Article

Men and Masculinities

2017, Vol. 20(4) 427-452
ª The Author(s) 2016
‘‘We Are So Pumped Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Full of Shit by the Media’’: DOI: 10.1177/1097184X16652654
journals.sagepub.com/home/jmm

Masculinity, Magazines,
and the Lack of
Self-identification

Andrea Waling1,2

Abstract
Men’s lifestyle magazines have long since been the focus of theorists in their
examination of masculinity. However, research concerning men’s responses to such
content, and whether these representations speak to their perceptions on
embodying particular forms of masculinity in an Australian context, is largely absent.
To understand how Australian men conceptualize their own ideas about masculinity
and identity, interviews were conducted with twenty Australian men who were
asked to peruse copies of men’s lifestyle magazines while pondering what it means to
be masculine. Engaging with the theoretical frameworks of representational mas-
culinity and masculine reformulation patterns, the results of this study found that the
men interviewed identified four themes of social pressure perpetuated by these
magazines regarding their own formation of a masculine identity. These include
media representation and cultural consumption pressures, body image and mus-
cularity pressures, performative sex and desirability expectations, and the fear of
social judgment from both those who expect, and those who reject, particular

1
Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society, School of Psychology & Public Health, College of
Health, Science & Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
2
School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Corresponding Author:
Andrea Waling, Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society, School of Psychology & Public
Health, College of Health, Science & Engineering, La Trobe University, 215 Franklin Street, City Campus,
Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia.
Email: a.waling@latrobe.edu.au
428 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

performances of masculinity. Despite these articulations, however, the men main-

tained that these expectations affect other men and not themselves. While these
men did not identify with these pressures, a textual analysis of their responses
suggest otherwise, indicating a paradox in which they both accept and reject the
mythscapes of aspirational masculinity presented before them.

Keywords
identity, bodies, sexualities, media, masculinity, magazines

In 1981, glam rock queens David Bowie and Freddie Mercury collaborated on a
quintessential piece of music notable for its consistent rhythmic bass, improvised
scat, and profound lyrics. Renowned for their divergence from traditional scripts of
masculinity in both lifestyle and appearance (see Auslander 2004, 2006), ‘‘Under
Pressure’’ could be interpreted as a commentary on both the external and the internal
expectations to conform to a normative, narrow, and constraining model of mascu-
linity in an ideology noted by scholars such as Connell (2001). Variations of this
ideology can be found in representational forms of media, such as men’s lifestyle
magazines, that seek to guide men on how to achieve culturally appropriate man-
hood. Australian editions of men’s lifestyle magazines like For Him Magazine
(FHM) have been the focus of theorists in their examinations of masculinity, and
they highlight what is available for consumption by Australian men (e.g., Mikosza
2003; Benwell 2007; Waling 2014). However, research concerning men’s responses
to such content, and whether these representations speak to their perceptions of
embodying particular forms of masculinity in Australia, is notably absent.
To understand how men conceptualize their own ideas about masculinity and
identity, interviews were conducted with twenty Australian men who were asked to
peruse copies of men’s magazines while pondering what it means to be masculine.
This research draws on Reeser’s (2010) work on mythscapes and representational
masculinity, along with Gerschick and Miller’s (1994, 1995) work on masculine
reformulation patterns. The term ‘‘hegemonic masculinity’’ is used in this research.
This is a conceptual framework that examines hierarchal structures of masculinity
and gendered power relations within culture and subcultures (Connell and Mes-
serschmidt 2005; Howson 2009). Hegemonic masculinity refers to an idealized form
of masculine character. In the context of this analysis, this is a Western interpretation
that includes whiteness, heterosexuality, upper-middle-class status, aggression,
strength, and confidence, among other traditional signifiers of traditional masculi-
nity. The term ‘‘men’s lifestyle magazines’’ is also used in this article to denote
particular genre of magazine that caters to the consumption and embodiment of a
particular masculine identity.
Using Benwell’s (2005) textual cultural approach in analyzing men’s readership
reception, alongside men’s lifestyle magazines as a point of reference, I argue that
Waling 429

the men interviewed for this research have identified four key areas of pressure.
These include media representation and cultural consumption pressures, body image
and muscularity pressures, performative sex and desirability expectations, and the
fear of social judgment both from those who expect and from those who reject
particular performances of masculinity. While the men interviewed maintain that
these expectations affect other men and not themselves, a textual analysis of their
use of language suggests otherwise. Therefore, the interviewees simultaneously
reject and embrace forms of masculinity as presented to them in the magazines.

Men in the Magazines

Theoretical examinations concerning gender, social identity, and masculinity within
magazines identity have argued that magazines provide for, and legitimize, particular
representations of gender identities and gender role expectations. Readers then draw
on the cultural frames presented in such magazines when constructing their own self-
identity (Stevenson, Jackson, and Brooks 2003; Jackson, Stevenson, and Brooks
2001; Holmes 2007; Hermes 2005; Crewe 2003). Contemporary studies of men’s
lifestyle magazine content have focused on such topics as sexualized representations
of women (Gill 2007), the consumerist production of masculinity (Alexander 2003),
body image and muscularity (McKay, Mikosza, and Hutchins 2005; Gough 2006;
Elliott and Elliot 2005), the emergence of modern and complicated masculinities
(Attwood 2005; Benwell 2004), representations of masculinity and gay men’s iden-
tities (Jankowski et al. 2014), masculinity and representations of ethnicity and race
(Pompper, Soto, and Piel 2007), cultural variations in constructing masculinity (Tan
et al. 2013), masculinity in relation to youth and aging (i.e., (Clarke, Bennett and Liu
2014)), hegemonic portrayals of masculinity (i.e., Ricciardelli, Clow, and White
2010), and men’s/boy’s courtship and sexual attitudes (i.e., Coy and Horvath
2011; Horvath et al. 2012). Studies focusing on Australian representations of mas-
culinity include Henderson’s (2001) examination of Track and Wheels; Booth’s
(2008) response to Henderson’s (2001) work; and Mikosza’s (2003) and Walings’
(2014) scholarship on Australian editions of magazines like Ralph, FHM, and Zoo
Weekly. Both Booth (2008) and Henderson (2001) maintain that magazines like
Track and Wheels reproduce hegemonic and hierarchal ideals of Australian mascu-
linity that are contingent on idealized product consumption, while Mikosza (2003)
examined the tone of writing voices used to attract a particular type of male audience.
In addition to theoretical scholarship, research has examined how magazines may
impact on men’s attitudes and beliefs in society. This includes studies investigating
the impact of magazines on self-esteem and body image (Lorenzen, Grieve, and
Thomas 2004; Morry and Staska 2001; Duggan and McLeary 2004), and content
analyses of reader’s responses to the subject matter found within men’s lifestyle
magazines (Benwell 2005, 2007). Ward, Vandenbosch, and Eggermont’s (2015)
study found that misogynistic attitudes increased among men who consumed maga-
zines in which women’s images are sexualized. These results have been echoed in
430 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

other, similar works, such as that of Taylor (2006) and Ward, Vandenbosch, and
Eggermont (2015). While plenty of research has focused on issues of sexism, sex-
ualization, body image, and sexual attitudes, very little has been done to engage with
how Australian men read such media when considering perceptions of what it means
to be masculine in a contemporary society. Hence, this article examines how men
negotiate the images, product consumption expectations, and representations of
masculinity in magazines such as FHM, Ralph, Zoo Weekly, and Men’s Health.

Theorizing Representational and Aspirational Masculinity

In his work on mythscaping, Reeser (2010, 22) argues that masculinities, which may
appear to be stable, are in constant flux due to interactions with other hybrid forms
circulated through media and other social institutions. He defines a mythscapee as
the process in which images, language, local myths/narratives, and physical embo-
diments work together to create and sustain a culturally held belief or ideal through
widespread enculturation (Reeser 2010, 22). Reeser (2010) maintains that encultura-
tion methods such as images, myths, and language are interconnected and rely on
each other to produce normalized masculine ideologies. Through these methods,
‘‘myths have the effect of retroactively reading a given idea of masculinity back onto
all masculinity in order to make it appear universal when in fact it is fabricated’’
(Reeser 2010, 27). By ‘‘universal,’’ Reeser (2010) is referring to an essentialist
understanding of masculinity, which he maintains is socially constructed.
These mythscapes of masculinity construct what Howson (2009) contends is an
aspirational masculinity. Using a reworking of Connell’s (1987) concept of hege-
monic masculinity, Howson (2009, 23) argues that hegemonic masculinity as a
theoretical framework is better understood as describing what men ‘‘should’’ do and
should be as opposed to describing their actual reality. Howson (2009, 23) maintains
that hegemonic masculinity ‘‘gives expression to men and women’s aspirations’’ and
functions as an ‘‘empty signifier of gender.’’ Schrock and Schwalbe (2009, 279)
similarly contend that signifying a masculine self requires mastering a set of prac-
tices that denote manhood. These practices are determined through men’s engage-
ment with both representational forms of masculinity, such as those found in the
media, and everyday praxes that have become part of the masculine mythscape. For
this analysis, the masculine mythscape as produced by men’s lifestyle magazines
(see Waling 2014) functions as a form of pressure for men who view these cultural
images in their own negotiation of ideals or aspirations of masculinity.

The Ideal Australian Man

Connell (1987, 1995, 2000, 2005) notes that in Western society, the archetypal
hegemonic male is white, heterosexual, able bodied, and middle class and often
typified by physical and mental characteristics such as aggression, muscularity, and
being confident. However, this ideal can vary depending on local time, culture, and
Waling 431

place (Donaldson 1993; Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). In an Australian context,

the ideal man shares many of the above traits but also maintains some qualities unique
to Australian culture and imaginings of Australian (white, colonial) masculinity.
Qualities such as mateship, rebelliousness, egalitarianism, antiauthoritarianism, and
patriotism become embedded within the white, able-bodied heterosexual male and can
be found in the romanticized figures of the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps
(ANZAC) soldiers (Donoghue and Tranter 2015), the surf lifesaver (Evers 2004), and
the swagman (Moore 1998).

Engaging Men’s Intrasubjectivity

The location of the intrapersonal is significant when understanding how men nego-
tiate their masculinity, as masculinity can be understood as an aspect of personhood
that requires some external acknowledgment from, and continuous engagement
with, the broader social institutions that work to shape and maintain it. Best under-
stood through Connell’s (2000, 29) notion of a hegemonic gender order, masculi-
nities are configurations of practice produced within gender relations that include
large-scale institutions and everyday interactions. Connell’s (2000, 29) discussion of
the hegemonic gender order maintains that men have different interpretations of their
ability to operate within a hegemonic structure on both an institutional and a personal
level. In accordance with this approach, the intrapersonal does not determine hege-
monic structure but rather works to produce difference within that structure, where
both being and becoming a man carry political conditions and potentialities for
gender identity (Whitehead 2002, 183). While men may or may not feel pressured
to achieve an aspirational masculine identity as set by larger social institutions, how
they interpret their path in either reconciling or rejecting these pressures within
themselves and among other men may have varying levels of difference. For Connell
(2000) and Whitehead (2002), men may draw on different resources to make sense of
a masculine identity, or they may attach different meanings to the same images, as
they draw on specific references that are circulated in their social life.
These levels of difference are best addressed by Gerschick and Miller’s (1994,
1995) work on reformulation, rejection, and reliance patterns regarding hegemony,
masculinity, and identity. Gerschick and Miller’s studies on disability and mascu-
linity have found that men who do not or cannot subscribe to traditional forms of
aspirational hegemonic masculinity have reformulated or rejected these ideals. For
Gerschick and Miller, some men reformulate a masculine identity by drawing upon
both hegemonic and nonhegemonic ideals. Others may reject contemporary cultural
standards in their identity formation, claiming that current ideals of masculinity are
wrong, and instead embrace their own opposing ideologies (Gerschick and Miller
1994, 1995). Still others may practice a pattern of reliance, wherein they work to
define their manhood along new lines in a way that involves performing traditional
hegemonic ideals while simultaneously feeling pressured by these ideals regarding
their identity formation (Gerschick and Miller 1994, 1995).
432 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

Analyzing Men’s Readership: A Textual Cultural Approach

Benwell’s (2005) work on qualitative methodologies for conducting research on
men’s reception of content within magazines advocates for a ‘‘textual cultural’’
approach. She argues that there is little scholarship involving how readers of maga-
zines make sense of cultural meanings from the texts they read, beyond a traditional
ethnographic rhetoric. This is in part, as Benwell (2005, 148) claims, due to an
emphasis on producing scholarship around processes of production and regulation
and on ethnographies of reception. Benwell proposes that a textual cultural approach
is a method that allows for researchers to investigate in depth the relationship of
reader’s reception to media texts. She further contends that researchers can gain
valuable insights by examining the language used by participants when responding
to interview questions and/or in organic conversation when discussing readership
reception. For Benwell, it is not just the content available (discursive analysis) in the
magazines nor how the men respond (ethnographic) to it that is of value but also the
manner in which their responses are structured (textual) that requires investigation.
Engaging with Benwell’s (2005) approach, this present study assesses how men
perceive commercialized representations of masculinity in magazines. This article draws
its findings from a larger doctoral project investigating Australian identity and mascu-
linity. Criteria for inclusion for this project involved age requirements of between
eighteen to thirty-five and third-generation Australian, as these men would be inheritors
of more than a hundred years of mythmaking. I wanted to examine what the younger
generations had to say about masculine identities, as they would have been much more
influenced by new, emerging masculinities as a result of globalization and technological
revolutions. To determine what impacts current representations of masculinity might
have on how men negotiate their own masculinity, twenty qualitative, one-on-one inter-
views1 were conducted with Australian men based in Melbourne aged between eighteen
and thirty-five years. This number of participants generated a surfeit of material and
provided a situation of data saturation, wherein the themes of the interview begins to
repeat (Guest, Bunce, and Johnson 2006). With this process, qualitative researchers are
no longer seeing new information as they analyze data throughout their study (Guest,
Bunce, and Johnson 2006). To recruit participants, a research poster with details about the
project was utilized and advertised both online and in hard copy. These posters appeared
on university campuses, coffee shop bulletin boards, and local fitness club notice
boards in Melbourne, alongside website forums and classifieds websites.2 Participants
had to get in contact with the researcher to demonstrate interest in participating in the
project. As such, all participation was voluntary on behalf of the participants. Interviews
were conducted between the months of March and September 2012, took place either in
local coffee shops convenient for the participant or a quiet office at the university, and
lasted between an hour to two hours each. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed,
coded, and analyzed using Atlas Ti Version 7.2 with attention paid to recurring themes.
Table 1 outlines the demographic characteristics of the participants. Most of the
men interviewed identified as heterosexual, had completed at least secondary
Waling 433

Table 1. Participant Demographics.

Characteristics Sample (N ¼ 20) Percentage

Age-group
18–24 Years 7 35
25–29 Years 9 45
30–35 Years 4 20
Sexual orientation
Heterosexual 15 75
Homosexual 1 5
Undisclosed 4 20
Heritage
Anglo-Celtica 14 70
Anglo-Europeanb 4 20
Mixed: Anglo-Celtic/Anglo-European 1 5
Mixed: Anglo-Celtic/Asian 1 5
Education attained
Secondary levelc,d 5 25
Technical and Further Education (TAFE)/ 5 25
vocational qualificatione
Undergraduate degree or higherf 10 50
Current occupation
Trades and skilled labor 1 5
Community and personal serviceg 4 20
Professional, corporate, and self-employedh 8 40
University student 7 35

Source: ABS (2006, 2009, 2012, 2013a, 2013b).

a
Defined by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) as individuals with white British and/or Irish ancestry.
b
Defined by the ABS as individuals with European heritage that is not of white British and/or Irish ancestry.
c
At the time of being interviewed, those with secondary level of education were in the process of
completing their bachelor degrees.
d
Defined by the ABS as the ‘‘highest level of primary or secondary education a person has completed,
irrespective of the type of institution or location where that education was undertaken.’’
e
Defined by the ABS as ‘‘postcompulsory education and training, excluding degree and higher level
programs delivered by higher education institutions, which provides people with occupational or
work-related knowledge and skills.’’
f
Defined by the ABS as ‘‘education offered by a university or other higher education institution, leading to
the award of a degree or higher level qualification.’’
g
Defined by the ABS as working in areas such as ‘‘social welfare matters and provide other services in the
areas of aged care and childcare, education support, hospitality, defence, policing and emergency services,
security, travel and tourism, fitness, sports, and personal services.’’
h
Defined by the ABS as performing ‘‘analytical, conceptual, and creative tasks through the application of
theoretical knowledge and experience in the fields of the arts, media, business, design, engineering, the
physical and life sciences, transport, education, health, information and communication technology, the
law, social sciences, and social welfare.’’

education, worked in professional or white-collar jobs, and were of Anglo-Celtic

(white Australian) heritage. This was not the intended targeted demographic;3 rather,
these were the men who responded to the advertisements. Their understanding of
434 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

masculinity and their readership reception can be considered quite privileged and
therefore not representative of a diverse group of men. Nevertheless, their responses
still provide intriguing data and perhaps highlight how such privilege impacts on
their sense of manhood within an aspirational hegemonic framework in Australia.
During the interviews, each man was shown the same copies4 of FHM, Ralph,
Zoo Weekly, and Men’s Health.5 Table 2 provides a breakdown of each magazine’s
content and target demographic. These magazines were chosen to build on a previ-
ous study that sought to examine the narratives of Australian masculinity presented
within them (Waling 2014). This article then presents thematic findings of some of
the issues these men brought up regarding these magazines when thinking about
masculinity, but it is not intended to be a generalizable, exhaustive, or quantitative
account. The men were asked to peruse each magazine and discuss their observa-
tions with the researcher. These discussions were open ended, with an informal
interview schedule designed to help incite discussions around masculinity and their
lived experiences when viewing these magazines. All identifying information has
been altered to ensure participant anonymity. Using these magazines proved to be a
useful tool in examining how contemporary men negotiate their own sense of man-
hood. By having the material present, the men were not only able to comment on the
representations before them but were also able to build on these discussions in
relation to their lived experiences of constructing an acknowledgeable masculine
identity. In so doing, the men articulated both the concerns they had with these
aspirational representations and the broader implications of considering their
identity within an increasingly globalized and postfeminist6 environment.

Pressures and Masculinity

The results of this study are organized thematically in accordance with the partici-
pants’ identification of three key areas that contribute to these conflicts of contrasting
masculine identities. These include pressures about media representations and cultural
consumption, body image and muscularity pressures, and performative sex and desir-
ability expectations. Building from these themes, the men highlighted a fourth key
area, the fear of social judgment that contributed to an inability to reconcile or dismiss
the pressure from the previous three areas. Despite this fear, however, the men did not
identify with the pressures present nor did they themselves feel afflicted, instead
insisting that other men were the ones who were affected and experienced uncertainty.

Media Representations and Cultural Consumption Pressures

We are so pumped full of shit by the media. (Adam)

Conforming to commercialized masculinities through the ‘‘selling’’ of masculinity is

an area of pressure identified by the participants. This is because media imagery
 Table 2. Breakdown of Men’s Lifestyle Magazines.

Publication Details For Him Magazine Men’s Health Magazine Ralph Magazine Zoo Weekly Magazine

Type Lad’s mag/lifestyle Fitness/lifestyle Lad’s mag/lifestyle Lad’s mag/erotic

Years in production 1985–present 1987–present 1997–2010 2004–present United
United Kingdom ed. United States ed. Kingdom ed.
1998–2012 Australian ed. 1997–present 2006–2015
Australian ed. Australian ed.
Publisher Bauer Media Pacific Magazines ACP Media Bauer Media
Place of Origina United Kingdom United States Australia United Kingdom
Online presence? Yes (fhm.com) Yes (menshealth.com) No Yes (zooweekly.com.au)
Content topics Fitness Fitness Fitness Comedy news
(Hetero)Sexuality Nutrition (Hetero)Sexuality Sports Entertainment
Fashion (Hetero)Sexuality Fashion Fashion
Lifestyle Fashion Lifestyle Comical/erotic pictures
Entertainment Grooming Grooming (Hetero)Sexuality
Grooming Health Entertainment
Target Middle- to upper-class men Middle-class men Working- to middle-class men Working-class men
demographic Early 20s to early 30s Early 30s upward to early 50s Early to late 20s Late teens to late 50s
Anglo-Europeanb Anglo-European b Anglo-European b Anglo-Europeanb
Heterosexualc Heterosexualc Heterosexual Heterosexual
a
Reviewed copies of For Him Magazine, Zoo Weekly Magazine, and Men’s Health Magazine were Australian editions of the magazines.
b
These magazines are meant to attract an Anglo-European audience due to featuring a mostly all-white demographic of both men and women within their pages.
c
These magazines attract both the heterosexual and homosexual male consumer; however, the incorporation of women is meant to reaffirm that these magazines
are meant for a heterosexual male.

435
436 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

‘‘provides a shared symbolic language for identifying certain practices as signs of

masculine character . . . [offering] symbolic resources for crafting conformist and
oppositional presentations of masculine selves’’ (Schrock and Schwalbe 2009,
283–84). Such imagery thus becomes an effective way for masculine ideas and
gendered discourses to be communicated to Australian men. This process is out-
lined in Schneider’s (1997, 110) work on desire and consumption, in which she
argues that the desire for a product becomes a means of realizing an (un)achievable
reality. By owning the commodity presented in an advertisement, a viewer
attempts to gain fulfilment of their desire (Schneider 1997, 110). However, view-
ers never actually achieve such desires, as these media images work only to
produce unachievable realities within a mythscape that ‘‘pressures’’ people into
adhering to such claims.
The external pressures that are applied to men—constructed within lifestyle
magazines, fictional and reality television, advertisements, movies, and other forms
of media—promote ideal but also marketable qualities of masculinity. The pressure
to conform to these qualities recurred in many interviews:

I think the idea of being male is under a lot of pressure for a lot of people . . . . I think
[it] is under attack in the same way being a woman is under attack. I think we’re slower
to realize that we’re being manufactured into a consumer rather than a person and that’s
wreaking havoc with our sense [of] manhood. (Adam)

Adam’s comment highlights what theorists have begun unpacking in the last decade
about damaging representations of masculinity (Gill, Henwood, and McLean 2005;
Gough 2007; Daniel and Bridges 2010). He likens these representations to contro-
versial images of women in the media, which is an area of scholarship extensively
addressed by feminist scholars (Harper and Tiggemann 2008; Gill 2012). Adam
feels that there is a lack of resistance from average men regarding these images and
he emphasizes a lack of awareness in the acceptance of the commodification of
masculinity. What is interesting to note is Adam’s use of the terms ‘‘we’’ and ‘‘our’’
throughout his statement, suggesting that he has some identification with other men
regarding these claims, and yet he himself was adamant that he did not feel pressured
to comply.
Other participants had similar perceptions:

[Viewing Zoo Weekly] Amazing feats of manliness, like punching and wrestling . . . .
These are all designed to kind of get me to admire the men in these magazines and the
things they do to be manly. (Drew)
[Viewing FHM] I see this as helping men being men and helping men meet society’s or
their perceptions of society’s expectations of what it means to be a man. I guess the
concession that—or the, I guess, the subject is that men need help with how to be a
man. It’s not obvious and it’s like it takes a whole fucking magazine to do him up. How
to be a dude kind of thing. (Reid)
Waling 437

Drew notes that certain traits or attributes are being sold as ‘‘masculine’’ in the
magazines to those who consume such media. These components have become
included in a narrative or mythscape of masculinity, and as a result, are seen as
being inseparable from what men might believe is male/masculine. This approach of
communicating aspirational masculinity has been used in other forms of media that
have been recognized by researchers such as Johnson and Kivel (2009), whose
research on movies, masculinity, and youth memory identified that the narrative
of the typical male hero has constructed a consumable masculinity that could then be
admired and, in part, replicated by young boys.
Reid’s comment touches on scholarly critiques on the role of consumption and
media imagery in the production of an (un)achievable identity (see Alexander 2003).
Both Drew and Reid distance themselves from being affected by these images. Reid
utilizes third person language (‘‘men’’) to note that while other men are expected to
follow these ideals, he himself is removed from this framework. In contrast, Drew’s
use of the pronoun ‘‘me’’ situates him as being impacted by the magazines. How-
ever, in stating that the magazines seek to get him ‘‘to admire’’ the imagery within,
Drew notes that his approval is required for them to be effective, thereby positioning
himself as removed from their potential influence.
The participants also illustrated that the magazines imply there is appropriate
cultural knowledge they should possess:

So I just opened up to this page [FHM], ‘Prints to put on your wall’, so these are all kind
of arty prints, graphic designers, but then [trying to make it seem appealing to men],
‘dumbing’ it down . . . . Here’s how to pimp out your wall, it [has] to be good and
acceptable if you [have] money, but then again it [has] to be masculine . . . . There is the
corporate influence of, you know, how to look good, how to dress, how to design
interior architecture, what kind of fucking guy wants to know how to style interior
architecture? It’s the influence of that that is leaving us conflicted because our parents,
our grandparents, our dads couldn’t give a shit about interior architecture but now
we’re expected to know all of this. (Evan)

Evan highlights that the type of cultural knowledge he is expected to maintain has
changed, with men’s masculinity now valued by their knowledge of what Evan feels
to be superficial. For Evan, older generations of men and their sense of masculinity
are viewed as being perhaps more ‘‘authentic’’ than the one(s) being fabricated and
sold to his generation in these magazines.
This remark reflects the uncertainties some men may experience in associating
with these new values as being appropriate signifiers of an urban, middle-class
masculinity. Such men demonstrate that these forms of masculinity have become
integrated with commercial interests, wherein new male identities are created and
linked to the consumption of a particular product (Johnson and Kivel 2009). This
leaves men like Adam, Drew, and Evan frustrated with the very idea that men need
advice on how to be men, thereby rejecting the mythscapes of masculinity that are
438 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

presented to them. They hint toward a nostalgia for a ‘‘realistic,’’ premedia mascu-
linity that is no longer considered appropriate for urban, middle-class men like
themselves.

Body Image and Muscularity Pressures

There are a lot of people with really fucking skewed ideas of being male. (Adam)

Achieving an appropriate, masculine body is another pressure that participants iden-

tified in constructing a viable and acknowledged masculine identity. Some theorists
have argued that representations of male bodies have become idealized and eroti-
cized, coded in a way that allows for sexual objectification (Simpson 1994; Gill,
Henwood, and McLean 2005). Male bodies have become a form of symbolic capital,
where signifying appropriate masculinity is structured more on how the body looks
and less on its actual capability (Bourdieu 1986; Gill, Henwood, and McLean 2005).
As Gill, Henwood, and McLean (2005, 45) suggest, a fetishization of muscles and
muscularity is arising, as corporate and white-collar work (which do not require
strong feats of physicality) become the preferred form of labor over skilled trades for
men in the globalized community. Thus, their bodies have become a way in which
males can define themselves in the globalized era (Gill, Henwood, and McLean
2005). Pressures on sustaining an appropriate masculine body are quite prevalent in
advertising and middle-class lifestyle television shows and magazines such as Men’s
Health or FHM, where the ‘‘male body is a desirable and desiring one, concerned
with health, fitness and beauty, issues which define an ‘embodied masculine life-
style’’’ (Boni 2002, 466). Middle-class men might find themselves under more
pressure than working-class men to adhere to these masculine aesthetics set by
magazines, as noted by theorists such as Miller (2005), who argues that urban men
are expected to retain more youthful and fashion conscious looks in accordance with
those encouraged in men’s lifestyle magazines in order to maintain their current
employment. However, these body ideals are constructed in such a way that they are
presented as instrumental to health as opposed to essential for beauty (Gill, Hen-
wood, and McLean 2005, 45).
Reid pinpoints this interpretation of Men’s Health, where male bodies are for him
not displayed as sexualized objects but rather as representations of good health and
indicators of the intense work needed to achieve these looks:

They’re sort of showing off his physique so that kind of makes it okay. It’s not about so
much appreciating the beauty of a man as how much work is done kind of thing to get
fully ripped. (Reid)

By associating ideal body image with health as opposed to attractiveness and beauty,
magazines like Men’s Health and FHM bypass the traditional notion of masculinity
Waling 439

that holds men are not and should not be interested in maintaining their appearance.
Instead, they present sculpted male bodies as pictures of health and longevity (Gill,
Henwood, and McLean 2005, 45). In doing so, these bodies become medicalized,
and men are convinced that that their own bodies are unhealthy and at risk if they do
not undertake the fitness regimes outlined in these magazines (Boni 2002). Within
this discourse, individuals are expected to ‘‘assume self-responsibility for the way
they feel, behave and look, with their display of the male body as a vehicle of care
and pleasure’’ (Boni 2002, 468).
However, as participants Connor and Henry note, the guides provided to help men
achieve this image of health are inconsistent and fixated on narrow body image ideals:

I read Men’s Health myself sometimes. I lost a lot of weight. I like to pick up tips but I
mean there’s an element of confusion. I find that you read one article that says you
should eat this. And then, the next month, you’re reading an article saying no, you
shouldn’t eat that. It’s like in the end, the researchers—everybody is contradicting each
other. (Connor)
[Viewing Men’s Health] I have a real problem with the body image [in this magazine],
you know, people striving for that sort of body image or, you know, it’s a gym junkie
stereotype . . . . Positive body image to me is someone that’s athletic and fit, healthy,
but, you know, not necessarily muscly—it may or may not be muscly. Whereas every-
one in this [magazine] is [muscular]. (Henry)

As Connor suggests, information in these magazines changes and may contradict

that offered in previous issues, leading to confusion about to construct a recogniz-
able and appropriate masculine identity that is entrenched with notions of muscu-
larity. Henry notes that magazines such as Men’s Health, whose perceived purpose is
to promote healthy lifestyles, are damaging in their portrayal of sculpted and some-
times unachievable bodies for average men.
Other criticisms the participants made concerning representations of bodies in
Men’s Health (and to an extent FHM, Ralph, and Zoo Weekly) included the lack of
racial diversity:

[Viewing Men’s Health] It’s a fantasy, a white-bread fantasy, you don’t see any ethnics
in here (Evan).
[Viewing Men’s Health] It’s telling us that we should all be white (Marcus).

Whiteness has been noted by a number of theorists in the representations of mascu-

linity in men’s lifestyle magazines (see Waling 2014; Farquhar and Wasylkiv 2007)
and both Evan and Marcus highlight the continued normalization of whiteness when
considering their own masculine identities. Although the magazines sell the idea that
anyone can achieve the advertised physique, the images they promote suggest that
no matter how much effort men of color invest in their bodies, they will be unable to
440 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

replicate these masculine ideals. As most of the participants involved in this study
were white, it is rather intriguing that they themselves, located in a position of
racial privilege in Australia, identified the lack of racial diversity as problematic
in the idealized representations of men. For them, these representations of bodies
are manufactured through a rhetoric of achievability, drawing on constructions of
masculinity as white and muscular which are necessary to the mythscape of
masculinity. In a similar vein to their perceptions of media and consumption,
these men reject these ideals as applicable to their own construction of mascu-
linity through their conscious recognition that these images are unachievable and
contradictory.

Performative Sex and Desirability Expectations

What they’re trying to do here is they’re trying to show you a selection of males that
appeal to females. That way, you want to become more like these males so that you’re
more appealing to females. (Brayden)

Sexual expectations and pressures concerning desirability focus on heteronorma-

tive assumptions of men as sexual subjects and pleasure seekers. They sustain a
focus on how men should behave in order to attract and to bed women as well as
the pressure to be or to identify as heterosexual. These expectations can manifest in
a variety of ways, such as through the status gained within a social circle regarding
the number of women a man has had sex with (see Seal and Ehrhardt 2003). With
regard to men’s lifestyle magazines and television shows, participants identified a
number of different pressures based on either expectations of them as men regard-
ing sex and sexuality or their sexual desirability to women. For instance, FHM and
Men’s Health were seen as perpetuating a particular type of sexual desirability. As
Brayden notes in the quote above, the magazines promote the notions that mascu-
line men are heterosexual men, that men need to look and behave in a certain way
to attract women, and that one of men’s main focuses in life should be attracting
women. These magazines sustain these expectations by encouraging men to con-
struct themselves as sexual objects and engage with sexual subjectification, pro-
moting a pornographic masculinity where men supposed to be sexually potent and
always ready for sexual encounters (Boni 2002; Gill 2007; Rohlinger 2002; Garner
2012; Attwood 2005).
Magazines such as Men’s Health construct male sexuality as performative and
mechanical, where ‘‘the body becomes a sexual machine, which has to be controlled
and kept functioning, and the sexual organs are transformed into ‘tools’ or instru-
ments by which the performance is accomplished’’ (Boni 2002, 473). Here, sexual
expectation pressures work in conjunction with body image pressures within a guise
of health, as identified by the participants:
Waling 441

[Viewing Men’s Health] Viagra, that’s interesting, why would they be advertising that
in a men’s magazine [aimed at young men]? . . . Not only do men [need] to feel bad
about the way they look, now they have to be able to get it up all the time . . . I thought
Viagra was for 50 year olds? The guys in here look like they’re in their 30s. (Ian)

Ian claims that Men’s Health, in addition to pressuring men about their appearance,
is placing pressure on their sexual performance through advertising sexually
enhancing drugs to young men. In doing so, it produces anxieties about sexual
performance by medicalizing male sexuality (Marshall 2002; Potts et al. 2003;
Vares et al. 2003). What Ian demonstrates is the disjuncture between representa-
tions of masculinity and health, where illnesses are invented to create a market for
the product (Marshall 2002). Discourses about erectile dysfunction focus on anxi-
eties and pressures to perform sexually (Potts et al. 2003; Vares et al. 2003). A
product such as Viagra, which promotes the treatment of erectile dysfunction,
creates a narrative of masculinity that conforms to an idealized, normative hetero-
sexuality. Thus, it creates a need for the product by playing on constructed anxi-
eties about masculinity and sexual performativity. Ian, like the other men,
distances himself from being affect through his use of third-person language,
positioning other men as potentially distressed concerning sexual expectations,
but he himself is unaffected.
In line with these issues of desirability and sexual performance, the participants
noted that heterosexuality was a key component in the construction of an appropriate
masculinity:

[Viewing Men’s Health] It annoys me that they have the obligatory female stuff but I
understand why they do that because if they didn’t, then this magazine would be really
threatening to heterosexual men. (Marcus)

By including women in this way, these magazines that incorporate contested expres-
sions of masculinity are reaffirming themselves as communicating appropriate and
new masculinities amid the fear of femininity (Edwards 1997, 2003). Magazines like
FHM and Men’s Health work to counteract these fears by reminding their readers
that men are still masculine as long as they are understood to be heterosexual. The
ripped male body can then be seen as a result of hard work and not an object of
sexual desirability as a way to differentiate it from similarly objectified representa-
tions of female bodies. In doing so, it reinforces the expectation of heterosexuality as
integral to the achievement of an idealized masculine identity.
The use of images of women in magazines such as Zoo Weekly and Ralph
Magazine also maintains pressure for men to objectify women in order to demon-
strate an appropriate maleness. Research by Ward, Vandenbosch, and Eggermont
(2015) and Ward and Schooler (2006) about men’s views of women’s bodies as
represented in magazines found similar conclusions. The researchers argue that the
media paints women as sexual objects whose bodies are constructed for the pleasure
442 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

of men, as opposed to offering a more multidimensional representation (Ward and

Schooler 2006, 704). Magazines that produce representations of objectified women
allow men to reinforce their own perceptions of traditional gender ideologies (Ward
and Schooler 2006, 711).
These notions of expectations regarding women, sexual objectification, and the
expression of appropriate masculinity were noted by the participants:

[Viewing Zoo Weekly] Women apparently are very, very important, preferably ones
that could be objectified. (Elliot)
[Viewing Zoo Weekly] I like women in the sense that they are good friends. I don’t like
them when they’re objectified and, obviously, I’m not interested in them sexually but
the fact that we’re only supposed to look at women in this kind of light is an issue.
(Marcus)

The participants highlighted that the women represented in these media are objecti-
fied and that this is the way men are expected to view and treat women. This
sexualization of women functions as an important signifier of heterosexuality and
masculinity by demarcating gender boundaries and challenging women’s authority
(Schrock and Schwalbe 2009, 285). The participants recognized this within the
magazines and images and found it problematic. This suggests that while they are
aware of the pressure to signify an appropriate, heterosexual masculinity through
women’s objectification, they do not agree with the manner in which this is to be
achieved. Rather, they are critical of the ways in which women’s bodies are pre-
sented as objects of male desire and that such objectification does not correspond
with how these men actually desire (or do not desire) women.

Fear of Social Judgment

I think there’s so many poor males growing up with, like, really just confusing role
models. Between Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rambo and [David] Hasselhoff, there
have been a lot of really strange ideas kicked around males’ heads . . . because they’re
such extremes. (Adam)

The observations outlined above that arose from viewing these magazines led the
participants to discuss issues of social judgment in relation to masculinity. Being
judged as a ‘‘real man’’ and the fear of judgment from peers about acceptable
masculine behavior play a crucial role in sustaining particular masculine narratives.
Judgments are constructed on sets of particular expectations, as developed within
social institutions that are then sanctioned through social communication. However,
these judgments are fractured, with no one coherent or unifying masculine narrative
provided as a guide. Rather, multiple narratives that demand different ideals of
masculinity contrast each other within the mythscape of aspirational masculinity,
Waling 443

creating uncertainty as to which behaviors and traits are deemed acceptable in

signifying manhood.
These tensions manifest themselves through social norms and corporate standards
of masculinity. Social norms include (and are not limited to) political correctness
and changes in what constitutes appropriate behavior in public (Cialdini and Gold-
stein 2004; Ostrom 2000; Sustein 1996). Corporate standards are structured on
appropriate work behaviors in white-collar and urban environments that have seeped
into everyday life outside of the office (Kotter 2008; Ray 1986). An example of this
is what Evan labels as ‘‘guy talk’’:

There is this clash between cultures of pressure to suppress ‘guy talk’ or ‘guy talk at the
pub’ and your kind of dodgy uncle who takes you to the pub or you’re out with the boys
and that’s just a normal common talk, but you know that you can’t say that stuff around
other people because you worry about how you’re going to be judged. So you’re under
pressure to express masculinity at the pub, but then once everyone’s around, you’re
expected to invert that, that’s where the conflict is. And then there’s corporate pressure
and societal pressure basically to suppress it, but there is this kind of masculine
pressure to exaggerate it. (Evan)

Grayson likewise reflects on this issue:

The problem is we put so many filters that we put on ourselves and I think that’s
probably even a trait of modern man masculinity. They don’t know where the filters
should end and begin. (Grayson)

Using the example of guy talk, Evan’s comment describes behavior that is
naturalized as being normal or inherent to men, noting that he feels conflicted
with both expressing and supressing such traditional masculine behaviors within
public spaces. Evan’s example is of particular interest in that he gestures toward
a particular (normal) way of speaking that is viewed in some contexts as no
longer appropriate. Like Evan, Grayson hints toward an idea of ‘‘filtering’’ or
censoring behavior to suit the particular social situation, creating a sense of
uncertainty in relation to how men engage with performing masculinity. Such
uncertainty often lies in conflict with traditional signifiers of masculinity, where
‘‘[to] be credited as a man, what an individual male must do . . . is put on a
convincing manhood act’’ (Schrock and Schwalbe 2009, 279). Both Evan and
Grayson indicate a naturalization of masculine traits, resulting in competing
tensions about how men should behave in a postfeminist and globalized land-
scape. This leaves men questioning how they can begin to reconcile aspirational
ideals of masculinity with their own identity formation. Grayson’s remark
begins with using self-identifying language (we) but then distances himself by
saying ‘‘they.’’ In doing so, Grayson positions himself as being unaffected but
articulates that other men are. Evan consistently uses the pronouns of ‘‘you’’ and
444 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

‘‘your’’ as a way to locate himself as unaffected by these judgments and yet

close enough to speak authentically to the experience.

Other Men and Not Themselves

While the participants outlined pressures for men to behave and perform a
particular way, they did not relate to these same ideals themselves. Rather, there
was a strong disinclination to conform to the representations as indicated by the
magazines. Participants were aware of the pressures articulated in the magazines
as a method of increasing a consumer market as well as the diversity of the
representations that indicated an inconsistency with the notion that only one
form of masculinity could be ideal. In saying this, however, the participants
did indicate that they feel that other men are affected by the content and
expectations in the magazines:

Not negotiating—reconciling the expectations that other people in my life may have of
what a man should be and reconciling those expectations with, you know, your beha-
vior or, like, how to behave, how to talk, how to walk and that sort of stuff. Reconciling
those things with what feels right to me kind of thing without, sort of, feeling disin-
genuous in either sense . . . . It’s pretty easy for me but for some other people, it’s
difficult. (Reid)
They’re [average men are] not sure whether—what they are allowed to do or what
they’re not allowed to do or what they’re allowed to say [in defining] their masculinity.
(Grayson)

Reid does not find these expectations difficult to reproduce but points out that it can
be difficult for others. Grayson makes similar remarks, observing that men are
confused about what it means to be masculine, but he did not state that he himself
felt this pressure. Most of the men expressed similar views, indicating that for this
particular group of men, achieving an acknowledgeable masculine identity was not
something they considered as an integral part of their identity.
Gerschick and Miller’s (1994, 1995) framework of identity reformulation is
applicable here with regard to the ways in which participants viewed representa-
tions of masculinity in the magazines. Contemporary narratives such as these are
fragmented, with no real consistency. They exist as fabricated productions, con-
structed through commercialized interests to commodify a narrative of masculinity
that encourages the consumption of associated products. Although men are recog-
nizing these messages, the participants noted that there is a lack of engagement
with them:

I draw a distinction between what everyone says you should be as a man and what I
personally think is important. I don’t tend to think of my gender as being too important
to my construction of myself, I guess . . . When I think of masculinity, I think of what
people tell me I should be, you know, rugged, handsome, strong, manly, whatever the
Waling 445

hell that means, I don’t really know. And then I think about what being a male means to
me and, to me, it’s just kind of like a means to an end. I am male and sure, that gives me
male parts, but I don’t think of my mind as being male for example. Not that I think of
my mind as being female. I just don’t think it’s gendered at all (Marcus).

Marcus’s comments are perhaps the most articulate example of this lack of engage-
ment, indicating that he recognizes the masculine narrative he is expected to
engage in but does not feel it is relevant for his life. He also maintains that he is
not thinking about ‘‘being’’ masculine and claims his mind is not particular
gendered.
In this, Marcus contradicts Whitehead’s (2002, 148) assertion that the ‘‘I’’ or the
self, in the private sense, offers a location within a social order that is gendered,
bounded by social status, and cannot be separated as a distinct ideology. Whitehead
(2002, 148) maintains that ‘‘[he] cannot ontologically exist outside [his] gendered
landscape. [He is] a masculine subject, for, like all before [him], [his] gender was
stamped on [him] at birth. Thus there is an embodiment to [his] gender that [he]
cannot dispose of easily, if at all.’’ In contrast, Marcus feels that this embodiment
can be disregarded through his assertion that his mind is not gendered. It is important
to note that the social position of the participants, as white, able bodied, middle class,
and, for the majority, heterosexual, may allow them to believe that they can be
exempt from these pressures, as Marcus suggests. They are privileged to an extent
that they may not feel that these pressures impact on their own reconciliation of
manhood and masculinity nor feel that they are conforming to an aspirational
mythscape of masculinity. Their sense of privilege may thus obstruct their view into
how these rather aspirational, hegemonic ideals of masculinity may have an influ-
ence on their masculine identity construction.
However, these claims of not identifying with the pressures inherent in the
representations of masculinity within the magazines were inconsistent. In line with
Benwell’s (2005) finding that her participants often contradicted themselves in
their discussions when she looked closely at a textual analysis of their responses,
the men interviewed for this study show similar behavior. On the surface, these
men appear to be disassociating themselves from feeling affected by these pres-
sures. Their use of the pronouns ‘‘they’’ and ‘‘he’’ as well as terms such as ‘‘guys’’
and men create a distance between their own experiences of masculinity and the
pressures they feel afflict other men. In doing so, they signify that instead of
reconciling their successes and failures with maintaining an appropriate masculi-
nity, as theorists such as Connell (2000) suggest men do, it is not something they
themselves think about on a consistent basis. In many cases, however, participants
used pronouns and verbs such as ‘‘I am,’’ ‘‘we are,’’ ‘‘you/you’re,’’ and ‘‘me,’’
when describing these pressures. In some instances, they used these pronouns and
verbs in the same sentences to both identify with and contest the idea that they are
affected by these expectations. This indicates a contradiction and perhaps speaks
to Connell’s (2000) suggestion of a hegemonic gender order or Gerschick and
446 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

Miller’s (1994, 1995) pattern of reliance, in which men may engage with hege-
mony on a subconscious, rather than conscious, level.

Conclusion
In line with the theoretical approaches of Connell’s (2000) hegemonic gender order,
Reeser’s (2010) concept of mythscapes and Gerschick and Miller’s (1994, 1995)
reformulation patterns, and taking men’s lifestyle magazines as a point of reference,
the participants recognized significant pressures associated with masculinity but
stated they did not feel affected by many of them. Rather, they indicated that ideals
about masculinity caused pressure for other men, with body image, sexual desir-
ability, and media pressures identified as key areas of concern. They outlined a
fourth area of pressure in relation to social expectations and the fear of judgment
both by their own male peers and greater society. However, while these men did not
explicitly identify with these pressures, a textual analysis of their responses suggests
otherwise, indicating a paradox in which they both accept and reject the mythscapes
of aspirational masculinity presented to them. These findings suggest that contem-
porary Australian masculinity continues to be fraught with tensions between tradi-
tional and emerging ways of signifying manhood. Although the participants could
identify the pressures of an idealized masculinity, as communicated through men’s
lifestyle magazines, they claim to negotiate these tensions instead of feeling as
though they have achieved ultimate success or failure in their replication (or lack
thereof) of the ideals presented before them. The cultured image of masculinity is
thus ruptured, as these men report having fractured ideas of what it means to be a
man and yet do not find these ideas troubling or problematic. This is not to assume
that these men do not act in gendered ways but rather that they do not expend a great
deal of thought or effort in their negotiation of their identities in relation to appro-
priate narratives of masculinity. Thus, as David Bowie and Freddie Mercury elo-
quently sing, men feel under pressure in relation to the reconciliation of ideals of
masculinity but are reluctant to admit that they themselves are affected.
It is important to recognize, however, that discourse can be seen as a structure in
which intrapersonal interactions are organized, and the role of men’s agency in
relation to these interactions requires further examination. Intrasubjectivity could
then be understood as framing a structured reality for men, where myths and repre-
sentations work together to give authority to dominant discourses of masculinity that
then are either consciously or subconsciously engaged with on various levels, as is
the case with the men interviewed for this research. While all masculinity is not
necessarily a product of, nor influenced by, a dominating hegemonic discourse, the
manner in which myths and representation continue to perpetuate aspirational hege-
monic ideals and the ways men respond to these ideals could be reflective of their
own personal engagement on a micro level. More research is then needed to unpack
these subconscious engagements and understand the reason why men both con-
sciously reject and yet seemingly still engage with various ideals of masculinity.
Waling 447

Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank her former PhD thesis supervisors Dr. Kirsten
McLean and Associate Professor Andrew Singleton for their guidance during the
data collection and write up of this piece, Professor Barbara Pini and Associate
Professor Richard Howson for their insightful suggestions and evaluations of her
work during the doctoral thesis examination, and the anonymous reviewers for their
helpful critical feedback on previous drafts. She would like to give a special thank-
you to Dr. Masha Davidenko for her reviews of this piece.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project was supported during PhD
candidature through the Monash Graduate Scholarship, The Faculty of Arts Inter-
national Postgraduate Research Scholarship, and the Monash International Postgrad-
uate Research Scholarship.

Notes
1. All interviews were conducted after receiving ethics clearance from the Monash Human
Research Ethics Committee at Monash University.
2. The most useful space for attracting participants was www.gumtree.com.au.
3. The conditions for participation in this study were developed for doctoral thesis require-
ments. It is interesting to note that these included only gender, age range, and generation
(with at least one grandparent as an Australian citizen or resident), yet only men who were
white, mostly heterosexual, and middle class or those with working-class jobs have access
to middle-class spaces volunteered to participate. The lack of gay men, men of color, and
working-class men who would meet the conditions for participation is perhaps reflective of
their own lack of identification as ‘‘Australian men’’ in contemporary Australian society
and continues to raise questions around the intersections of masculinity, nationality, race/
ethnicity, and sexuality.
4. Details of each magazine copy used in the interviewing process are available in the
bibliography (Barnes 1998–2015; Cockerill 1997–present; McSorley 2006–present; Pin-
tado 1997–2010).
5. For Him Magazine is no longer available in print in Australia, while Ralph (an Australian
produced magazine) ceased production in 2010. During revisions of this piece, Zoo Weekly
was subsequently cancelled and its online presence shut down.
6. I use the term ‘‘postfeminist’’ carefully in this piece to highlight a complex belief that we
have now moved beyond the needs of feminism in Western environments. This is not to
suggest that Australian society is in an era where the gains of feminism have been
448 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

successfully achieved. Rather, it illuminates the situation in which these men find them-
selves, amid an era of continuing politics around gender equity, and also acknowledges the
tensions these men experience in trying to both engage with and reject ideals of mascu-
linity and manhood.

References
Alexander, S. 2003. ‘‘Stylish Hard Bodies: Branded Masculinity in Men’s Health Magazines.’’
Sociological Perspectives 46:535–54.
ATLAS ti. Version 7.2 [Computer software] (1999) Berlin, Scientific Software Development.
Attwood, F. 2005. ‘‘Tits and Ass and Porn and Fighting.’’ International Journal of Cultural
Studies 8:83–100.
Auslander, P. 2004. ‘‘Performance Analysis and Popular Music: A Manifesto.’’ Contempo-
rary Theatre Review 14:1–13.
Auslander, P. 2006. Performing Glam Rock: Gender and Theatricality in Popular Music. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2006. Australian Social Trends, 2003 (4102.0).
Accessed May 14, 2014. www.abs.gov.au
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2009. Yearbook Australia, 1995 (1301.0). [Online].
Accessed May 14, 2014. www.abs.gov.au
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2012. Education and Training Statistics National
Centre Glossary. [Online]. Accessed May 14, 2014. www.abs.gov.au.
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2013a. Australian and New Zealand Standard
Classification of Occupations: Major Group 2 Professionals (201.2). [Online]. Accessed
May 14, 2014. www.abs.gov.au.
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2013b. Australian and New Zealand Standard Classifi-
cation of Occupations: Major Group 4 Community and Personal Service Workers (201.2).
[Online]. Accessed May 14, 2014. http://www.abs.gov.au
Barnes, J. (Ed.). 1998–2015. For Him Magazine (FHM) Australian Edition. January 2011
[Issue]. Sydney, Australia: Bauer Media Group.
Benwell, B. 2004. ‘‘Ironic Discourse Evasive Masculinity in Men’s Lifestyle Magazines.’’
Men and Masculinities 7:3–21.
Benwell, B. 2005. ‘‘‘Lucky This Is Anonymous.’ Ethnographies of Reception in Men’s
Magazines: A ‘Textual Culture’ Approach.’’ Discourse Society 16:147–72.
Benwell, B. 2007. ‘‘New Sexism? Readers’ Responses to the use of Irony in Men’s
Magazines.’’ Journalism Studies 8:539–49.
Boni, F. 2002. ‘‘Framing Media Masculinities: Men’s Lifestyle Magazines and the Biopolitics
of the Male Body.’’ European Journal of Communication 17:465–78.
Booth, D. 2008. ‘‘(Re)reading The Surfer’s Bible: The Affects of Tracks.’’ Continuum 22:
17–35.
Bourdieu, P. 1986. ‘‘The Forms of Capital.’’ In Handbook of Theory and Research for the
Sociology of Education, edited by J. Richardson, 241–58. New York: Palgrave.
Cialdini, R. B., and N. J. Goldstein. 2004. ‘‘Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity.’’
Annual Review of Psychology 55:591–621.
Waling 449

Clarke, L. H., E. V. Bennett, and C. Liu. 2014. ‘‘Aging and Masculinity: Portrayals in Men’s
Magazines.’’ Journal of Aging Studies 31:26–33.
Cockerill, I. (Ed.). 1997–Present. Men’s Health Magazine. April 2010 [Issue] Australian
Edition. Sydney, Australia: Pacific Magazines.
Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Sydney,
Australia: Allen & Urwin.
Connell, R. W. 1995. Masculinities. Sydney, Australia: Allen and Urwin.
Connell, R. W. 2000. The Men and the Boys. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Connell, R. W. 2001. ‘‘The Social Organization of Masculinity.’’ In The Masculinities
Reader, edited by F. J. Barrett and S. M. Whitehead, 30–50. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Connell, R. W., and J. W. Messerschmidt. 2005. ‘‘Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the
Concept.’’ Gender and Society 19:829–59.
Coy, M., and M. A. Horvath. 2011. ‘‘Lads’ Mags, Young Men’s Attitudes towards
Women and Acceptance of Myths about Sexual Aggression.’’ Feminism & Psychology
21:144–50.
Crewe, B. 2003. Representing Men: Cultural Production and Producers in the Men’s Mag-
azine Market. Oxford, UK: Berg.
Daniel, S., and S. K. Bridges. 2010. ‘‘The Drive for Muscularity in Men: Media Influences
and Objectification Theory.’’ Body Image 7:32–38.
Donaldson, M. 1993. ‘‘What is Hegemonic Masculinity?’’ Theory and Society 22:643–57.
Donoghue, J., and B. Tranter. 2015. ‘‘The Anzacs: Military influences on Australian Identity.’’
Journal of Sociology 51:449–63.
Duggan, S. J., and D. R. McCreary. 2004. ‘‘Body Image, Eating Disorders, and the Drive for
Muscularity in Gay and Heterosexual Men: The Influence of Media Images.’’ Journal of
Homosexuality 47:45–58.
Edwards, T. 1997. Consuming Masculinities: Style, Content and Men’s Magazines. London,
UK: Cassell.
Edwards, T. 2003. ‘‘Sex, Alcohol and Fags: Masculinity, Style and Men’s Magazines.’’ In
Masculinity and Men’s Lifestyle Magazines, edited by B. Benwell, 136–46. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Elliott, R., and C. Elliot. 2005. ‘‘Idealized Images of the Male Body in Advertising: A
Reader-response Exploration.’’ Journal of Marketing Communications 11:3–19.
Evers, C. 2004. ‘‘Men Who Surf.’’ Cultural Studies Review 10:27–41.
Farquhar, J. C., and L. Wasylkiw. 2007. ‘‘Media Images of Men: Trends and Consequences of
Body Conceptualization.’’ Psychology of Men & Masculinity 8:145–60.
Garner, M. 2012. ‘‘The Missing Link: The Sexualization of Culture and Men.’’ Gender and
Education 24:325–31.
Gerschick, T. J., and A. Miller. 1994. ‘‘Gender Identities at the Crossroads of Masculinity and
Physical Disability.’’ Masculinities 2:34–55.
Gerschick, T. J., and A. Miller. 1995. ‘‘Coming To Terms: Masculinity and Physical Dis-
ability.’’ In Men’s Health and Illness: Gender, Power and the Body, edited by D. Sabo and
D. F. Gordan, 183–204. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gill, R. 2007. Gender and the Media. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
450 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

Gill, R. 2012. ‘‘Media, Empowerment and the ‘Sexualization of Culture’ Debates.’’ Sex Roles
66:736–45.
Gill, R., K. Henwood, and C. McLean. 2005. ‘‘Body Projects and the Regulation of
Normative Masculinity.’’ Body & Society 11:37–62.
Gough, B. 2006. ‘‘Try to Be Healthy, But Don’t Forgo Your Masculinity: Deconstructing
Men’s Health Discourse in the Media.’’ Social Science & Medicine 63:2476–88.
Gough, B. 2007. ‘‘‘Real Men Don’t Diet’: An Analysis of Contemporary Newspaper Repre-
sentations of Men, Food and Health.’’ Social Science & Medicine 64:326–37.
Guest, G., A. Bunce, and L. Johnson. 2006. ‘‘How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An
Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability Field Methods.’’ Methods 18: 59–82.
Harper, B., and M. Tiggermann. 2008. ‘‘The Effect of Thin Ideal Media Images on Women’s
Self-objectification, Mood and Body Image.’’ Sex Roles 58:649–57.
Henderson, M. 2001. ‘‘A Shifting Line-up: Men, Women and Tracks Surfing Magazine.’’
Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies 15:319–32.
Hermes, J. 2005. Re-reading Popular Culture. Carlton, VIC: Blackwell.
Holmes, T. A. D. 2007. ‘‘Mapping the Magazine: An Introduction.’’ Journalism Studies 8:
510–21.
Horvath, M. A., P. Hegarty, S. Tyler, and S. Mansfield. 2012. ‘‘‘Lights On at the End of the
Party’: Are Lads’ Mags Mainstreaming Dangerous Sexism?’’ British Journal of Psychol-
ogy 103:454–71.
Howson, R. 2009. ‘‘Theorising Hegemonic Masculinity: Contradiction, Hegemony and
Dislocation.’’ In Migrant Men: Critical Studies of Masculinities and the Migration
Experience, edited by M. Donaldson, R. Howson, and B. Pease, 23–40. New York:
Routledge.
Jackson, P., N. Stevenson, and K. Brooks. 2001. Making Sense of Men’s Magazines. London,
UK: Polity Press.
Jankowski, G. S., H. Fawkner, A. Slater, and M. Tiggemann. 2014. ‘‘‘Appearance
Potent’? A Content Analysis of UK Gay and Straight Men’s Magazines.’’ Body
Image 11:474–81.
Johnson, C. W., and B. D. Kivel. 2009. ‘‘Consuming Media, Making Men: Using Collective
Memory Work to Understand Leisure and the Construction of Masculinity.’’ Journal of
Leisure Research 41:109–33.
Kotter, J. P. 2008. Corporate Culture and Performance. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Lorenzen, L. A., F. G. Grieve, and A. Thomas. 2004. ‘‘Brief Report: Exposure to Muscular
Male Models Decreases Men’s Body Satisfaction.’’ Sex Roles 51:743–48.
Marshall, B. 2002. ‘‘‘Hard Science’: Gendered Constructions of Sexual Dysfunction in the
‘Viagra Age.’’’ Sexualities 5:101–14.
McKay, K., J. Mikosza, and B. Hutchins. 2005. ‘‘‘Gentlemen, The Lunchbox Has Landed’:
Representations of Masculinities and Men’s Bodies in the Popular Media.’’ In Handbook
of Studies on Men and Masculinities, edited by M. S. Kimmel, J. R. Hearn, and R. W.
Connell, 270–88. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McSorley, D. (Ed.). 2006–Present. Zoo Weekly. September 20th, 2010 [Issue]. Sydney, Aus-
tralia: Bauer Media Group.
Waling 451

Mikosza, J. 2003. ‘‘In Search of The ‘Mysterious’ Australian Male: Editorial Practices in
Men’s Lifestyle Magazines.’’ Media International Australia: Incorporating Culture &
Policy 107:134–44.
Miller, T. 2005. ‘‘A Metrosexual Eye on Queer Guy.’’ Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 11:
112–17.
Moore, C. 1998. ‘‘Guest Editorial: Australian Masculinities.’’ Journal of Australian Studies
22:1–16.
Morry, M. M., and S. L. Staska. 2001. ‘‘Magazine Exposure: Internalization, Self-
objectification, Eating Attitudes, and Body Satisfaction in Male and Female University
Students.’’ Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du
Comportement 33:269–79.
Ostrom, E. 2000. ‘‘Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms.’’ The Journal of
Economic Perspectives 14:137–58.
Pintado, S. (1997–2010). Ralph Magazine. June 2007 [Issue]. Sydney: Australian Consoli-
dated Press (ACP Magazines).
Pompper, D., J. Soto, and L. Piel. 2007. ‘‘Male Body Image and Magazine Standards:
Considering Dimensions of Age and Ethnicity.’’ Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 84:525–45.
Potts, A., N. Gavey, V. Grace, and T. Vares. 2003. ‘‘The Downside of Viagara: Women’s
Experiences and Concerns about Viagara Use by Men.’’ Sociology of Health and Illness
25:697–719.
Ray, C. A. 1986. ‘‘Corporate Culture: The Last Frontier of Control?’’ Journal of Management
Studies 23:287–97.
Reeser, T. W. 2010. Theorising Masculinity: An Introduction. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ricciardelli, R., K. A. Clow, and P. White. 2010. ‘‘Investigating Hegemonic Masculinity:
Portrayals of Masculinity in Men’s Lifestyle Magazines.’’ Sex Roles 63:64–78.
Rohlinger, D. A. 2002. ‘‘Eroticizing Men: Cultural Influences on Advertising and Male
Objectification. Sex Roles 46:61–74.
Seal, D. W., and A. A. Ehrhardt. 2003. ‘‘Masculinity and Urban Men: Perceived Scripts for
Courtship, Romantic, and Sexual Interactions with Women.’’ Culture, Health & Sexuality
5:295–319.
Schneider, R. 1997. The Explicit Body in Performance. New York: Routledge.
Schrock, D., and M. Schwalbe. 2009. ‘‘Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts.’’ Annual
Review of Sociology 35:277–95.
Simpson, M. 1994. Male Impersonators: Men Performing Masculinity. London, UK: Rou-
tledge Chapman & Hall.
Stevenson, N., P. Jackson, and K. Brooks. 2003. ‘‘Reading Men’s Lifestyle Magazines:
Cultural Power and the Information Society.’’ The Sociological Review 51:112–31.
Sustein, C. R. 1996. ‘‘Social Norms and Social Roles.’’ Columbia Law Review 96:903–68.
Tan, Y., P. Shaw, H. Cheng, and K. K. Kwangmi. 2013. ‘‘The Construction of Masculinity: A
Cross-cultural Analysis of Men’s Lifestyle Magazine Advertisements.’’ Sex Roles 69:
237–49.
Taylor, L. 2006. ‘‘College Men, Their Magazines, and Sex.’’ Sex Roles 55:693–702.
452 Men and Masculinities 20(4)

Vares, T., A. Potts, N. Gavey, and V. Grace. 2003. ‘‘Hard Sell, Soft Sell: Men Read Viagra
Ads.’’ Media International Australia: Incorporating Culture & Policy 108:101–14.
Waling, A. W. 2014. ‘‘Heroes, Retros and Metros: Narratives of Conflicting Masculinities and
Tensions within Contemporary Australian Media.’’ Outskirts: Feminisms Along the Edge
30. Accessed March 3, 2015. http://www.outskirts.arts.uwa.edu.au/volumes/volume-30/
andrea-waling.
Ward, L. M., and D. Schooler. 2006. ‘‘Average Joes: Men’s Relationships with Media, Real
Bodies, and Sexuality.’’ Psychology of Men and Masculinity 7:27–41.
Ward, L. M., L. Vandenbosch, and S. Eggermont. 2015. ‘‘The Impact of Men’s Magazines on
Adolescent Boys’ Objectification and Courtship Beliefs.’’ Journal of Adolescence 39:
49–58.
Whitehead, S. M. 2002. Men and Masculinities. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Author Biography
Andrea Waling is a research officer in the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and
Society. She is currently working on a project called Muscling Up, an Australian Research
Council Discovery Project that seeks to investigate the body image–enhancing practices of
Australian men in relation to broader issues of masculinity, sexualization, and embodied
subjectivity in late modernity. Her research interests include theoretical and empirical exam-
inations of men and masculinity; men’s health; and investigations of sex, sexuality, and
gender in the media.