Gay male attractn toward mcular men: Do matg ntext matter? - ScienceDirect

Contents:

• GAY MALE ATTRACTN TOWARD MCULAR MEN: DO MATG NTEXT MATTER?
• IS THE BODYBUILDG INDTRY GAY FOR PAY? BODYBUILDG TROLL VCE GOODM TAK SHOTS AT NICK TRIGILI
• THE PROFSNAL ATHLETE WHO CAME OUT AS A GAY MAN— 1989
• GAS & PAS: BLACK GAY BODYBUILRS & THE COMPLEX DYNAMIC BETWEEN MCL & QUEER DIRE
• THREAD: GREG KOVACS TALKS ABOUT GAY4PAY

GAY MALE ATTRACTN TOWARD MCULAR MEN: DO MATG NTEXT MATTER?

Fdgs om the studi have substantiated the theory that athetics plays a key role women's judgments of men's physil rearch has been nducted on perceptns of attractivens gay male populatns, but past rearch has nfirmed that physil appearance is an important factor perceived attractivens of other men among gay men (Beren et al., 1996, Hospers and Jansen, 2005, Sergs and Cody, 1985, Siever, 1994, Yelland and Tiggemann, 2003).

There is evince that gay men preferred lean, proportnate, mcular, and athletic (-shape) men (Bartholome et al., 2000, Halkis et al., 2004, Hatala and Predhodka, 1996, Swami and Tovée, 2008).

However, further studi have shown that gay men's ratgs of attractivens are more sensive to mculary than to weight (Levque & Vichky, 2006). This field has foced almost exclively on women's preference among heterosexual men, and has yet to lve to such dividual variabily wh a gay male populatn.

IS THE BODYBUILDG INDTRY GAY FOR PAY? BODYBUILDG TROLL VCE GOODM TAK SHOTS AT NICK TRIGILI

Dpe the growg body of rearch on gay male ratgs of attractivens, much of the methodology ed past studi is nstraed by their study sign and statistil approach. G., gree of mculary) current study was signed to extend observatns om studi of attractivens nducted wh heterosexual populatns to a gay male populatn and to approach the paradigm of gay male partner preference g both person-centered variabily and figure-based variabily (or em-level variabily the psychometric lerature; see Boek & Wilson, 2004).

) termatns of attractivens of a seri of on the aforementned fdgs, we hypothized the followg: (1) figure-level variatn will be non-learly related to physil attractivens: two orthogonal featur (body fat and mculary) will peak at the cultural ial (low body fat and high mculary) but taper away om this peak, and reflect quadratic relatnships wh attractivens; (2) gay men will be more discrimatg (i.

E., steeper taper om/toward the most attractive figure) when observg figur unr the expectatn of a short-term relatnship pared to a long-term relatnship; and (3) gay men's partner stat and other physil characteristics (e.

THE PROFSNAL ATHLETE WHO CAME OUT AS A GAY MAN— 1989

Sectn snippetsParticipantsParticipants for the study nsisted of 193 self-intified gay, adult men (above the age of 18). Of the 193 participants, 173 intified as beg primarily gay, while 17 RultsParticipants’ self-reported mean BMI was 24.

GAS & PAS: BLACK GAY BODYBUILRS & THE COMPLEX DYNAMIC BETWEEN MCL & QUEER DIRE

In terms of fat-ee mass x (FFMI), a measure of lean body mass (Kouri, DiscsnThe primary purpose of the current study was to vtigate the heterogeney perceptns of male physil attractivens wh a gay male populatn and to exame this heterogeney while acuntg for both observer and figure rived based variabily.

THREAD: GREG KOVACS TALKS ABOUT GAY4PAY

Rults of the study nfirmed that gay men tend to rate mcular and athletic physiqu as the most attractive body typ. Prer manhood and mculary: Effects of threateng men's masculy on reported strength and mcle dissatisfactn2017, Body ImageA worthwhile future study would exame the effects of the threats a sample of gay men.