Body-Shaming of Men

[lewisnotmiller]

In discussions about multiple areas of politics, society, and life in general, I have observed that body-shaming of men seems to be alarmingly socially acceptable. This isn't limited to one aspect of men's bodies either.

Take perhaps the most common one: insulting men based on penis size. Often, it's the case that the person doing the body-shaming has obviously never seen the penis of the man they're insulting, but the implication is that if a man has a small penis, then they're cowardly, undesirable, or any other designation among a litany of negative ones. Never mind that penis size is unrelated to any personality traits or that there are conditions like micropenis that result in small penises, sometimes resulting in immense distress for the men who have them--on top of the social stigmatization thereof.

Then there are the insults based on weight, which, while not exclusive to men, sometimes seem to find acceptance from specific people who otherwise reject such body-shaming. I have lost count of the amount of times I have seen insults such as "fat white man" and "big-bellied idiot" being used toward men.

Why is such body-shaming so widely accepted, in your opinion? If society wants to combat shaming of different body types, being fat, different skin tones, etc., then shouldn't it also seek to combat language such as "this guy has a small [insert any colloquial word for penis]"?

Meh...
Never had much issue with that, or heard too much serious insulting around it. Which isn't to say it doesn't happen, and I daresay men with issues (physical or esteem) will find things insulting where others wouldn't.

But skin colour and (particularly) age are more socially accepted forms of insult.
And whilst I've noticed this more in recent years, there is both confirmation bias, and levels of impact.

For all that my age and skin colour get me unfairly stereotyped, I wouldn't trade middle-class, middle-aged white male for an aging woman of colour, for example.

 

[Sedim Haba]

In discussions about multiple areas of politics, society, and life in general, I have observed that body-shaming of men seems to be alarmingly socially acceptable. This isn't limited to one aspect of men's bodies either.

Take perhaps the most common one: insulting men based on penis size. Often, it's the case that the person doing the body-shaming has obviously never seen the penis of the man they're insulting, but the implication is that if a man has a small penis, then they're cowardly, undesirable, or any other designation among a litany of negative ones. Never mind that penis size is unrelated to any personality traits or that there are conditions like micropenis that result in small penises, sometimes resulting in immense distress for the men who have them--on top of the social stigmatization thereof.

Then there are the insults based on weight, which, while not exclusive to men, sometimes seem to find acceptance from specific people who otherwise reject such body-shaming. I have lost count of the amount of times I have seen insults such as "fat white man" and "big-bellied idiot" being used toward men.

Why is such body-shaming so widely accepted, in your opinion? If society wants to combat shaming of different body types, being fat, different skin tones, etc., then shouldn't it also seek to combat language such as "this guy has a small [insert any colloquial word for penis]"?

It's accepted because it's being done to men. No one gives a .... about men.

 

[Heyo]

It's accepted because it's being done to men. No one gives a .... about men.

Including men. When you are in a privileged position, you are fair game and you are supposed to not care.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

It’s just a fact of life. The bigger your **** the more high value you tend to be among women looking for sex. So it’s a common tactic to attack a man’s ability to satisfy his partner, in attempt to make him feel worthless and ashamed over something he can never change.

Yet, too large is sometimes an issue, with some women preferring smaller organs. I feel like this is a case where it's best to be average...

But still not something to shame over.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Meh...
Never had much issue with that, or heard too much serious insulting around it. Which isn't to say it doesn't happen, and I daresay men with issues (physical or esteem) will find things insulting where others wouldn't.

I find the last sentence particularly interesting. Would you mind elaborating on it?

I don't think men with issues are the only ones who find certain kinds of comments (e.g., a seriously intended "he has a small [insert word for penis here]") insulting, nor, in my opinion, should they be the only ones to do so. I don't have a micropenis or weight problems, for example, but I can definitely see why and how making fun of small penises or of being fat can be insulting and harmful.

But skin colour and (particularly) age are more socially accepted forms of insult.
And whilst I've noticed this more in recent years, there is both confirmation bias, and levels of impact.

For all that my age and skin colour get me unfairly stereotyped, I wouldn't trade middle-class, middle-aged white male for an aging woman of colour, for example.

I wouldn't trade being male with being female where I live either (or indeed anywhere else, but especially here), although I'm interested in exploring the specific issue of the acceptability around body-shaming of men rather than comparing what types of shaming men and women encounter and the relative impact thereof. While women almost invariably have it worse, I don't think that discounts that specific types of shaming can still be quite damaging to many men.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It's accepted because it's being done to men. No one gives a .... about men.

It's often widely accepted in many male-centric, patriarchal societies where politics, the workplace, the media, etc., are all largely centered and structured around male preferences and perspectives, though. How do we account for that, in your opinion?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Me neither. One that is too big is not a positive. Ouch!

No it's not.
In simple and somewhat crude terms it's more about fit than size.
(Ignoring other factors)

My partner dated a guy who was somewhat smaller than me and she preferred different positions with us due to this.

I'm not...small, and this means in specific positions I will sometimes hit her cervix which is apparently pretty painful.

 

[Erebus]

Why is such body-shaming so widely accepted, in your opinion? If society wants to combat shaming of different body types, being fat, different skin tones, etc., then shouldn't it also seek to combat language such as "this guy has a small [insert any colloquial word for penis]"?

As @The Hammer pointed out, ideas about what size a man's penis should be are often dictated by culture. Today, the perception is "the bigger the better" but this seems to mainly be the view of heterosexual men. I suspect that one reason for that is that heterosexual men generally don't see other men's penises outside of porn. While I don't want to derail the thread into debating the pros and cons of porn, I do think that the tendency for male pornstars to have enormous penises probably gives heterosexual men a skewed perception on what the ideal size should be.

So you have plenty of men who generally only see pornstar sizes and you know what pornstars do... they have sex with dozens, if not hundreds, of gorgeous women. I think it's easy to forget that the people in those videos are being paid for a job. You could have the biggest snake in the world but it's probably not going to be much help in actually forming a relationship with a woman. That's a sore spot for a lot of men these days, with the incel movement being a particularly extreme example of it.

The result is that if you want to insult a man without having to put too much thought into it, tell him he has a small penis.

The reasons for this type of body shaming being considered more acceptable are a bit more complicated but I'll give my thoughts on what I consider to be the main one.

Since most people don't walk around naked, the person giving the insult probably has no idea how big their target's penis actually is. That means it's the reaction to the insult that's the most telling. Getting offended or calling the insult out as body shaming is going to be taken as proof that yes, this guy really does have a small penis. The best bet is to laugh it off.

Men can't actually talk seriously about this subject without giving the impression that they're undersized. They have to turn it into a joke if they want to avoid further insults. It's not body shaming, it's just playful banter and anybody who feels self-conscious as a result obviously deserves to feel self-conscious. Since people who aren't heterosexual men typically find the obsession with size kind of bemusing, they're also likely to see the whole thing as a joke too.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I find the last sentence particularly interesting. Would you mind elaborating on it?

For you? Of course not!
There are a couple of levels to my meaning, but I should start by saying I don't mean it's okay to abuse other men verbally. Just that I'd see abusing a man by suggesting he had a small penis as no worse than suggesting he's a...man, language filters make this tough....a penis head. Or whatever else. Verbal abuse is verbal abuse. Aiming abuse at a man's penis size is unlikely to cause more harm than other abuse (which is, of course, harmful) unless the target has particular self esteem issues, or physical issues adding a level of hurt above and beyond the abuse.

If someone called me [insert gay insult] I'd take offence from the intent. But the insinuation itself wouldn't add anything to the insult. I'm not gay, and I'd don't view it as a prejorative anyway.

I don't think men with issues are the only ones who find certain kinds of comments (e.g., a seriously intended "he has a small [insert word for penis here]") insulting, nor, in my opinion, should they be the only ones to do so. I don't have a micropenis or weight problems, for example, but I can definitely see why and how making fun of small penises or of being fat can be insulting and harmful.

Being insulted or abused can be insulting and harmful, I agree. My point was more just around whether an insult based on physical features the insulter hasn't even seen should be considered more insulting than any other verbal abuse directed at someone.

I wouldn't trade being male with being female where I live either (or indeed anywhere else, but especially here), although I'm interested in exploring the specific issue of the acceptability around body-shaming of men rather than comparing what types of shaming men and women encounter and the relative impact thereof. While women almost invariably have it worse, I don't think that discounts that specific types of shaming can still be quite damaging to many men.

True enough.

Not to discount your point (which I do agree with), but I somehow treaded the line between jock and geek during school, and being able to deal with crude toilet humour in a casual fashion was a much surer path to not being viewed as an outsider in jock groups.
Equally, if less obviously, there were encoded humour in geek groups, sometes around relative intelligence, etc.
I don't see that as any different or better than body shaming, tbh.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think this applies to a subset of people. Another justification I have seen for male body-shaming is based in stereotypical, outdated notions of what it means to "be a man" or to be "masculine." For example, among some of the hyper-misogynistic, overtly macho internet subcultures that often take unscientific and highly subjective terms like "beta male" and "alpha male" seriously, shaming other men--whether by body-shaming them or mocking their personality and demeanor--seems to be a way for some to feel better about themselves or to prop up their sense of worth.

Inaccurate notions about what it means to be a man, which some refer to as "toxic masculinity" (a term I find useful in a context like this), are among the primary drivers of body-shaming targeting men, in my opinion.

The subset you refer to is huge.
But I don't see the perpetrators doing it to "feel better
about themselves". It appears to be out of loathing.

I'm reminded of one young feminist (who no longer posts
here.) She was liberal, well off, thin, white, & young.
She regularly scorned old white fat men. This just wasn't
something that would embiggen her. The group offended
her, especially as political foes. And being the enemy,
they're fair game for bigoted insults that would never be
tolerated here towards blacks, Asians, women, etc.
All IMO.

 

[Koldo]

Then it must be me being nonbinary that makes me not get it rather then me being asexual. I dont get why men care so much about being seen as masculine or manly.

Peer pressure and social hierarchy.

 

[Koldo]

These types of shaming exist even among many groups that don't necessarily view men as perpetrators, though. I'm sure there are some people who believe body-shaming men is justified because of viewing men as aggressors, but what do you think makes the shaming acceptable to so many people besides those?

I think you have got it backwards. Let me explain: It is not that people need a justification to body-shame a given category of people, but rather that they need a "justification" to stop them from doing it (if they are inclined on doing it in the first place).

A lot of people find it fun to be mean to others, and what stops them on their tracks is the backlash they get nowadays when they are mean to minorities. But they feel free to be mean to others.

 

[Revoltingest]

Recent trends in this thread remind me of....
Interesting Comments by Colion Noir About Ad Banned By NFL

 

[Debater Slayer]

For you? Of course not!
There are a couple of levels to my meaning, but I should start by saying I don't mean it's okay to abuse other men verbally. Just that I'd see abusing a man by suggesting he had a small penis as no worse than suggesting he's a...man, language filters make this tough....a penis head. Or whatever else. Verbal abuse is verbal abuse. Aiming abuse at a man's penis size is unlikely to cause more harm than other abuse (which is, of course, harmful) unless the target has particular self esteem issues, or physical issues adding a level of hurt above and beyond the abuse.

If someone called me [insert gay insult] I'd take offence from the intent. But the insinuation itself wouldn't add anything to the insult. I'm not gay, and I'd don't view it as a prejorative anyway.

Thanks for clarifying!

I can see your point, and I find myself within the camp of men who would find any insult aimed at them about supposed penis size to be silly more than anything else. There are a lot of other epithets and ways of shaming that may hurt more than that one, but I chose to focus on the body-related ones in this thread because of what I view as widespread acceptance thereof in many circles that otherwise stand against body-shaming--or at least claim to.

Being insulted or abused can be insulting and harmful, I agree. My point was more just around whether an insult based on physical features the insulter hasn't even seen should be considered more insulting than any other verbal abuse directed at someone.

I suppose it depends on the target of the abuse and how they perceive the insults. While such sensibilities are probably too variable among different individuals for us to make any accurate guesses about them, the acceptance of male body-shaming as just a fact of life is more likely to be present among the majority, which I find problematic.

Not to discount your point (which I do agree with), but I somehow treaded the line between jock and geek during school, and being able to deal with crude toilet humour in a casual fashion was a much surer path to not being viewed as an outsider in jock groups.
Equally, if less obviously, there were encoded humour in geek groups, sometes around relative intelligence, etc.
I don't see that as any different or better than body shaming, tbh.

I think intent matters, and so does an individual's attitude when someone else takes exception to their humor and points that out to them. Often, well-meaning people may apologize or avoid similar jokes in the future, whereas the kinds of serious, malicious comments I'm talking about are specifically intended to denigrate and hurt the targets.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The subset you refer to is huge.
But I don't see the perpetrators doing it to "feel better
about themselves". It appears to be out of loathing.

I'm reminded of one young feminist (who no longer posts
here.) She was liberal, well off, thin, white, & young.
She regularly scorned old white fat men. This just wasn't
something that would embiggen her. The group offended
her, especially as political foes. And being the enemy,
they're fair game for bigoted insults that would never be
tolerated here towards blacks, Asians, women, etc.
All IMO.

I'm not inclined to comment on former members' views given that they're not here and can't elaborate on those anymore, but in general, sometimes mentioning someone's ethnicity or age while attacking them can be a way of highlighting perceived issues with the views prevalent among their demographic rather than attacking their skin color, age, etc., per se.

Take the US as an example: the majority of far-right voters are indeed older, white, and male. The views they espouse also often negatively affect women who don't fit into specific social boxes. This gives a different perspective on a frustrated "old white man" beyond mere ageism or racism: it then becomes a scathing comment about people who hold certain views... who, in this case, simply happen to be comprised of an old, white, and male majority.

There are many different contexts in which I see such insults, though, many of which seem to be purely out of malice--hence my starting this thread to explore the acceptability thereof.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think you have got it backwards. Let me explain: It is not that people need a justification to body-shame a given category of people, but rather that they need a "justification" to stop them from doing it (if they are inclined on doing it in the first place).

A lot of people find it fun to be mean to others, and what stops them on their tracks is the backlash they get nowadays when they are mean to minorities. But they feel free to be mean to others.

I'm not sure I see much evidence for the notion that people are mean by default. Sure, it's true for many, but a lot of bullying and insulting behaviors and attitudes are, by and large, learned or acquired from others. There's a reason that, for example, children who grow up in LGBT-accepting communities and households are far more likely to also be accepting than those who grow up in homophobic communities or households.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not inclined to comment on former members' views given that they're not here and can't elaborate on those anymore, but in general, sometimes mentioning someone's ethnicity or age while attacking them can be a way of highlighting perceived issues with the views prevalent among their demographic rather than attacking their skin color, age, etc., per se.

A good excuse for bigotry regarding age, skin color, age, etc.

Take the US as an example: the majority of far-right voters are indeed older, white, and male. The views they espouse also often negatively affect women who don't fit into specific social boxes. This gives a different perspective on a frustrated "old white man" beyond mere ageism or racism: it then becomes a scathing comment about people who hold certain views... who, in this case, simply happen to be comprised of an old, white, and male majority.

To dis all people who share some traits with a despised
group is bigotry. They could criticize just the views. But
they also go after race, gender, age, etc. We (not me)
accept attacking men because they're men. But we
don't tolerate attacking women as a group.
This is why it's acceptable to dis Trump's skin color,
weight, & hair style....but not Hillary's or Obama's.

There are many different contexts in which I see such insults, though, many of which seem to be purely out of malice--hence my starting this thread to explore the acceptability thereof.

Do you believe that the right context OKs mocking
& insulting people based upon race, age, gender,
handicap, etc?

 

[Koldo]

I'm not sure I see much evidence for the notion that people are mean by default. Sure, it's true for many, but a lot of bullying and insulting behaviors and attitudes are, by and large, learned or acquired from others. There's a reason that, for example, children who grow up in LGBT-accepting communities and households are far more likely to also be accepting than those who grow up in homophobic communities or households.

There is a difference between being an homophobic and going out of one's way to be mean to queers. The first can definitely be learned but the second one, I don't think so... One can be instigated to be mean? Sure, but it takes some inner desire to be mean to to do it regularly.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I'm not...small, and this means in specific positions I will sometimes hit her cervix which is apparently pretty painful.

Yes, I can attest to this.

 

[Debater Slayer]

A good excuse for bigotry regarding age, skin color, age, etc.

An excuse is different from a mere explanation of context. To not consider the backdrop of a given comment is to leave oneself open to oversimplification and misunderstanding.

To dis all people who share some traits with a despised
group is bigotry. They could criticize just the views. But
they also go after race, gender, age, etc. We (not me)
accept attacking men because they're men. But we
don't tolerate attacking women as a group.

Attacking women as a group is indeed quite tolerated, albeit with more pushback nowadays (thankfully so). Some could even become multimillionaires and social media celebrities while attacking women or having a history of being sexual predators.

We don't disagree on the other parts above.

This is why it's acceptable to dis Trump's skin color,
weight, & hair style....but not Hillary's or Obama's.

Hillary faced significant amounts of abusive comments about her appearance. With high-profile politicians, it seems that some consider it fair game to use such language even when that means insulting those with the shared traits as "collateral damage."

Do you believe that the right context OKs mocking
& insulting people based upon race, age, gender,
handicap, etc?

No, but it can explain the motives behind it. (The difference is subtle but still present.)