Men, Masculinities and Health: Critical Perspectives

B. Gough and S. Robertson ( eds ) Men, Masculinities and Health: Critical Perspectives . Basingstoke : Palgrave MacMillan , 2010 £19.99 (pbk ) xvii + 251 pp . ISBN 978-0-230-20312-9 Academic interest in men, masculinities and health has mushroomed in recent years. Today, this interest has currency amidst concerns among health professionals, policymakers and researchers about men’s shorter life expectancy relative to women – a ‘deficit’ which is often blamed on men’s purported‘risk behaviours’ and avoidance of healthcare when demonstrating ‘real’ masculinity. As Kate Hunt states in the book’s Foreword, such over-simplistic and unhelpful explanations have recently been challenged by researchers who take a more nuanced and critical approach ‘to the interrelationships between masculinities and health’ (p.x). Gough and Robertson further such an approach in their thoughtful edited collection. In their introduction, subtitled ‘what is the point of this book?’, they state that the common ‘pathologisation of masculinity masks the complex and sometimes contradictory nature of masculinity – or masculinities’ (p.1) in health and illness contexts. In furthering debate, their intention is to showcase different disciplinary (and interdisciplinary) contributions ‘which foreground issues of masculinities in diverse health-relevant arenas’ (p.1–2). Prioritising qualitative research, and featuring contributions from sociologists, social psychologists, cultural studies scholars and former health professionals from the UK, Canada and Australia, the editors eschew ‘a consistent textbook perspective’ (p.3) in favour of an approach that is more conducive to debate and different authors’ interests and backgrounds. Correspondingly, a ‘once-and-for-all definition of masculinity’ is avoided, with the editors instead ‘allow[ing] all contributors to utilise the term’ as they see fit (p.3). Although eclectic, and, by the editors’ admission, sometimes contradictory (p.232), the book is well-organised. The main body of the text is structured into three parts, followed by a succinct editorial Afterword that summarises and synthesises the book’s main themes. Part 1 is titled ‘Current issues and debates in the field of men’s health and masculinity’. Chapters consider: integrating health inequalities literature and critical studies on men (Lohan, Chapter 1); cultural texts, such as superhero films, which reproduce (extra)ordinary masculinities and ‘invulnerability myths’ that encircle men’s health practices (Buchbinder, Chapter 2); men’s health promotion/public health, and the centrality of embodied agency and social structure (Robertson and Williams, Chapter 3); and, methodological issues, or using interviews to access men’s largely ‘silenced’ illness narratives amidst shifting power relations (Oliffe, Chapter 4). I found Robertson and Williams’ chapter to be particularly insightful; notably, their emphasis on ‘life-chances’ over ‘lifestyles’ as interpreted within an embodied, critical realist framework. It is a useful complement to Lohan’s chapter, which sets the scene for thinking about and explaining structured realities (gender, class) and health. Part 2 is titled ‘Popular conceptions of men’s health and well-being’ and part 3 is titled ‘Men, masculinities and illness’. Part 2 includes mundane accounts, with reference to cancer support groups (Chapter 5, Seymour-Smith), older men (Chapter 6, Davidson and Meadows), an obesity reduction manual (Chapter 7, Gough), and African-Caribbean and White working-class fathers (Chapter 8, Williams). Themes range from the delicate (feminised/feminising) act of giving and receiving help to material hardship and racism. Part 3 showcases studies on prostate cancer (Chapter 10, Broom) and coronary heart disease (Chapter 12, Galdas). Problems traditionally associated with women, which reportedly affect increasing numbers of men, are also featured; namely, post-natal depression (Chapter 9, Lee) and eating disorders (Chapter 11, Drummond). Themes here range from how ethnicity shapes men’s ‘help-seeking behaviour’ to the putative role of bodybuilding as a means of redressing gender insecurities in societies where men’s ‘body image’ concerns risk becoming a serious public health problem. These chapters vary in their theoretical sophistication and engagement with relevant sociological literature, though they all usefully draw attention to issues that will interest readers of this journal. In the Afterword, the editors flag three main emergent themes that have implications for future research, practice and policy: 1) ‘the contradictory (fluid) nature of men’s social (health) practices’, 2) the recognition that plural masculinities are patterned social practices ‘rather than personal characteristics’, and 3) the politically contested nature of health (discourses) (p.234). The editors also make other relevant points. Besides critiquing ‘an individual “behaviour change” model for addressing men’s health’ (p. 235), they reflexively underscore the value of going beyond a ‘Euro-Australian-North American standpoint’ in future research. Overall, this is a worthwhile and accessible book that will appeal not only to medical sociologists but others interested, or working, in men’s health. The range of materials presented, from different disciplinary perspectives, means that this is an informative read and it is one that I have learnt much from. However, in the spirit of the editors’ goal of promoting more complex and nuanced debate I will finish with some brief critical remarks concerning two topics that I have researched and which emerge in this book; namely, bodybuilding and obesity discourse. Despite the goal of promoting critical perspectives, at times I felt some contributors could have offered a more informed and sociologically incisive critique. For example, the chapter on ‘body image’ uncritically relies on ‘psy’ sciences and other studies that diagnose and pathologise male bodybuilders, or men supposedly suffering from the so-called Adonis Complex. Also, while the chapter critiquing obesity discourse usefully flags the obfuscation of men’s emotions within health promotion, it is empirically unwarranted to state that men labelled ‘overweight’ or ‘obese’ on the Body Mass Index ‘are bound to feel at least slightly vulnerable’ about this amidst claims about an obesity epidemic and ideals of male bodily perfection (p.138). Perspectives on fatness, and what constitutes it, clash amidst irrational rationalisation and the ‘doings’ of masculinity. My own research indicates that men with a reported BMI>25 kg/m2 (and not just technically ‘obese’ bodybuilders with a ‘six pack’) often reject this biomedical measure, and justify their ‘size’ even when, somewhat paradoxically, losing weight/fat for purported medical reasons. Nonetheless, this is not to detract from the book’s overall value: this is an important and timely contribution to debate and one that I would recommend to a wide readership.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.