded based on the content while advertisements were coded based on the image and text. For example, an article discussing Jared Allen, a professional football player, would be coded in the category of “sport” under the subcategory of “interviews with sport stars.” Whereas, an advertisement for flavored vodka, depicting multiple scantily clad women drinking the vodka in a nightclub would be coded in the categories of “entertainment” and “women” under the sub-categories of “alcohol,” “clubbing,” and “women wearing more than a bikini.” To determine inter-rater reliability, each page was analyzed separately by two independent researchers. The researchers were a white male and a white female graduate student. Prior to beginning the coding, meetings were held to discuss coding expectations, the coding table, and any potential biases or issues that could affect the interpretation of the page content. Coding was done independently although researchers met as frequently as necessary (often multiple times a week) to check for ambiguities, disagreements or problems which could arise when interpreting the content. This process increased both the reliability and validity of the analyses. Over 95% of the page categorizations were agreed upon by the researchers. If the researchers disagreed about how the page should be categorized a discussion and secondary analysis ensued. If agreement was not achieved, the page was removed from the analysis (less than three percent of pages were removed from the analysis). Page categorizations were then used to determine what percentage of each publication was dedicated to a particular theme. This also allowed for the page length between and within publications to be omitted as a potential issue (percentages were tallied for the publication as a whole and used in the analyses rather than page frequencies).
Results and Discussion Representations of masculinity were the focus of the analysis. The three main emergent themes were depictions
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
69
Table 1 The total number of readers of each men’s lifestyle magazine analyzed.
Total audience (thousands)
Men’s health
Esquire
GQ
Maxim
Stuff
OUT
Details
10,892
2,710
6,058
13,551
5,598
125
1,002
FHMa
Sources: Men’s Health, Esquire, GQ, Maxim, Stuff 2005 Nielsen/NetRatings@plan (Spring 2005Release); Out 2005 MRI Custom Study (Index: Spring 2005 U.S. Adults), Details 2006 MRI Doublebase (Index: December 2006) a
FHM, Unstable projects as publication ceased in March of 2007
of the male body (see Table 5), aesthetics and grooming (see Table 6), and men’s fashion (see Table 7). The analysis explored whether the different lifestyle magazines promoted differing forms of masculinity and whether depictions of the male body, aesthetics and grooming, and men’s fashion differed depending upon the form of masculinity promoted. Depictions of Masculinity To determine what form of masculinity was being depicted in the various publications, we looked for elements that past research has associated with different masculinities. By doing so, it became apparent that certain magazines had commonalities. These publications will be discussed together. Maxim, Stuff and FHM magazines depicted women more frequently than men in both advertisements and articles. These women were more likely to be pictured wearing the equivalent to a bikini or similarly revealing clothing (22.5% of the pages in Maxim to 34.17% of the pages in FHM portray women in such a manner). Thus, these magazines, unlike the other magazines, were reminiscent of soft-core pornography (see Table 3). These characteristics extended
beyond the attire. Women were also posed sexually along with other women or men. For example, women were photographed with their legs slightly apart or with their hands on the arm or thigh of another woman. Although explicitly sexualized imagery did not constitute a large proportion of the pages of these publications, it did not appear in other magazines (see Table 3). There was also a greater emphasis on sports (e.g., sporting events, paraphernalia, professional sports and interviews with sport stars) and entertainment (e.g., video gaming, music, television shows, film releases, travel and dining or clubbing) in FHM, Stuff, and Maxim in comparison to the other magazines (See Table 4). The sport-related advertisements and stories were predominantly about higher risk or violent sports, such as: stunts (e.g., performing skateboarding tricks like an ollie or kickflip), boxing and UFC (Ultimate Fighting Challenge). The advertisements and articles regarding entertainment differed from other publications by allocating more pages to discussions about video gaming systems and games. One theme which was unique to these magazines was a sense of crassness toward women and personal hygiene (See Table 3). For example, vaginal odors were crudely
Table 2 Reader demographic characteristics for each men’s lifestyle magazine analyzed.
Median age Median HHI Men readers Women readers Age 18–34 Age 25–49 Married Single House hold income 50,000+ 60,000+ 100,000+
Men’s health
Esquire
GQ
Maxim
Stuff
OUT
Details
37.7 $71,147 84% 16% 43% 60% 55% 45%
43.5 $66,685 64% 36% 30% 56% 51% 49%
33.1 $63,180 69% 31% 56% 61% 36% 64%
28.5 $59,143 75% 25% 71% 59% 34% 66%
28 $61,534 82% 18% 74% 59% 29% 71%
42.2 $92,500 91% 9%
33 $73,570 67%
68% 59% 30%
63% 49% 33%
60% 52% 28%
60% 49% 24%
61% 51% 25%
78%
FHMa
57% 73% 70%
46%
59% 35%
Sources: Men’s Health, Esquire, GQ, Maxim, Stuff 2005 Nielsen/NetRatings@plan (Spring 2005 Release); Out 2005 MRI Custom Study (Index: Spring 2005 U.S. Adults), Details 2006 MRI Doublebase (Index: December 2006) a
FHM, Unstable data as publication ceased in March of 2007
.14 12.86 1.29 .00 .00
.07% 6.57% 1.03% .00% .00%
38.00 14.43 3.29 6.86 4.71
Count
Count
%
Maxim
Out
22.50% 9.94% 2.00% 4.11% 2.83%
% 10.43 15.43 1.14 .00 .00
Count 5.37% 8.68% .56% .00% .00%
%
Men’s health
4.86 28.29 .00 .14 .00
Count
GQ
2.03% 12.10% .00% .04% .00%
% 53.43 14.43 6.29 10.71 7.43
Count
FHM
34.17% 9.94% 3.96% 6.75% 4.80%
% 1.86 15.43 .14 .00 .00
Count
Details
.90% 8.68% .06% .00% .00%
% 32.43 5.71 3.43 9.57 7.29
Count
Stuff
23.61% 3.91% 2.54% 6.95% 5.41%
%
4.71 15.57 .57 1.14 .00
Count
Esquire
2.70% 9.13% .36% .64% .00%
%
.57 .00 .00 5.57 .71 3.57 .14 21.86
.64% .00% .00% 4.69% .61% 2.81% .16% 18.48%
1.43 5.29 5.14 1.14 1.57 2.00 5.43 12.71
Count
Count
%
Maxim
Out
.90% 2.94% 3.10% .65% .98% 1.19% 3.28% 7.44%
% 2.86 5.14 .57 6.86 .71 2.86 .43 3.00
Count 1.46% 2.52% .28% 3.44% .33% 1.42% .20% 1.49%
%
Men’s health
2.43 5.00 .71 9.29 .43 7.43 .14 20.00
Count
GQ
.96% 2.02% .24% 3.98% .13% 3.03% .05% 8.03%
%
4.71 5.14 8.29 2.29 1.00 2.71 7.86 13.00
Count
FHM
2.98% 3.33% 5.25% 1.43% .63% 1.71% 4.89% 8.39%
%
1.14 1.43 .00 3.71 1.14 1.86 1.43 5.71
Count
Details
.62% .63% .00% 1.90% .50% .97% .87% 2.73%
%
.14 3.57 6.14 2.29 .57 2.29 6.57 17.00
Count
Stuff
.09% 2.50% 4.42% 1.80% .44% 1.81% 4.69% 12.10%
%
2.86 3.43 .57 6.14 1.86 1.71 .00 9.14
Count
Esquire
1.39% 2.08% .32% 3.35% 1.04% .82% .00% 4.95%
%
Average Counts = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the total number of issues of each publication analyzed. Average % = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the sum of the pages of all issues, made into a percentage
Sport: Sport star interview Sport: Events & paraphernalia Sport: High risk & violent Entertainment: Travel Entertainment: Clubbing Entertainment: Culture Entertainment: Video games Entertainment: Entertainment
Theme: Sub-category
Table 4 Average page count and average percentage of pages dedicated to thematic categories of sports and entertainment by publication.
Average Counts = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the total number of issues of each publication analyzed. Average % = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the sum of the pages of all issues, made into a percentage
Women: Revealing clothing Women: Fully dressed Women: Sexual depictions Humor Crudeness
Theme: Sub-category
Table 3 Average page count and average percentage of pages dedicated to thematic categories of women, crudeness and humor by publication.
70 Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
.53% .08% .00% .61%
.71 .14 .00 .85
.29 2.29
.71 1.29
Avg. Count
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Maxim
Stuff
.18% 1.33%
.44% .71%
Avg. %
.71 2.28
2.00 .57
Avg. Count
FHM
.47% 2.10%
1.26% .37%
Avg. %
.14 1.85
1.71 .00
Avg. Count
GQ
.06% .74%
.68% .00%
Avg. %
.43 .57
.00 .14
Avg. Count
Details
.20% .29%
.00% .09%
Avg. %
.57 1.42
.71 .14
Avg. Count
Esquire
.36% .87%
.41% .10%
Avg. %
.43 1.14
.71 .00
Avg. Count
Out
.48% 1.12%
.64% .00%
Avg. %
8.86 37.43
20.43 8.14
Avg. Count
4.29% 18.65%
10.28% 4.08%
Avg. %
Men’s health
.43 3.71 5.85
1.22% .29% 2.48% 3.99%
.57 8.43 11.00
2.00 .32% 4.92% 6.43%
1.19%
Avg. %
.43 7.43 9.43
1.57
Avg. Count
FHM
.27% 4.76% 6.04%
1.01%
Avg. %
.00 14.43 15.72
1.29
Avg. Count
GQ
.00% 5.52% 5.99%
.47%
Avg. %
.00 11.00 12.57
1.57
Avg. Count
Details
.00% 5.38% 6.30%
.92%
Avg. %
.00 2.86 3.86
1.00
Avg. Count
Esquire
.00% 1.61% 2.10%
.49%
Avg. %
.00 5.00 5.14
.14
Avg. Count
Out
.00% 3.89% 4.05%
.16%
Avg. %
.14 12.00 12.85
.71
Avg. Count
.07% 6.12% 6.54%
.35%
Avg. %
Men’s health
Average Counts = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of aesthetics and grooming divided by the total number of issues of each publication analyzed. Average % = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the sum of the pages of all issues, made into a percentage. A metrosexual can be homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual (Simpson 1994). FHM is no longer in print in North America
1.71
Gelled hair Beauty products Total counts and percentages
Avg. Count
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Maxim
Stuff
Shaving
Aesthetics and grooming subcategory
Table 6 Thematically analyzed aesthetic and grooming content of each magazine recorded both by total average counts and total average percentages.
Average Counts = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the total number of issues of each publication analyzed. Average % = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the sum of the pages of all issues, made into a percentage. A metrosexual can be homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual (Simpson 1994). FHM is no longer in print in North America. Advertisements depicting muscular men were counted in both categories (both the categories that included supplements and body building)
Body building and muscular men Eating for strength and supplements for muscular enhancement Cardio and endurance training Total counts and percentages
Body subcategory
Table 5 Thematically analyzed body content of each magazine recorded both by total average counts and total average percentages.
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78 71
Average Counts = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of fashion divided by the total number of issues of each publication analyzed. Average % = Total number of pages in all issues of each publication depicting occurrences of each thematic category divided by the sum of the pages of all issues, made into a percentage. A metrosexual can be homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual (Simpson 1994). FHM is no longer in print in North America
14.20% 28.43 22.65% 25.71 28.81% 59.71 35.60% 73.72 32.97% 82.71 13.10% 20.87 16.75% 16.29% 23.29
28.43
1.29% 1.51`% 2.43 3 1.73% 1.26% 2.14 1.43 3.14% 1.63% 6.57 3.57 3.76% 1.77% 7.86 3.86 3.38% 1.27% 8.71 3.28 2.57% 4.15% 4.00 6.72 2.33% 4.59% 3.24% 4.66% 4.43 7.00
4.00 7.71
4.18% 7.22% 8.43 14.57 .39% 19.27% .43 21.71 1.09% 22.95% 2.14 47.43 2.47% 27.60% 5 57 1.91% 26.41% 4.86 65.86 1.75% 4.63% 2.86 7.29 2.94% 6.89% 4.86 11.86 3.28% 5.11% 4.43 7.43
Sport wear Designer fashion and business attire Accessories and shoes Extreme casual wear, and surf and skater gear Total counts and percentages
Avg. Count Avg. Count Avg. Count Avg. % Avg. Count
Avg. %
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Esquire Details GQ FHM Maxim Stuff Fashion: Subcategory
Table 7 Thematically analyzed fashion content of each magazine recorded both by total average counts and total average percentages.
Avg. %
Out
Avg. %
Avg. Count
Avg. %
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
Men’s health
72
discussed and stories about urinating on a passed out friend were included. In sum, there was a pervasive use of laddish humor, banter, ridicule and general macho joking around. Similarly to Benwell’s (2004) finding regarding irony, this crassness appeared to represent the other less distinctive form of masculinity. This version of masculinity was one that marginalizes emotionality, sensitivity and thoughtfulness. Overall, the images of youthfulness, sexuality, promiscuity, entertainment, and extreme sports presented in these magazines were consistent with the literature on laddist masculinity (Attwood 2005; Jackson et al. 2001; Taylor 2005). In contrast, GQ and Details featured women far less frequently (see Table 3) and when portrayed they were more modestly dressed than in lad magazines (12.10% of the pages in GQ and 8.68% of the pages in Details showed modestly dressed women compared to the 2.03% of the pages in GQ and .90% of the pages in Details showing women in revealing clothing). The featured male models were slightly older, better manicured and more polished than the lad models. This is consistent with Canape’s (1985) observation of GQ in the mid 1980s. The most dominant theme in GQ and Details was the advertising and discussion of high-end designer fashion and business attire (27.6% of the pages in Details and 26.4% of GQ’s). Multi-page fashion spreads and articles about how to dress and new and upcoming styles were predominant features (see Table 7). Furthermore, in comparison to laddist publications, Details and GQ had a greater emphasis on material wealth and status symbols (e.g., Omega or Esquire watches, Gucci cuff links, Montblanc pens). Details and GQ also addressed men’s appearance concerns, such as aging and hair loss, more frequently than the lad publications. These magazines discussed preventing and coping with aging, specifically hair loss or balding. FHM and Stuff magazines did not mention these issues in any publication analyzed. Overall, Details and GQ’s emphasis on expensive designer men’s fashion, designer accessories and the cultivation of a polished appearance were consistent with the literature on metrosexuality (Segal 1993; Simpson 1994). Esquire and OUT magazines were oriented to the metrosexual demographic as indicated by their frequent portrayals of expensive designer fashions, status symbols and the polished appearance of the male models. These two publications, however, used slightly older and more mature models and placed a greater emphasis on current events than the other metrosexual magazines, as well as the laddist magazines. OUT magazine was published for a gay audience, which explained its representations of male sexuality throughout the publication. Male models were featured sexually in provocative poses alone or with other men. This supported previous findings that magazines
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
targeted to a gay readership tend to have more explicitly homoerotic representations of male models (Jackson et al. 2001). Men’s Health magazine featured elements of metrosexuality, with its emphasis on fashion and appearance concerns. However, the publication was primarily concerned with issues of men’s health and muscularity (see Table 5). The predominant theme in the publication was physical strength, focusing on increasing muscle mass via diet, exercise and strength training. Overall, these emphases were consistent with the literature on muscularity (Davis 2002; Pope et al. 2000). From analyzing the content of the magazines, FHM, Stuff, and Maxim seemed to promote laddist masculinity (Attwood 2005; Jackson et al. 2001; Taylor 2005), whereas GQ and Details seemed geared toward metrosexuality (Segal 1993; Simpson 1994). Although Esquire, OUT, and Men’s Health promoted elements of metrosexuality, Esquire seemed to promote an older metrosexuality, OUT depicted a version of gay metrosexuality, and Men’s Health predominantly promoted muscularism. Thus, current men’s lifestyle magazines seemed to be representing different forms of masculinity. The Male Body Having established that varying forms of masculinity were depicted in different men’s lifestyle publications, we now examined how the male body was portrayed in these different magazines. Based on past research, we expected a greater emphasis on the body in Men’s Health (e.g., Alexander 2003) than in the other magazines. Whether laddist and metrosexual magazines depict the male body differently was unknown and of specific interest. Images of the male body were evident throughout each publication (see Table 5). Generally, all models had lean and well-toned bodies but were not hypertrophic. Noteworthy here, there was a trend in some of the metrosexual magazines toward models who were relatively thin. Not surprisingly, the magazine that focused the most on the male body itself was Men’s Health. Weight training, diet and nutritional information were the predominant forms of body shaping discussed in the magazine. Overall 10.28% of the pages presented images of moderately muscular men flexing, body-building and strength training. Meanwhile 8.20% of the pages advertised diets and nutritional information specifically for muscular enhancement (see Table 5). The type of male body most commonly depicted in the publication was toned and muscular—but not massive. Men’s Health gave the most attention to strength training and being lean, with an emphasis on achieving this body type via healthy diet and exercise behaviors (e.g., having
73
good form when working out, not using illegal muscle or stamina increasing drugs, and eating right). Other forms of exercise and diet—beyond weight training to build muscle mass—were also presented (see Table 5) under the guise of promoting overall health (e.g., articles encouraging cardiovascular training [4.29%]). As Barlett et al. (2008) found that exposure to muscular media images increased body dissatisfaction among men, being bombarded by the images in these men’s lifestyle magazines may contribute to clinical issues ranging from low self-esteem to Body Dysmorphic Disorder. All other magazines analyzed gave minimal, if any, attention to achieving a muscular body. Across these magazines, an average of 0% to 1.54% of the pages were dedicated to body-work for muscle gain and less than 1.6% to diet, supplements and cardiovascular exercise (see Table 5). However, it was apparent that the masculine body ideal was lean and toned as opposed to hypermuscular. Most often, bodywork and strength training were about achieving a certain appearance rather than about being healthy. This finding corresponds to Attwood’s (2005) research on the male body and heterosexuality, where she claimed that lifestyle magazines were coming to favor the fashion or toned body over the hypermuscular male body. While conventional notions connecting muscularity with masculinity (Davis 2002; Pronger 2002) were frequently identified in Men’s Health magazine—this masculinity, along with its associated traits (e.g., being physically strong, competitive and athletic) have been identified by researchers as maintaining the dominant position of men in society (Connell and Wood 2005; Davis 2002; Donaldson 1993). Strangely, though, the content of the other magazines signified a movement away from hyper-muscularity. In fact, the male bodies represented in all the men’s lifestyle magazines were much less hypertrophic than male bodies presented in bodybuilding magazines such as Flex or Muscle & Fitness (Pope et al. 2000). This suggests that strength was but one method of establishing and maintaining power among men. For example, metrosexual publications relied more on money and status as representations of power (as purchasing the designer fashions and status symbols in these publications necessitate considerable wealth), whereas the laddist magazines focused on sexual dominance over women as a primary source of power. Thus, the different forms of masculinity were utilizing different elements of hegemonic masculinity to assert power and dominance. With the exception of the focus on muscle mass gain in Men’s Health, the emphasis in other magazines was predominantly on weight loss. The importance of weight loss was indicative that body fat was anathema to cultural ideals of masculinity and that men need to work on and be responsible for their bodies (Giddens 1991; Robertson
74
2006). This pressure to lose weight has plagued women for decades (Wolf 1991). It now appears that men are facing this pressure. All magazines had inspirational stories about how particular men, often celebrities, struggled with their weight. For example: Jorge Garcia from LOST was interviewed in Maxim (March 2006c) about being overweight and how his weight affected him. Testimonials reported by men about their weight loss success were featured in all of the publications. For example, an article published in Men’s Health was entitled: “I was a big fat [man]. Then I went to the movies” (March 2006, p. 82). Although these testimonials and inspirational stories may be motivational for some men or assure others that their own weight struggles were normative, these stories also emphasize that the body is a project that can be worked on and this may lead to greater dissatisfaction with men’s own appearance. In addition, articles in the laddist magazines were often derogatory about people who were overweight. This derogation displays an additional element of hegemonic power, where groups of men were excluded from the dominant group (Carrigan et al. 1985; Connell 1987). Male readers would be especially motivated to avoid being categorized into this low status subgroup of men. Thus, the male body was displayed in all publications, confirming the idea that the male body was now very visible (Bordo 1999; Gill et al. 2005). Although the visibility of the male body may have detrimental consequences for men, such as additional pressures to lose weight or to keep the body toned, depictions of the male body may also be used to assert dominance over women and other groups of men. Aesthetics and Grooming Next, we analyzed whether magazines that promoted differing forms of masculinity portrayed aesthetics and grooming differently. Given the research of Segal (1993) and Simpson (1994), we expected the metrosexual magazines to emphasize aesthetics and grooming more than the other magazines. Advertisements for male cosmetics such as moisturizers, facial cleansers and fragrances did appear in all of the magazines, accounting for 1.61% to 6.12% of the content. Nonetheless, the meterosexual magazines did seem to promote these products more than the other magazines (see Table 6). A noteworthy finding, however, was that the type and brand of product, the content of the advertisement and the meaning embedded in the accompanying text varied among the magazines as well. Advertisements in the metrosexual publications—including Men’s Health and OUT—primarily promoted designer colognes and beauty products (e.g., Dolce & Gabbana,
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
Calvin Klein and Fendi). All of these publications also included articles that discussed and ranked men’s cosmetic and grooming techniques. Advertisements typically featured clean cut, clean shaven men. For example, the following text appeared in one article: “You are how you groom. Behind every blinding smile, careful coiffure, and neatly trimmed nostril fringe lays the daily routine that defines you. The way you leave the bathroom says a lot about how you’ll tackle each day ... Good grooming has the power to make you a better man ... start grooming for improvement” (Bean and Boye 2006, p. 158). Advertisements like this promoted a new consumer-oriented preoccupied society. Past research has also identified that Hollywood cinema contributed to this phenomenon by helping to foster the importance of aesthetics for men (Featherstone 1991). Advertisements and articles about grooming and aesthetics compose, on average, 6.12% of the pages in Men’s Health, 5.38% in Details, 5.52% in GQ, 3.98% in OUT (see Table 6). The same trends were evident in Esquire, though to a much lesser extent (1.61% of the pages). The laddist magazines also advertised cosmetic and grooming products, but with a different focus. These magazines tended to pitch products as ways to attract women. For example, an Old Spice advertisement for scented body wash in Maxim (2005, p. 84) depicted a photograph of a woman’s breasts, stomach and unbuttoned fly stating that “you may not have noticed, but women also have noses.” Frequently advertised brands, including AXE, Tag and Old Spice, placed advertisements showing women removing their clothes and becoming sexually aroused by their products (e.g., the AXE effect). These types of advertisements and articles made up, on average, 4.92% of the pages in Maxim, 2.48% in Stuff and 4.76% in FHM (see Table 6). These types of articles and advertisements were consistent with the view that aesthetics and grooming play a central role in contemporary consumerism (Featherstone 1991; Shilling 1993). The message these magazines conveyed was that through buying products and services a man can change his embodied self and, thus make himself into the man he wants to be. Traditionally, concerns about appearance and the attractiveness of the body have been more common amongst women and disavowed by heterosexual men (Davis 2002). Our results suggest that this norm is subject to contestation. Additional cosmetic products primarily advertised in the laddist publications were shaving products and hair gels. Advertisements for these specific grooming supplies composed on average between 1.01% and 1.22% of the pages in these magazines. The other lifestyle publications devoted markedly fewer pages to these items (an average of .32% of pages in all other publications, see Table 6). Notably, all three laddist magazines often carried the same advertisements (same product, brand, and photo spread). The hair
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
product advertisements generally displayed clean shaven men with spiked hair (to demonstrate the effects one could obtain with the product), whereas the shaving advertisements used bold colors and focused on the physical razor (and the technology used), to the exclusion of all else— even the male models. Articles and advertisements about aging and preventing hair loss appeared more often in metrosexual magazines than the other publications. Products such as Redken for Men, which was marketed as being able to thicken hair and slow hair loss, were advertised frequently. A Redken advertisement in an issue of Details depicted a man with his hair styled to boost density. These magazines tended to present their readers with the idea that thinning or graying hair is a problematic but treatable issue. This sort of material ranged from .27% of the pages in GQ to 1.09% of the pages in Details. Maxim was the only laddist magazine to also contain this type of information (.15%). Whether it was promoting hair gels and razors for a more youthful, boyish look in the lad magazines or dealing with hair loss and gray hair in the metrosexual magazines, these publications were promoting different ways of slowing the appearance of age. This was consistent with Coupland’s (2007) finding that aging and appearance were concerns of men. Yet rather than from their thirties onward, our findings indicate that men may become concerned about aging in their twenties. Men’s fear of aging makes them susceptible to the marketing of products purported to slow or even reverse the aging process (Nabi 2002). As Featherstone explained, discourses within movies, television, newspapers and advertisements make men feel that “the wrinkles, sagging flesh, tendency toward middle-aged spread, hair loss etc. which accompany aging should be combated by energetic body maintenance on the part of the individual with help from the cosmetic, beauty, fitness and leisure industries,” (1991, p. 178). Capitalizing on these fears has opened up a venue to extend the marketing of aesthetic and grooming products and services to men as well as women, who have hitherto been the focus of this industry (MacDonald 1995). Fashion Finally, we analyzed the portrayal of fashion in the magazines. Again, based on the findings of Segal (1993) and Simpson (1994), we expected the metrosexual publications to promote fashion more than the other magazines. Although fashion photo-spreads, advertisements and articles constituted a number of pages in all the men’s lifestyle magazines, the metrosexual magazines did seem to devote a greater percentage of pages to fashion and designer accessories in comparison to other magazines. However, the style of clothing, the type of fashion, and how
75
the male models were posed generally differed across publications (see Table 7). GQ, Details, and Esquire magazines generally presented men dressed in high-end designer business attire (e.g., suits by Armani and Hugo Boss) or, for non-work situations, in brand name fashion labels (e.g., Dolce & Gabbana and Diesel). By portraying these attractive male models in expensive attire, often surrounded by beautiful women, these fashion advertisements projected images of confidence and success. Articles accompanying these fashion spreads frequently instructed men on how to transform business attire into business casual and evening wear or to inform them about what they should wear in different contexts. For example, the article “The ten things you need in your closet: You take care of the socks and underwear. We’ll supply the rest” informed men about the latest fashion trends, how different pieces of clothing should be worn together, and when to wear the outfits (Esquire, March 2006b, p. 94). Fashion was being promoted as the key to financial success. Similar to the other metrosexual publications, advertisements in OUT primarily pitched designer fashion labels. Unlike the other magazines, OUT focused more on evening and club wear, which tended to be tight fitting, sheer, sexually provocative and highlighting body contours and skin. Male models in OUT wore more revealing clothes—or only underwear—more often than in the other publications. Rather than depicting male models accompanied by women, these attractive, lean, and well-toned male models were frequently pictured together. Pages dedicated to designer fashions made up on average 19.27% of the pages in OUT (see Table 7). The majority of fashion advertisements and articles in Men’s Health depicted designer business and evening wear— although fashion itself was much less prevalent than in the other metrosexual magazines, comprising up to 7.22% of the publication’s pages (see Table 7). Unlike the other publications there was a greater focus on sportswear (4.18%). The models in these sportswear images were attractive and well groomed, often posed actively engaging in physical activity. The fashion advertisements and articles depicted in the laddist magazines were considerably different from the other publications. Business attire and designer fashion content was common but less frequently depicted than in the other publications. Type of clothing and how that clothing was presented also differed. Clothing was more causal, relaxed in fit, and youthful (e.g., dress shirts were unbuttoned without ties). For example, a six page fashion article, entitled Essentials, pictures a young attractive model dressed in a Hugo Boss suit on the first page. Each consecutive page shows the same model wearing only one piece of the suit paired with some other causal designer clothing—such as the suit jacket with a sleeveless t-shirt, sandals and orange rolled
76
up cargo pants (Maxim, April 2006a). The emphasis here is how to make designer business attire much more casual. Designer business attire made up on average 6.89% of the pages in Maxim, 5.11% of Stuff, and 4.63% of FHM (see Table 7). The lad publications also advertised other types of fashions, including less expensive brands such as American Eagle, Abercrombie & Fitch and Unionbay. These advertisements and articles showed young attractive models, in their late teens or early twenties, in their dorm rooms or with friends, wearing t-shirts, cargo pants or jeans while enjoying sports, music or video games. For example, an advertisement for Arizona Jean Company pictured a young man dressed in jeans and a t-shirt sitting on his twin bed in his dorm room while tossing a basketball in the air (FHM, August 2006). Models were also depicted in groups of friends. Advertisements for men’s clothing were also framed sexually. For example, a Pepe Jeans ad pictured a male model embracing a female dressed in a mini-skirt and cropped halter top (Stuff, April 2006, p. 129). Thus, these magazines seemed to promoting fashion as a means for social success. Surfer and skater wear was also advertised in the laddist magazines. Advertisements and articles for skater or surfer gear depicted physically fit and carefree models in their late teens or early twenties who were dressed and actively posed for such activities. For example, a wakeboarding fashion spread included the caption “Wave Stunners: What’s cooler than knowing how to tear like a world-class wakeboarder? Looking like you don’t care” (Maxim, July 2005, pp. 140– 146). Overall, advertisements and articles for surf and skater fashions and less expensive causal wear made up an average of 4.14% of the pages in FHM, 4.66% of Stuff and 4.59% of Maxim. The other genres depicted such advertisements and articles on a range of only .27% to 1.77% of their pages (see Table 7). Overall, the centrality of fashion in all of the publications illustrated that these magazines promoted image, style, and appearance as being important for contemporary men. How fashion was marketed was about more than just the clothing. Models, for instance, were wearing these fashions and, in this way, the positive characteristics of the models themselves (e.g., attractive, toned, successful) were being sold as achievable given the proper dress. Thus, men were being targeted by consumer capitalism (Featherstone 1991; Giddens 1991). The message was that a man is defined by how he dresses. These underlying themes of fashion leading to social success (laddist magazines) or financial success (metrosexual magazines) can be encompassed within the realm of hegemonic masculinity (Connell 2005; Connell and Wood 2005). Connell’s notion of hegemonic masculinity centers on the power differential in gender relations (Carrigan et al.
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
1985; Connell 1987, 1993). In other words, there is a hierarchy of power, where some men are at the top (Carrigan et al. 1985). Traditionally, hegemonic masculinity locates wealthy heterosexual men at the top of this hierarchy, subordinating other men (e.g., men of different sexualities, races and social classes) as well as women (Carrigan et al. 1985; Connell 1993, 2005). The laddist magazines, however, elevated socially successful (e.g., popular, well liked) men to the top of this power hierarchy, whereas metrosexual publications continue to promote wealthy heterosexual men but specifically within the context of appearance and prestige. Men’s Health, on the other hand, focused on athleticism as the dominant and powerful factor for manliness. These forms of masculinity, therefore, are variants within hegemonic masculinity. The magazines not only suggested that a man has a better chance of being successful in relation to other men by ‘dressing the part’, they also suggested that men can be dominant over women should they do so. In the laddist magazines, the fashion spreads portrayed the men as sexually dominant. In the metrosexual magazines—including Esquire and Men’s Health—the fashion models often appeared as attracting the attention and interest of women, which also put them in a position of power and control. In addition, as none of the models were portrayed as subordinate, unattractive, or unhappy, the implied message is that these men were at the top of the hierarchy and by achieving the right look, the reader can be too. Limitations and Future Research The content analysis provided a systematic (information was assigned to categories according to criteria) and objective (each step was conducted adhering to specific rules and procedures) approach to investigate dominant portrayals of masculinity. Future content analyses could be improved by sampling more issues of magazines and sampling a range of magazines from different countries together, which could further increase the generalizability of the findings. Also, a comparative international focus (e.g., comparing issues of Maxim published in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom) could provide greater insight into masculinity portrayals in Canada and elsewhere. The most prevalent limitation of the content analysis is its purely descriptive nature as it cannot establish causal relationships among variables (Bordens and Abbott 2008). A second limitation is the limited longevity of the findings (Bordens and Abbott 2008). Given the magazines analyzed in the content analysis were published between 2004 and 2006; the findings of the analysis specific to magazine content will decrease in applicability as the magazines become increasingly outdated.
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78
Future research investigating how male images in men’s lifestyle magazines affect men and their sense of self is needed. Although the findings from this study suggest that the images in men lifestyle magazines—such as the promotion of thin but muscular models—may be detrimental to men’s psychological wellbeing, future research utilizing more experimental designs or longitudinal studies may wish to examine these issues further.
Conclusion Past research on men’s lifestyle magazines has tended to focus on a particular magazine (e.g., Alexander 2003; Boni 2002) or a particular sub-genre of men’s lifestyle magazines (e.g., Attwood 2005; Taylor 2005). Building on past research, the current study examined multiple men’s lifestyle magazines targeting different demographics of men to investigate similarities and differences in portrayals of the body, aesthetics and grooming, and fashion across magazines. We found that the men’s lifestyle magazines promoted different forms of masculinity. Overall, metrosexuality was most commonly depicted (Details, GQ, Esquire, and OUT) as might be expected given the lifestyle genre. Laddist masculinity was predominant in a sub-genre within lifestyle magazines (Stuff, FHM and Maxim). Extreme muscularity was only emphasized in Men’s Health, though elements of metrosexuality were apparent in this publication as well. Despite which forms of masculinity were most prominent in each publication, elements of hegemonic masculinity were depicted throughout. Thus, metrosexuality and laddism were not so much discrete alternatives to hegemonic masculinity, but different vehicles through which hegemony could be expressed. Part of hegemonic masculinity’s power and ability to remain dominant is its ability to adapt to the different social contexts (Connell 2005). Thus, hegemonic masculinity remains dominant due to its malleability as it molds itself into emerging or new forms of masculinity. Although it was once common for images of men to be restricted to facial photos or sports action shots (Archer et al. 1983; Davis 2002), the depictions of men in the magazines were not similarly restricted. Full length body shots of men were common to all publications, demonstrating the increased visibility of the male body (Bordo 1994, 1999; Connell 1987; Davis 2002). These images of men were often sexualized and objectified, which is consistent with research on advertising and men (Coupland 2007). This objectification is something that has been noted in women’s magazines for years and has been associated with negative consequences (Davis 2002; Wolf 1991) and now new research suggests that men may be affected by objectification as well (Barlett et al. 2008).
77
Shifting norms, values and customs threaten social identity—they are no longer pre-determined or regulated (Beck 1992). Thus people, including men, are required to make life choices that require some amount of risk because only in taking risk can the self be transformed (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1995). This, combined with the increasing visibility of male body in magazines, increases men’s responsibility for their body shape and puts pressure on them to transform and improve the body—often as a component of their identity (Giddens 1991; Robertson 2006; Shilling 1993). Theorists have argued that men are increasingly being held responsible for their personal appearance (Davis 2002; Featherstone 1991; Giddens 1991; Robertson 2006; Shilling 1993). The men’s lifestyle magazines examined here reinforce this view. Readers gain the impression that they need to groom and dress in a particular manner in order to be successful, although the look varies depending upon the desired form of masculinity. The overall objective of self-improvement pervades the collective discourse. In this way, these publications promote consumerism by exposing men to advertisements and articles about the male body, aesthetics and fashion.
References (2006a, April). Maxim, 100, 1–189. (2006b, March). Esquire, 1–239. (2006c, March). Maxim, 99, 1–156. Alexander, S. M. (2003). Stylish hard bodies: Branded masculinity in Men’s Health magazines. Sociological Perspectives—Media, Popular Culture, and the Arts, 46, 535–554. Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 725–735. Arizona Jean Company. (2006, August). FHM, 70. Attwood, F. (2005). “Tits and ass and porn and fighting”: Male heterosexuality in magazines for men. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 8, 83–100. Barlett, C. P., Vowels, C. L., & Saucier, D. A. (2008). Meta-analyses of the effects of media images on men’s body-image concerns. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 279–310. Bean, M., & Boye, B. (2006, May). The 2006 Men’s Health grooming awards: A thousand tubes, bottles, and jars. Relax—we found the best. Men’s Health, 23, 158–164. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Toward a new modernity. London: Sage. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995). Ecological politics in an age of risk. Cambridge: Polity. Benwell, B. (2004). Ironic discourse: Evasive masculinity in men’s lifestyle magazines. Men and Masculinities, 7, 3–21. Boni, F. (2002). Framing media masculinities. European Journal of Communication, 17, 465–478. Bordo, S. (1994). Reading the male body. In L. Goldstein (Ed.), The male body (pp. 265–306). Ann Arbor: Michigan University. Bordo, S. (1999). The male body: A new look at men in public and private. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
78 Bordens, K. S., & Abbott, B. B. (2008). Research design and methods: A process approach (7th ed.). San Francisco: McGraw Hill. Budgeon, S. (2003). Identity as an embodied event. Body and Society, 9, 35–55. Canape, C. (1985). Refashioning the male marketplace. Marketing & Media Decisions, 20, 84–88. Carrigan, T., Connell, R. W., & Lee, J. (1985). Towards a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and Society, 14, 551–604. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. California: Stanford University. Connell, R. W. (1993). The big picture: Masculinities in recent world history. Theory and Society, 22, 597–623. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: University of California. Connell, R. W., & Wood, J. (2005). Globalization and business masculinities. Men and Masculinities, 7, 347–364. Coupland, J. (2007). Gendered discourses: The ‘problem’ of ageing: Consumerized solutions. Discourse and Communication, 1, 37–61. Davis, K. (2002). ‘A dubious equality’: Men, women and cosmetic surgery. Body & Society, 8, 49–65. Donaldson, M. (1993). What is hegemonic masculinity. Theory and Society, 22, 643–657. Edwards, T. (1997). Men in the mirror: Men’s fashion, masculinity and consumer society. London: Cassell. Ekberg, M. (2007). The parameters of the risk society: A review and exploration. Current Sociology, 55, 343–368. Featherstone, M. (1991). The body in consumer culture. In M. Featherstone, M. Hepworth, & B. Turner (Eds.), The body: Social process and cultural theory (pp. 170–196). London: Sage. Frederick, D. A., Fessler, D. M. T., & Haselton, M. G. (2005). Do representations of male muscularity differ in men’s and women’s magazines? Body Image, 2, 81–86. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity. Giddens, A. (1994). Living in a post-traditional society. In U. Beck, A. Giddens, & S. Lash (Eds.), Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Cambridge: Polity. Gill, R., Henwood, K., & McLean, C. (2003). A genealogical approach to idealized male body imagery. Paragraph: A Journal of Modern Critical Theory, 26, 187–201. Gill, R., Henwood, K., & McLean, C. (2005). Body projects and the regulation of normative masculinity. Body & Society, 11, 37–62. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. I was a big fat [man]. Then I went to the movies. (2006, March). Men’s Health, 21, 82. Jackson, P., Stevenson, N., & Brooks, K. (2001). Making sense of men’s magazines. Oxford and Malden: Polity. Jeffords, S. (1993). Can masculinity be terminated? In S. Cohan & I. Rae (Eds.), Screening the male: Exploring masculinities in Hollywood cinema (pp. 245–262). Hark: Routledge.
Sex Roles (2010) 63:64–78 Kimmel, M. S. (1996). Manhood in America. New York: Free. Lorenzen, L. A., Grieve, F. G., & Thomas, A. (2004). Brief report: Exposure to muscular male models decreases men’s body satisfaction. Sex Roles, 51, 743–748. MacDonald, M. (1995). Representing women: Myths of femininity in the popular media. London: Edward Arnold. MacKinnon, K. (1992). Representing men: Maleness and masculinity in the media. Oxford: Oxford University. Nabi, R. L. (2002). Discrete emotions and persuasion. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook (pp. 289–307). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Nixon, S. (1996). Hard looks: Masculinities, spectatorship and contemporary consumption. London: University College London. Nixon, S. (2001). Resignifying masculinity: From ‘new man’ to ‘new lad’. In D. Morley & K. Robins (Eds.), British cultural studies (pp. 373–385). Oxford University Press. Old Spice. (2005, March). Maxim, 87, 111. Pepe Jeans. (2006, April). Stuff, 77, 129. Pope, H., Phillips, K., & Olivardia, R. (2000). The Adonis complex: How to identify, treat and prevent body obsession in men and boys. New York: Simon and Schuster. Pringle, R. (2005). Masculinities, sport, and power: A critical comparison of Gramscian and Foucauldian inspired theoretical tools. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 29, 256–278. Pronger, B. (2002). Body fascism: Salvation in the technology of physical fitness. Toronto: University of Toronto. Robertson, S. (2006). “I’ve been like a coiled spring this last week”: Embodied masculinity and health. Sociology of Health & Illness, 28, 433–456. Segal, L. (1993). Changing men: Masculinities in context. Theory and Society, 22, 625–641. Shilling, C. (1993). The body and social theory. London: Sage Publications. Simpson, M. (1994). Male impersonators: Men performing masculinity. New York: Routledge. Spitzer, B. L., Henderson, K. A., & Zivian, M. T. (1999). Gender differences in population versus media body sizes: A comparison over four decades. Sex Roles, 40, 545–565. Taylor, L. D. (2005). All for him: Articles about sex in American lad magazines. Sex Roles, 52, 153–163. Vigorito, A. J., & Curry, T. (1998). Marketing masculinity: Gender identity and popular magazines. Sex Roles, 39, 135–152. Wamsley, K. (2007). The public importance of men and the importance of public men: Sports and masculinity in nineteenth century Canada. In K. Young & P. White (Eds.), Sports and gender in Canada (2nd ed., pp. 75–92). Oxford University Press. Wave Stunners: What’s cooler than knowing how to tear like a worldclass wakeboarder? Looking like you don’t care. (2005, July). Maxim, 91, 140–146. Wienke, C. (1998). Negotiating the male body: Men, masculinity, and cultural ideals. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 6, 255–287. Wolf, N. (1991). The beauty myth. London: Chatto and Windus.
Copyright of Sex Roles is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. 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.
