Hyper-masculine advertising has been found to encourage men to an “unrealistic and potentially harmful brand of masculinity.”
A new study published in the most recent issue of Sex Roles suggests that sexist advertising aimed at men is just as damaging as that aimed at women. According to the report, researchers found that “print ads targeting men also encourage them to aspire to an unrealistic and potentially harmful brand of masculinity,” otherwise known as hyper-masculinity, which the paper defines as “gender-based ideology of exaggerated beliefs about what it is to be a man.”
Psychologists from the University of Manitoba studied the ads in 8 US men’s magazines which were published in 2007-2008, the publications were “differentiated by readership age, education, and household income,” and the ads were analyzed for any “hyper-masculine depictions.” What researchers found was that at least 50% of the ads in most magazines, and as many as 90% in some promoted one or more of the following hyper-masculine beliefs:
- Danger is exciting.
- Toughness is a form of emotional self-control.
- Violence is manly.
- It’s fine to be callous about women and sex.
The study indicates that throughout the ads which were analyzed, “The beliefs that toughness equals control and that danger is exciting were more common than the belief that violence is manly or callousness towards women and sex.” Research also showed that hyper-masculine ads were significantly more common in magazines geared toward “younger, lower-income, and less educated readers.” In other words, those who are most at-risk for “appropriating such beliefs and behaviors.” The study also asserts that the perpetuation of the hyper-masculine images in the advertisements is problematic because it “exposes readers to these beliefs and normalizes them.”
Photo: FontShop/Flickr
“Danger is exciting.
Toughness is a form of emotional self-control.
Violence is manly.
It’s fine to be callous about women and sex.”
Same thing as girl power marketing, but for men.
We don’t have to worry – considering that the vast majority of advertising portrays men as humiliated, passive, feminized, degraded overgrown androgynous boy-men.
The problem of too much masculinity is not an issue.
The fascinating question here is – Why are people paid to do these ‘studies’ that prove men are evil again? THAT is the interesting question. How much are they paid? Who is behind this nonsense?
Here’s now I’m seeing it. I’m seeing this not as proof that men are evil but rather proof that there are indeed damaging influences that are pushed into the faces of men and boys. Something that plenty of men and MRAs have been saying for quite a while.
This article and the 2 comments above have me thinking about the use of hypersexual.
Hyper is usually meant to be “beyond the norm”. Well considering that we are currently have a lot of discussion over what the norm is and/or should be how can we know what the “beyond the norm” is?
I’m sure someone could say I’m arguing over symantics but I think we’d be better served if instead of talking about the hyper masculine we instead talk about the unrealistic and damaging. To me it seems we’d better served that way.
Actually, “hypersexual” does mean someone who is sexual in a “hyper” way—an obsessive, constant, potentially dangerous and reckless way. So “hypermasculinity” means exactly that: a form of masculinity that is not normal.
I think I get what they’re saying, but the using the term “hyper-masculinity” in some ways runs counter to a lot the gender theory that the word comes out of. The definition included here is laughable. It’s vague and uses the root word in the definition. That’s like saying hypersexual means someone who’s sexual in a hyper way. There is also the hint here that masculinity is inherently toxic, so a hyper version is especially pathological. You may as well call it “severe, terminal masculinity.” Masculinity is highly subjective, fluid, constantly redefined, shaped by cultural and social context, and frequently… Read more »