Received 05/11/14

Revised 05/19/15
Accepted 05/21/15
DOI: 10.1002/jcad.12072

The Roles of Family, Friends,

and Romantic/Sexual Partners in the
Body Image of Sexual Minority Men
R. Lewis Bozard Jr. and J. Scott Young
The purpose of this study was to explore the roles of family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners in the body image
development of sexual minority men. Data were analyzed using consensual qualitative research methodology. Romantic/
sexual partners, family, and friends were all found to play influential roles in body development, with romantic/sexual
partners being the most significant and friends being the least significant. Implications for counselors and counselor
educators, as well as suggestions for future research, are provided.
Keywords: bisexual, body image, gay, male, sexual minority

Growing evidence has indicated that sociocultural factors,

including interpersonal experiences with family members,
friends, and intimate partners, affect the body image development of men (Ambwani & Strauss, 2007; Boroughs
& Thompson, 2002; Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006; Carlin,
2008; Drummond, 2005; Fawkner, 2005; Galli & Reel, 2009;
Harvey & Robinson, 2003; Morgan & Arcelus, 2009; Ryan
& Morrison, 2009; Sira & White, 2010). Cash (2002) identified interpersonal experiences as one of four highly salient
factors that influence body image investment and evaluation,
along with cultural socialization, physical characteristics,
and personality attributes. Interactions with family members,
friends, peers, and strangers communicate expectations regarding the meaning of a persons body, both verbally and
nonverbally. Sexual minority men, defined for this study as
men who identify as bisexual or gay, are believed to be more
strongly affected by body image disturbances and associated
consequences compared with their heterosexual peers (Boroughs & Thompson, 2002; Chaney, 2008; Drummond, 2005;
Feldman & Meyer, 2007; Harvey & Robinson, 2003; Morgan
& Arcelus, 2009; Wiseman & Moradi, 2010). Researchers
have called for an in-depth investigation of body image as it
relates to mens experiences with family and friends (Ryan
& Morrison, 2009) and romantic relationships (Ambwani &
Strauss, 2007; Tantleff-Dunn & Gokee, 2002).
Unfortunately, the extant data consist of fragmented
findings drawn primarily from heterosexual samples. Gay
culture, with its strong emphasis on a lean, somewhat muscular appearance as a critical factor in social acceptance

and attraction of sexual partners, exerts pressure on sexual

minority men to achieve unrealistic standards of appearance
(Boroughs & Thompson, 2002; Chaney, 2008; Drummond,
2005; Harvey & Robinson, 2003; Morgan & Arcelus, 2009).
Gay and bisexual men may experience cognitive dissonance
as they seek acceptance from partners, potential partners, and
sexual minority friends who simultaneously transmit strict
gay cultural ideals regarding body appearance. Furthermore,
because of heteronormative cultural biases, sexual minority
men sometimes experience strained relationships with their
families of origin and their peers (Sullivan, 1999). Thus, the
purpose of this study was to examine the influences that family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners exert in the body
image development of college-age sexual minority men.

Body Image Development

Among Sexual Minority Men
Numerous clinical risks related to body image disturbances
among sexual minority men have been reported. These risks
include a greater likelihood to use health-compromising
anabolic steroids (Dillon, Copeland, & Peters, 1999); a
greater pressure to be thin, and therefore diet, compared with
straight men (Morgan & Arcelus, 2009); a greater occurrence of anorexia, bulimia, or nonspecified eating disorders
(Feldman & Meyer, 2007); and an increased risk of suicide
(Eaton, Lowry, Brener, Galuska, & Crosby, 2005; Kim, 2009;
Whetstone, Morrissey, & Cummings, 2007). Complicating
matters, depression and low self-esteem, risk factors for body

R. Lewis Bozard Jr. and J. Scott Young, Department of Counseling and Educational Development, University of North Carolina at
Greensboro. R. Lewis Bozard Jr. is now at Care and Counseling Center of Georgia, Decatur, Georgia. Correspondence concerning
this article should be addressed to R. Lewis Bozard Jr., Care and Counseling Center of Georgia, 1814 Clairmont Road, Decatur,
GA 30033 (e-mail: lewis.bozard@gmail.com).
2016 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

150

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

The Body Image of Sexual Minority Men

image disturbances, are experienced by gay men at higher
rates and are thought to be exacerbated by the challenges of
navigating their sexual identity, particularly at the early stages
of the coming-out process (Harvey & Robinson, 2003; Petrie
& McFarland, 2009).
Studies of adolescent and young adult men from primarily heterosexual samples have found that both negative and
positive effects on body image may emerge through interpersonal experiences (e.g., peer comments, teasing, pursuit of
romantic relationships, visual body comparison), although
findings have been inconsistent (Ata, Ludden, & Lally, 2007;
Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006; Carlin, 2008; Galli & Reel,
2009; Hoyt & Kogan, 2001; McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2003;
Olivardia, 2001; Pope, Phillips, & Olivardia, 2000; Ricciardelli, McCabe, & Banfield, 2000; Ryan & Morrison, 2009;
Sira & White, 2010). A few studies involving sexual minority
participants have discovered connections between interpersonal relationships and male body image development, yet
the nature of the influences has not been specifically explored,
especially for the sexual minority participants. In their qualitative study of 12 Irish men (11 heterosexual, one gay), Ryan
and Morrison (2009) found that the acquisition of sexual partners was one influence on body image. In a qualitative study
of 15 men ages 18 to 24 years (M = 21 years; eight straight,
seven gay), Morgan and Arcelus (2009) found that gay bars
and clubs, locations where patrons often seek sexual partners,
constituted especially unhealthy environments for body image, and they also found that media influence, gay bars, and
the feeling of being judged primarily on physical appearance
greatly affected gay participants. Adams, Turner, and Bucks
(2005) qualitatively explored young adult mens experiences
of body dissatisfaction in the United Kingdom; their study
consisted of seven heterosexual men, five gay men, and two
bisexual men. Adams et al. observed that most participants
definitions of body dissatisfaction included references to how
they were perceived by others. For some participants, simply
being seen by others was sufficient enough to elicit concern.
Also, feedback from romantic/sexual partners, regardless if
it was an affirmation or rejection, was particularly salient.
In view of the pressure exerted through gay culture to attain
a lean, muscular appearance, sexual minority men are likely
to experience cognitive dissonance as they seek social acceptance through interpersonal relationships and simultaneously
receive messages that their bodies do not meet cultural ideals
from some of the same interpersonal relationships. Therefore,
this study sought to specifically investigate the influences of
family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners on body image
development among sexual minority men.

Method
Researchers have noted the value of qualitative methodology to fully capture the complex, subjective, perceptual, and
experiential nature of male body image issues (Bottamini &

Ste-Marie, 2006; Chaney, 2008; Filiault, 2007; Galli & Reel,

2009; Morgan & Arcelus, 2009; Ridgeway & Tylka, 2005). We
chose consensual qualitative research (CQR) as the method of
qualitative inquiry. Although we considered other qualitative
approaches, we selected CQR for its relatively higher level of
rigor, including the use of multiple researchers and an audit
process to promote the trustworthiness of the findings. CQR
provided an effective means to collect rich descriptions from
a minority population regarding a topic that had not been
explored with such depth and to then identify key findings
using a collaborative process that allowed us to draw from the
varied expertise and common agreement of multiple reviewers. Before the commencement of the research, approval was
granted by the universitys institutional review board.
Participants
The participants were eight men associated with two universities (a small, private liberal arts university and a mediumsized, public university) in the southeastern United States. A
sample size of eight to 15 participants has been suggested
to promote both representation of multiple perspectives and
accommodation for unexpected variability, which could
affect the process of analysis and grouping of data (Hill,
Thompson, & Williams, 1997). Participant selection criteria
included the following: (a) self-identifying as a bisexual or
gay man; (b) being 18 to 30 years old; (c) having the ability
to identify experiences affecting body image development
that occurred in family, friend, and romantic/sexual partner
relational contexts; (d) being willing to describe these experiences for the purposes of the investigation; and (e) being
either currently enrolled in college or previously enrolled
within 6 months before the interview. Six of the study
participants self-identified as gay and two self-identified
as bisexual, with ages ranging from 19 to 26 years (M =
22 years, SD = 2.20). Six participants identified as White/
Caucasian and two as Black/African American. Participants
were asked to consider their thoughts and feelings about their
bodies on most days in the past month and then rate their
current body image on a 10-point Likert-type scale ranging
from 1 (I completely dislike my body) to 10 (I completely like
my body). Participant responses ranged from 3 to 7, with a
mean of 5.43 (SD = 1.72). Three participants responses were
on the lower (negative) end of the scale, four participants
responses were on the higher (positive) end of the scale, and
one participant gave no response.
Researchers Backgrounds and Biases
The research team consisted of the first author, who was
a doctoral student, and two faculty members of the first
authors doctoral committee, one of whom is the second
author. No members of the research team had previous
direct experience in the use of CQR, but all participated in
CQR training conducted by the first author and consulted

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

151

Bozard & Young

with two additional faculty members who had extensive
experience in CQR methodology. To reduce subjective
bias, we participated in a bracketing exercise before data
collection and analysis (Hill et al., 2005), in which we
discussed our experiences, perspectives, and expectations
regarding the phenomenon under investigation (Hill et
al., 1997). We all reported at least minimal personal and
professional experience with body image disturbances and
expressed the expectation that sexual minority men might
be more likely than straight men to experience problems
related to their body image. The second author reported
minimal previous familiarity with gay culture, whereas the
other two team members, including the first author, had
extensive experience with sexual minority populations.
The first author and the nonauthor faculty member were
highly familiar with body image research. The nonauthor
faculty member had previously conducted research related
to body image. We all expected that family, friends, and
romantic/sexual partners could potentially play significant
roles in body image development.
Measures
Demographic questionnaire. Participants completed a brief
demographic questionnaire. This questionnaire included
items pertaining to sex, age, ethnicity/race, education, sexual
identity, and follow-up contact.
Psychosocial history form. Participants completed a male
body image psychosocial history form before the interview.
The questionnaire consisted of eight items that the first author
developed by drawing from the Adonis Complex Questionnaire (Pope et al., 2000) and Pope et al.s (2000) list of questions related to symptoms for muscle dysmorphia, eating
disorders in men, and body dysmorphic disorder.
Semistructured interview. We asked the participants
a series of questions developed from the existing literature, with primary attention to the overarching research
question, How do sexual minority men describe the
relationship between their body image development and
their experiences involving (a) family, (b) friends, and (c)
romantic/sexual partners? Specifically, we asked the participants the following questions, with additional follow-up
questions based on individual responses: (a) What do you
think about body image as a concern of men? (b) What
struggles related to body image, if any, have you witnessed
bisexual and gay men experience? (c) Have you noted
anything that seems different or unique about male body
image as experienced by bisexual and gay men? (d)
What factors do you think may influence the body image
of sexual minority men? (e) This research project is
intended to focus on the experiences of bisexual and gay
men. Which term do you use to identify yourself? How
would you briefly describe what you mean when you say
that you are bisexual/gay? (f) Considering your own life

152

experiences, how might you generally describe your body

image? (g) Describe a specific experience that occurred
within the context of family, friends, or romantic/sexual
partners that related to your body image development in
a significant way (h) How did this experience relate to
your thoughts and feelings about your body? (i) What
role, if any, did the type of relationship (i.e., family, friend,
and romantic/sexual partner) play in the significance of this
experience? (j) Is there another specific experience that
occurred within the context of family, friends, or romantic/
sexual partners that related to your body image development in a significant way? Tell me about it (k) Thinking
about all of the experiences you have described, which
experience, or experiences, was most influential? How?
Have the roles of family, friends, and romantic/sexual
partners in your body image changed over time at different
stages of your life? How? (l) Thinking about all of the
experiences you have described, what role, if any, did your
sexual identity play relative to your body image? and (m)
Is there anything else about this topic or this interview
that you would like to share? We repeated the question Is
there another specific experience that occurred within the
context of family, friends, or romantic/sexual partners that
related to your body image development in a significant
way? unlimited times to capture all relevant experiences.
Procedures for Data Collection
The study applied convenience and snowball sampling,
which have been recommended for marginalized and stigmatized social groups such as sexual minority men (Filiault
& Drummond, 2009; Patton, 2002). The call for participants
was publicized through e-mail announcements via university
electronic mailing lists; face-to-face announcements made by
the first author at regularly scheduled meetings of a campus
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) organization;
one-on-one personal discussions with LGBT students and
allies; and social media, including Facebook announcements
asking readers to communicate the call to people who might
be eligible to participate, which were posted by the first author
on pages of LGBT student groups and on his own Facebook
page. These audiences and participants were asked to consider
participating or to share news of the opportunity to participate
with potential participants within their social networks. In the
announcements, the first author directed potential participants
to access a recruitment letter posted online using SurveyMonkey. At least 5 days before the interview, we e-mailed copies
of the informed consent form, the demographic questionnaire,
the male body image psychosocial history form, and the interview questions for review only to individuals who agreed to
participate. The participants completed the informed consent
form, the demographic questionnaire, and the male body image psychosocial history form before the interview, and they
gave these materials to the first author at the beginning of

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

The Body Image of Sexual Minority Men

the interview session. Experiences contributing to male body
image development occur over a span of years and are uncommonly discussed by most men. We hoped that the opportunity
to recall events in advance of the interview would enhance the
quality of responses overall. The first author conducted and
audiotaped the face-to-face interviews. Interviews ranged in
duration from 33 to 69 minutes.
Data Preparation and Analysis
The first author transcribed and double-checked the interviews
for accuracy. Then, he assigned sequential numbers and distributed them without identifying information to the research
team members before the team analysis meetings. We met
twice to code the findings, with a time lapse of no longer than
2 months between an interview and our final analysis of it.
We independently completed initial coding of the transcripts
before each meeting. Then, we reached consensus through a
discussion of the tentative coding during analysis meetings so
that all members agreed with the final results. Our coding of
the data followed standard CQR procedures, which involves
three primary steps: (a) identifying and coding domains in
which to cluster data, (b) identifying core ideas that constitute
the essence of participants described experiences, and (c)
conducting cross-analysis of data to locate categories that
are applicable across participant cases (Hill et al., 1997). In
the final step, we assembled the cross-analysis, core ideas
into categories (Hill et al., 1997). A faculty member, who
had direct experience as a CQR researcher and auditor and
who had published multiple studies using CQR methodology,
served as our external auditor and reviewed and verified the
findings immediately upon completion of the process (Hill
et al., 1997).
Evaluation of the Results
Hill et al. (1997) outlined three essential criteria for evaluating results of CQR: (a) trustworthiness of the method, (b)
coherence of the results, and (c) representativeness of the
sample. This study ensured trustworthiness through careful monitoring of the processes of data collection and data
analysis, including appropriate interview development,
minimization of bias, consensual process, auditing, and
accurate reporting of findings. Triangulation, or the collection of data using multiple sources, is a prime means
for the pursuit of coherence and promotes reliability and
internal validity (Creswell, 2007; Hill et al., 1997). In this
study, we attained triangulation by comparing the individual
participant data between the verbal information collected
during the interview and the written information collected
on the psychosocial history form. Similar responses across
sources suggest that the data are trustworthy, whereas a pattern of contradictory responses suggest that the data may be
unreliable. All participants were found to present consistent
information. Representativeness is closely related to the

concept of transferability and is considered to be a measure

of external validity in qualitative inquiry (Creswell, 2007).
In this study, we addressed representativeness by carefully
attending to the participant selection process (i.e., selecting
a relatively homogeneous group of participants); examining
the stability of the findings; and reporting the findings as
general, typical, or variant.

Results
A final consensus resulted in a list of six domains: (a)
relationship types affecting body image development, (b)
modalities of body image development experiences, (c)
romantic/sexual partners effects on body image development, (d) familys effects on body image development,
(e) longevity of the most influential experiences, and (f)
changing roles of relationships over time. Table 1 presents
the categories within each domain. Representativeness, or
frequency of occurrence, of categories was reported using
labels of general (applicable to all or most cases [n = 78]),
typical (applicable to more than half of cases but not all [n =
56]), and variant (applicable to half or fewer of the cases,
but more than one [n = 24]; Hill et al., 2005). Categories
represented by only one respondent were considered rare and
were neither included in the table of findings nor assigned
a label. Domains containing general and typical categories
are presented in the following paragraphs.
Table 1
Domains and Categories With
General and Typical Labels
Domain and Category
Relationship types affecting body image development
Romantic/sexual partners and potential romantic/
sexual partners
Family
Other relationships
Friends
Modalities of body image development experiences
Verbal comments
Observation of another persons body/self-comparison
Romantic/sexual partners effects on body image
development
Supported/complimented by partner
Negative comments from partner
Partner had own body concerns
Sex/cuddling
Body size (thin/overweight)
Increased exercise
Familys effects on body image development
Felt supported
Mother as the most influential family member
Longevity of the most influential experiences
Longevity
Changing roles of relationships over time
Roles do change over time

Label

General
General
General
Typical
General
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical
Typical

Note. N = 8. General = applicable to all or most cases (n = 78);

typical = applicable to more than half of cases but not all (n = 56).

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

153

Bozard & Young

Relationship Types Affecting
Body Image Development
We specifically asked the participants to consider the roles
of romantic/sexual partners, family, and friends. This domain
(i.e., relationship types affecting body image development)
captured the relationship categories that participants identified as most influential in their body image development:
romantic/sexual partners and potential romantic/sexual
partners (general category), family (general category), other
relationships (general category), and friends (typical category). Romantic/sexual partners emerged as perhaps the
most influential of the relationship types, likely because of
their relational proximity and psychological importance.
Influences were both supportive and destructive in direction.
For example, one participant, a 24-year-old, White, gay man,
stated, Until I really became sexually active I dont think
[body image] mattered as much to me. He described the
following experience:
There was a guy that I was really interested in doing something with. We messed around a little bit, but when it came
to what he considered as actually having sex, he was not
interested in that, and I immediately thought, Is there something wrong? Is he not interested in this because hes not in
the mood, or is he not impressed with the size of my penis?
Whats the issue here?

A 21-year-old, White, gay man reported that his first sexual

partner, whom he found very attractive, directly affected his
body image development:
We had sex and, afterward, I made the stupid mistake of saying, Well, how was it? and he said, Oh, well, you could use
more practice. And for some reason, in my head, that didnt
translate as exactly what he said. It was Youre not attractive.

Participants reported positive and negative experiences

with family members. For example, a 26-year-old, white, gay
participant reported that his mother complimented him by
saying, You could be covered in shit and be more handsome
than blah blah blah, while adding that this is like a mothers
bias. However, his mother also expressed concerns that he
was too thin and should gain weight. Another participant, a
21-year-old, White, gay man explained,
[Family members are] more willing if they see that Im trying to restrict my diet or something like that, theyll be like,
You dont need to worry about it. You can eat whatever you
want. And so I feel more comforted around them as opposed
to gay individuals.

The influence of encounters with friends was reported by

interviewees as an important, although perhaps less direct,

154

influence on the body image development of participants.

A 26-year-old, White, gay man indicated that observing
the repulsive appearance of a friend who never had clean
teeth had influenced him for years, since adolescence, to
be conscious of the appearance of his own teeth. Similarly,
a 19-year-old, White, gay man, who perceived himself as
overweight, explained that a simple comment from a close
friend that he was so skinny produced a positive effect
that endured for days. In this way, even passing or indirect
influences of friends had an important and lasting impact on
the body image development of the participants, but likely
in a less personal manner than the influence of romantic/
sexual partners.
Although participants were asked specifically about the
influence of family, friend, and romantic/sexual partner relationships, some interviewees voluntarily added descriptions of
important influences from other relationships, including high
school teachers, college professors, and adolescent female
peers. A 21-year-old, White, gay participant described his
encounter with his high school drama instructor:
At the time, my one goal in life was to be an actor, and she
said, Itll never happen. . . . Youre not masculine enough.
Youre too small. You dont have enough muscle. And at the
same time that I was realizing that the gay community values
that kind of masculinity, so I was hearing this from someone
I really trust at the same time as my minority culture was
telling me, oh yeah, shes right, you should be like that. . . . I
absolutely thought she knew everything . . . and the fact that
she was an authority figure very specifically.

Relationships outside the types explicitly solicited in the interviews clearly had the potential to be influential, sometimes
in a negative manner and sometimes in a positive direction,
such as a college professor who identified as gay and was a
source of inspiration to one of the participants.
Modalities of Body Image
Development Experiences
Participants described a range of types of experiences through
which other people affected body image development. Verbal
comments (general category) and observation of another
persons body/self-comparison (typical category) emerged as
the most significant mechanisms through which other people
affected body image development. All participants identified
verbal comments by others about their bodies as a direct influence on their body image development. Comments about a
range of body features, including body size (thin/overweight),
muscularity, eyes, and general attractiveness, were observed.
For example, as a 26-year-old, White, gay participant walked
past three female peers during high school, he overheard one
of the girls comment, Oh my God, hes so pale, which caused
this individual to become very self-conscious about his

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

The Body Image of Sexual Minority Men

complexion; become even more self-conscious about girls
in general; and consider, but ultimately refuse, to purposefully tan. A 21-year-old, White, gay man revealed the strong
impact of verbal criticism when he related a comment that a
partner made while they were cuddling after having not seen
each other for a period of time. The partner stated, Wow!
Youve gained some weight. The participant described his
reaction as follows: I immediately shut down and withdrew
emotionally because I dont like to be told negative things
about the way I look. I think Im especially sensitive to criticism. He developed a preoccupation with losing weight and
became more self-conscious about his appearance. Overall,
participants wanted positive feedback about their bodies and
experienced significant emotional distress when negative
verbal feedback was provided, even from nonintimate sources.
Seeing another mans body, then engaging in self-comparison,
was an important influence reported by participants. A 21-yearold, Black, bisexual participant emphasized the importance of
sharing a bedroom with his more athletic brother as a teenager.
He found that comparing himself against his brother, in both
positive and negative directions,
really did shape a lot of my opinions of myself and there are
times I felt like it influence[d] my future, my sexual relations
in college and my choices of boyfriends and partners and other
things. At the same time its also helped me to realize that I
can achieve things . . . because I was like, Oh, well, obviously my brother was able to do this and look at him now.
The fact is that I can do that. I can be like that.

Another participant, a 26-year-old, White, gay man, favorably

compared his penis size with those of his partners, which
produced a heightened self-confidence about his own body.
Across participants, the comparison of ones body with others
was a common occurrence that resulted in either enhanced
self-esteem or disillusionment.
Romantic/Sexual Partners Effects
on Body Image Development
The domain of romantic/sexual partners effects on body
image development captured the aspects of the participants
relationships with their partners that were most significant for
them. The categories consisted of (a) supported/complimented
by partner, (b) negative comments from partner, (c) partner
had own body concerns, (d) sex/cuddling, (e) body size (thin/
overweight), and (f) increased exercise. All categories were
typical. Partner influences were mediated through a wide
range of methods from positive and negative comments to
nonverbal actions and modeling/observation.
Positive comments from partners produced affirming and
motivational developmental experiences. Contexts ranged
from hookup scenarios to dating relationships and longer
term romantic/sexual partnerships. One 24-year-old, White,

gay participant stated, Someone that I was with commented

a lot on I have a nice ass, so I would do what I could to make
it better. Regarding his ex-boyfriend, a 19-year-old, White,
gay man explained, He was always very supportive. He still
is. If I ever really talk to him hes always really nice. That was
part of the reason I fell in love with him.
Although participants frequently named romantic/sexual
partners as supportive, they also identified romantic/sexual
partners as making negative comments with potentially
detrimental effects. The 24-year-old, White, gay participant
who reported a compliment on his buttocks as positive also
reported that negative comments from partners led him to
increase his exercise regimen and to focus on enhancing his
appearance after the comments caused him to believe that
his body was deficient. In fact, some participants initiated
or intensified their exercise programs as a result of experiences with romantic/sexual partners. A 21-year-old, White,
gay man stated, Afterwards, I went to the gym a lot more
often. So [my partners comments] definitely influenced my
further behavior and caused me to look at myself more often
and try to lose weight.
A partner who had his or her own body image concerns also
affected some of the participants. A 21-year-old, White, gay
man explained that an ex-boyfriend was very conscious about
his own body and he made sure that he looked good and was fit
and everything. Coming from him, it was even more of a direct
insult because thats something that really matters to him.
Physical intimacy produced a common context for romantic/
sexual partners influence on body image. One participant described how a partner grabbed the participants body and then
commented that the participant had gained weight. Another participant became self-conscious about his body after a new sexual
partner lost interest during an episode of physical intimacy and
did not provide an adequate explanation of his loss of interest
to the participant.
Several participants were concerned about their body size
along the spectrum of thin to overweight. One participant
disliked being seen as a bear (i.e., a gay subculture term
denoting a man who has a large build and is usually older) by
a potential partner. Another participant, with a history of disordered eating and feeling negative about being overweight,
had a potential partner grab his chest and make insulting
remarks that insinuated he was fat.
Familys Effects on Body Image Development
The domain of familys effects on body image development
reported aspects of relationships with family members that
were significantly influential. Themes related to the familys
effects were less diverse than those reported in relation to
romantic/sexual partners. Two typical categories emerged in
relation to the family: (a) felt supported and (b) mother as
the most influential family member. A 21-year-old, White,
gay man described how his family usually provided him

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

155

Bozard & Young

with a comfortable space in which he did not need to feel
concerned about his body in the self-conscious way he did
while around gay individuals. A 24-year-old, White, gay participant explained that, in contrast to the body-centric nature
of sexual situations,
a family or a friend relationship is more of a love for each
other as people, not for each others body. . . . You have that
relationship because of a bond based on love and the fact that
were born into the same family and things that we shared as
interests. . . . But theres a lot more insecurity with a sexual
partner relationship.

Participants specifically named mothers, more than any

other, as an influential family member. Participants sometimes reported negative effects from their mothers, whereas
others identified the positive effects of this relationship.
A 19-year-old, White, gay man described a situation in
which his mother, after having a few alcoholic drinks,
grabbed his chin with her hand and said, This is getting
larger after the past couple days, which intensified the
participants self-consciousness about his perceived double
chin. A 21-year-old, Black, bisexual man had his mother
say to him in college, Are you going to start working out
or something? You used to look really good. Now youre
just there. The participant explained that he experienced
trash talk as customary in his family context, and during the interview, he seemed to dismiss the impact, yet
its significance is revealed in the fact that he recalled the
comment years later.
Longevity of the Most Influential Experiences
The domain of longevity of the most influential experiences
resulted from the analysis of aspects of each participants
single most influential body image development experience.
Longevity (typical category) emerged as the one category
common to most mens influential experiences. Longevity was
noted both in terms of the activating experience and in terms
of the duration of the effects of the experience. A 21-year-old,
Black, bisexual man who shared a bedroom with his athletic
brother explained the long time span of the activating experience in the following way:
The one thats most impactful would have to be my brother
just because of the longevity of it. . . . Ive been dealing
with the contrasting [myself] with my brother all of my life
so its continuously there. And, since going to college, its
lessened, but its still there. I can go home and see him, then
you fall back into the general script of behavior and it just
reinforces itself.

A 21-year-old, White, gay participant who emphasized the

longevity of the effects of remembering observed, Something

156

that someone does is more impactful than something someone

says, most of the time. Its a lot less easy for me to forget.
Comparing the lingering effects of negative and positive
experiences, a 19-year-old, White, gay participant observed
that negative experiences carry through more than positive
do, thats for sure. Definitely stay for longer.
Changing Roles of Relationships Over Time
Participants frequently stated that the roles of other people
in their body image development changed over time, with
other people tending to exert less influence on body image
as participants grew older. The relative importance of the
various relationship types in affecting body image development evolved over time as well. In this domain, one typical
category emerged: Roles do change over time. A 21-year-old,
White, gay participant summarized his experience, saying,
Theres more of an internal locus of control as opposed to
somebody else dictating or outside of them dictating how
I feel about myself, which is definitely positive. Another
participant, a 24-year-old, White, gay man, outlined a progression of changes from adolescence to young adulthood,
through which the primary interpersonal influence on his body
image evolved from family (meeting expectations) to friends
(seeking acceptance) to short-term romantic/sexual partners
(seeking sex; e.g., Once I came out, it started to become
more of a focus of being considered attractive by those that
I wanted to have sex with) to a long-term romantic/sexual
partner (pleasing that one person). Some participants reported
that the influences of all people, including family, friends,
and romantic/sexual partners, had declined in importance
over time. A 21-year-old, White, gay man expressed relief at
the singular focus of having one long-term romantic/sexual
partner to please rather than trying to get constant affirmation from different sexual partners.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore the roles of interpersonal relationships with family, friends, and romantic/
sexual partners in the body image development of college-age
sexual minority men. In line with Cashs (2002) assertion, we
found that the participants identified interpersonal experiences as influential for their body image. Furthermore, the
results are consistent with findings among general adolescent
populations (Ata et al., 2007; Ricciardelli et al., 2000) that
parents and friends influence the body image development of
adolescent women and men. Our study suggested that experiences with romantic/sexual partners may be more intensely
influential in body image development than experiences with
family and friends, especially in later adolescence and collegeage years. This valuing of romantic/sexual partners by the
sexual minority participants in this study is similar to that of
the mostly heterosexual population of Ryan and Morrisons

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

The Body Image of Sexual Minority Men

(2009) study of young Irish men and to that of Adams et al.s
(2005) sexually inclusive study of young men in the United
Kingdom, which emphasized the pressure to use body appearance to attract and retain sexual partners. In particular, the
current findings are consistent with Adams et al.s statement
that feedback from sexual partners was particularly salient
(p. 278); however, the present study is the first to find these
results among a population of gay and bisexual young adult
men. The greater number of partner-related categories that
were shared by more than half of the participants suggests a
greater universality of experiences involving romantic/sexual
partners than experiences involving family or friends. This
finding suggests the need for continued research with the goal
of better understanding the unique impact of romantic/sexual
partners on body image development within this population.
Furthermore, three participants spoke about their partner
relationships in terms of investment. In partner relationships, usually of a physically intimate nature, the body is
fully exposed and subject to direct evaluation. Indeed, in the
domain of romantic/sexual partners effects on body image
development, one of the typical categories was sex/cuddling,
in which one may feel especially vulnerable because of the
heightened level of emotional and physical intimacy.
Although participants reported receiving negative comments
from their romantic/sexual partners, they also reported that a
different romantic/sexual partner or the same romantic/sexual
partner in a different context were sources of positive support and
encouragement. Half of the participants reported that short-term
romantic/sexual partners had become less important to their body
image and that long-term romantic/sexual partners had become
more important; thus, over time, the roles of partners may change.
The relationship context of a long-term romantic/sexual partner
may foster feelings of security and acceptance while decreasing
the frequency of seeking acceptance and affirmation from new
romantic/sexual partners amid the competitive gay culture with
its specific body ideals. Considering the college-age population
and the reports of several participants own college-age experiences, the transition from short-term romantic/sexual partners,
acquired primarily for sex, to longer term romantic/sexual
partners, with a more holistic interest, is likely a developmental
transition in many cases.
Family appeared to be the next influential interpersonal
relationship. This finding is similar to that of Ryan and Morrison (2009), who found that family members were influential
among their primarily heterosexual sample, but, in contrast
with Ryan and Morrisons findings, our study found that peers
were less influential than family members. In comparison with
the domain dealing with romantic/sexual partners, in which
there were six typical categories, the family-related domain
produced only two typical categories: (a) felt supported and
(b) mother as the most influential family member. Although
there were negative exceptions, family relationships were
portrayed by multiple participants as a context in which they

could feel a comforting sense of familiarity with minimal

levels of judgment. Five participants reported that an effect
of their interactions with family pertaining to body image
development was feeling supported by family. Five participants described at least one influential experience involving
their mothers, whereas no other family relationship type was
named by more than one participant. Mothers in several cases
made remarks to their sons that negatively affected their body
image. This finding contrasts with Ata et al.s (2007) earlier
finding that, among a general sample of adolescents, mothers
had a mostly positive impact on their sons. Further exploration of the roles of specific family members could enhance
counselors understanding behind the high occurrence of
mothers in this study.
Among the three relationship types examined in this study,
experiences with friends were least likely to be discussed by
participants. Six participants identified friends as influential.
Although most studies, to date, have focused on peers rather
than friends, the current study purposefully sought feedback
about the role of friends as a more intimate form of relationship. Previous studies (e.g., Bottamini & Ste-Marie, 2006;
Morgan & Arcelus, 2009; Ryan & Morrison, 2009) identified peers as a primary influence on male body image among
primarily heterosexual samples. In the present study, no
categories were identified within the friend-related domains
that were typical or general, indicating the lowest degree of
universality in participant experiences when compared with
romantic/sexual partners and family. Worthy of note is the
fact that proportionally more of the categories in the friend
domains were positive than in the family and romantic/sexual
partner domains. For example, several variant categories
indicated positive roles in body image development: (a) supportive toward his body image concerns, (b) positive comments from friends, and (c) supporting public performance
involving display of his body. The following statement of a
19-year-old, White, gay participant could explain the link
between the positive-leaning categories in the friend domains and the participants decision to less frequently name
friends as influential in comparison with romantic/sexual
partners and family: Its the negative [experiences] that are
most influential overall. In other words, one might ask if the
predominantly positive nature of experiences with friends
mediates the lower reported incidence of friend experiences.
Future research could further explore this potential disparity
in the level and nature of influence exerted by friends/peers
between the primarily heterosexual samples of previous studies and the sexual minority sample of this study.
When participants were asked to identify the single most
influential experience influencing their body image, three
participants reported the role of family in their most influential experiences and three participants reported the role of
romantic/sexual partners in their most influential experiences.
In contrast, no participant identified the role of friends in his

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

157

Bozard & Young

most influential experience. Two participants said that their
most influential experience involved a professor or teacher.
The high levels of intimacy, both emotional and physical,
that are frequently present within family and romantic/sexual
partner relationships, in comparison with peer relationships,
may intensify the effects of body image experiences. Family members and long-term romantic/sexual partners also
tend to be more consistently present in a persons life than
friends, who are more easily dispensable. In this way, the more
enduring nature of relationships with family and long-term
romantic/sexual partners coalesces with the longevity factor
that was found to be a significant category.
Overall, the study produced eight domains and 78 categories pertaining to interpersonal relationships. Only 16
of the 78 categories were labeled as general or typical (i.e.,
endorsed by at least half of the participants and therefore
most salient to the findings). The universality of experiences
is found in the participants endorsements of the importance
of family, friends, and romantic/sexual partnersas well as
other interpersonal relationshipsin their own body image
development. Although family, friends, and romantic/sexual
partners are important factors in the body image development experiences of sexual minority men, the specific ways
in which these interpersonal relationships produce effects are
diverse and relatively unique within individuals. Furthermore,
family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners contribute to
body image development of sexual minority men in both
affirmative and destructive ways.
Limitations
Several issues related to the sampling procedure produced
potential limitations. For one, we recruited the participants primarily through LGBT organizations and social networks. These
individuals are more likely to be public or semipublic about their
sexual orientation and may have higher levels of awareness and
advocacy concerning sexual minority concerns. Participants
who are more private about their sexual orientation or who are
not affiliated with an LGBT organization might have different
perspectives. The use of convenience and snowball sampling approaches can potentially limit diversity by involving participants
who are connected through common social networks. Furthermore, volunteers for a research study may self-select based on
factors such as higher levels of experience with the topic, desire
for notoriety, or desire to meet the interviewer.
In this study, for purposes of consistency, we recruited only
bisexual and gay men for participation, but some definitions
of sexual minority would encompass other identities, such as
transgender, queer, questioning, and heteroflexible. Furthermore, the identity of bisexual includes many possibilities for
sexual attraction and experience, so a more diverse array of
bisexual participants might produce different views.
Limitations existed in the data collection and analysis
techniques. Use of self-reported data inherently raises

158

questions of subjectivity, limited self-awareness, and participant truthfulness. Although face-to-face interviews provide
some advantages over less personal techniques, the risk of bias
through social desirability, or the desire of the interviewee to
be seen in a positive light by the interviewer, is greater when
interviews occur in person (Hill et al., 2005). Also, because
we provided participants with the interview questions ahead
of time, participants may have rehearsed their answers or
generated socially desirable responses (Mehta, 2011).
Implications for Counselors
and Counselor Educators
When treating college-age sexual minority men who struggle
with the effects of negative body image, counselors might
be vigilant for evidence of the presence of body image disturbance, especially if commonly related conditions such as
disordered eating, excessive exercise, and low self-esteem
are present. In cases in which body image is assessed to be a
clinically significant concern for treatment, counselors should
ask the client about the roles that romantic/sexual partners,
family, friends, and important other people in the clients life
may have played. Counselors are advised to be cognizant of
the fact that individuals who hold psychological relevance
are capable of influencing another persons body image not
only through verbal comments but also through their actions
or by the clients self-comparison.
In cases in which these relational influences have been
detrimental to body image development, treatment should
include identifying methods for the client to diffuse the impact
of the other person or persons; these methods include clinical
approaches such as cognitive behavior interventions, the development of assertiveness skills, avoidance or new approaches
to contexts in which the client feels negatively about his body,
and self-esteem enhancement (Cash, 2002). Furthermore, because romantic/sexual partners, family, and friends sometimes
play an encouraging or supportive role in promoting positive
feelings about ones body, counselors may suggest that clients
solicit the help of romantic/sexual partners, family, or friends
in reimagining thoughts and feelings about their bodies.
Counselor educators who identify as a sexual minority may
knowingly or unknowingly assume a modeling role for their
students. Because two of the eight participants in the study
noted the effects of gay male instructors, one can assume that
bisexual and gay students may view bisexual and gay teachers
and professors as role models or may pay particular attention
to what they say. A basic orientation to sexual minority culture
and the forces within it that intensify body image concerns
could enhance students ability to understand and effectively
address the social context of bisexual and gay men. When
teaching sociocultural theory, counselor educators should be
sure to include romantic/sexual partners, family, and friends
as agents of influence in addition to the more frequently cited
role of the media.

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

The Body Image of Sexual Minority Men

Suggestions for Future Research
In this study, we did not research the relative importance of family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners in relation to other influences on body image development. Further research could enable
clinicians and researchers to understand the general importance
of family, friends, and romantic/sexual partners in comparison
with the importance of other influences, such as the media and
pressure within gay culture to meet a specific body ideal.
Another subject for further research is the specific experience of bisexual men. With only two participants who
self-identified as bisexual, this study provides little basis for
determining whether there may be significant differences between the body image development of gay and bisexual men.
Furthermore, other sexual identities, beyond gay and bisexual,
could be included within the sexual minority population.
Several participants in this study noted that body appearance
ideals vary within gay culture, because particular subcultures
emphasize specific body appearance characteristics, such as
twinks (young and thin), bears (large build and usually older),
and jocks (muscular). The variations within these subcultures
may ultimately make generalizations about sexual minority
mens body image development difficult, impossible, or inappropriate. Therefore, further research is warranted to understand the idiosyncrasies of body image development within
specific sexual minority subcultures and how family, friends,
and romantic/sexual partners relate to such development.
Numerous connections between body image and sexual relations appeared in this study. Factors such as sexual rejection,
self-evaluation of body image based on the success or inability
to attract sexual partners, and influential experiences with partners during sex or cuddling suggest collectively that sex plays
an important role in the body image of sexual minority men.
Further research is warranted to explore interactions between
sex and body image among bisexual and gay men, who often
live within the highly sexualized gay culture.

References
Adams, G., Turner, H., & Bucks, R. (2005). The experience of body
dissatisfaction in men. Body Image, 2, 271283. doi:.10.1016/j.
bodyim.2005.05.004
Ambwani, S., & Strauss, J. (2007). Love thyself before loving
others? A qualitative and quantitative analysis of gender differences in body image and romantic love. Sex Roles, 56, 1321.
doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9143-7
Ata, R. N., Ludden, A. B., & Lally, M. M. (2007). The effects of
gender and family, friend, and media influences on eating behaviors and body image during adolescence. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 36, 10241037. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9159-x
Boroughs, M., & Thompson, J. K. (2002). Exercise status and sexual
orientation as moderators of body image disturbance and eating
disorders in males. International Journal of Eating Disorders,
31, 307311. doi:10.1002/eat.10031

Bottamini, G., & Ste-Marie, D. (2006). Male voices on body image.

International Journal of Mens Health, 5, 109132. doi:10.3149/
jmh.0502.109
Carlin, N. (2008). From grace alone to grace alone: Male body image and intimacy at Princeton Seminary. Pastoral Psychology,
56, 269293. doi:10.1007/s11089-007-0114-x
Cash, T. F. (2002). Cognitive-behavioral perspectives on body image.
In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of
theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 3846). New York,
NY: Guilford Press.
Chaney, M. P. (2008). Muscle dysmorphia, self-esteem, and loneliness among gay and bisexual men. International Journal of Mens
Health, 7, 157170. doi:10.3149/jmh.0702.157
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dillon, P., Copeland, J., & Peters, R. (1999). Exploring the relationship between male homo/bi-sexuality, body image
and steroid use. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 1, 317327.
doi:10.1080/136910599300914
Drummond, M. J. N. (2005). Mens bodies: Listening to the
voices of young gay men. Men and Masculinities, 7, 270290.
doi:10.1177/1097184x04271357
Eaton, D. K., Lowry, R., Brener, N. D., Galuska, D. A., & Crosby
A. E. (2005). Associations of body mass index and perceived
weight with suicide ideation and suicide attempts among U.S.
high school students. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine,
159, 513519. doi:10.1001/archpedi.159.6.513
Fawkner, H. J. (2005). Body image attitudes in men: An examination of the antecedents and consequent adjustive strategies and
behaviors (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Feldman, M. B., & Meyer, I. H. (2007). Eating disorders in diverse
lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations. International Journal of
Eating Disorders, 40, 218226. doi:10.1002/eat.20360
Filiault, S. M. (2007). Measuring up in the bedroom: Muscle, thinness, and mens sex lives. International Journal of Mens Health,
6, 127142. doi:10.3149/jmh.0602.127
Filiault, S. M., & Drummond, M. J. N. (2009). Methods and
methodologies: Investigating gay mens body image in
Westernized cultures. Critical Public Health, 19, 307323.
doi:10.1080/09581590802626463
Galli, N., & Reel, J. J. (2009). Adonis or Hephaestus? Exploring
body image in male athletes. Psychology of Men & Masculinity,
10, 95108. doi:10.1037/a0014005
Harvey, J. A., & Robinson, J. D. (2003). Eating disorders in men:
Current considerations. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 10, 297306. doi:10.1023/a:1026357505747
Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 52, 196205. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196
Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide
to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling
Psychologist, 25, 517572. doi:10.1177/0011000097254001

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

159

Bozard & Young

Hoyt, W. D., & Kogan, L. R. (2001). Satisfaction with body image
and peer relationships for males and females in a college environment. Sex Roles, 45, 199215. doi:10.1023/A:1013501827550
Kim, D.-S. (2009). Body image dissatisfaction as an important
contributor to suicidal ideation in Korean adolescents: Gender
difference and mediation of parent and peer relationships. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 66, 297303. doi:10.1016/j.
jpsychores.2008.08.005
McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2003). A longitudinal study of
body change strategies among adolescent males. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 32, 105113. doi:10.1023/a:1021805717484
Mehta, S. (2011). International immersion: An exploratory study
of critical factors, sustained impact and counselor development
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://libres.uncg.edu/
ir/listing.aspx?id=8144
Morgan, J. F., & Arcelus, J. (2009). Body image in gay and straight
men: A qualitative study. European Eating Disorders Review,
17, 435443. doi:10.1002/erv.955
Olivardia, R. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall, whos the largest of
them all? The features and phenomenology of muscle dysmorphia. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 9, 254259.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Petrie, T. A., & McFarland, M. (2009). Body image and disordered
eating among males. In J. Reel & K. Beals (Eds.), Beyond gymnasts and sorority sisters: Body image and eating disorders in
diverse populations. Reston, VA: AAHPERD/NAGWS.
Pope, H. G., Phillips, K. A., & Olivardia, R. (2000). The Adonis
complex: The secret crisis of male body obsession. New York,
NY: The Free Press.

160

Ricciardelli, L. A., McCabe, M. P., & Banfield, S. (2000). Body image and body change methods in adolescent boys: Role of parents,
friends and the media. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 49,
189197. doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(00)00159-8
Ridgeway, R. T., & Tylka, T. L. (2005). College mens perceptions
of ideal body composition and shape. Psychology of Men &
Masculinity, 6, 209220. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.6.3.209
Ryan, T. A., & Morrison, T. G. (2009). Factors perceived to influence young Irish mens body image investment: A qualitative
investigation. International Journal of Mens Health, 8, 213234.
doi:10.3149/jmh.0803.213
Sira, N., & White, C. P. (2010). Individual and familial correlates of body satisfaction in male and female college students. Journal of American College Health, 58, 507514.
doi:10.1080/07448481003621742
Sullivan, A. (1999). Love undetectable: Notes on friendship, sex,
and survival. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Gokee, J. L. (2002). Interpersonal influences
on body image development. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.),
Body images: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 108116). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Whetstone, L. M., Morrissey, S. L., & Cummings, D. M. (2007).
Children at risk: The association between perceived weight
status and suicidal thoughts and attempts in middle school
youth. Journal of School Health, 77, 5966. doi:10.1111/j.17461561.2007.00168.x
Wiseman, M. C., & Moradi, B. (2010). Body image and eating
disorder symptoms in sexual minority men: A test and extension
of objectification theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57,
154166. doi:10.1037/a0018937

Journal of Counseling & Development April 2016 Volume 94

Copyright of Journal of Counseling & Development is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and

its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.