Why does the general public believe only women are victims of body image and eating disorders? Adolescent to adult males are dangerously preoccupied with the appearance of their bodies. The difference between men and women are men almost never talk openly about this problem. Society has taught them that they shouldn’t be concerned about how they look. But countless numbers of men are sacrificing important aspects of their lives to working out compulsively. This leads to distorted body images, which ties together with eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia (Adonis Complex.) The general public usually categorizes these disorders with women only. Women aren’t the only victims; men are suffering too, but just silently.
According to Greek mythology, Adonis was seen as the premier model of male beauty and masculinity. According to Adonis in Greek Mythology, Persephone raised Adonis. Aphrodite, queen of the gods, loved Adonis but Persephone refused to give him up. The matter was settled when Zeus, the king of gods, made a deal. Adonis was to spend four months with Persephone, four months with Aphrodite and four months on his own. It was known that he chose to spend his four months of solitude with Aphrodite.
Adonis was portrayed as an icon of male beauty and masculinity; “The body of Adonis presumably represents the ultimate male physique imaginable to the sixteenth-century artist” (Olivardia 6). If we looked at the paintings of Adonis today, there would be a consensus that he looked plump and out of shape compared to today’s body builders.
The “Adonis Complex” is not an official medical term; it is used to describe the various secretive body image concerns of males. This ranges from minor physical implications to self-destructing body image disorders such as anorexia and bulimia nervosa.
The media plays a huge role influencing adolescent to adult males to believe that being more lean and muscular equals attractiveness. Whenever I am standing in line at the super market, every magazine cover I see has a model on it. When there is a male on the cover, he is usually flashing his rock hard abdominal muscles or flexing his bulging chest. As a young boy subjected to these images I became immediately envious; even to this day I admit I wish I had those features. Image what this is doing to the psy...
... middle of paper ...
...and Self-Starvation. New York: Norton, 2000.
Cowart, Virginia, James E. Wright. Altered States: The Use and Abuse of Anabolic Steroids. Indianapolis: Masters Press, 1999.
Cowart, Virginia, Charles E. Yesalis. The Steroids Game. Champaign: Kinetics, 1998.
Kinoy, Barbara P. Eating Disorders: New Directions in Treatment and Recovery. West Sussex: Columbia Press, 2001.
Levenkron, Steven. Anatomy of Anorexia. New York: Norton, 2000.
Moe, Barbara. Coping With Eating Disorders. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 1991.
Olivardia, Roberto, Katherine A. Phillips, Harrison G. Pope. The Adonis Complex: The Secret Crisis of Male Obsession. New York: Free Press, 2000.
Pittman, Frank. Man Enough: Fathers, Sons, and the Search for Masculinity. New York: Putnam’s Sons, 1993.
Smith, Lendon M.D. Dr. Lendon Smith's Diet Plan For Teenagers. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1986.
Yancey, Diane. Eating Disorders. Connecticut: Millbrook Press, 1999.
Adonis in Greek Mythology. .
Body Dysmorphic Disorder. .
Mythology: Adonis. .
In Kimmel’s essay “’Bros Before Hos’: The Guy Code” he argues that the influence of society on masculinity is equal to or greater than biological influences on masculinity. In the essay, Kimmel uses various surveys and interviews to validate his argument. He points to peers, coaches, and family members as the people most likely to influence the development of a man’s masculinity. When a man has his manliness questioned, he immediately makes the decision never to say or do whatever caused him to be called a wimp, or unmanly. Kimmel’s argument is somewhat effective because the readers get firsthand accounts from the interviewees but the author does not provide any statistics to support his argument.
... I've lived among them all my life. You can't believe a word they say. You know that. I mean, they're born liars.” In this statement you can clearly tell his prejudice against the kid, just because of where he was raised. Juror # 10 and juror # 3 has prejudice against the kid. Juror # 3 has personal experience with a kid like the accused. “Reminded of his own family's personal crisis, Juror # 3 tells the jurors of his own disrespectful, teen aged boy who hit him on the jaw when he was 16. Now 22 years old, the boy hasn't been seen for two years, and the juror is embittered: "Kids! Ya work your heart out."” This is a direct example of juror # 3’s prejudice against the accused. When prejudice was in effect in the movie, it clouded the judgments of the jurors that were prejudice against the boy just because he was raised in the slums.
The first vote ended with eleven men voting guilty and one man not guilty. We soon learn that several of the men voted guilty since the boy had a rough background not because of the facts they were presented with. Although numerous jurors did make racist or prejudice comments, juror ten and juror three seemed to be especially judgmental of certain types of people. Juror three happened to be intolerant of young men and stereotyped them due to an incident that happened to his son. In addition, the third juror began to become somewhat emotional talking about his son, showing his past experience may cloud his judgment. Juror ten who considered all people from the slums “those people” was clearly prejudiced against people from a different social background. Also, Juror ten stated in the beginning of the play “You 're not going to tell us that we 're supposed to believe that kid, knowing what he is. Listen, I 've lived among 'em all my life. You can 't believe a word they say. I mean, they 're born liars.” Juror ten did not respect people from the slums and believed them to all act the same. As a result, Juror ten believed that listening to the facts of the case were pointless. For this reason, the tenth juror already knew how “those people” acted and knew for sure the boy was not innocent. Even juror four mentioned just how the slums are a “breeding ground
Mosse, L George. The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity. New York: Macmillan publishers, 1996.
These two jurors are almost the plain opposite of each other. Juror 3 appears to be a very intolerant man accustomed of forcing his wishes and views upon others. On the other hand, Juror 8 is an honest man who keeps an open mind for both evidence and reasonable doubt. Since these two people are indeed very different, they both have singular thoughts relating to the murder case. Juror 8 is a man who is loyal to justice. In the beginning of the play, he was the only one to vote ‘not guilty’ the first time the twelve men called a vote. Although his personality is reflected on being a quiet, thoughtful, gentle man, he is still a very persistent person who will fight for justice to be done. Juror 8 is a convincing man who presents his arguments well, but can also be seen as manipulative. An example would be when he kept provoking Juror 3 until he finally said “I’m going to kill you" to Juror 8. He did this because he wanted to prove that saying "I’ll kill you" doesn’t necessarily mean that Juror 3 was actually going to kill him. Juror 3 is a totally different character. He is a stubborn man who can be detected with a streak of sad...
Juror number eight is the main protagonist, he also a reserved with his thoughts, yet very strategic with them. He is the defender of the down trodden victim. He has a calm rational approach to everything and he reveals the gaps in the testimonies placed against the defendant. These examples would be; that the old man couldn’t have seen the boy run out of the house, as the old man had a limp and therefore could not make it to the door in time. The old lady across the road could have never saw the boy stab his father, due to she wasn’t wearing her glasses and it was pitch black. Number eight is a man that s...
Juror #10, a garage owner, segregates and divides the world stereotypically into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ ‘Us’ being people living around the rich or middle-class areas, and ‘them’ being people of a different race, or possessing a contrasting skin color, born and raised in the slums (poorer parts of town). It is because of this that he has a bias against the young man on trial, for the young man was born in the slums and was victim to domestic violence since the age of 5. Also, the boy is of a Hispanic descent and is of a different race than this juror, making him fall under the juror’s discriminatory description of a criminal. This is proven on when juror #10 rants: “They don’t need any real big reason to kill someone, either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter… most of them, it’s like they have no feelings (59).
Veale, D., Gournay, K., Dryden, W., Boocock, A., Shah, F., Willson, R., & Walburn, J., (1996). Body Dysmorphic Disorder: A Cognitive Behavioural Model and Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 34, 717-729.
“Gentlenes, patience and liberallity, wee must delight in eache other, make others Condicions our owne rejoyce together, mourne together, labour, and suffer together, allwayes haveing before our eyes our Commission and Community in the worke”(Winthrop). This idea says that everyone should have the same amount of patience with everyone, treat everyone with the same amount of respect, and when someone else is struggling that it is the communities job to help them out. Another good goal to aim towards but again completely unrealistic to think that everyone is going to have the same patience and treat everyone equally. As much as people wish it could happen it can’t. There’s always that one person thats just super difficult and as just really hard to be patient with. Also there is always going to be class and ranking, people are always going to think they are better then a certain person or group of people. Its sad but thats just the way the world and people
Over the years even action figures have gotten larger muscles, so much so that they are to proportions physically impossible to obtain. Every time you turn the corner, your eyes are drawn to some advertisement that shows a man with his shirt off, muscular and defined. “There is no way to plug popular culture into an equation and see what effect it has on mass psychology, of course, but there is widespread sentiment that these provocative images of buff males have really upped the ant...
Juror #1 originally thought that the boy was guilty. He was convinced that the evidence was concrete enough to convict the boy. He continued to think this until the jury voted the first time and saw that one of the jurors thought that the boy was innocent. Then throughout the movie, all of the jurors were slowly convinced that the boy was no guilty.
In the views of Micheal Kimmel “hegemonic masculinity” is a socially constructed process where men are pressured by social norms of masculine ideals to perform behaviors of a “true man” and its influence on young male’s growth. It is the ideology that being a man with power and expressing control over women is a dominant factor of being a biological male. The structure of masculinity was developed within the 18th to 19th century, as men who owned property and provided for his family with strength related work environments was the perfect example of being a generic “American man.” Kimmel introduces Marketplace Manhood and its relation to American men. He states, “Marketplace Masculinity describes the normative definition of American masculinity.
In Susan Bordo’s essay “Beauty Rediscovers the male body”, Bordo stresses the changes on the concern of the male body and how the male body is depicted in advertisements. Bordo demonstrates her stance on male advertising with graphic images of male bodies with intense descriptions. In the 1990s there was this emergence of male models depicted in a more sexual way. As Bordo states in her essay, the images of these
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.