Fierce Not Freaky

Fierce not Freaky

The Simultaneous Incorporation, Dismissal and Adjustment of Dominant Norms of Femininity by Female Bodybuilders in Contemporary Australia.

Written by Freya Nadine Lambrechts

University of Amsterdam

Research Master Social Sciences

GSSS

10266704

Supervised by dr. R. Spronk

Second Reader; dr. C.M. Roggeband

1st of May 2018, Amsterdam

Acknowledgements

I like to dedicate this thesis to the strong women who participated in my research. Without their collaboration this master thesis would have never existed. They surprised me with their willingness to, not only give me their time but also to share their deepest thoughts and feelings. They opened up to me, trusted me and therefore allowed me to create a deeper scientific understanding of their lives and their bodybuilding ambitions. Their openness and generosity form the beating heart of this work and therefore I am incredible grateful.

I would also like to thank a few persons who made this thesis possible. First of all, my parents for their ongoing support and patience throughout my university career. Their endless optimism and the statement that ‘everything is going to be okay’ did turn out to be true in the end. Secondly, I would like to thank my friends who reminded me that there is a life outside of the academia and made me happier person on a day-to-day basis. Last, I would like to thank my supervisor dr. Rachel Spronk who took a difficult case (me) and guided me through this extensive project.

Table of contents

Introduction 6

Chapter 1: The sport bodybuilding

The history, organization and development of bodybuilding in Australia 15

Chapter 2: Becoming a bodybuilder

The inspirations and motivations of women to participate in bodybuilding 34

Chapter 3: Bodybuilding & biowpower

The influence of biopower on the female bodybuilder 57

Chapter 4: Muscular yet feminine

The complex construction of muscularity, masculinity and femininity in women’s bodybuilding 78

Conclusion 103

Bibliography 108

Introduction

‘It’s genuinely indescribable. It is nerve-wracking, exhilarating, terrifying and simply incredible. You feel like your stomach is going to drop out of your butt when you’re waiting backstage and then when they call your name you just go: You go with all the attitude and presence you can muster’ (Sharon, a twenty-seven-year-old Bikini competitor).

Bodybuilding is a sport that appeals to the imagination. The physiques that are presented on stage redefine nature, push biological boundaries and contest gendered beliefs. Women’s bodybuilding in particular, challenges dominant ideas about femininity, womanhood and the natural female body. In the last decades, bodybuilding federations have placed a limitation on the development of female muscularity and have formalized the display of femininity in order to control the contesting appearance of their female athletes. Nevertheless, the challenging character of female bodybuilders in relation to traditional gender roles remained which often led to their portrayal as ‘freaks’ in mainstream media. Yet, female athletes are not passive subjects in this and are aware of their complex relation with gender and other dominant social norms. In this thesis, I focus on how female bodybuilders use their agency to participate in their bodybuilding ambitions while simultaneously regulate the perception of themselves as women by the enactment of femininity. I therefore pose the question: How can we understand the simultaneous incorporation, dismissal and adjustment of dominant norms of femininity by female bodybuilders in contemporary Australia? I answer this question in four chapters. In the first chapter, I describe the sport of women’s bodybuilding. I show how it was developed, how it is organized and what the important judging criteria are within Australia. Moreover, I highlight the ideal body within this setting in which a special attention is paid to the fitness ideal, the gendered ideal and the role of masculinity and femininity. The second chapter answers the question; ‘why do women participate in bodybuilding?’, by highlighting three different stages in women’s bodybuilding careers; the first contact, the development of initial motives and the motives to continue their participation despite the restricting and demanding character of the sport. Together, those three stages are able to explain the complex, intertwined and multiple motives of women to involve themselves in bodybuilding. The third chapter describes the constructions of power, control and discipline, in which female bodybuilders find themselves. Special attention is paid to the incorporation of biopower, knowledge and desire. The fourth and final chapter, is focused on techniques of risk management. Here, I analyze how femininity is experienced and used by female bodybuilders to self-fulfill, redefine and reassure their sexed identity. Those four chapters combined form

6 an in-depth analysis of how female bodybuilders enact their agency to work with, reject and adjust dominant gender norms in order to legitimize their bodybuilding participation.

Women’s Bodybuilding in Social Scientific Literature

Former research on women’s bodybuilding has mostly been focused on the inclusion or dismissal of traditional femininity norms. Here, the question is post if women who participate in bodybuilding should be understood as transgressing normative gender boundaries or instead as merely reinforcing the current gender division (MacGrath and Chananie-Hill 2009: 236). The different perspectives that were used to answer this question created a breeding ground for discussion. Consequently, bodybuilding is now approached in three different manners; as a form of resistance, as compliance and as a combination of the two. The idea that bodybuilding is a form of resistance has been highlighted by feminist scholars in the past decades. They argue that women’s participation in bodybuilding is able to empower them in multiple ways (Brace-Govan 2004; Brady 2001; Heywoord 1998; Krane et al. 2004; Ryan 2001; Shea 2001). First of all on an individual level; female bodybuilders are actively constructing their physiques as ‘an expression of the will to self-construct, [and] to self-fulfill’ (Roussel and Griffet 2000: 140). This gives them the feeling of being in control over their own bodies (Fisher 1997). Moreover, the development of their athletic prowess increases their confidence and self-esteem. In this way, bodybuilding enables women to feel healthier, sexier and more powerful (Grogan et al. 2004; Monaghan, Bloor, Dobash and Dobash 1998). Secondly, bodybuilding is seen as a form of resistance on a societal level. The sport is considered to be an important arena in which gender norms can be challenged. The female variant of the sport creates the opportunity for women to be viewed as equals to men, instead of being inferior (Ian 1991). Moreover, female bodybuilders transcends the imaginary borders of femininity which allows them to challenge (what has been considered) the ‘natural’ female form (St. Martin and Gavey 1996). The built female body is able to highlight- and fight against- the naturalized processes that widen the gender divide in our modern society (Featherstone 1999). In addition, the development of female muscularity can be considered as a ‘semi-rebellious act’ against the Western ideal of feminine thinness (Wesely 2001: 173). It has been stated that the amount of shown rebellion is connected to the muscle size; the more muscles a woman has, the more she is resisting the norms of femininity (Guthrie and Casteinuovo 1992). However, as Dworking (2011) notes, also the more modest forms are able to push on the glass ceiling of female muscularity. It might just be a bit more gentle (MacGrath and Chananie-Hill 2009: 237).

In contrast, others have argued that women’s bodybuilding is a form of compliance to traditional heterosexual and normative gender roles. They acknowledge that female bodybuilders increase their physical strength and muscularity due to their participation but highlight that those developments are highly regulated. Female bodybuilders have to comply with the ideals of bodybuilding federations in order to become successful. The ideal body that is promoted is first of all is characterized by a restricted, controlled and limited amount of female muscularity. A regulation of this kind appears to contradict the aim of the sport:

‘In a sport where the aim is to build the biggest muscles one can, the competitive female bodybuilder can be penalized for being too big and not feminine enough. A similar situation would be limiting the speed at which women runners can run or the height that women high jumpers can jump lest they become unfeminine’ (Choi 2003: 73).

It is the perception in which an inherent connection is made between muscularity and masculinity that stimulates the restriction on female muscularity in bodybuilding. This also becomes evident in the mandatory posing routines that are designed to limit the appearance of a gender-bending physique and place an additional emphasis on feminizing aesthetics (Scott 2011: 82). It has been argued that this reinforcement of femininity, through the rules and regulations, exemplifies the compliance of the sport (Bordo 1988; 1990). The obligatory forms of femininity are symbols of traditional womanhood and therefore do not challenge, but instead reinforce normative standards beauty (Bordo 1988; 1990). Furthermore, the feminized appearance is a way through which female bodybuilders are able to demonstrate their heterosexual desirability (Choi 2011: 74). This position of the female bodybuilder, as a heterosexually desirable object, is very apparent in their portrayals since they are more likely to be depicted as sex objects than as a sportswomen (Choi 2011: 74-75). Moreover, it should be stressed that women’s bodybuilding incorporates the drive for female bodily perfection. While contemporary culture is focused on slender perfection, bodybuilding concentrates itself on muscle perfection. Along these lines, the female body is still expected to embody the ‘gendered role of feminine beauty perfection’ (Scott 2011: 81). Women are forced to participate in self manipulation and subject themselves to hair extensions, unhealthy dieting, excessive tanning and plastic surgery, to achieve this (Scott 2011; 81). In sum, those regulations limit the freedom of female athletes within bodybuilding which substantiates the perception of the sport as a form of compliance. Scholars developed a third way to understand gender within women’s bodybuilding as a reaction to those two contradicting theory’s. According to this argument bodybuilding should be understood as a sport which simultaneously represents resistance and compliance with traditional gender norms (see Bolin 1992; Hall 1996; St Martin and Gavey 1996). This

8 perspective claims that, on the one hand, the physical bodybuilding body is an object of resistance since it deviates from socially acceptable norms of femininity, womanhood and its expression of physical female power. However, on the other hand, female bodybuilders also incorporate attitudes that represents compliance to the socialized norms of femininity and womanhood (Scott 2011: 82-83). This double enactment makes female bodybuilders resist standards of traditional gender roles while being in conformity with the traditional norms of femininity (Miller and Penz 1991: 152). In this way, women are able to represent both resistance and compliance in their bodybuilding participation.

The fitness industry and bodybuilding in Australia

The origins of bodybuilding in Australia can be found in the rising popularity of the health and fitness industry. This industry offers individuals the tools to achieve the bodybuilding physique and has gradually become a globalized phenomenon (Johansson & Andreasson 2016: 143). It promotes an active lifestyle which is made available for the masses and is worldwide presented as a potential answer to all kinds of health issues (ibid.: 144). The scope of this industry is enormous. In 2012, it was estimated that the health and fitness market had value of 75.7 billion dollar worldwide (IHRSA 2013). While the leading fitness and health market can be found in the US, which is also seen as the origins of the fitness and gym culture, the fitness industry rapidly expanded in many different countries in the last years (Johansson & Andreasson 2016: 144). Also in Australia, where twenty-seven percent of the total adult population have participated in some kind of fitness and / or gym activities (Stewart, Smith and Moroney 2013). The Australian fitness culture can be seen as a glocal market. On the one hand, it is heavily influenced by the globally organized health and fitness market. It has been argued that there is a ‘considerable convergence in how this “culture” is expressed, takes form, and is performed in many Western countries’ (Johansson and Andreasson 2016:147). This is supported by the standardization of several aspects of the world wide fitness industry; the body ideals, equipment, education and the competitions (ibid.: 149). Especially the standardization of the ideal bodybuilding physique makes the Australian fitness market conform to globally constructed ideas. They incorporate an international standard for the ideal fitness body which in turn heavily influences bodily ideals (Sassatelli 2011) in Australia. On the other hand, global movements and industries adapt to local traditions. In the case of Australia, the fitness industry has become connected to their already existing beach culture. Where before the beach was foremost a place for social contact, it is now incorporated in many fitness activities (Johansson and Andreasson 2016) for example in

9 outdoor classes or at outdoor gyms. In addition, the beach has become an important spot where the fitness body is presented in a public place (ibid.: 154). This shows how global commodities, in this case the health and fitness industry, is influenced by and simultaneously has an influence on local traditions, social and cultural relations ships and the ways of communication. The Australian fitness culture can therefore be seen as a process of ‘glommodification’ which is understood as ‘a combination of structural uniformity and symbolic diversity’ (Steen-Johnson 2007; Urry 2003). Moreover, sports have become part of the national Australian identity and it is therefore not surprising that the majority of the nation’s heroes are athletes (Johansson and Andreasson 2016: 161). However, athletes that have achieved this status are predominantly males. Female athletes remain portrayed in a sexualized manner in media reports (Stevenson 2002). In addition, the media incorporate a strong binary representation of the sexes. Women are portrayed as more slender than men and men are repeatedly portrayed as more muscular than women (Johansson and Andreasson 2016:162). This exemplifies the large divide between the ideal female and male body in which men are supposed to be muscular and women to be fit, slender and feminine (Connell 1990). In the end, it is never the muscular, strong and competent female body that is commercialized and promoted but rather the slender bikini body (Johansson and Andreasson 2016: 160). In sum, Australian bodybuilding heavily depends on the fitness and health market. This globalized market is able to offer individuals a standardized opportunity to developed a specific bodybuilding physique. However, the market is also shaped to fit into specific Australian traditions, for example the beach culture. This specific setting of bodybuilding in Australia becomes more valuable through the incorporations of local traditions. The beach has become a place to show (off) the fit bodies but this strongly supported by the climate of Australia. This climate also forces bodies, and in my case especially the female muscular bodies, into daily interactions. The body becomes visible and this physical presence has an enduring influence on social communication. Due to this cultural adaption of this globalized and standardized industry, Australia offers an exceptional valuable field in which interactions (of female bodybuilders) are constantly influenced by the presence of the built female body that deviates from dominant beauty norms. This opens up the opportunity to study the multiple, complex and tensed relationship of female bodybuilders with dominant social norms.

Methodology

The intentions of this research are to explore the experiences of female bodybuilders and understand their social interactions, reality and behavior from their perspective. I used the method of participant observation to comprehend their resistance against, negation with and reproduction of femininity, in and outside their sports participation. This method included my own participation in a WFF/NABBA bodybuilding competition; (New South Wales) State Titles on the 9th of October 2016. Before I could enter this competition, I needed to be socialized in the bodybuilding lifestyle. I found a(n) (affordable) coach who provided me with preparation plan. This included a trainings scheme (which prescribed me to train in the gym once or twice a day) and a diet (that required me to measure and prepare six meals a day). Moreover, the plan also prescribed a lot of physical rest to support the recovery of my body (which strongly restricted my social activities). Those preparations enabled me to participate in a bodybuilding competition but also gave me an in-depth understanding of the sport and its intensity. When I started the research, I severely underestimated the physical, mental and emotional consequences of my own participation. During my bodybuilding preparations I experienced an extreme amount of control over my body. I noticed how my physique was constantly judged within (but also outside of) the fitness industry by personal trainers, coaches and other regular gym visitors. The standard I was expected to embody was exceptional and I got daily reminders that I was not there yet. I understood that those people tried to motivate and challenge me to become better, in order to do well at my competition. However, I didn’t feel like I wanted to push my body to that extent and found it hard to accept being called ‘too fat’. At this point, I was already struggling with the effects of the diet just to become thin enough to participate. Moreover, I did not feel comfortable in this new, extremely slender body. I was constantly plagued by fatigue and hunger. The hardest part was knowing that my discomfort was caused by hunger and that if I would increase my calorie intake, I would feel better. This resulted in an internal fight between wanting to complete the preparation requirements, because it is an essential part of the sport I wanted to understand, and reducing my involvement, as it made me feel physically and emotionally unwell. My position as a researcher; as someone who is not completely in but also not completely outside of the situation, complicated those decisions even more. Throughout my preparation phase I struggled with setting and keeping boundaries. Looking back, I would argue that I went native and subjected my body to strict regimes to achieve an ideal body which was not mine. Yet, this full commitment offered me a very precious insight in the daily social interactions and experiences of female bodybuilders.

Figure 1. Comparison two weeks out and a few days out; the development of a lean body.

It was only in the course of my fieldwork that I realized the importance of my own bodily experiences in the process of understanding. The preparations phase allowed me to understand the individually experienced effects and impacts of the bodybuilding regime. Moreover, the physique I gained through those preparations positioned me in the same complex relation to traditional gender norms as other female bodybuilders. I noticed how my physical presence influenced the behavior of other individuals. Depending on the social context, I was approached with admiration or with disgust. Moreover, I felt captured in this ambivalent position since I was unable to escape my own body. This was confronting on a personal level while it simultaneously was incredible valuable on an academic one. It allowed me to understand how the female muscular body is perceived by others and how this influences social interaction on a day to day base. This made it possible to take into account the small forms of interaction, which would be lost in an interview since they might seem too insignificant or too small to mention, but which actually reveal the underlying hierarchies of power and gender. Participant observation also permitted me access to places and people that otherwise would have been beyond reach. It allowed me to be present at posing classes, locker rooms and meetings. Moreover, my own participation made the communication with other athletes easier. Female bodybuilders have often been portrayed as ‘freaks’, ‘mannish women’ and ‘steroid (ab)users’ in mainstream media. They are therefore very cautious to talk about their sport with outsiders. My dual position, as an in and outsider, gained their confidence that I had not the intention to ridicule their sport. Moreover, they believed that I, in contrast to outsiders, was able to understand their motives and experiences as bodybuilders. In return, I

12 secured their anonymity which also increased their ability to speak openly. This simultaneously means that all names in this research have been anonymized. This research is based on multiple forms of data. First of all, as mentioned, a substantial part of my research revolved around the method of participant observation which included my own involvement in a bodybuilding competition. Throughout my fieldwork I kept a field diary in which I described my bodily experiences, doubts and feelings connected to this participation. Secondly, this research relays on observations of bodybuilding specific environments. The majority of those observations are made during my regular visits to multiple gyms in Sydney. Here, I highlighted the interactions that took place between female bodybuilders and other gym visitors. Moreover, I observed the habits, practices and unwritten laws that were enacted in those settings. Bodybuilding events, in addition to gym observation, formed another important observation site. This includes bodybuilding events, posing meetings and bodybuilding competitions. Those events offered a rare social setting in which all attending individuals had a connection to the sport of bodybuilding. Here, I observed interactions but also actively involved myself in them. The interaction between me and the women at those events was strongly facilitated by my own muscular body which displayed my own inside status. I managed to have many informal chats with bodybuilders of all divisions (including physique and bodybuilding). The conversations often revolved around their current physique or competition goals at the start, but was easily opened up to a deeper conversation about their motives and desires. In those cases I did not hide my double status of an in and outsider (participant and researcher). Those informal chats allowed me to ask women to participate in my research which many of them did. In addition to gyms and bodybuilding events, beaches also became an important site of observation. The Australian beach culture is very present in the daily lives of female bodybuilders. It is the locus of social activity and simultaneously the place where the fit body is shown (off). Here, I observed the social interactions, behaviors and reactions that were triggered by the muscular female body and how female bodybuilders presented their physiques in this specific social setting. Thirdly, I held in-depth interviews, which lasted anywhere between one and a half and three hours, to unravel the complexity of this subject. I interviewed eight female bodybuilders who I have met through my own bodybuilding participation and by the snowballing method. I received help from gym managers, personal trainers and male bodybuilders in my search for female participants. Also women who I already had interviewed would give me the contact details of some of their bodybuilding friends which allowed me to reach out to more women. Moreover, those interviews were conducted at the places that were preferred by the female bodybuilders. This included multiple interviews at the beach (Coogee and Bondi Beach), in café’s and special nutrition’s café’s (in which all the meals and drink are provided the exact amount of grams of ingredients and calorie intake).

All interviews were semi-structured, recorded and transcribed. Fourth, I was able to enrich the deeper understanding of the motives, desires and beliefs of female bodybuilders, by supplementing the in-depth interviews with extensive questionnaires. Through the snowballing method and online communication I came in contact with nine women who did like to participate in my research but who I was unable to meet due to great distances within Australia. In those cases, women took the time to fill in a three page long online questionnaire which touched upon all the topics I would otherwise ask in an in- depth interview. Those questionnaires give a surprisingly extensive and valuable insight in the opinions, experiences and motives of those female bodybuilders. In addition, online communication also enabled me to understand the (inter)national bodybuilding community. Those communities manifest themselves in online private groups for which you need to be invited to join. In those groups, female bodybuilders are able to open up about their problems, ask questions and share their passion. Moreover, many discussions are held on how to improve their physique and about how the judges are or should be looking at contestants. In addition, this online form also offers emotional support to athletes. This included many motivational posts and words of encouraged. Last, I paid attention to the social environment of female bodybuilders. This included (in)formal conversations with (posing) coaches, personal trainers, judges and ex-competitors. Those actors offered their own perception on the sport and the role of female athletes within it. This is important because they strongly influence the sport related opportunities and final physique of female bodybuilders. Taken together, my data enabled me to create a wider holistic frame in which the female bodybuilder find herself. The multiple forms of interviewing (ranging from informal chats till in-depth interviews) enabled me to place the female bodybuilder central while other forms of data collection allowed me not lose sight on the influences of the social field around her. In the end, I am most of all grateful for all the stories that are shared with me. I hope this thesis does justice to their voices and is able to create a sensitive understanding of complex intersections of norms in which female bodybuilders find themselves.

Chapter 1: The Sport Bodybuilding

The history, organization and development of bodybuilding in Australia

The origins of bodybuilding 16

The development of women’s bodybuilding 17

The increase of muscularity 18

The organization of bodybuilding in Australia 20

Federations 20

Natural vs enhanced 21

Divisions in bodybuilding 22

Style and presentation 23

Judging in bodybuilding 27

The gendered body 28

The ideal body 31

The origins of bodybuilding

Bodybuilding is a relatively new sport which has its origins at the end of the nineteenth century. During this time there was a renewed interest in weightlifting within Europe. So called ‘strong men’ traveled around to perform their strengths and capabilities for the entertainment of others. The first (self-) identified bodybuilder was one of those strong men: Eugene Sandow1 (2nd of April 1867 - 14th of October 1925). Sandow differed from other strong men because he promoted the bodybuilding way of life by teaching methods of exercise and dietary habits. Moreover, he also developed the first bodybuilding show in the world: ‘the Great Show’ (1891) which was held in London. In a sold-out Royal Albert’s Hall, sixty men took the stage in black tights, black jockey belts and leopard skins. The bodybuilders were judged upon their general muscular development, the equality of their muscularity, general health, the condition of their tissues and the condition of their skin. Prizes where thus not awarded to the men with the largest muscles but to the ones who displayed the best overall health. The first modern bodybuilding event was the ‘Mr. America Competition’ held in 1940 in New York. This competition formed the fundaments of bodybuilding as we now know it. Prizes were award to men who had the overall best physique, best body part (such as arms, legs, abdominals ect.) or who were the most muscular2. In the years that followed, multiple important bodybuilding federations were formed around the world, such as the IFBB (International Federation of Bodybuilding and Fitness) founded in Canada in 1946 by Ben and Joe Weider3 . This was followed by the NABBA (National Amateur Body-Builders’ Association) founded in England in 19504. Those federations created large-scale international bodybuilding competitions for instance the Mr. Universe (from 1948 onwards) and the Mr. Olympia (from 1965 onwards). Those competitions enabled the sport to grow, characterized by athletes such as Arnold Schwarzenegger (Mr. Olympia) and Dennis Tinerino (Mr. Universe). In the 1970’s bodybuilding had proven itself as a legitimate sport for men and had become a multibillion-dollar industry based in more than a hundred (mostly Western) countries5.

1 Born as Friedrich Wilhelm Müller but best known under his stage name Eugene Sandow. 2 Chapman, D. 1994 The Mr. America contest. A brief background. A short history of the oldest, continuous bodybuilding contest in the country. http://www.musclememory.com/articles/MrAmerica.html (19/11/2017). 3 The IFBB Federation 2016 The Founding Fathers, Ben and Joe Weider. https://www.ifbb.com/the-founding-fathers-ben-and-joe- weider/ (02/07/2017). 4 The NABBA federation 2016 NABBA The first and the original competitive bodybuilding association. http://www.nabba- international.com/na_int4.html (02/07/2017). 5 Robson, D.

The development of women’s bodybuilding

While men’s bodybuilding was already flourishing in the late 1970’s, women’s bodybuilding just became introduced. Throughout the twentieth century women in Western societies gained rights and possibilities that before were the privileges of men: Women attained the right to vote, own property, receive an education and participate in sports. Supported by this expansion in freedom, some women moved themselves into the male dominated domain of strength- and weight-training. In 1979 the first bodybuilding competition for women; ‘The Best in World Contest’, was organized. This was followed by the ‘Zane Women’s Invitational’ and the ‘Ms. Olympia’ held in the U.S. in 1980. In 1981, the IFBB supported this development by organizing the first European Championship in Women’s Bodybuilding in which nine countries were competing6. During this time, bodybuilding gained mainstream attention and popularity through the movies Pumping Iron 1 & 2. The first Pumping Iron film focused on the competition between Arnold Schwarzenegger and Lou Ferrigno, in their aim to become Mr. Olympia. The follow up version, Pumping Iron 2, featured the beginning years of women’s bodybuilding and focused on the preparations of female bodybuilders towards the Cesar’s World Cup of 1983. The film presented Bev Francis and Rachel McLish as main characters. McLish was the first woman that became Ms. Olympia (1980) and embodied traditional ideals of femininity by displaying elegance, a styled appearance and only a slight muscle tone. This was contrasted by the Australian Bev Francis who was a world champion in powerlifting. Francis challenged the assumed limits of female muscularity and confronted the judges with a more muscular (female) physique then they had ever seen before. Her appearance triggered conflicts within the federation of the IFBB and in bodybuilding in general. Questions were raised about how this new type of female body should be judged: Should they mark a more muscular developed physique as better (as is it done in the male variant of the sport) or should they reward women that fit the traditional ideals of feminine beauty the best? The head judge of the IFBB took a clear stance in this discussion by stating the following:

‘What we are looking for is something right down the middle. A woman who has a certain amount of esthetic femininity but yet have that muscle tone to show that she is an athlete… We want what is best for our sport and best for our girls. We don’t want to turn people off, we want to turn them on… I just wanna say that women are women, and men are men and

2014 A history lesson in bodybuilding . https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson61.htm (19/11/2017). 6 Dobbins, B. 2013 The history and evolution of women’s bodybuilding. http://muscle-insider.com/features/history- evolution-womens-bodybuilding (20/11/2017).

17 there is a difference. And thank god for that difference. That is all I have to say’ (Pumping Iron 2).

The IFBB as an organization decided that esthetic femininity is crucial (for female bodybuilders) to become successful and that excessive muscularity threatens this. As a result, female athletes were expected to balance their muscularity and femininity in order to do well. In 1991 the IFBB made those limitations official by formalizing female muscularity in their judging criteria. Women were now formally warned not to get ‘too big’ and it was explicitly stated that overt muscularity would be marked down. Additionally, the display of femininity, beauty and elegance were also added to the official judging standards of women’s bodybuilding.

The increase of muscularity

Despite the efforts of the bodybuilding federations to limit the muscularity (and emphasize on the femininity) of female athletes, the bodybuilding bodies (male and female) gained in muscularity over the years. This growth was sustained by three developments. First, the development of new fitness techniques and equipment were able to stimulate the growth of muscles more effectively. Second, knowledge about how to condition a body with a high level of muscularity while maintaining a low fat percentage improved. Last, the development of new and better drugs made more muscular growth possible. Those three developments together resulted in the display of increasingly muscular and lean physiques in the sport of bodybuilding. Yet, it was in particular the increase of female muscularity that was percieved as problem by the IFBB. To counter this developtment, the federation introduced new divisions in which the muscularity of women was explicetly restricted. In 1995 the first competition that included an additional division for women was held. The women who participated in this new and so called ‘Fitness division’ were judged upon their physique (which had to be less muscular than in the Bodybuilding division) and on their display of traditional feminity ideals (such as being elegant) in an athletic routine, a swimsuit round and a evening gown section. In addition, the bodybuilding federation NPC (The National Physique Committee) developed the Figure division in 2001. Figure did not include an athletic or evening gown round but explicitly only allowed a more moderate form of women’s musuclarity and demanded the display of traditional femininity by its athletes. The IFBB welcomed the Figure division at their most presituges competition, The Olympia, in 2003.

Figure 2. Left Bev Francis and Rachel McLish in the movie pumping iron (1983), right Ms Olympic 1990-93 Lenda Murray7

The IFBB considered the development of new divisions as not sufficient enough to reduce the muscularity of their female athletes. The federation officials therefore created an extra measure: In december 2004, Jim Manion, (the chairman of the IFBB) spread a memo in which he introduced the so called ‘20 percent rule’. This rule requested that all female athletes who were competing in the categories of Bodybuilding, Figure and/or Fitness would decrease their muscularity by a factor of twenty percent (Shrit 2013). Moreover, it was emphasized that all the judges had been informed to mark in correspondence with the new ‘proper criteria’ for the female physique8. The IFBB justified the memo as a safety measure to protect the health of their female athlethes9. This is particulary interesting because similar steps to reduce the overall muscularity of men were never made. Anno 2016 bodybuilding can be understood as a modern sport which is organized, controlled and managed by international federations. Moreover, the sport is strongly connected to new developments in medical science that make the existence of extremely muscular and lean physiques possible. While bodybuilding federations support the physical growth of their male athletes, by rewarding the male who carries the biggest muscles on a lean body with a prize, female muscularity has become controlled and restricted. The ideal female body that is created by federations (for athletes to approach) is characterized by

7 All rights reserved to: https://alchetron.com/Lenda-Murray-276231-W 8 Author unknown 2006 Figure competitors and the 20% percent rule. https://blogmuscle.wordpress.com/2006/08/12/figure- competitors-and-the-20-percent-rule/ (04/02/2018). 9 Ray, C. 2010 Promoting real women. The state of women's bodybuilding in the NPC and IFBB. http://promotingwomen.blogspot.nl/2010/11/state-of-womens-bodybuilding-in-npc-and.html (02/07/2017).

19 traditional ideals of femininity. This means that in a sport in which the aim is to develop a muscular physique, women have to balance their muscular development with the incorporation of femininity ideals, in order to become successful. It is important to note that bodybuilding federations construct their sport in interaction with our contemporary Western society. The sport therefore functions as a specific field in which societal believes about gender, power and desires can be uncovered.

The organization of bodybuilding in Australia

Bodybuilding is an international sport which is organized by multiple federations. Those federations provide the opportunity to compete and set the range of possibilities. They have the power to decide upon rules, restrictions and judging criteria. However, how those rules and regulations are implicated depends per country. In this section, I describe the bodybuilding landscape of Australia in which special attention is be paid to the different federations, divisions and judging criteria in place.

Federations

There are five federations that shape the landscape of competitive bodybuilding in Australia. Three of them promote natural (drug-free) bodybuilding: the INBA (International Natural Bodybuilding Association), WNBF (World Natural Bodybuilding Federation) and the ANB (Australasian Natural Bodybuilding). The other two federations, IFBB (International Federation of Bodybuilding) and the NABBA / WFF (National Amateur Body-Builders Association / World Fitness Federation), do not drug test their athletes and prefer a more enhanced look10. Even though those five federations organize their own events and competitions, combined they set the norm and create the possibilities of bodybuilding within Australia. Competitors have the opportunity to compete in the federation that they prefer. The main difference between the federations is grounded in the organization of their divisions, routines and their portrayed ideal physique. Most competitors endorse the federation that portrays an ideal body which is closest to the physique they have or would like to have in the future. In practice this means that the competitor first has to decide between natural or enhanced bodybuilding.

10 This involves an ideal body which is likely to be developed with the help of enhancing drugs to create a more muscular and lean physique.

Natural versus enhanced

In Australia, there are three federations who identify themselves as ‘Natural Bodybuilding Federations’ and two who do not. The natural federations portray the ideal physique as a body that could be achieved without the use of substances. In general, this means that self- identified natural bodybuilding competitions showcase a more moderate bodybuilding body. The athletes will be characterized by less muscularity and higher body fat percentages which creates a so called ‘softer’ look. This is in contrast with the non-natural federations that represent an ideal body that is more developed. The participants have to carry a higher level of muscularity and a lower body fat percentage which creates a so called ‘harder ’bodies. This might suggest a clear separation between natural and non-natural federations on paper but this divide is not present in our social reality. Three federations identify themselves as natural but only two of them (INBA and the ANB) are connected to the ASADA (Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority)11. However, even though the INBA and the ANB are connect to ASADA, they still not drug test their athletes on a regular basis. Moreover, the federations actively distort the distinction between natural and unnatural bodybuilding. For example, the INBA states in its regulations that is not drug use that will be condemned but the visibility of it:

‘If a competitor displays characteristics associated with drug use, it is deemed a fault in an INBA natural contests - such as Gynecomastia (bitch tits) - judges are instructed to mark any competitor with a drug characteristic down one place. For instance, if for no other reason than "bitch tits" the competitor is the best on stage they will be marked down to second place. If the imperfection is severe, the competitor may lose even more places. There are methods available (creams or surgery) and we ask any competitor to rectify the problem before competing - if not, the above penalty applies’ (INBA Australia: official judging criteria12).

Within this statement, the INBA changes the moral question from; ‘are you a drug free athlete?’ into ‘could you pass for a drug free athlete?’. It highlights the incorporated tensions of the term ‘natural bodybuilding’ and the fragility of the promoted restrictions on substances (ab)use. Nevertheless, between 2012 and 2014 the INBA did ban four athletes for the use of enhancing substances13. Those athletes looked too enhanced to be considered ‘natural’ by the general public and were therefore disqualified. This shows that there is not a clear distinction

11 https://www.asada.gov.au/search/bodybuilding 12 2016 Judging guidelines ICN Australia (http://icompeteaustralia.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=24&Itemid=51). 13 https://www.asada.gov.au/news/media-statement-three-inba-bodybuilders-receive-sporting-bans and https://www.asada.gov.au/news/media-statement-two-year-sporting-ban-bodybuilder-oskars-sarkans

21 between natural and enhanced bodybuilding. The division that is in place works through the imagined appearance of an natural body which still able to distinct itself from the more developed physiques displayed in the non-tested federations.

Divisions in Bodybuilding

The divisions in bodybuilding allow women (and men) with a variety of body types to compete. In this thesis I refer to all athletes as ‘female bodybuilders’ despite their physical differences . It is therefore important to explicitly state the different physical ideals that are embodied in the divisions and make the appellation of ‘female bodybuilders’ more transparent. The importance of this clarification was also highlighted by the athletes participating in my research:

‘I think the actual term ‘female bodybuilder’ is in itself misleading. To the general public, female bodybuilders are the massively masculine women that they see at the IFBB Olympia in America. I’ve seen many Bikini girls call themselves bodybuilders and obviously this is confusing. It would be useful if the general public could understand the different levels of bodybuilding and as such, terms such as Bikini model, Fitness model, Figure competitor, Physique competitor, Bodybuilder would be far more accurate and understood’ (Brenda, a forty-six-year-old figure and physique competitor).

Each bodybuilding federation offers a set of divisions which a competitor can enter. The divisions are separated from each other by a limitation on muscularity and the formulization of femininity. The most well-known categories are: Bikini, Fitness, Figure, Physique and Bodybuilding. This are the divisions that are represented by every federation and are hierarchical in size; every category is relative to the next. The divisions can be seen as progressive stops towards muscularity and moving away from traditional femininity ideals. So in this sense the Bikini is the smallest category: They have the highest fat percentage, the least amount of muscularity and are expected to incorporate the most feminine ideals (such as flirty behavior on stage, wearing heels, shiny bikini’s, etc.) On the other side of the spectrum is Bodybuilding, which is characterized by the highest muscularity, least amount of fat and the display of traditional femininity becomes (respectively) less important. The other divisions (Fitness and Figure) function as progressive points in between this hierarchy. It is important to note that federations that offer the same division (for example Fitness) are not looking for the same ideal body. The ideal body of a division is rooted in the overreaching beauty perception of the federation. Some federations promote a more muscular

22 look for their athletes than others. This is also connected to their self-identified status as ‘natural’ or as a ‘non-tested’. As a result, similar named divisions often display completely different bodies (Figure 3.).

Figure 3. Fitness division from left to right in WFF, IFBB and ANB

While each federation represents a different physical ideal in their divisions, the promotion and preference of less muscular divisions (for women) over the more muscular ones, is shared. In the last decades, bodybuilding has actively restricted the opportunities for female athletes to developed their muscularity to its extremes. In many competitions women’s bodybuilding is now replaced by the less muscular Physique division. Moreover, the smaller divisions are used by the federations to establish their identity to the outside world by using them as promotion material. This contemporary emphasis on smaller physiques reestablished the sport in many countries and made them gain in popularity. Yet, it is not only the less muscular physiques that appeals to a wider public but also the explicit display traditional femininity in the on stage performance.

Style and Presentation

The way in which bodybuilding bodies are presented on stage is structured along the lines of the divisions. A general presentation style can be identified even though the rules slightly change per federation. In the Bikini division, the women wear a two-piece-bikini which is characterized by bright popping colors and are covered with sparkling stones. The emphasis

23 is placed on the presentation of an ‘ideal woman’ which is described in (the judging criteria) in terms of elegance, femininity and softness:

‘The assessment, beginning with a general impression of the physique, should take into consideration the hair, make-up and face, the overall body development and shape…; the condition of the skin and the skin tone; and the athlete’s ability to present herself with confidence, poise and grace. Since muscularity development and muscle quality is not assessed, the judges should favor competitors with a harmonious, proportional, classic female physique, good posture, correct anatomical structure…. The overall image displayed should demonstrate poise, femininity and self-confidence….’ (IFBB 14)

The judging criteria highlight that the Bikini models are not assessed on their muscular development. They are expected to present a ‘classic female physique’ which is characterized by elegance and femininity. To emphasize those characteristics, Bikini competitors are ‘warned against adopting a tense pose, displaying the muscularity’ (ibid.) and instead they have to perform a posing routine that incorporates femininity. This is done by enhancing (the optical illusion of) an hour glass figure and by shifting between the front, side and back poses in a smooth, elegant and so called ‘soft’ manner. Moreover, the Bikini athletes are expected to wear high heels, shiny jewelry and be completely styled. Hair and make-up are understood as very important because the athletes are judged on their ‘overall- look and beauty’. However, how good hair, makeup or skin tone should actually looks like, remains implicit. This gives judges the freedom to mark the contesters on unarticulated beauty ideals.

Figure 4. Bikini poses 15

14 IFBB Rules. Section 7: Women’s bikini fitness. (http://www.ifbb.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Women- Bikini-Fitness-Rules-2017.pdf) 15 All rights reserved to: http://www.posingcoach.com.au/bikini-fitness-model-competition-tanning-midnight- spray-tanning/

The Fitness division is very similar to the Bikini division. Athletes in Fitness wear the same bikinis and are also judged upon their hair, makeup and skin condition (nice tone, healthy looking and without cellulite). Likewise, they too have to embody a symmetrical physique and be able to display confidence, poise and grace, on stage. However, the difference between the Bikini and Fitness division is captured in the development of muscularity: The ideal Fitness body should have ‘a round and firm appearance with a small amount of body fat’ (IFBB ). Yet, the development of this muscularity and the embodied fat percentage is controlled by the federations: ‘Physiques that are considered either too muscular or too lean must be marked down’ (ibid.). Where this boundary between a ‘good’ muscular development and ‘too much’ muscular development is exactly placed, remains unclear. The Figure division is constructed between the less muscular, more feminine divisions of Bikini and Fitness, and the more muscular and (portrayed as) less feminine divisions of Physique and Bodybuilding. This middle position is also incorporated in their presentation style and the judging criteria. In the presentation of the body, Figure athletes are allowed to pose in a more tensed way than the Bikini and Fitness athletes but not as muscular as in the physique and bodybuilding divisions. Moreover, they wear one-piece-bikini which allows them to show the full muscular development of their back and legs but it is still expected to be covered in glittery stones. In addition, the judging criteria state that Figure competitors have to show poise and confidence which are seen as important characteristics to enhance their feminine appeal16. While simultaneously they have to present a ‘firm, toned, feminine physique’ which has some degree of muscularity and muscular separation17. The federation NABBA captures this tendency by stating that the Figure athlete should have a ‘trained look’ and a low body fat percentage, without ‘carrying [muscular] development to an extreme that could be classed as unfeminine18’.

16 Nabba Guidelines 2016 (http://www.nabba.com.au/15-competition/rules-guidelines/38-ms-figure-athletic- rounds) 17 Nabba Guidelines 2016 (http://www.nabba.com.au/15-competition/rules-guidelines/38-ms-figure-athletic- rounds) 18 Nabba Guidelines 2016 (http://www.nabba.com.au/15-competition/rules-guidelines/38-ms-figure-athletic- rounds)

Figure 5. Figure Poses19

The Physique and Bodybuilding divisions present the most muscular and lean bodies (also known as hard physiques) and are the only two divisions that allow the women to show their full muscularity in their poses. The women perform barefoot, wear an one-piece-bikini’s and are in general not allowed to wear any jewelry. Even though the display of femininity becomes less important, they are still expected to embody characteristics of Western femininity ideals on stage (such as long hair, make up and shiny bikini’s).

Figure 6. Bodybuilding poses20

The difference between the Physique and Bodybuilding division is based on the allowed amount of muscularity and femininity. In Bodybuilding women are permitted to develop their muscularity to their maximum capabilities and are not explicitly be judged upon their display of femininity. The WNBF (World Natural Bodybuilding Federation) included the Bodybuilding division for women in 2015 in which the judging criteria were gender neutral. The bodybuilding contestants (male and female) had to show symmetry, overall balance and condition. Moreover, the judges assessed their muscularity on the base of mass, definition and proportion21. This is contrasted by the Physique division in which the muscular development is restricted and femininity is part of the judging criteria. Here, the judges are expected to ‘compare muscle shape, density, and definition while still bearing in mind the competitor’s overall balanced development and femininity22’. In the last years, the Bodybuilding division has often been excluded at competition and slowly becomes replaced by the Physique division. The different divisions and connected presenting styles display the incorporated tendency between muscularity and femininity. Female bodybuilders constantly have to balance their appearance. They have to carefully move themselves along the lines of having ‘enough’ and having ‘too much’ muscular development while they simultaneously managing their displayed femininity in order to be perceived as ‘beautiful’, ‘feminine’ and as a ‘good athlete’ by the judges.

Judging in Bodybuilding

Judging criteria prescribe the style, presentation and ideal physique of a particular division. However, the judges apply those criteria on the competing athletes. A judging panel in bodybuilding includes around eight people (this differs between competitions and federations) who have earned their respect in the bodybuilding world and are mostly retired athletes or federation officials. Furthermore, there is only one selection of jury members available per competition, who will judge all the men’s and women’s divisions. This selection of judges determines which physique represents the ideals of the federation, the competition and the division, the best. During the competition, the panel of judges will be seated at a long linear table which is positioned directly in front of the stage. Female bodybuilders will present their physiques once or twice on this platform, depending on the federation. When there are two presentations

21 2015 WNBF official bodybuilding judging criteria (https://www.worldnaturalbb.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/03/2015-Juding-Criteria-BODYBUILDING.2.pdf) 22 IFBB Rules. Section 8: Women’s physique. (http://www.ifbb.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Womens- Physique-Rules-2017.pdf)

27 rounds, a separation is made between an individual and comparison presentation. In the individual round, the body of an athlete is judged upon their personal presentation and the proportions of the body. The second round is then used to compare multiple physiques with each other. However, some federations choose to have only one presentation round which places a great amount of pressure on their judges. Due to the time limitations, it becomes virtually impossible to exanimate every body in itself. In those cases judges will look first for the women who stand out. When the jury has made a selection, their numbers (which are attached to their bikini bottoms) will be called. Those women then move to the middle of the stage, place themselves in front of the non-selected women, and perform comparing quarter turns. During those quarter turns the selected women are ranked among each other. After a first session of quarter turns, the women will be rearranged again. The most favored athlete by the judges will be placed in the middle position and every place away from her is a rank down. This routine enables the judges to compare the most favorable athletes with each other. At the end, only the athletes who won (or placed as it is called in bodybuilding) will be called forward and will know their rank. None of the competitors will receive feedback on their performance or an explanation (or perhaps a justification) of their placing. The contestants are allowed to send an email to the federation to ask for feedback. They have to include a photo of themselves (which was taken on the competition day) which will then be analyzed by one of the judges. The judge will highlight her flaws and will explain what (area’s or activities) she can work on to improve her placing next time. However, the federation or the judge is not obligated to answer this request. Moreover, what the considerations and applications of the judging criteria were on that specific competition day, remains unclear.

The gendered body

Female bodybuilders are judged by a panel of jury members who base their decisions on the judging criteria that are formulated by the federations. The inclusion of femininity has become increasingly important in this judging process and in bodybuilding in general. It is therefore crucial to highlight the meaning of the term ‘femininity’. However, in order to do so, the construction of gender has to be analyzed first. Gender was first theorized by Simone de Beauvoir in her famous book The Second Sex in 1949. She made the distinction between matters of (biological) sex from matters of (cultural) gender. Here, gender became the cultural meaning and form a body acquires which is connected to their labeled sex. Sex was interpreted as an anatomically distinct and invariant aspect of the body which is given at birth (Beauvoir: 1949). This distinction, between the

28 cultural and the biological, formed the base of the famous statement that ‘One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman’ (Beauvoir 1949). In the decades that followed, Beauvoir’s work, and especially her described gender/sex distinction, formed the base of many feminist studies. Nevertheless, many researchers have problematized the relationship between biological and cultural processes as described by Beauvoir. It was argued that those relations were far more complex and reflexive than had been assumed before (Rossi 1984: 10-14). In 1987, West and Zimmerman complicated the gender/sex distinction by adding another category; ‘the sex category’. In this new categorization, sex is determined on conventional biological criterions, for example on the base of genitalia or chromosomes. However, since genitals are mostly covered and chromosomes can only be detected through tests, our sex becomes invisible. In those situations individuals sustain sex through the sex category, which requires identificatory displays that proclaims a certain membership (West and Zimmerman 1987). The sex category supposes someone’s sex but is not determined by it. Moreover, in contrast to gender, the sex category does not depend on the display of femininity or masculinity. In other words, a woman could be considered as unfeminine but this would not make her ‘unfemale’ (ibid.: 134). Gender is the activity of managing situated behavior in relation to normative conceptions and activities appropriate for one's assigned sex category. ‘Doing gender’ is therefore a routine accomplishment which is imbedded in everyday interaction and the reproduction of gender stereotypes. It manages occasions and the engagement in behavior that is at risk of gender assessment (ibid.: 125/136). In bodybuilding competitions, just as well as in daily lives, individuals are expected to show a certain amount of gendered characteristics to live up to their assumed sex. To fulfill their gendered identity, socially recognized males have to display traits of masculinity, while individuals identified as female are expected to enact qualities of femininity. Masculinity and femininity can only exist in relation to each other and are structured in a dualistic relation (Paechter 2006: 256). They one can only be what the other is not. Femininity and masculinity are in this way able to create each other in their reversed reflection. In other words, femininity can be defined as the absence of masculinity (ibid. 256) and masculinity as the lack of femininity. Yet, this does not mean that there is an equal balance between the two. In contrast, femininity incorporates a subordinate position and masculinity a dominant one. Due to the significance of masculinity in the construction of femininity, it is important to analyze this concept carefully. Masculinity has been described as a multiplicity of gender practices that are enacted by men who are, on the base of their physical appearance, assumed to be male (Pascoe 2011: 6). Whitehead (2002) underlines this multiple and plural identity of masculinities in his work: They differ over time, context and space. Moreover, masculinities are inherently connected to variables such as class, race, ethnicity and age (Whitehead 2002).

In 1995, Connell developed the vital term ‘hegemonic masculinity’ which places a strong emphasis on the embedded power relations in masculinity. He defined this term as follows;

‘The configuration of gender practice which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of the legitimation of patriarchy, which guarantees (or is taken to guarantee) the dominant position of men and the subordination of women’ (Connell 1995: 77).

Hegemonic masculinity offers the opportunity to discuss a particular idealized image of masculinity that is dominant over femininity and other masculinities (Barrett 1996: 130). In contemporary Western culture, this idealized image of masculinity is characterized by a man who is rational, aggressive, independent, risk-taking and heterosexual (Connell 1995). Cornwall and Lindisfarne describe how those hegemonic versions of masculinity structure relations of inequality but are unable to entirely control subordinated forms because they will never completely be comprehensive. ‘That is, there is always some space for subordinate versions of masculinity- as alternative gendered identities which validate self-worth and encourage resistance’ (Cornwall and Lindisfarne 1994: 5). In addition, Connell (1995) states that when hegemonic masculinity is embodied by at least some men, it legitimates the domination of men over women as a group. Women, in turn, are characterized by femininity. The concept of ‘hegemonic femininity’ that was developed as a counterpart of the concept of hegemonic masculinity, was converted in the term ‘emphasized femininity’ to highlight the asymmetrical relation between femininity and masculinity in the patriarchal gender order (Connell & Messerschmidt 2005). The concept was in line with the idea of Connell (1987) that no form of femininity can be hegemonic and it was identified as;

‘The complementary femininity oriented to accommodating the interests and desires of men, characterized by a display of sociability rather than technical competence; its content is linked to the private realm, particularly marriage and childcare’ (Sisjord & Kristiansen 2009: 3).

Characteristics that are connected to emphasized femininity are being passive, dependent, emotional, compassionate, maternal and gentle (Krane 2001: 117). The enactment of femininity should be seen as an artifice or an achievement (Bartky 1988: 27). Women actively have to enact those characteristics to conform to a dominantly perceived as ‘natural given’ ideal. They have to present femininity through their bodies as well as their faces which are ‘trained to the expression of deference’ (ibid.: 30). Feminine movements, posture and gesture have to display three elements: grace, constriction and a certain amount of eroticism which has to be restrained by modesty (ibid. 30). For example,

30 women make sure the take up little space by actively place themselves in small, narrow and harmless positions (ibid: 30). They are trained to smile (more often than men) and constrict their posture and style of movement (ibid.: 29-30). In addition, women are also expected to display proper styles of femininity through the styling of the body. The female body can be seen as an ornamented surface which needs to be disciplined in its production (ibid.: 31). The skin is expected to be hairless, soft and supple (ibid.: 31). Body hair must be removed, skin needs to be pampered and hair needs to be styled (ibid.: 31-32). Moreover, make up and clothing, are used to create a feminine look. In conclusion, a women must ‘make herself “object and prey” for the man’ (ibid.: 34). This shows how masculinity and femininity can only be defined in relation to each other but are always part of an unequal power hierarchy. Masculinity is characterized as hegemonic, while femininity is placed in a subordinated and marginalized position. Moreover, the enactment of masculinity and/or femininity are not natural given. It are behaviors, attitudes and languages that are socially and culturally constructed that become reproduced. Women and men have to enact those gendered traits in order to fulfill the expectations that come with their perceived to be ‘natural’ sex of being male or female.

The ideal body

In the contemporary Western society, the ideal body is more present in our daily lives than ever before (Marzano-Parisoli 2001: 217). Images and ideas about the body are spread through advertisements, mass media and medical debates. Moreover, the body that is presented has never been more idealized and well groomed (ibid.: 217). The body has become an object that can be sculpted and perfected (See Glassner, 1992; Jeffords, 1994; Dutton 1995). Moreover, in this discourse the emphasis is placed on individuals, who are expected to take control and shape their appearance towards the cultural ideal (Fiscke 1987: 19). This cultural idealized body is especially interesting because it is simultaneously an aesthetic and an ethical marker (Marzano-Parisoli 2001: 220). The ideal body is depicted as fit, healthy and thin. Those three elements have become entangled and are used as equivalents of each other (Pylypa 1998: 25). This ideal is substantiated by a health discourse which equals thin and fit to healthy and depicts overweight as unfit, unhealthy and deviant (ibid.:25). Moreover the maintenance of good health is perceived as an individual obligation which should be achieved through dieting and exercise (ibid.25). A person who achieved and/or maintains this type of body, is seen as someone who embodies characteristics such as self-control, will power and discipline (Crawford 1984:70). In this way, having a thin body represents control over their own body which in turn is recognized as an ethical activity: It

31 enables individual to reach moral integrity (Marzano-Parisoli 2001: 220). In contemporary Australia, the bodybuilding body is closely connected to this ideal of being healthy and fit. Athletes have to participate in regular training sessions and follow a strict diet in order to achieve this physique. Those efforts are understood as markers of personal characteristics such as independence, self-control and willpower. Along these lines, the built body then becomes a marker of a physically and mentally powerful individual. In men’s bodybuilding, this reinforces the image of the hegemonic masculine man since they are expected to show strength, discipline and independence. Moreover, it needlessly intersects with hegemonic masculine ideals such as a being rational (since a male bodybuilder is understood to be a master over his own body) and being physically dominant, not only over non-hegemonic male groups but especially over women. Along these lines, the built male body is able to function to support hegemonic masculinity by defining physical superiority and dominance over others. This stands in stark contrast with the built female body which is understood as problematic in the dominant discourse of contemporary Australia. Even though women are stimulated to be fit, healthy and are expected to show some muscular development (Martin & Gavey 1996: 46), the feminine ideal remains limited to a slender body. The case of Bev Francis (See Chapter 1; the development of women’s bodybuilding) functions as an example of how the muscular female body is in conflict with contemporary Western categorizations and social beliefs. First of all, Francis challenged the assumed to be natural hierarchical relationship between men and women. It is believed that men are inherently physically stronger than women due to intrinsic biological differences which are found and supported by science. The presence of a(n) (extremely) muscular female body clashes with this cultural assumption. Secondly, Francis did not show the expected (and assumed to be natural) feminine behavior. Instead of making herself small, not taking up more space than necessary, she broadened herself. Rather than showing softness in her movements and physique, she displayed hardness by the high development of muscularity and her posing routine. In addition, she displayed her body without extra feminine attributes (such as make up, hairstyle, ect.) as a substitute of showing a certain amount of heterosexual eroticism. The combination of Francis’s lack of displayed femininity together with her muscular physique, challenged the assumed to be natural differences between the sexes, which lead to a strong feeling of unease among bodybuilding officials and the general public. The built female body challenges traditional femininity ideals and puts inevitable pressure on the naturalized gendered and hierarchical division between men and women. As mentioned before, the development of a trained body is seen as a symbol of a disciplined, strongminded and rational person. It symbolizes independence; someone who is taking control over their own lives. Those characteristics are mostly understood as elements of

32 hegemonic masculinity which are in contrast with traditional femininity ideals. However, women who participate in bodybuilding are able to embody those characteristics that used to be seen as the privileges of masculine men. Bodybuilding organizations all over the world took measures to reassure the hierarchical power relation between the sexes and keep traditional gender roles intact. Federations try to limit the amount of female muscularity by creating different divisions, demanding their female athletes to reduce their size and by adding explicit restrictions on female muscularity in their judging criteria. In addition, the display of femininity is also formalized. Femininity has many forms and no individual is able to embody all the characteristics simultaneously. However, it is exactly the balance between masculine and feminine behavior which is in need to be controlled. Female bodybuilders are therefore asked to portray and display themselves in a formalized feminine manner to avoid a distorted balance which could challenge the ‘natural’ gendered sexes.

Chapter 2: Becoming a Bodybuilder The inspirations and motivations of women to participate in bodybuilding

Introduction 35

The first contact 36

What are the elements of bodybuilding that attract women to participate? 38

Inspiration to become 38

Inspiration to overcome 40

Inspiration to Achieve 42

The disempowering effects of power 43

The intruding character of bodybuilding 44

Why do women participate in bodybuilding? 46

(Serious) Leisure as a Means to Become; 47

Strong 48

In control 50

Empowered 51

A part of a community 53

Conclusion 55

Introduction

In the dominant view of Australia sports participation is perceived as highly beneficial. This is constructed in relation to a health discourse that promotes being fit and thin as a healthy way of living and therefore preferable (Pylypa 1998: 25). The involvement in sports is seen as one of the key elements to reach this idealized way of life. Yet, not every sport is perceived as suitable for every individual. It has been argued that sport as an institution is predominantly masculine and ‘that sport participation promotes the development of traditionally masculine traits or characteristics such as competitiveness and achievements’ (Murray & Howat 2009: 69). Die and Holt (1989) even argue that within the Western world being an athlete is largely incompatible with what it means to be a woman (ibid.: 69). This makes the involvement in sport especially appropriate for men while it becomes socially less desirable for women. However, not all sports are characterized by the same gendered elements. Koivula (2001) highlights how all sports, based on the expected gendered social behavior of a society, can be divided into three groups. In this way, sports are perceived to be; more feminine-, more masculine- or gender neutral- appropriate activities (Koivula 2001). Bodybuilding is intrinsically connected to the development of overt muscularity and is therefore classified as more masculine which makes the sport seem to be especially suited for men. However, from the late seventies onwards, women have actively involved themselves in this sport which is in general seen as unsuitable for them. In this chapter, I answer the question: ‘Why do women participate in bodybuilding? I highlight three different stages in women’s bodybuilding careers in order to create a holistic image. The first stage is focused on the first contact. Bodybuilding is a marginalized sport and mainstream knowledge about it is often limited to the extreme variants. It is therefore interesting to reconstruct the circumstances in which women came in contact with the sport. The second phase describes the effects of this contact on the initial motivations of women to start their own participation. Here, the emphasis is placed on the inspiration of women to become, to overcome and to achieve. Those inspirations are in particularly strong because they incorporate ‘power femininity’(Lazar 2006: 505) which consists of four interconnecting feminist signifiers; agentive power, sexual power, empowered beauty, and knowledge as power. After those initial motives, desires and inspirations women are introduced to the bodybuilding way of life. I describe my personal experiences in the sport which made me question what bodybuilding is able to offer its athletes in return for their time, effort and dedication. This is explained in the third phase in which I highlight the motives of women to keep on participating in this sport despite its restricting and demanding character. I show how bodybuilding should be understood as a form of serious leisure (Stebbings 1982) which is

35 able to offer women the opportunity for identity enhancement, self-fulfillment and personal expression (ibid.: 253). Female bodybuilders in particular highlight the possibility of the sport to (re)claim their identity as being strong, in control, empowered and part of a community. Taken together, those three stages describe the complex, intertwined and multiple reasons for women to participate in the sport of bodybuilding.

The first Contact

Women’s bodybuilding is a relatively new and marginalized sport. It does not receive a lot of media attention and competitions are only held a few times a year, at indoor venues. This results in a limited amount of general knowledge among the Australian population about the sport. This unfamiliarity of most women with - and the limited available image of- the sport makes it interesting to explore how women get in contact with bodybuilding. In contemporary Australia, playing sports and in particular going to the gym, has become important activity. This is closely connected to the modern Western beauty ideal in which women are expected, as an individual responsibility and obligation, to follow a healthy diet and involve themselves in regular exercise to achieve this physical ideal (Pylypa 1998: 25). This is also the main motivation given by the women in my research of why they joined the gym. They often rationalized their participation as a way to become ‘healthy’ or ‘fit’ but it was clear from their answers that the Western slender beauty ideal was prominent in their motivations. This was for example the case for Brenda, a forty-six-year-old physique competitor:

‘After leaving school I needed a sport/hobby to try and keep fit and not get fat. I joined a gym around the corner from my work and went to cardio type classes every day, sometimes twice a day, and also did running etc. for many years. My weight has always been a struggle for me, I always felt like I was too fat’ (Brenda).

Due to the intertwined relationship between a slender body and being healthy in this specific discourse, women are able to rationalize their involvement as ‘healthy’ and therefore as something good. Like Brenda, the initial gym participation of now female bodybuilders mostly consisted of a lot of cardio and light weight exercises. This type of fitness is highly promoted for women because it stimulates the development of a slender and thin body without the development of overt muscularity. However, in order to get closer to her ideal body, Brenda involved herself in weight training: ‘After travelling around the world for over a year with my now husband, he introduced me to weights in an effort to see better results than cardio alone was providing’ (Brenda). Like most women, Brenda came in contact with

36 weight training and eventually the sport of bodybuilding through her gym participation. This can be explained through the central position of fitness, and therefore gym visitations, in the sport. Bodybuilding revolves around modeling the body towards a specific ideal which can only be achieved through systematic training and dieting. The training regimes are (almost completely) executed in the gym and involve a combination of strength/weight training to increase their muscle size and cardio training to decreases the body fat percentage. In this way, the gym becomes an important locus in the process of bodybuilding . The women in my research often explained to me that they were confronted with (female) bodybuilding in their gym and that they were impressed by their physiques: They recall feelings of admiration and respect; not only because of their already achieved physiques, but also because of their displayed confidence, femininity and dedication to their training regimes. Moreover, some women were stimulated by those bodybuilders to involve themselves in the same sport. This happened for example to Rachel, a twenty-two year old Figure competitor:

‘So I pretty much just trained twice a week… and then some guy took me of the electronic tools and told me: “You shouldn’t do all those cardio’s, you should be these lifting weights”. He then showed me all those weight things and I got addicted to that. I was still scared of adding weight but then after about three months of getting forced to like-, I was pretty much getting spotted and I was not lifting anything but it got me so used to challenging myself. So I started up adding weight and scaring myself. I became used to the pain and you start loving it…’ (Rachel)

The guidance Rachel received from a bodybuilder in her gym, helped her to feel more confident in this type of training, challenge herself and eventually change the shape of her body. It is not uncommon for women to receive assistance from an already established bodybuilder. Men and women who participate in bodybuilding are truly passionate about their sport and are often willing to make an effort to share this passion, on a voluntary basis, with others. Moreover, they also motivate and support women who are already involve themselves in weight training to show off their achieved physique in a competition:

‘I have been a personal trainer for 10 years… I was always working in environment where people were competing in bodybuilding and they told me you should do it, you should do it. So yea I was in an environment where people told me you should do bodybuilding, you should give it a go. I was always doing a lot of weight training and then my ex-boyfriend was a bodybuilder so I did a little bit of training with him and then yea I kinda just drifted into that’ (Nina).

Women like Nina, who involve themselves in the gym environment and participate in weight training are stimulated to compete by other athletes which makes the sport more approachable. Moreover, due to the genuine passion of the already established athletes, now female bodybuilders became curious of what it would be like and what bodybuilding was actually was all about. Taken together, it is the inspiration by-, interaction with- and motivation received from- already established bodybuilders that sparked the interests women to participate in this specific sport.

What are elements of bodybuilding that inspire women to participate?

The last section described how women come in contact with and gain knowledge about bodybuilding. While awareness of the sport is undeniable essential for the possibility of sports membership, it does not explain the individual motives of women to participate. Therefore, I now highlight the incorporated elements of bodybuilding that stimulate women’s sports participation. I argue that women are encouraged to participate through the ability of bodybuilding to inspire them in three different ways; to become, to overcome and to achieve. Those different inspirations are built on the incorporation of ‘power femininity’(Lazar 2006: 505) in Bodybuilding. ‘Power femininity is a “subject-effect”(in Judith Butler’s terms) of a global discourse of popular (post)feminism, which incorporates feminist signifiers…’(ibid.: 505). Power femininity is able to create the image of a woman’s world in which femininity and the desire for self-aestheticization are celebrated. In bodybuilding power femininity is used to substitute a layer of femininity and feminist displays of strength to the sport, to increase the social appropriation of women’s participation. Central in this, is the incorporation of four different but interconnecting feminist signifiers; agentive power, sexual power, empowered beauty and knowledge as power. In this section, I describe how power femininity, with the inclusion of the important feminist signifiers, are able to inspire women to participate in bodybuilding.

Inspiration to Become

The incorporation of power femininity (Lazar 2006) in bodybuilding, is able to spark the inspiration of women to achieve the same (physical and mental) ideal that female athletes already embody. One of the integrated feminist signifiers is empowered beauty which is based on the feminists critique that the media creates an unrealistic bodily ideal image. Lazar

38 shows how advertisement incorporated this feminist ideal by questioning skinny as the only definition of beauty (ibid.: 508). Bodybuilding federations, companies and fitness products have also incorporated this notion of empowered beauty by creating similar slogans stating that; ‘Strong, not skinny’ or ‘Strong is the new Sexy’. This message offers an alternative form of beauty which is able to inspire young women. This was for example the case for Naomi, a twenty-two-year-old bikini model and law student based in Western Sydney. She felt incredible stirred by the image of the Bikini athletes when she visited a fitness expo close to her home:

‘I watched the Bikini models and I thought: “Wauw I want to do that one day! I want to look like that!” I watched them and yea I wanted to do what they were doing. - What was it about those girls that interested you so much? I think just that they were like, I don’t know, they were inspiring because they weren’t just skinny or whatever. They were strong and looked confident. Just.. really good kind of thing. It looked like they were having fun. It looked like something I wanted to achieve, to set a goal kind of thing’ (Naomi).

The incorporation of the feminist signifier of empowered beauty leads to an adjusted ideal image which is able to inspire women like Naomi. It is exactly the combination of traditional feminine beauty ideals and a slight deviation from those ideals (by displaying a new form of being beautiful or sexy) that forms a powerful image. In addition, female bodybuilders embody a certain amount of sexual power which can be understood as the ‘reclamation of women’s sexual desire and the celebration of sexual agency’ (ibid.: 512), that is experienced as inspirational:

‘I saw those Figure girls on stage for the second time ever but now I had the experience of being a fitness professional behind me, so I had a difference experience when they walked on stage. I wasn’t sitting there with a can of vodka anymore. I was sitting there thinking: Fack these girls have the maddest bodies I have ever seen. I was.. I ..I.. I couldn’t even speak. I had respect. I thought they were as hot as fuck. I never had seen girls with bodies like this before. It was sexy. It was inspiring. Like, I was just so attracted to it. I thought to myself I got to do that! It was so like “oh my god look at these girls’ bodies!”’ (Kiara).

Due to Kiara’s own involvement in the fitness industry, her perception (and way of life) had changed. She was socialized into the empowered beauty ideal of ‘strong is sexy’, which allowed her to see the beauty and sexual attraction of the Figure competitors. Moreover, she recognized the individual control of the Figure competitors over their own sexuality in the

39 way they moved and presented themselves on stage. This shows how female athletes were inspired by the embodied signifiers of empowered beauty and sexual power in the sport of bodybuilding. It supports the presentation of female bodybuilders as powerful, attractive and in control, which functioned as an important role model for many women.

Inspiration to Overcome

The image of female bodybuilders as individuals who embody strength, power and control, is especially inspirational for women who try to overcome or deal with an undesirable situation. In contemporary Western societies, a strong focus is placed on the individual (Crawford 1984) in which a person is expected to achieve personal happiness and to fulfill the duty of cultivating a cultural attractive body (Davis 1995). Moreover, when an individual fails to live up to those ideals, it becomes their personal responsibility to change their situation and to become in control of their own happiness, body and fate. Bodybuilding offers a modern solution to those expectations. Bodybuilding is an individual sport in which agentic power (Lazar 2006) is depicted as a necessity since it are the individual efforts that determine the success of an athlete. Even though female bodybuilders have a coach who supports them, most of the training sessions and dieting relays on their own determination and therefore on their agency. Multiple women in my research were inspired by the image of bodybuilding as a way to take control over their own life. It is interesting that this sense agency was especially valued by women who were dealing with- or tried to overcome- an unpleasant situation. One of those women was Abigail, a 29-year-old mother of two, based in the outer suburbs of Western Sydney. After her relationship of almost a decade ended, she decided it was time to invest in herself:

‘I went through a really bad relationship that ended last year. So once it ended I decided I wanted to achieve what I always wanted to do. Achieve it, go after it and get up there [the bodybuilding stage]. - Me: and after the relationship you just thought; I am going to do this? Yeah it was.. it was a violent relationship so.. it stole a lot of who I really was. - Me: I’m sorry to hear. No, no, it’s okay. It’s better. Life has never have been better. I just lost myself as a person. So to just achieve something like this.. cause no matter who you got behind you, it is only you who is putting.. you know. You are the one who is the control what you are putting in your mouth and you are in control of how hard you train. You are the only one who is going to be up there on stage, no matter who is behind you, it is only you’ (Abigail).

It was especially this individualized character of the sports which attracted Abigail. Bodybuilding allowed her to do something completely for and by herself. Her success ultimately depended on her own agency which could therefore be experienced as a personal achievement and allowed her to be (re)assure her in her own strength:

‘It [bodybuilding] has given me a whole heap of strength. Not just physically but also mentally. Knowing that no matter what you are put through, you can still achieve things. Knowing how strong your mind can actually be to get through those days in which you think; “I don’t wanna do this”. And just, you know, tell yourself to push on, push on. So I think that is the biggest thing I got out of it, knowing how strong you really can be… It has given me confidence again. I guess it has given me a whole new look on life. The want of wanting more, you know. It opened up a whole new world’ (Abigail).

The (re)assurance of her individual mental and physical strength through her bodybuilding participation, supports the development of self-confidence. This new found confidence is not limited to her physical or athletic capabilities, but rather supports her to become more empowered in all aspects of life. The case of Abigail highlights that even though bodybuilding can be understood as a sport, it is not experienced as just sports participation by its athletes. Bodybuilding can inspire women to overcome- and personally deal with - negative feelings such as powerlessness and unhappiness. The motivation of Abigail to participate in bodybuilding was stimulated by a specific undesirable social situation in which she was placed. However, for some women, the need for control and reassurance of their own agency, comes from their position in an internal undesirable situation. This was the case for Nicole a thirty-one-year-old Figure competitor from Canberra, who struggled with depression for multiple years:

‘I had so many issues that caused depression and sadness and I felt so weak and broken inside. I felt that I want to build my strength and be there for myself… I wanted my body shape to reflect my mental strength. I also wanted to learn discipline and self-control. Bodybuilding was my escape specially during the tough times I have been through back then. I felt amazing knowing that I am working on myself and doing something that will impact me positively while distracting myself from all the negative aspects in my life’ (Nicole).

For Nicole, bodybuilding functioned as an opportunity to work on and (re)claim her own agentic power. Her participation gave her the prospect of achieving the physical and mental

41 strength she was so inspired by. The sport inspired and helped her to become who she wanted to be, an identity which wasn’t limited to a certain physique:

‘It’s more about living a lifestyle where we feel good, healthy, strong, full of energy and happy with ourselves…I learnt to know that IAM ENOUGH and that I can work on my weaknesses and be proud of my strength and best qualities’ (Nicole).

Looking back, Nicole is extremely pleased with her decision to participate in bodybuilding and feels like the sport was able to help her overcome her personal struggles: ‘Bodybuilding transformed my life and saved me’. The story of Abigail and Nicole show how bodybuilding, and in particular the incorporation of agentic power within this sport, is able to inspire women to overcome an undesired social situation. In contemporary times, agentive power has become especially important due to a strong focus on the individual, the significance of having a cultural cultivated body and the highly rewarded characteristic of self-control. Bodybuilding incorporates those characteristics and is able to inspire and support women in their desire to embody this power

Inspiration to achieve

So far I described three different modes of power incorporated in power femininity; agentic power, empowered beauty and sexualized power, that attract women to participate in the sport of bodybuilding. The last form of inspiration, which was identified by all women in my research as an element of their initial motivation to participate, is the inspiration to achieve a goal. This source of inspiration is especially powerful because it simultaneously enacts all four feminist signifiers of power femininity. First of all, it plays on the feminist signifier of empowered beauty since bodybuilding functions as a means to achieve unrealized beauty potential. This is understood as a process of empowerment because it makes something visible which was already hidden inside of the individual. Moreover, the bodily goal embodies beauty empowerment through the slight adjustment of traditional beauty ideals. The bodybuilding ideal incorporates the development of muscularity in combination with a low fat percentage, instead of promoting a slender female body. Secondly, achieving a bodybuilding physique is closely connected to the feminist signifier of sexual power, in the way that the women are able to present and play with their sexual desirability on stage. Thirdly, this physical ideal can only be achieved through the incorporation of knowledge as power. Female bodybuilders have to become

42 educated about how to beautificate and condition their bodies to reach this goal. Last, and most importantly, reaching a goal heavily plays on the feminist notion of agentic power since bodybuilding requires agentic action in order to become successful. A bodybuilding physique symbolizes the individual actions of an athlete since it can only be achieved through structural effort and commitment. The bodybuilding physique as a goal to work towards, is perceived as particularly desirable due to its challenging character. ‘I was just really excited to give myself a challenge’ (Rachel). Female bodybuilders perceive the difficult and challenging elements of sport, such as the many training sessions, the strict diet and the controlled lifestyle, as tests of individual strength and power: ‘I wanted to test myself and determine if I had the drive and will power to do what it takes to compete’ (Diana). Those test allow them to push their individual boundaries and see what they are mentally and physically capable of: ‘The challenge of the diet is hard but that is also great because it pushes you out of your comfort zone’ (Lorene). In this way, the tough elements of the sport are also viewed as the positive and rewarding aspects which in turn are able (re)define their own identity: ‘I think that [a bodybuilder] is someone who have set a goal and decided based on their goals this are the things they have to do to reach it. And if they are ambitious and competitive they going to do everything they need to do to become the best they can be’(Kiara). The achieved bodybuilding physique will then become a symbol which reflect their embodied characteristics of dedication, passion and persistence. In sum, women become motivated to participate in bodybuilding because it inspires them to reach a difficult but powerful goal. The bodybuilding physique becomes especially desirable through its incorporation of all four feminist signifiers used by power femininity with a strong emphasis on agentic power. In this way, bodybuilding offers them an opportunity to test their own capabilities, and in the case of success, to claim the characteristics of being powerful. Bodybuilding inspires women to work towards something which challenges them to do more then they have done before- but also to become more than they ever were.

The disempowering effects of power femininity

The last section described how different feminist signifiers, as characteristics of power femininity, are united in bodybuilding and are able to inspire women to participate in the sport. However, it should be explicitly stated that this involves signifiers of feminist ideas and does not include the embodiment of the feminist ideals. All four feminist principles that are used within power femininity ( knowledge as power, agentic power, empowered beauty and sexual power) are transformed into (partly) de-politicized ideals that are supportive of

43 existing patriarchal norms. Beauty empowerment, for example, does not celebrate every body or the natural shape of women. Instead it glorifies the opportunity, with the help of a product such make up or a process such as bodybuilding, to improve and achieve their unrealized beauty potential (Lazar 2006: 506). Moreover, while the bodybuilding bodies give an additional shape to beauty, it still confirms too many traditional femininity beauty standards including the low fat percentage. In addition, the feminist signifier of knowledge as power is also limited. While ‘opening up access and opportunities for education and learning for women have been among important feminist concerns’ (ibid.: 508), education in the discourse of power femininity is restricted to beautification of the body. Within power femininity, empowerment through education is derived from ‘the acquisition of knowledge and skills that enable one to become self-reliant and experts in one’s own right’ (ibid.: 509). However, the type of knowledge that is derived is limited to the ability to beautification their own bodies, with appropriate forms of muscularity and (formularized forms of) femininity, which is already seen as a primarily women’s domain. In this way, women fit into the ideals of our contemporary society in which the achievement of becoming a ‘beauty expert’ is reproducing patriarchal norms (ibid.: 509). Also the ability to display agentic power is restricted within power femininity: Self-determination is especially promoted to achieve ‘aestheticization of their physical appearances’ (ibid.: 510). Along these lines, agentive action should be used to ‘fight for your right to own a perfect body’ (ibid.: 510) and not to become or be whoever you like. Last, the signifier of sexual power is embedded in the feminist discourse as the ‘reclamation of women’s sexual desire and the celebration of sexual agency’ (ibid.: 512). However, in the discourse of power femininity this leads to a resexualization of women in which they are still shown as sexual objects. In short, power femininity takes feminist signifiers and reduces them to de-politicized ideas. While the feminist notions advocate for change, the application of those feminist signifiers in power femininity actually replicate and reproduce patriarchal norms. However, women who are attracted and/or inspired by those signifiers feel the possibilities of those (limited) powers. In this way, bodybuilding offers an individual opportunity to enrich themselves with the believed qualities.

The intruding character of bodybuilding

Inspiration is the first step towards bodybuilding participation. After this initial development of motives, action has to be taken. To start, athletes have to find themselves a coach who is able to introduce them to this new way of life. The first meeting with a coach can be seen as a personal introduction to the sport. He or she will talk you through a plan of what you have to

44 do in order to reach a certain bodybuilding physique. This initial contact can be quite confronting, as it was in my case:

‘After a short conversation about my expectations and choice of division, he (Adam, my possible coach) asked me to undress so he could see my current physical state. I was prepared for this request and wore (short) shorts and a sport bra beneath my clothing. He kept on looking at me as I was undressing in front of him: His face was emotionless. When I was only covered by the shorts and sports bra, I looked into the mirror (which covered one complete wall like in a dance studio). The first thing I noticed was the great lighting in this room, right away I could see that my abs were strongly showing. I quickly twisted my body in a few positions and thought to myself: “I can do this, I am in a great shape”. Adam rolled his chair towards me and started to exam my body. He asked me to perform my posing routine while he mumbled things like “not bad, not bad”. He then stopped me and made me redo every pose separately while he moved my body parts in his preferred position. Without any hesitations he touched my arms, stomach and shoulders. He identified my “problem areas”: I had to much fat around my butt and inner thighs. He pulled my inner tights back, which created a non-existing thigh gap, to show what I should look like. He told me not to worry. I was going to work on those problem areas and in the end, only two problematic spots was a really good score’ (Fielddiary: 18th September 2016).

I experienced this introduction to the sport as especially confronting because my body was measured in a way that was unfamiliar to me and differed from the way that I viewed my body. Right away my physique was compared to the standards of bodybuilding perfection. This resulted in the explicit identification of some of my body parts as not good enough. Moreover, reaching out to a coach also meant giving her/him the authorization of your own body. (S)He will construct a preparation plan you have to follow that will alter your appearance in a certain way. Along these lines, your body becomes an object that needs to be (re)shaped through your efforts into a marker of bodybuilding perfection. I ended up not collaborating with this particular coach but I was supported by another one named Stella. She prescribed me a strict diet and trainings regime for the upcoming weeks to prepare my body for a bodybuilding competition. Due to my extensive background in sports, I felt confident that I would be able to take part in this sport quite easily. I was wrong:

‘I am struggling. Struggling with the diet and balancing it with life. I am so limited in everything. I can’t hang out with people, get a drink or even just go over. Moreover, I am really really really struggling with food. I know I should lose the weight if I want to do well

45 and everyone tells me it will be fine. I just need to lose some kg’s but nothing too much. Yet, it is the lack of nutrition on the low carb days that drive me crazy. I see myself as a strong and determined person but I can’t seem to put my head down and do this. This might be due to my ambiguous position of researcher but I just have the urge to scream that I am not fat, I am healthy. And when I say that I mean I am really healthy. I probably have around fifteen percent fat and the rest of my weight is muscles. I have a six pack and I used to feel fit. However, this is not good enough for bodybuilding. Bodybuilding isn’t about health or feeling good. It is about starvations, dehydration, hung overs, feeling the worst you ever done and show it as if it is your best moment of your life. The moment they stand on that stage they are starving, severe dehydrated, have a headache and they have to pretend it’s all perfect and good. But why?! Why go through all those effort for those few minutes on stage. It has to look like everything is perfect, glitter and glamour, but everyone in this world know you need laxatives pills just to go to the toilet. There is nothing beautiful about those feelings. So for what?! What makes all of this worth it?!’ (Field Diary September).

It is clear that this field note does not represent a rational analysis made by a researcher but rather displays my personal frustrations and the feeling of powerlessness. I was overwhelmed by the effects and consequences that were connected to my own participation in bodybuilding. Especially the magnitude of the diet which weakened my body but also exhausted me emotionally and mentally. At this point, I was not capable to distance myself in order to understand what the sport was able to offer me, or any of the other athletes, which was worth the mental, physical and emotional discomforts. It took time, a physical recovery and the help of other athletes, to truly understand the possibilities of bodybuilding and what it is able to offer to its athletes.

Why do women participate in bodybuilding?

The initial inspirations and motivations of women to participate in bodybuilding are followed by the challenging and difficult reality of this participation. Bodybuilding is an intruding sport which has an impact on every aspect of their life: It takes a lot of time, effort and money, to be able to compete. Yet, women willingly put themselves through those strict regimes, one competition after the other, year after year. This raises the question: What do women receive from their bodybuilding participation that makes the efforts worth it? In other words: Why do women participate, and keep on participating, in the demanding sport of bodybuilding? To answer this question, I place the focus on the individual motives that support and fuel the bodybuilding participation of female athletes. Moreover, I conceptualize

46 bodybuilding as a form of serious leisure (Stebbins 1982) which enables us to understand the intensified relationship between actions and experience. By approaching the sport through the lens of serious leisure, six elements become central; identification, unique ethos, leisure career, durable benefits, personal efforts and perseverance (Stebbings 1982: 256-257). In the following section I show how bodybuilding, as a form of serious leisure, incorporates those six elements in their embodiment of four characteristics that offer identity enhancements by being; strong, empowered, in control and part of a community. Taken together, those characteristics support a new enhanced identity which is able to offer women self-fulfillment and improve their experienced quality of life.

(Serious) Leisure as a means to Become

Leisure as a field of research originates in the Industrial Revolution. The concept of leisure was defined as ‘being antithetical to work’ (MacCosham 2016: 54) and was therefore measured in the time individuals had after work and any form of ‘disagreeable life obligation’ (such as eating, sleeping, cleaning ect. ) (ibid.: 54). In the 1950’s this definition of leisure was criticized. It was argued that the concept leisure should not be focused on time but instead on what individuals do during that time. This gave rise to an activity-based definition in which leisure became conceptualized as ‘freely chosen activities voluntarily pursued during time after obligations necessary for survival’ (ibid.: 55). This activity-based approach has been important in the development of the research field of leisure but has also been assessed critically on the assumed to be unlimited free choice, freedom and the exclusion of the possibility of manipulation and/or exploitation of an individual’s behavior (Rojek 1995). Moreover, scholars highlighted the lack of focus on the individual experiences of those leisure activities as a significant shortcoming (Blackshaw 2010). As a reaction, the experience-based approach was developed in which the focus was placed on the experiential qualities of leisure (MacCosham 2016: 55). The conceptualization of leisure by using the experience-based approach has become increasingly popular in recent years (Ibid.: 56). Nevertheless, researchers remain unable to reach a consensus on a singular definition that is able to represent the field of leisure (ibid.: 56). In this research, I approach leisure as an experience-based activity in which individuals are able to perceive themselves as (semi-)autonomous individuals. Leisure allows the individual a sense of control over their own behavior, choices and actions, despite the undeniable presence of constraints. In addition, I support the claim of Stebbing, stating that certain forms of leisure are able to offer a prime opportunity for identity enhancement, self- fulfillment and personal expression (Stebbings 1982: 253). Moreover, I follow MacCosham,

47 in approaching leisure as an activity that has the ‘capacity to establish and solidify relationships between experiences and activities’ (MacCosham 2016: 57). This process enables leisure to become beneficial for the individual which consequently can improve the quality of live and well-being of the individual. Nevertheless, bodybuilding should not simply be understood as leisure. Rather, it should be conceptualized as a form of ‘serious leisure’ (Stebbins 1982). While casual forms of leisure can bring joy and pleasure to its participants, it is only the serious variant that is able to offer true personal fulfillment, identity enhancement and self-expression (Stebbins:1982: 253) Serious leisure differs from other forms of leisure in the incorporation of six elements; identification, unique ethos, leisure career, durable benefits, personal efforts and perseverance (ibid.: 256-257). In addition, the activity becomes central in the participants life and requires a significant amount of personal investment (Elkington & Stebbins 2014). The following section is focused on answering the question: Why do women participate, and keep on participating, in the demanding sport of bodybuilding? I describe four positively experienced personal characteristics; being strong, in control, empowered and part of a community, that women are able to embody- and identify with- through their participation in bodybuilding. The conceptualization of bodybuilding as a form of (serious) leisure is crucial since it facilitates for a solidified relationship between activities and experiences. The power serious leisure has to change the experience of its practitioners depends on the incorporation of the six elements (identification, unique ethos, leisure career, durable benefits, personal efforts and perseverance (ibid.: 256-257). In the next section, I describe how the elements of serious leisure are founded within the four desired characteristics and therefore are part of the transformation into- and the incorporation of - an enhanced identity.

Strong

Being strong is an important characteristic that women are able to incorporate in their own self-identification through their bodybuilding participation. Female bodybuilders divide this concept along the lines of mind-body dualism which results in the division of being mentally and/or physically strong. Physical strength in bodybuilding is attained through the challenging training regimes that are designed to stimulate muscle growth and their increase physical strength. The increase of bodily strength results in a durable benefits (Stebbins 1982: 256) which can be advantageous in activities connected to their bodybuilding participation and in their daily lives. Adrienna, a thirty-one-years-old bikini competitor, became confident in her own strength through bodybuilding: ‘I am a smaller person but I got a good muscle

48 tone. It just makes a massive difference in my day to day life. I can do whatever I want and not worry about stuff’ (Adrienna). Before Adrienna had to depend on others in order to complete her daily chores at work and at home. She needed help with lifting boxes or carrying multiple bags of groceries. Due to her bodybuilding participation, Adrienna became physically stronger which increased her independence and gave her more confidence in her own (physical) abilities. Moreover, women also highlight the development of mental strength as a durable benefit (Stebbins 1982: 256) which is stimulated by their participation in bodybuilding. Mental strength becomes undeniable through the realization of their own persevere (Stebbins 1982: 250). Stebbins describes perseverance as a quality of serious leisure in which the participant have to persist under harsh conditions. It is partly through the conquering of adversity that positive feelings about this activity come in to being (Stebbins 1982: 256). In bodybuilding every woman is subjected to harsh and challenging conditions since this specific ideal body can only be developed through adversity. Moreover, women connect positive feelings to those hardships because it allows them to grow their (perceived) mental strength:

‘For me it is a journey, a learning opportunity, one of my goals is to get comfortable with my discomfort during my prep. So I expect that there will be days when I feel hungry, tired, drained, down, etc.. I actually look forward to it knowing that it is part of the process. I want to learn me through these tough times, build my strength, never give up on myself, learn to deal with these situations positively’ (Nicole).

At the same time, conquering those hardships becomes an undeniable symbol of their mental strength in itself:

‘Everything comes second to prep, relationships, friends, family, work, other hobbies and your body! I am sore all the time but you eventually get used to it. Everything is harder in your day to day life when your muscles scream at the slightest bit of work or resistance and you can’t have any spontaneous plans as your meals all have to be prepared and with you before you can go out for more than a few hours. One day can derail you physically and mentally and you need to be incredibly mentally tough!’ (Sharon).

It is their persevere that reassures women in their mental strength which is therefore experienced as a positive element of the sport. Women who succeed to persist are able to achieve a bodybuilding physique which will then become an undisputable symbol of their mental and physical strength.

In short, bodybuilding enables women to gain and become aware of their mental and physical strength. This becomes a durable benefit in their bodybuilding activities and their day to day life which leads to a reconceptualization of the self. The athletes are able to identify (Stebbings 1982: 257) themselves with the sport due to the incorporation of bodybuilding as a form of serious leisure in their lives. Along these lines, women are able to claim the characteristic of being strong which is connected to the sport of bodybuilding, as their own: They therefore become and identify themselves as strong women.

In Control

In addition to the incorporation of being strong as a personal characteristic, bodybuilding also enables women to feel in control. In Australia, the dominant view highly values individuals who are in control and/or show a certain amount of control over their bodies. Those ideas are interconnected in the sense that individuals who are able to control their bodies are expected to automatically gain control over their lives (Davis 1995: 53; Eskes et. al. 1998: 319). In addition, the amount bodily control is measured by the contemporary beauty ideal of being ‘fit, healthy and thin’ (Pylypa 1998: 25). This discourse makes bodybuilding particularly suitable as a means to develop the feeling of being in control. It is therefore not surprisingly that the contemporary significance of having control over the body and the consequently act of having control over your life, was reproduced by female bodybuilders:

‘You have total control of your life, excluding injuries. Whereas other things in life you don’t have a say. But with bodybuilding you can have a say. You set a goal and you work for it. When you achieve it, it feels good’ (Amber).

Bodily control creates a sense of stability in a life full of uncertainties. Bodybuilding is an individual sport in which the participant is seen as fully responsibly. They carry the responsibility for their training intensity, diet and the eventually shape of their stage body. Everything that happens (or does not happen ) depends on their own agentic power. This setting allows women to feel like a creator with seemingly endless opportunities:

‘….it is a very addictive feeling, knowing you’re in control and like creating, manipulating your nutrition, your cardio and your weight training that you can create something so, so incredible to look at’ (Kiara).

Kiara also highlights how she relays on her own personal efforts (Stebbings 1982) to control her body. The efforts made by female bodybuilders relay on the development and enactment of knowledge, training and skill which is needed to alter the physical appearance into a bodybuilding physique. By achieving a bodybuilding physique, the women confirm to contemporary ideas about control. They have mastered their own body through the investment of personal effort. Even though control in this setting is limited to the development of the body towards a specific cultural ideal, the feeling of being in control is a durable benefit that reaches far outside the realm of sport. Female bodybuilders become masters in their own lives because they believe they would. Supported by their achievements in bodybuilding, female athletes are reassured in a new identity in which they can identify themselves as ‘women who are in control’. This increases their confidence and opens up possibilities in their personal and professional lives.

Empowered

Another important characteristic that bodybuilding, as a form of serious leisure, is able to offer its practitioners is empowerment. Empowerment is a process in which individuals (of a disadvantages group) developed the ability to (re)gain control over their own lives (Hargreaves 1994). This can be achieved through individual actions that have the capability to improve their personal situation (Gutierrez, 1990; Mc Whirter, 1991). Bodybuilding is especially suitable as a means for women to gain empowerment in the contemporary Western society. As mentioned, in the Australian society a strong emphasis is placed on the individual to be ‘fit, thin and healthy’ (Pylypa 1998:25) which are seen as personal responsibilities. Bodybuilding plays on those existing ideals and simultaneously offers women the opportunity, in a socially accepted way, to spend money, time and effort on themselves. In this way, bodybuilding allows women to partake in individual and self-focused actions, rather than working towards the command of others, which supports the possibility of their individual empowerment. Empowerment is also characterized by the ability to develop some kind of potential that was already within the individual (Hargreaves 1994). Along these lines, individuals are only able to empower themselves and they cannot get the power bestowed by others (Staples 1990). This idea lies also at the heart of bodybuilding. The female bodybuilders highly value the opportunity of the sport to set a long term individual goal which they can structurally work towards. However, their success depends on enactment of three elements of serious leisure; persevere, effort and career. First of all, persevere is essential to conquer the

51 hardships that are connected to bodybuilding. The ability to endure is seen as a sign of personal determination, strength and control. Those characteristics were already founded within the individual but were able to developed or become manifested through their sports participation. In this way bodybuilding offers women the opportunity to develop their personal potential, in this case the characteristics of determination, strength and control, which supports the possibility of empowerment. Second, a significant amount of personal effort (Stebbings 1982) is needed to develop individual knowledge, training and skill, that are crucial for female bodybuilders to reach their physical goals. This includes (among others); knowledge about the biology of the body; the developments of muscles and the specific nutritional values of food. Moreover, training is needed to develop certain skills such as the right implementation of fitness exercises. As a result, women who invest personal effort in their bodybuilding participation are able to improve themselves and advance their potential through the development of their knowledge, skills and training, which supports potential empowerment. Third, female bodybuilders need to have careers (Stebbings 1982) in their bodybuilding participation in order to achieve their physical goal. The career of an athlete represents their own development in the time that they are involved in their enduring pursuit. Especially during prep time (the months leading up to the competition in which they actively prepare themselves), physical changes are made explicit and closely monitored. The women make photographs, weigh themselves and measure their body parts, to be aware of their bodily progress and possible setback. This preparation phase is characterized by their own ‘turning points, stages of achievement or involvement’ (Stebbings 1982: 256). Women experience their bodybuilding careers and especially their bodily progress as extremely rewarding: ‘[The best part of bodybuilding is] watching your body developed and seeing the results of all the hard work’ (Diana). Women are only able to succeed in bodybuilding when they are able to grown in their own careers, by increasingly becoming more advanced in the development of their own potential. Women become aware of their own (developed) potential by achieving their ideal bodybuilding physique in which the on stage presentation serves as the most important moment. It is the process of setting, working towards and achieving a goal, which is identified as one of the most rewarding aspect of the sport: ‘I guess the thing that I got from it [competing] was the self-satisfaction that I achieved a goal and a challenge that was big, really big, you know’ (Kiara). Furthermore, feelings of satisfaction and being proud are strengthened when other people notice their progress:

‘I am, of course, so happy with the amazing progress my body has made and I’ve found a self-worth I never knew I could have. I carry myself better, my posture is better and I feel

52 happy and healthy and incredibly determined. Hands down the absolute best part however is when you receive recognition for your hard work ….’ (Sharon).

Many women therefore highlight their time on stage as the main reward of their bodybuilding participation:

‘The best part of bodybuilding is definitely getting on stage because it is sort of like the validation of the hard work you have done. Even though if you don’t place just the fact you made it to stage. Because there are a lot of people who start but don’t finish’ (Adrienna).

Bodybuilding is for the women about setting and completing a personal challenge; to do more than they have done before and achieve more than they thought they would be capable of. The process represents the development of their own potential by which the women discover their own strengths. Being on stage as a bodybuilder is a perceptible representation of their careers, persistence and efforts. It is the visible proof of their personal empowerment.

A part of a community

Bodybuilding is a sport that eminently lends itself for personal development and empowerment due to its strong emphasis on the individual. Nevertheless, the idea of community (in which bodybuilding is the connecting factor) is still highly valued. Female bodybuilders share an unique ethos (Stebbings 1982: 257) which includes ‘special beliefs, values, moral principles, norms and performance standards’ (ibid.: 257). Female bodybuilders often feel misunderstood within their own social environment which is mostly filled with people who do not participate in the sport. This increases their appreciation of the support they receive from the bodybuilding community which is structured along the lines of- and between- federations. For analytical purposes, a distinction can be made between a local community and (inter)national community. The local community is based on direct personal interaction. Women mostly come in contact with each other through coaches, posing classes and gym visitations. However, it is the built body that functions as a marker of your in- or out-side status. When someone carries the marker of being an insider of this particular community, conversations about bodybuilding, physiques and training are easily started:

‘Today, I met a bodybuilder named Carmen at the gym I regularly visit. Right away she stood out from the fitness crowd. She looked phenomenal with a strong, muscular yet lean

53 appearance. I think she noticed me too because after only a few minutes, when we were training close to each other, we started to interact. It started with some small comments about the hard work and effort the other was putting into their trainings regime but it didn’t take long before we were talking about bodybuilding. When I told her I was preparing for my first competition she tried to ease my mind by telling me everything was going to be fine: I was looking good and I still had enough time to diet. I told her that I was really impressed by the way she looked. She laughed and said: ‘Never compare yourself to anyone else. Everyone’s roads and bodies are different, just bring the best you can be. When I look at you, I am so jealous of your arms. We all have something. Just lose a bit more weight and you will look incredible on stage’ (Field diary 28 September 2016).

It is the physical body that becomes the marker of someone’s inside status which actively opens up the possibility of interaction. Moreover, in those conversations women voice their understanding and offer their support to each other. In this way, women are able to simultaneously be a part- and make use of- this social support system. The availability of community support is in particularly experienced as important because female bodybuilders are often confronted with criticism on the way they look or live, in their social environments. In those cases women feel often unable to share their sport related difficulties because they fear rejection. Here, the bodybuilding community offers a safe place in which silly and maybe even peculiar things women do, as a result of their bodybuilding participation, can be shared without the risk of being criticized. On the contrary, since all women involve themselves in the same uncommon behavior, it becomes something to laugh and joke about:

‘I would do it again: Seeing all the competitors, being involved in something where there are other people who have trained as hard I have and dieted as hard as I have. It was good to see and I felt a sense of belonging because there are not many people around me from home, friends and family who, you know, who do it. So they saw me go through it and saw how hard it was but they obviously don’t know what it is like. So.. - Me: you find people who doing the same thing? Yeah that is right. Especially the last week of diet, that was the worst (laughs) and at the and there were the donuts.. (laughs even louder) -Me: Yeah I know! (laughs) I didn’t even had them! you didn’t? - Me: No! hahaha! ooooh I did! I had half a donut but I had donuts the next morning for breakfast - Me: Nooo that’s gross!!(laughs)

Hahaaha yeah I know’ (Abigail).

Silly things, as well as the experienced joys and struggles of the sport, can be shared within a community. It is the unique ethos (Stebbings 1982: 257) that brings female bodybuilders together and which is understood as more important than their physical location. Due to the modern methods of communication a (inter)national bodybuilding community is able to exist. Online communication allows the women to share their stories, ask for advice and find support in a safe environment of like-minded. This (inter)national community has become especially important in the Australian context due to the (relatively) small amount of practitioners who are spread over enormous distances. The shared unique ethos brings athletes physically (meetings, events, ect. ) and non- physically (internet) together. When a new athlete become part of this bodybuilding community, it will simultaneously intensify their personal identification with the sport and its participants. Moreover, the experienced importance of the relationship of an athlete with their community should not be underestimated. Rachel, a twenty-two-year-old figure competitor even identifies being part of the community as one of her central motives of her own participation:

‘….I love the IFBB23. And I am actually really happy that that was the path I went into straight away cause it was like a little family. The judges all know each other, and all the figure girls are also friendly and the bikini girls are like really interactive with the figure girls. And I just love the family of IFBB’ (Rachel).

In addition, Rachel highlights the idea that bodybuilding is a bit less competitive than more traditional sports: ‘In bodybuilding everyone is helping each other, if you forgot to buy your bikini glue someone will borrow you her bikini glue…’(Rachel). It is her belonging within this community that strengthens her own self-identification as a bodybuilder. She becomes one of them, and the community becomes part of her.

Conclusion

This second chapter answered the question: Why do women participate in bodybuilding? Bodybuilding offers a socially acceptable opportunity for women to enhance their identity and enrich themselves with qualities they value. In other words, bodybuilding becomes

23 A specific bodybuilding federation.

55 tremendously gratifying and rewarding for women because of its opportunity to develop a new identity. Bodybuilding participation allows female athletes to identify themselves as being; strong, in control, empowered and part of a community. The combination of those elements offer a strong personal fulfillment and identity enhancement which could only be realized through the incorporation of a sport as serious leisure. The consequences of this new self-ascribed identity reach far beyond the realm of sport. Women identify an experienced increase of their self-worth and therefore modify their personal choices. The ‘want of wanting more’ as Abigail beautifully describes it, leads female bodybuilders to use those (re)claimed characteristics in their personal and private lives to improve their social situations. This chapter highlighted women’s inspirations, motivations and the advantages they receive from their bodybuilding participation. While those components are crucial to the understanding of women’s involvement in the sport, it is also incomplete. The next chapter will test the perception of the female athletes by describing the disempowering effects and limited possibilities of bodybuilding. It will shed light on the complex position of power and empowerment in this sport.

Chapter 3: Bodybuilding & Biopower The influence of biopower on the female bodybuilder

Introduction 58

Biopower 59

How does biopower influences the female bodybuilder? 60

From sexuality to biopower 60

(Bio)Power in institutions and mechanisms 61

Biopower through self-discipline and self-surveillance; 62

Dieting/ training/ resting 63

The individualizing effects of a self-controlled lifestyle 66

Biopower constituted within the female bodybuilder 67

The influence of power on individual’s desire 68

Female bodybuilders as vehicles of power 70

Social consequences of the inability to conform 71

Critical note on Foucault 74

Conclusion 76

Introduction

Bodybuilding offers a socially accepted opportunity for women to enhance their identity and enrich themselves with the qualities of strength and control. As shown in chapter 2, this has many positive effects on the lives of athletes and gives them the possibility to construct and to be (re)assured in a new powerful identity. However, it is important to highlight how those individual bodybuilding experiences are constructed in relation to power. In this chapter, I therefore ask the question: How is bodybuilding participation embedded in and contributing to power? I answer this question by building on the work of Foucault. Foucault’s work is famous for his ability to unravel the relationship between knowledge and power, and how the state is able to use those to control the population through social institutions. Moreover, in the first volume of The history of sexuality (1976), Foucault developed the concept of biopower which refers to the practice, which is used by modern nation states, to regulate their subjects through ‘an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for achieving the subjugations of bodies and the control of populations’ (Foucault 1976: 140). The construction of biopower is in particularly interesting in the case of bodybuilding. According to Foucault, biopower does not only rely on the embedded knowledge and power within institutions but is also placed within individuals through self-control and self-surveillance; a characteristic female bodybuilders literally identify as one of the most valuable components they obtained through their participation. In this chapter, I highlight the constructions of power, control and discipline, in which female bodybuilders find themselves. The chapter starts with a short description of the origins and definition of the concept of biopower. Biopower relays on a two-folded process in which its distribution is supplemented through institutions and through self-surveillance and self- control. I describe how those two processes effect the female bodybuilder in which special attention will be paid to the incorporation of biopower in the essential bodybuilding activities of training, dieting and resting. Moreover, I describe how power, and in particular knowledge and desire, influences the personal experiences of female bodybuilders. This is elaborated by the case of Brenda, a 46-year-old physique competitor. Her story gives a voice to the (possible) far-reaching effects of the individual experienced inability to live up to certain desires and/or social norms. Last, I stress that even though the work of Foucault and the concept of biopower is an useful instrument within social research to uncover existing power relations, it is not able to capture the complexity of social reality. This chapter becomes a part of a wider project which is able to highlight the constructions of power, control and discipline, in which female bodybuilders are located, which influences but do not determines their personal experiences.

Biopower

In the nineteen century, one of the basic phenomena of state control had become ‘power’s hold over life’(Foucault 1997: 240). This is the acquisition of power over an individual insofar that the individual was recognized as a living being of which the biological came under state control (ibid.: 241). When absolute power, especially the power of sovereignty, is consisted in the power to take lives, the technology of biopower is able to emerge (Foucault ibid.: 247). Biopower refers to the dominant system of social control that has been present in Modern Western Europe (Foucualt 1975). In contrast to earlier models of power, Foucault’s biopower does not approach power as a form of domination in which a repressive and centralized force operates from one group to dominate the other. Instead, Foucault conceptualizes power as something that is dispersed throughout society and cannot be located. Biopower takes two main forms. The first form, which is also identified as ‘bio- politics’, focuses itself on the regulation of the population. Here power and discipline are used to regulate the reproductive capacity of the human body in which reproduction, morbidity and mortality are controlled (Foucault 1978). This form of biopower seeks to control the population on a statistical level. The second form, which Foucault also refers to as ‘biopower’, focuses itself on the control and manipulation of individual bodies. Here power and discipline are combined to control the human body to create a productive and useful objects that could make up a more disciplined and effective population (ibid.). Biopower functions by the means of a two folded process. On the one hand, biopower is built on institutionalized disciplinary techniques such as constructed in schools, hospitals, prisons etc. On the other hand, biopower relies heavily on the internalizations of self- regulating behaviors of individuals in which they use disciplinary techniques to organize space, time and daily practices (ibid.). ‘Individuals voluntarily control themselves by self- imposing conformity to cultural norms through self-surveillance and self-disciplinary practices…’ (Pylypa 1998: 21-22) and by doing this, they subjugate themselves to power. Biopower then becomes a notion which is able to conceptualize the body as a site of subjugation through the analyzation of voluntarily participation in habitual daily bodily practices, which are structured along the lines of power (Foucault 1978). In this way, the concept of biopower in social scientific research, is able to locate individual motivations and desires within a wider framework of power.

How does biopower influences the female bodybuilder?

The concept of biopower has the ability to uncover how power, discipline and knowledge influence the individual within the modern society. Yet, in this research, the focus is not placed on any individual but instead on the female bodybuilder in particular. In the next section, I first I describe how the modern perfect body was formed. This will be followed by an analysis of the two folded process of biopower. I highlight how female bodybuilders are both affected by biopower through its ability to exerts power through institutions and by the stimulation of self-regulation behavior in order to conform to the norms of power. I highlight this process in three important bodybuilding activities; dieting, training and resting. Together, this analysis shows how female bodybuilders become implicated in their own subjugation through discipline, control and their own voluntary participation in daily bodily routines and practices.

From sexuality to biopower

Sexuality enabled the birth of biopower. It gave rise to the production of discourses that allowed biopower to normalize and control individuals and the population (Foucault 1997: 279). On the one hand, sexuality was connected to the disciplines of the body. On the other hand, sexuality was applied to regulate populations through the far-reaching effects of this activity. Therefore sexuality could be used as the base for regulations and as a standard for disciplines (ibid.: 278-279). However, the construction of sexuality as an objective of repression, control and surveillance led to ‘an intensification of each individual’s desire, for, in and over his body’ (Foucault 1980:57). This cumulated into resistance against the sexual body in the twentieth century. Here, Foucault highlights the ability of power to transform itself when it is confronted with resistance. It will create new avenues of expression. In the case of sexuality, power transformed itself from control by repression into control by stimulation. The new message became; 'Get undressed- but be slim, good-looking, tanned!' (Foucault 1980: 57). This adaption enabled power to stay in control through the creation of desire, focused on the embodiment and display of the ’perfect’ body. The perfect body has the privilege to be shown and is constructed around the obsession with being fit, thin and healthy: Three ideas that are used as equivalent and have become strongly entangled (Pylypa 1998: 25). Pylypa demonstrates how this constructed ideal body is the product of two different discourses. First, there is a strong presence of a health discourse which presents the fit and thin body as healthy and conceptualizes the overweight or unfit body as deviant and unhealthy (ibid.: 25). The second discourse depends

60 on the media and advertising industry which depicts the fit and thin body as healthy and therefore also as beautiful and sexy. In addition, the labeled unfit body is depicted as ugly, unpopular and unsexy (ibid.: 25). Along these lines, both discourses use the notion of ‘health’ as a justification of their norms. However, it is important to highlight that the notion of health is never value-free: It is a moral discourse (ibid.: 25). Together with the ideology of individual responsibility for health, it is now believed that individuals have the personal obligation to achieve or maintain a healthy body through the activities of dieting and fitness participation (ibid.: 25). Individuals who internalize this moral discourse are led into the activities of self-surveillance and self-discipline (ibid.: 26.). This is not just is not only the embodiment of the discourse but even more so of biopower that depends on this internalization of self-regulating behaviors. In the next section, I highlight how biopower is internalized in the practices of bodybuilding. As mentioned, biopower works as a two folded process on an institutionalized and an individualized level. To highlight this duality I first describe the institutionalized disciplinary techniques in which biopower is embedded to control the body in Contemporary Australia. This is followed by the internalization of biopower by individuals which is focused on the disciplinary techniques that organize space, time and daily practices.

(Bio)Power in institutions and mechanisms

The ability of biopower to exert its power through institutions depends heavily on the incorporation of panopticism. Foucault based this concept on Bentham’s descriptions of the Panopticon ; an architectural figure. This involves a semi-circular prison in which each inmate is placed in an individual lighted cell which is visible from the tower that located at the center (Vaz & Bruno 2003: 275). The tower has windows which allows surveillants to watch every cell but do not allow the prisoner to look in. This creates a situation in which the prisoners are aware of the fact that they can always be subjected to virtual observation without ever being able to confirm this actuality (ibid.: 275).The prisoner will therefore; ‘…inscribes himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles; he becomes the principle of his own subjection’ (Foucault 1979: 202). In this way, power renders through the Panopticon by promoting self-surveillance. In modern societies, institutions are created to resemble this panoptic scheme to increase their power. In addition to the incorporation of a panoptic scheme, discipline is another crucial factor which enables the exercise of power. It is a technology which includes a whole sets of techniques, procedures, levels of applications, instruments and targets (ibid.: 204). Moreover, it is embedded within different institutions to control the population. Among others,

61 discipline can be taken over by ‘specialized’ institutions such as the prison, by institutions that use discipline as an instrument for a certain mean such as schools and hospitals, and by the state apparatus that has the function to assure discipline within society as a whole such as the police force (ibid.: 204). The panoptic arrangement of society, maintained with the power of discipline, provides the possibility of the generalization (Foucault 1975: 204). At this point in time, there is a network of mechanisms running through every layer of society, which is everywhere and always alert, without intermission in time or space (Foucault 1975: 204): ‘On the whole, therefore, one can speak of the formation of a disciplinary society in this movement that stretches from the enclosed disciplines, a sort of social “quarantine”, to an indefinitely generalizable mechanism of panopticism' (ibid.: 204). This is not based in disciplinary modality of power that has replaced all others, but instead it is grounded in the ability of power to infiltrate the others and serving as an intermediary. This makes it possible to distribute the effects of power to every corner of society (ibid.: 204). In this way, power is able to distribute itself through a network of mechanisms and institutions, that have incorporated panopticism and discipline, to penetrate deeply into individual lives. This construction of power creates the breeding ground of biopower which can be used for the production and maintenance of ’useful’ objects. Here, the focus is placed on the individual who has to be monitored and disciplined to assure its efficacy. Female bodybuilders, like every individual, function as objects within those institutions which form a central part within our modern lives. The modern institutions teach the female bodybuilders that they are individual beings who are assigned with (a limited amount of) agency. This agency needs to be used to embody the prescribed ideals; to work, to be active, fit and live a ‘healthy’ lifestyle. There is a strong emphasize on their own responsibility of their own success, health and body. In addition, through the incorporation of panopticism in institutions, the norms that have been inflicted on the individual become embodied. This transforms external opposed ideals into self-regulating activities that are supported by self- surveillance and self-disciplining. In the next section I highlight how female athletes participate in those activities and therefore support the ideals of biopower through their bodybuilding participation.

Biopower through self-discipline and self-surveillance

The state is only able to bring all aspects of life under its control when individuals voluntarily agree to self-regulate their behavior to conform to the norms of power. The individual therefore becomes an important locus of power. Female bodybuilders in particular involve themselves in daily practices and routines, connected to their sport participation, that demand

62 self-surveillance and self-regulation. This is embodied through their involvement in dieting, training and resting. Three activities that are central in the sport of bodybuilding and have to be enacted in order to become successful. However, their involvement in those activities simultaneously leads to their own subjugation.

Dieting

Within the discourse of biopower, the construction of the ideal body and the personal obligation to achieve or maintain a good health are central. Health in this sense is connected to thinness which can be achieved through the disciplinary regime of dieting. The success of a diet depends on the availability of two elements; commercial production of technologies of surveillance and self-monitoring behavior. First, the availability of commercial production of technologies of surveillance are essential to measure the success of a diet. Bathroom scales, nutritional information charts, calorie counting tables, diet books etc., are all designed to enable the individual to control and monitor their own bodies. Bodybuilders use those equipments on a daily basis. The body is weighted by the use of scales; the magnitude of body parts are monitored with the help of measuring tapes and body fat calipers are used to measure the amount of fat constituted in the skinfolds. The data that is generated is converted into charts that connect the increase/decrease of weight or fat percentage to an certain amount of time. Moreover, developments in the medical science are made available to the individual to monitor their body in ways that were impossible before. A great example of this is the dexa scan. This is a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry which before was used to measure bone mineral density for osteopenia and osteoporosis in patients. Now, this technique is used as the golden standard of body fat measurement within bodybuilding because of its accuracy and (relatively) affordability. The scan is able to measure exactly how weight loss is constituted within the body: It monitors the development in of various body parts and what it consisted of (fat or muscle tissue). Medical technologies which are made available to individuals, together with the widespread production commercial technologies of surveillance (such as scales and calipers), enable bodybuilders to monitor their body more closely than ever before. Secondly, the subjection of the self through self-surveillance is essential for the success of a diet. Women in bodybuilding aim to have an extremely low fat percentage on their competition day. Even though there is some variation between the divisions (the Bikini division is allowed to have the highest fat percentage while the Bodybuilding division has to be the leanest), all women competing in bodybuilding have to follow a diet to develop a bodybuilding physique. Self-monitoring behavior and self-surveillance are essential since the

63 diet is experienced as challenging by all the women. Naomi a twenty-two-year-old bikini competitor struggled with dieting due to the lack of variation; ‘I liked the food but sometimes you get a bit sick of it… you kind of do want a bit of variety sometimes but when you’re on comp prep, if that is your plan that is your plan, you have to follow it’. Other competitors, especially from more muscular and leaner divisions, highlighted the experience of hunger. The diets are designed to make the body decrease in fat due to the lack of the nutritious it needs to sustain itself. Hunger is therefore inseparably connected to the extremely lean bodies displayed in the more muscular bodybuilding divisions. ‘When you first do a bodybuilding competition , you don’t know anything about it. You don’t know what feeling hungry feels like… you get to four weeks out and you get so hungry you can’t think about anything apart from food’ (Kiara). It is the self-discipline and the self-monitoring behavior that enables women to progress towards the idealized perfect body. The athletes develop personal ways to deal with the restricted amount of food. Abigail, for example, tried to make, bake or cook something more tasty with the ingredients she was allowed to have . Even though she was a good and creative cook, she also struggled at the end of her preparation phase: ‘The last week was probably the only week I really struggled with. Because it was so low in carbs and I just couldn’t function’(Abigail). Others tried a more flexible diet, in which they included food they were longing for but which would not be allowed in a normal diet due to (for example) the amount of calories in them. However, as Rachel explained to me ‘No matter how flexible your diet is, it is going to get hard’ (Rachel). To maintain this kind of diet, the women have to monitor their food intake and display a strong sense of self-discipline by depriving themselves from the food they are craving for. In this way dieting sustains biopower through the activity of self-surveillance which enables the female bodybuilder to achieve and maintain dominant bodily norms, while subjugating the self. Dieting also structures the time, places and daily practices of the athletes. The diet of female bodybuilders is extremely restricted and requires them to eat six carefully weighted meals a day. To maintain this diet women have to plan their day, and even their week ahead, to make sure they have access to the right kind and amount of food at every prescribed moment. This is often done by meal prepping in which the women pack and order their food for the whole day upfront; ’I eat out of containers 7 days a week. That is what I do and most people think that is really fucking weird’ (Kiara). In this manner, the ability to subject themselves to the diet depends on their ability to regulate their own time, space and daily activities.

Training

Training, in addition to the dieting, is another essential activity through which biopower is distributed into the lives of female bodybuilders. Training is an activity in which the internalization of self-regulating behaviors are used to achieve or maintain the idealized (bodybuilding) norm. Within bodybuilding, training refers to a specific exercise scheme which an athlete has to follow in order to adjust her physical appearance . The trainings schemes that are used are diverse and are specified on the current physique, capacities and (physical) goal of the athlete. Nevertheless, every scheme revolves around the participation in fitness. Fitness is a modern invention that originates from the commercial production of technologies of surveillance. Fitness equipment offers an unique opportunity of self- surveillance through the consistency of its measurements. Athletes can easily monitor their increase or decrease in strength through the weight they use. In contrast to more traditional sports, fitness turns the qualities of the body into objective measurable features. Moreover, fitness allows individuals to gain a greater sense of control over the development of the body. It enables athletes to develop certain body parts towards the shape that they prefer. This is possible because exercises target on certain muscles or muscle groups by which the athlete can select its own development. So, fitness participation enables individuals to have a greater control over their bodies and increase their ability of self-surveillance. The participation in fitness also organizes the time, space and daily practices of its athletes. Even though, the training schemes are very diverse, they all have a structuring effect on the lives of athletes. In general, female bodybuilders train between four to six days a week which includes two visits a day when they get close to a competition. The training sessions have to be done on prescribed days to facilitate the training of specific muscle groups on different days. They cannot be delayed or done in advance due to the rest the body needs in between the sessions to recover. In this manner, the trainings session structure the week and the day of the athlete. This is process of planning is enforced through the great amount of energy and to a lesser extent the amount of time, that is needed to complete the training. Often women schedule their training sessions in the evening or right after work so that they would be able to rest afterwards. This obligation to train leads to the restriction of their participation in other (social) activities due to a lack of time and/or energy. In short, the training of female bodybuilders supports biopower and depends on self- regulating behaviors of individuals. Training in bodybuilding revolves around the participation in fitness, which allows women to monitor and measure their body closely to create the most useful and productive version of itself. Moreover, the involvement in training forces women to organize their space, time and daily practices in order to eventually achieve

65 their desired ideal body. Here, female bodybuilders, are made responsible for their own appearance, production and health.

Resting

The third activity through which biopower is able to infiltrate into the lives of individual is the activity of resting. As mentioned, women in bodybuilding lead extremely structured lives. They have to control their food intake by weighing and preparing it up front and planning the time to eat six times a day. Furthermore, they have to train almost every day and closer to the competition even twice a day. This is all done in addition to their ‘normal’ and mandatory daily activities such as work, housework and taking care of children. All those activities have to be monitored and carefully planned to fit in the hours of the day. To counter this extremely full schedule of daily tasks, resting becomes a mandatory act. Women have to include rest to allow the body to recover from the training sessions and the additional diet. This implicates that women, when they do have some free time, need to self-surveillance themselves to invest this in their bodily process, by staying at home or going to bed early. Women have to show self-discipline by dismissing what they would like to do (for example going out or be social) and instead act the way they should behave to sustain their bodily transformation towards dominant norms and be the most productive version of themselves. This places a great amount of control on their lives which limits their freedom to do what they like to and go where they want.

The individualizing effects of a self-controlled life

Biopower relies on the internalization of self-regulating practices of individuals. Female bodybuilders voluntary enact self-surveillance and self-regulation in the practices of dieting, training and resting. Those three activities function as organizing principles to which their space, time and daily practices are subjected to. The strict self-surveillance enables the women to transform their physical appearance in a slender yet muscular body. This physique confirms to the norm of looking fit, healthy and thin and is therefore seen as the embodiment of the (bodybuilding) ideal. However, reaching this ideal through the use of self-regulating practices and the organization of their lives, comes at a cost. Female bodybuilders have to live extremely structured lives in which everything they do is focused towards production of labor and highly functional bodies. This never-ending process reproduces (an exaggerated version of) the idealized norm which enables women to feel ethically good about themselves.

However, their involvement in this highly structured way of life also generates the experience of negative feelings such as loneness and being forsaken, due to its restriction on social contacts:

‘I still can get really lonely cause… say you do a diet without any cheat meals, you’re just recycling your carbohydrates or something like that. So there is no cheat meals, no opportunity to go out and socialize with friends. When you get to the weekend, you start with a training on Saturday morning. You might socialize around your cardio, that’s it. I am actually a really social person, like I love hanging out with my friends, I love hanging out with people... like I do genuinely love people. That is my natural way I am as a person; I am a peoples person. So a big aspect of who I am and my real, yea my authentic self is to want to be around people but I found that through the sport I ended up going the completely opposite way, where I would spend lots and lots of time by myself.... Yea that can be extremely lonely and I do get very lonely when I am prepping for competition, for sure’ (Kiara).

Here, Kiara highlights how her participation in bodybuilding strongly limits the social contact she desires. Even though many participants did mention that they felt supported by their significant others during their preparation process, they also emphasized on the feeling that nevertheless; ‘you’re in it on your own’. Significant others, friends and family are able to offer support and give their approval. However, all the work that has to be done relies on self- surveillance and self-discipline of the athlete. It is only the female bodybuilder alone who is experiencing the hunger, exhaustion and stress. Moreover, she is the only one who has to exclude herself from social situations, which she is longing for, in order to conform the structuring activities of her life. It is therefore often stressed that bodybuilding is a very individual sport, which makes the women take individual pride in their accomplishments, but which is also able to isolate its practitioners and stimulate feelings of loneness.

Biopower constituted within the female bodybuilder

In this section, I showed how female bodybuilders are affected by biopower. Following Foucault, it is important to highlight that power can be found anywhere and therefore also inside of us. The concepts of biopower helps us to view the body as a site of subjugation and enables us to understand how female bodybuilders are implicated in their own oppression through control, discipline and their own participation in daily bodily routines and practices. Even though those practices, and the regulation of them, are experienced and identified as voluntary actions, women do highlight how their bodybuilding participation forces them to

67 neglect some of their desires. Social contact and events are the most named activities women feel like they are missing out on. However, even when the women point out that the strict self-surveilling behavior excludes some of their desires, they still indicate that the reward of reaching the ideal body and living the ‘right’ and ‘healthy’ way is more important to them than their losses. They experience a moral and ethical reward for their confirming behavior which allows them to take pride in their self-discipline and self-surveillance.

The influence of power on individual’s desire

Female bodybuilders are constantly subjected to and part of power. This goes to the extent that women constantly monitor themselves to live up to certain ideals. However, women do not experience this as confirmation to an imposed form of power. On the contrary, bodybuilding participation is often identified as a form of self-expression, empowerment and personal ambition (also see chapter 2). So how is it possible that an activity which is structured in line with the norms of dominant power, and requires women to regulate and surveillance themselves, is still experienced as a form of free will and even as personal constructed ambition? To answer this question, I focus on Foucault’s description of power as being productive instead of repressive, which functions through the production of two elements; ‘knowledge and desire’ (Foucualt 1980). In the work of Foucault, knowledge is identified as an important element in the theorization of power. New forms of knowledge are produced through the scientific discourse of medicine, psychiatry, the criminal justice system and social sciences. Yet, the knowledge that they produce is never neutral or objective: It is embedded in power which makes it represents particular conventions, perspectives and motivations (Pylypa 1998: 23). In addition, science, and especially medicine, has the ability to define the ‘normal’ and the ‘deviant’ way of being. This particular kind of knowledge has a great impact on individuals. It is able to change the way individuals behave and has a controlling effect on their bodies. Moreover, the ability of science to set this binary has simultaneously a ‘totalizing’ and ‘individualizing’ effect on power (ibid.: 23-24). It is totalizing in the sense that it creates pressure on all individuals, through the process of normalization, to confirm to the norms. Yet, it is ‘individualizing’ since it are the individuals who fail to live up to the norms that become at risk to be labeled as deviant. It has to be kept in mind that power is not repressive but productive. Conformity to the ‘normal’ way of living is not forced upon the individual by domination or as a form of coercion. Instead, conformity to the norms and ideals of power is led by desire (ibid.: 24). While power influences the knowledge that produces the socially normalized labels of

‘normal’ and ‘deviant’, it is desire that drives individuals to conform to the ‘right’ and ‘moral’ way of living. Individuals actively compare themselves to others who are labeled, or connected to the ‘deviant’ category, to ensure themselves of their own value. ‘If a norm of behavior comes to exist in reality, it is reinforced by the fact that no one desire to be outside it’ (Vaz and Bruno: 278). This will refrain individuals from behavior that would be, in their eyes, be linked to the category of abnormal. In this way, ‘the norm becomes the object of individuals’ desire instead of being only externally imposed’ (ibid.: 278). This process highlights how the individual and personal experienced desire of the female athletes are eventually based on the norms of power. In contemporary Australia, there is a strong presence of a health discourse which presents the fit and thin body as ‘the normal’ and conceptualizes the overweight or unfit body as ‘the abnormal’. Here, the notion of ‘health’ functions as a key justification of this categorization. In bodybuilding those norms are internalized and replicated by its athletes:

‘….I would say it (bodybuilding) is a healthy pageant.

- Me: but is it healthy to be this lean? The leanness you get to no but the health like; there is no doubt that having muscle mass and being fit and staying fit contributes to your health. And the fact that you’re not – you’re pretty much not obese, you don’t have excessive fat, you don’t have the fat in like around organs that makes you just so much healthier as well. And you’re consciousness of how you look. I reckon- even though it is unhealthy to be so obsessed with how you look- I reckon it is also healthy in a way because you keep yourself on track, to not let yourself go and to be healthy. You don’t get all the health related diseases like cholesterol, osteoporosis from having muscle mass and all that sort of stuff’ (Rachel).

The female athletes highlight their bodybuilding participation as a ‘healthy’ way of living by which they create a healthy and attractive body. Moreover, it also makes them feel morally and ethically good about themselves. It is rewarding to be labeled as ‘normal’ and maybe even, in the case of female bodybuilders, as the best (most exaggerated) version of this ‘normal’, while the connotation with the ‘abnormal’ is feared. In this way, achieving the ideal of a slender yet muscular body, is based on the internalizing of the norms of power, while it is simultaneously experienced as a personal desire. The influence of power on the production of knowledge and desire is essential for its existence. Yet, it is through invisibility that it is able to gain in strength: ‘Its success is proportional to its ability to hide its own mechanisms’ (Foucault 1980:86). In this way, ‘power is strongest when it is able to mask itself’ (Pylypa 1998: 34). Through the manipulation of knowledge and desire, the constrains that are placed on female bodybuilders,

69 as well as on individuals in general, become internalized and appear to be positive or even desirable. The internalization of power is then able to structure, limit and set the possibilities of individual desires. It is in this setting, when individuals identify personal restrictions as individual motivations, that power is able to flourish.

Female bodybuilders as vehicles of power

Female bodybuilders are part of their own subjugation through biopower. However, it is important to stress that this type of power is not a form of domination which is imposed on the individual by a dominant group (Pylypa 1998: 23). On the contrary, Foucault has highlighted how power is ‘exercised from innumerable points, in the interplay of nonegalitarian and mobile relations’ (Foucualt 1980: 94). Following this view, female bodybuilders are not only receivers of power but also vehicles of power. This reproduction of power is embedded in the ‘discourses and norms that are part of the minute practices, habits and interactions of our everyday lives’ (Pylypa 1998: 23). This makes the transmission of power through the daily habitual practices and interactions possible. Kiara, a thirty-nine-year-old figure competitor, described in her interview how power moves through the interplay of non-egalitarian relationships and affected her personal norms, ideas and behaviors. Due to her participation in bodybuilding, Kiara was faced with disciplinary comments about her appearance, from strangers as well as from her bodybuilding friends. In the next quote, her female bodybuilding friend uses power in day to day interaction to ensure the reproduction of norms:

‘It is a bit hectic for people. They are like ‘wow did you see that girl who just walked past with those biceps, and the arms and the shoulders?’ And that is what it does look like. I know, cause I have friends who are bikini competitors, who would tell me. My most recent off season I was hanging out with a bikini competitor and she was like “you’re physique is getting a bit hectic, like it is getting like wow”. Yea that would have affected it… more so than anything’ (Kiara).

In this quote, Kiara is confronted with a subjective perception of her body which has been influenced by the incorporation of dominant discourses and norms. Her female friend uses those embodied norms as framework in order to understand, evaluate and eventually discipline Kiara’s body. Kiara, in her turn, voices how this form of discipline affected her ideas and behavior ‘more so than anything’. The disciplinary power of her friend made her

70 change her day to day life and control her body even stricter, to the extent that it was only mentally pleasing while it made her physically uncomfortable:

‘Nah I don’t feel good but I like where I am, the size I am. So I cleaned my diet out, I restricted myself to one cheat meal a week, and I started to do cardio every morning and I dropped six kilos and I kept it of for the last three months’ (Kiara).

Kiara’s confrontations with nonegalitarian forms of power were not solely focused on the shape of her body and her deviancy of the traditional beauty ideal. It also incorporated the implication of how this deviancy could have a(n) (negative) effect on her future love life:

‘Well she said like “yea your body is looking a bit hectic, you need to calm that shit down. You’re not going to meet a guy, like guys will not be attracted to it, boys are not into it”’. (Kiara).

In this manner, Kiara’s body becomes not only the locus of power through the embedded norms of another female bodybuilder, it also confronts Kiara with the disciplinary power of an imagined other (in this case a potential life partner). This shows how power in bodybuilding is not opposed from above; rather it exemplifies how all individuals function as vehicles of power, which they can use upon others. Power, in this way, is transmitted through practices, habits and interaction, which take place in our everyday lives.

Social consequences of the inability to conform

This chapter has shown how biopower functions as a dominant system of control which structurally regulates and manipulates the individual. It is therefore inevitable that those processes of power influence the perception of the self. In this section, I demonstrate how the desire, knowledge and disciplinary pressure to live up to bodybuilding ideals, can become leading in an individual’s choices and is able to harm their self-perception and experienced self-worth. In contemporary Australia, female beauty can be achieved through submission to the ‘tyranny of slenderness’ (Chernin 1981). In this cultural system, the body is subjected to structural dieting and exercise (ibid.) which actively disciplines the body. The body is deprived from food which causes the bodily reflexes of hunger or exhausting. However, those bodily sensations need to be repressed, controlled and dominated, in order to achieve the ideal body. In this manner ‘the body becomes one’s enemy’(Bartky 1988: 28). This causes a

71 strong detachment within individuals in which a separation is made between the irrational and wild body, and the controlled and cultivated mind. Female bodybuilders often highlight this in terms of mental strength; exemplifying that their mind and willpower are stronger than the resistance of the body. This separation in the self, dividing an allegedly dominant mind in relation to the uncultivated body, causes an internal fight in many female bodybuilders. Their bodies become identified as one’s enemy which tries to prevent them from being normal and the desired the self. This not only complicates the understanding of the self but it can also have drastic influences on the identified self-worth and self-perception of an athlete. In my research Brenda a 46-year-old natural pro figure and physique competitor, was willing to share her internal fight and its consequences with me. The involvement of Brenda in exercise, dieting and eventually in bodybuilding was always focused on the development of a body that was in lines with contemporary ideas of feminine beauty. After decades of training, she achieved an incredible muscular and lean body which is characterized by feminine beauty ideals (such as long hair, narrow waist, breasts (implants) etc.). Within the bodybuilding community of Australia, her impressive physique is widely recognized. She has been selected to be an official pro within natural bodybuilding and has won many competitions. However, her success is not reflected in the way she perceives herself. She is still fighting an internal battle between self-doubt, her desire to reach the imagined feminine bodybuilding ideal and her actual physical state. When she prepares for a competition, she constantly struggles with the uncertainties of her body;

‘…your mind constantly tells you that you are not good enough, that you are getting fatter all the time even when you are actually getting leaner, that your muscles are getting smaller even when they are actually getting bigger, that you should just give up, you’ll never make it. The constant struggle wears you down mentally’ (Brenda).

This quote highlights the internal struggle of Brenda which is centered around her fear of being unable to achieve her desired and ideal physique during the preparation phase. In the post comp phase, Brenda is again confronted with fear because bodybuilding physiques are unmaintainable and she has to develop her body away from the slender ideal. This physical transformation represents the loss of control over the body and therefore it functions as a signifier of the loss of self-control. The loss of those two highly rewarded characteristics, are embodied in the physical feared component of fat:

‘God I can't stand it, I'm so fat, so disgusting, so hideous, just get it off me, get it off! I can't stand it, I'm so gross, can't bear the sight of myself. Can't leave the house, everyone is looking

72 at me, hating the sight of me, laughing at how I've failed, thinking how gross I am. My stage body was so beautiful, how could I have let this happen? I hate it, I hate it, I hate it. I'm so stupid, so weak, such a failure’ (Brenda 24)

Female bodybuilders despise the increase of their body fat percentage. The physical progress women worked towards in the months before, slowly disappears through the growing fat percentage: The vascularity decreases, muscle definition is reduced and the “hard” body turns into a softer version of itself. However, it is the fear of seeing the abnormal in themselves which makes the feeling of loss even greater. Bodily fat has become the signifier of the abnormal, the deviant. In this way, the changing body composition stands not only for an unhealthy lifestyle, it also represents a lack of self-control and eventually being undesirable. Moreover, the feeling of failing to live up to the an exaggerated version of the ‘normal’ is reinforced through the widespread presence of this ideal body. Online and especially on social media, the ideal bodybuilding body is often depicted. Women all over the world are able to share photos of their body which can be accessed by everyone at every moment. This is a popular conduct within the bodybuilding culture which creates an almost unlimited stream of photos and videos of ideal built bodies. This ongoing, timeless and limitless stream of images has become the framework to which female bodybuilders measure themselves against. This increases the pressure to achieve an intensified form of perfection:

‘Your muscles are never big enough, you are never symmetrical enough, there is always someone (actually huge amounts of people) who are bigger, leaner, prettier, younger, more famous than you….You constantly see your own flaws’ (Brenda).

While before female bodybuilders measured themselves to other bodybuilders in the same competition, now they are competing against every bodybuilder that has ever photographed her physique. Due to the immeasurable competition and comparison, it can feel like they are unable to achieve the ‘best’ body. Moreover, the feeling of inability to achieve the ideal is also grounded in the kind of photos that are spread. A photograph creates the illusion of an image that displays a two dimensional copy of a certain reality. However, the image actually represents an illusion which only exist in the picture: Photographs are manipulated to enhance the reality. This is especially the case when bodies are depicted. Bodybuilding physiques can only exist in a timeframe, since the stage body is only maintainable for one or two days. Moreover, they are enhanced through; spray-tan, make-up, lighting, posing and

24 This quote is shared by Brenda on an online forum. Brenda used this message highlight the struggles female bodybuilders face in their post comp phase and tried to reinsure women that they are not alone in this.

73 sucking-in. On top of that, there are the additional filters and the use of Photoshop to boost the represented ideal even more. In this way, the categories of ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ become stricter and more extreme. The boundaries are pushed by physiques that are even thinner and more muscular. The experienced inability to achieve or live up to a constructed physical ideal, can cause feelings of unhappiness, worthlessness and bodily dissatisfaction. Those feelings restrict women in their daily lives and take away a sense of freedom to be, do or wear whatever they want. Brenda explained to me that she felt like she ‘never trained hard enough’ and was ‘never lean enough’. She is expressed how she is unable to ‘enjoy activities just for their own sake’ and how she feels like she has to restrict her food intake. Even when she is not preparing for a competition, she is still is unable to ‘enjoy food properly’. The body of Brenda, but also those of many other athletes, have become something that they are insecure about and fight against. However, it is also something they can never escape. Not even in their most intimate and personal relationships: ‘I feel that sex is only for beautiful people, and because I never feel beautiful I never feel sexy, and this obviously is difficult as I don’t even want sex with my husband, however much I love him’ (Brenda). The case of Brenda reveals how bodybuilders are prey to feelings of failing (by not living up the specific bodybuilding norms and ideals) and of the feared embodiment of the deviant category, which can lead to a distorted relationship of the athlete with her body. As a result, it makes women restrict themselves which disables them to enjoy many activities in their day to day lives. However, it has to be noted that not every female bodybuilder experiences the feeling of failing and/or the fear of the deviant, in the same manner. In my research, almost every bodybuilder highlighted a critical view towards her body and the difficulties she had to accept her changing body (including myself), especially after the competition. Nevertheless, this did not restrict them in their enjoyment of life. Nonetheless, the case of Brenda is extremely insightful because it gives an honest and rare inside view in the way specific expectations, norms and ideals, can play on the mind of individuals, reaching into their most intimate moments.

A Critical note on Foucault

This chapter analyzed women’s bodybuilding participation through the lens of Foucault. I made the concept of biopower central, supported with a strong focus on the production of knowledge and desire as agents of power, and the activity of self-surveillance as one of its most important mechanisms. Those theories provide a deeper understanding of power, which moves beyond the conceptualization of power as a form of repression, oppression and force

74 imposed by the state. However, it is important to reflect critically and pay special attention to the inadequacies within those theories. In this section I highlight three important shortcomings within the theory of Foucault that restrict the opportunity to represent and analyze the full scope of reality. First of all, one of the main problems within work of Foucault (especially for feminist scholars) is his reluctance to attribute explicit agency to individuals (Deveaux 1994: 228). Individuals are presented passive and equally accepting of social norms (Pylypa 1998: 33). However, individuals do respond differently to the knowledge that is produced as shown in this thesis. Bodybuilding is just one of many possibilities to react to the power and associated desire to achieve a fit and slender body. Moreover, not everyone is confronted with the same framework of power. Foucault’s work fails to highlight the different kind of power, knowledge and desire that is distributed among minorities based upon their gender, age, race, sexual orientation, culture or class. In addition, Hartsock (1990) has highlighted how unequal power relations of subordination and domination are absent in the work of Foucault. Foucault describes power as enmeshed in a network of relations in which it is everywhere. Hartsock argues that this definition makes power ‘disappear’; ultimately it can be found nowhere (Hartsock 1990: 70). This becomes dangerous when we state that all individuals are equally engaged in their own domination which is able to lead to a form of victim blaming. Secondly, the work of Foucault does not allow any space for resistance or social change. According to Foucault, ‘where there is power, there is resistance’. However, this resistance is only able to challenge power which is then able to transform itself. Along these lines Foucault asserts resistance as another form of power in disguise (Pylypa 1998: 34). This suggest that Foucault denies the possibility of a successful resistance or social change. Moreover, Foucault highlights that the work of social scientist should be limited to the exposure of power relations. He excludes science to form a critique against a power construction and withholds himself from working towards social change (ibid.: 34). This is in contrast with my own belief in which social scientists should not only unravel the construction of power but also hold the responsibility to critique it where necessary. Third and last, Foucault’s theory is unable to give voice to (the feeling of) empowerment. Empowerment would have been conceptualized by Foucault as a means by which power is able to mask itself (ibid.: 34) which completely denies the personal experience of individuals. As shown in Chapter Two, the feeling of empowerment is especially important for women to participate in bodybuilding. While there should be attention to the external manifestations of dominance and power, empowerment can mostly be found in the inner processes of individuals which sustain a sense of freedom or choice. ‘Women’s “freedom” does not simply refer to objective possibilities for maneuvering or resisting within a power dynamic but concerns whether a women feels empowered in her

75 specific context’ (Deveaux 1994: 234). Moreover, the work of Foucault depicts physical active and trained individuals as the creation of docile bodies. However, this interpretation of physical training denies the possible beneficial effects women can experience from it. Among others, training has the ability to make women feel stronger, more confident and energetic. Therefore, I would like to suggest to not solely define training as a form of submission to power. Instead, it is essential to look at women’s experience of freedom and the barriers to freedom, to analyze how a certain activity is constructed within. In this way we are able to ask ourselves the question if physical training could be a way to resist the gender divided power, even though it is embedded within a larger system of power. Together, the exclusion of agency, the lack of space for resistance and the denial of empowerment, make the work of Foucault incomplete for any feminist scholar. Even though his work has been valuable within this chapter to unravel larger forms of power in which female bodybuilders are located, this chapter cannot be read on its own. This would diminish or delimit women’s subjectivity. Therefore it is important to read this chapter as what it is; an explanatory description of power which is non-egalitarian and constituted through production of knowledge and desire, which is able to give an extra dimension to the analysis of the experiences, desires and motivations of female bodybuilders. In the end, female bodybuilders ‘are both constituted by, and reflective of, their social and cultural contexts’ (Deveaux 1994: 227).

Conclusion

In this chapter I analyzed female building through the lens of biopower. On the one hand, biopower works through a network of mechanisms which is infiltrated within institutions. Those institutions are able to penetrate deep into individual lives by monitoring and disciplining the individual to assure its efficacy. On the other hand, biopower works through the subjugation of individuals. Through bodybuilding participation female athletes involve themselves (among others) in the activities of dieting, training and resting. Those three activities function as organizing principles to which their space, time and daily practices are subjected to. This subjugation is experienced to be voluntary; biopower depends on the willingly participation of individuals to self-monitor and self-regulate their practices to replicate the norms. Even though those practices, and the regulation of them, are experienced as an expression of free will, women do highlight how their bodybuilding participation neglects their some of their desires. However, female bodybuilders identify their personal reward of reaching the ideal body and living the ‘right’ and ‘healthy’ way as more important than loss of some desires.

The subjugation of female bodybuilders is voluntary because the influence of power on their behavior is not recognized. This is possible through the incorporation of knowledge and desire which functions as agents of power. The knowledge which is available to female bodybuilders is never neutral. Additionally, sciences has gained the ability to define the normal and deviant way of living which has a great impact on the knowledge based desires of an individual. Female bodybuilders, involve themselves in their subjugation to confirm to desire which are based on particular conventions, perspectives and motivations, promoted by the state. Moreover, power is ‘exercised from innumerable points, in the interplay of nonegalitarian and mobile relations’ (Foucault 1980a:94). This includes female bodybuilders who are part of power due to the internalized norms and by disciplining others accordingly. According to Foucault, it is exactly this ability of power to mask itself, which strengthens it. Here power is able to disguise constraining factors by making it appear as positive and even desirable. In short, the concept of biopower enables us to place female bodybuilders in an overreaching framework of power which influences their own desires, motivations and behaviors. However, this is not all encompassing due the exclusion of agency, the lack of space for resistance and the denial of empowerment. Moreover, while bodybuilding participation and having a fit body is efficient for the state, this does not delegitimizes the possible beneficial effects experienced by female athletes. As a feminist scholar, I acknowledge the importance and influence of external manifestations of power and dominance, while I do not let this determine the subjectivity of individuals. It is crucial to take the inner processes that condition women’s sense of freedom in account to truly understand the phenomena of bodybuilding.

Chapter 4: Muscular yet Feminine The complex construction of muscularity, masculinity and femininity in women’s bodybuilding

Introduction 79

Analyzing femininity in the field 80

Muscularity and/or masculinity? 82

Muscularity in the making 83

The unnatural natural body 86

The on-stage performance of femininity 90

Balance work 93

Out & proud 97

The ideal body 100

Conclusion 101

Introduction

Bodybuilding is an unique sport in which the main goal is to develop a(n) (context specific) ideal physique which can only be achieved through strict dieting and intensive training. Its practitioners actively challenge what is considered to be the natural appearance of the body. Even more, female bodybuilders in particular contest gendered ideals through their development of muscularity, strength and athletic prowess. While men in general are expected to display an angular body which would demonstrate their ability to protect and their embodied power (Bolin 1992, Bordo 1997), women are expected to display femininity which is characterized by softness, passivity and non-aggression (Ian 1991). This creates a physical power hierarchies which supports the idea that men represent the dominant sex, and women their weaker counterpart (Bolin1992). The human biology, and in particular the physical dominant position of men, was and is still used as an important justification for gender inequality (Lorber 1993; Johnson 2005). The idea of a biological hierarchy between the sexes is actively reinforced by gender which is displayed in personality, behavior and appearance (Bolin 1992). This ongoing reproduction is necessary to keep those sex differences (that are considered to be natural) and the power hierarchy, intact. Yet, the physical presence of female bodybuilders alone already contests this hierarchy. They show that women are able to grow a similar muscularity (as their male counterparts) since (with the exclusion of the specific muscles associated with the female and male genitalia,) the muscle anatomy of the sexed body does not differ (Ian 1991). However, those women, who contest the considered to be natural female body, are at risk for social penalties. In those cases, the display of femininity becomes a grateful means to regulate this risk. In this chapter I focus on those techniques of risk management by analyzing how femininity is experienced and used by female bodybuilders to self-fulfill, redefine and reassure their sexed identity. To understand those processes, I first highlight the incorporation of femininity in the sport of bodybuilding, by focusing on the different genealogy of men’s and women’s bodybuilding. This will be followed by a description of the position of the muscular body in modern Western societies. Here, special attention is paid the paradoxical character of muscularity and how it is used to reassure the dominant position of men (over women) in the fitness setting. In addition, I show how female bodybuilders feel like they have to incorporate cultural notions of womanhood to legitimize their sex. In this section, I focus on the wide spread presence of breast augmentations among athletes. Yet, it is not only through the cultivated body that women try to legitimize their position as women, they also perform (an exaggerated form of) femininity during their on stage performance. I highlight how female bodybuilders constantly involve themselves in balance work to reassure their sexed identity

79 in and outside the bodybuilding setting and in their daily lives. Last, I show that women are proud of their muscularity even though it is the source of their perceived controversial character. Together, those elements show how, why and in what way, femininity is displayed, experienced and used by female bodybuilders, within and outside of their bodybuilding practices.

Analyzing femininity in the field

In this chapter, I analyze how the female bodybuilders in Sydney, Australia, experience and enact gendered behavior. It is therefore important to recognize that gender is a cultural construct which meaning is subjectively shaped and constantly varies depending on place and time (Kimmel 1995). Yet, there is a certain agreement on what is considered to be typically masculine or feminine characteristics in contemporary Western societies (Williams and Best 1990). This is often placed in a binary opposition; what is seen as masculine is therefore not feminine, and the other way around. In other words, femininity and masculinity are always constructed in relation to- and can only be defined by- the other. It is therefore essential to talk about masculinity and men’s bodybuilding in order to understand femininity and women’s bodybuilding. In this thesis, I set myself apart from previous research by redefining an important underlying postulation: I disagree with the assumption that male bodybuilding is the normal or even the neutral form of bodybuilding. Both women and men exaggerate their gendered identities on the bodybuilding stage. Yet, the masculine performance of male bodybuilders has often has been neglected in social research, despite of its extraordinary character. Male bodybuilders represent an exaggerated version of traditional masculine values such as strength, determination and independence. Yet, social scientists have often focused themselves on women’s bodybuilding as a form of compliance due to the formalization of femininity. Even though it is correct that men’s bodybuilding judging criteria does not include masculinity explicitly, this does not mean that they are not judged upon it. Bodybuilding is built on the idea of what it means to be a masculine man. The mandatory poses and styles support the masculine ideal and enable men to display the most muscular and defined version of themselves. The transactions between the poses are smooth but do not allow elegance or softness (which is a requirement in the women’s variant). In contrast, it is obligatory for male bodybuilders to change in controlled and firm movements. A male bodybuilder who would show feminine characteristics in his performance would not only be unable to win, but would also jeopardize his own identity as a male. Research has shown that men and boys who engage in socially constructed feminine characteristics are at

80 risk of being labelled with subordinated forms of masculinity such as ‘wimp’ or ‘sissy’ (Courtenay 2000: 1389) and even as ‘not real man’. Especially in the strong heterosexual masculine context of bodybuilding, the portrayal of feminine behavior becomes extremely dangerous since it could damage the fantasy of the ideal dominant masculine man. This exemplifies how male bodybuilders are constrained by disciplinary masculinity, in the same way that female athletes are captured by femininity. The next question then is: If masculinity is (an important) part of the judging criteria for male bodybuilders, why is it not made explicit like femininity in women’s bodybuilding? This has everything to do with the genealogy of the sport. Bodybuilding was developed to offer men a stage to show their athletic prowess, physical domination and as an opportunity for them to embody the ideal of a masculine man. Women’s bodybuilding was developed from this male form. The first women’s bodybuilding competitions adapted implicit femininity expectations which were followed by most athletes. However, different than in men’s bodybuilding, female athletes (such as Bev Francis) started cross unwritten boundaries of traditional gender norms. To control this gender crossing behaviour, which simultaneously contested the idea of the female body as the weaker sex, bodybuilding federations made certain feminine qualities official requirements for its female athletes. Nowadays, women’s bodybuilding is still characterized by the federations attempts to reproduce feminine women which form a binary opposition to their masculine men. Nevertheless, it has to be noted that women’s bodybuilding essentially differs in two ways from men’s bodybuilding. First, women’s bodybuilding is dominated by the ideal of heterosexual desirability, in a way that is absent in the male variant. This could be explained by men’s bodybuilding having its origins in male athletes trying to impress male judges. This is a tensed relationship in which the judges have reassure their heterosexual personalities while looking at (almost completely undressed) male bodies. Therefore they explicitly looked for a masculine ideal; something other men would look up to and want to be like. However, in women’s bodybuilding, (the mostly male judges) judges started to look for ‘beauty’ which in practice meant the display of heterosexual desirability. This prevents women’s bodybuilding bodies to be seen in their own aesthetics (in which they would be judged upon the display of muscularity, symmetry and definition) and are instead viewed in relation to (heterosexual) desire. Secondly, women who participate in bodybuilding are always subjected to masculine behaviour (through their participation in weight training, posing routines and the display of muscularity), while men are not directly confronted with feminine characteristics. This is connected with the aim of bodybuilding to develop a lean and muscular body which is socially perceived as a form of masculinity.

Muscularity and/or masculinity?

The muscular development of the female body lies at the heart of its interpretation of the sport as a form of resistance against traditional gender norms. By developing a muscular body, women cross the imaginary borders of femininity and contest the considered to be natural female form (St. Martin and Gavey 1996). Some female bodybuilders develop their strength to the extent that their muscles become bigger than those of most men, which enables them to lift heavier than most men (Choi 2003: 72). As a result, their physical presence alone is able to contest the sexed power hierarchy, since the biological given (power) differences are often used to justify social gender inequality (Lorber 2005). It is therefore essential to not only look at female bodybuilders as just a form of transgressive femininity, but also to place their existence in an overreaching web of gender norms, boundaries and power, which is created in relation to their constructed binary other (men), to understand the dangerous character of female muscularity within modern societies. Muscularity has become a paradox in our contemporary Western society. The importance of physical signs of male dominancy increases when the need of the physical strength in the social environment decreases. In modern Australia, heavy lifting and the protection of resources do not rely on human power anymore. Also the importance of male muscularity in social relations has decreased due to the increasing equality between the sexes, which makes male physical protection no longer a necessity. This resulted in the loss of an evolutionary advantage of the muscular and/or strong body (Scott 2011: 75). However, to justify social inequality between the sexes, the idea of the superior biology of the male is essential. This results in the importance of a musculature appearance, which helps men to fulfill their experienced need to reassert their masculinity (Gray and Ginsberg 2007) and eventually reassure their dominance over the other sex. Men’s bodybuilding is ideally suited to fulfill those culturally shaped desires of masculinity, muscularity and dominance, which enable men to reproduce traditional gender roles and power relations. This in contrast to women’s bodybuilding which actively contests traditional ideals due to the display of female muscularity and athletic prowess. Bodybuilding federations recognized the contesting characteristic of women’s participation in the sport and decided to limit their transgressive character by regulating their muscular development. While men’s bodybuilding stimulates the growth of muscularity by rewarding the male with the most muscular body, women, in contrast, are at risk of losing points when they become ‘too’ muscular. It is ironic that in a sport where the aim is to build the biggest muscles one can, women can lose the competition by being ‘too good’ at it. Even though, physical force and muscularity are no longer necessities in contemporary Western societies, and are not only limited to the male sex, they still represent

82 the biological domination and superiority of men. This biological belief is supported by gender ideals in which men are often portrayed as dominant, protective and muscular. This in contrast to women who are portrayed as petite, submissive and/or fetishized as sex object (Scott 2011: 75). The more a woman develops her muscularity, the further she moves away from acceptable norms of beauty and femininity (Brace-Govan 2004; Gruber 2007). Those gendered cultural ideals put female bodybuilders at risk for being labeled as ‘too big’, ‘manly’, or as lesbians (McGrath and Chananie-Hill 2009: 237) in and outside the bodybuilding community. It is interesting, that when women contest the normative gendered ideals, and therefore the power hierarchy which is constructed between the sexes, that their own inclusion in this heterosexual hierarchy is denied.

Muscularity in the making

It is not only the muscular female body that challenges normative gender roles, but also the process of its development. Johnston describes how bodies are not only able to shape the gym environment but are actually shaped by it (1996: 328). The space of gyms are used to constitute the corporeality’s of gym members by offering a strong sex based division. Group areas are mostly shaped into feminine spaces and strength/free-weight spaces are created to be masculine. This is especially important because those gendered spaces actively help to identify and create feminine and masculine bodies (Johnston 1996: 328). Most of the group training session have a focus on light- or bodyweight exercises that help to shape a slender or slightly toned body. This is in stark contrast with the free weight and strength rooms which enable individuals to develop strength and overt muscularity. Even though there are no official boundary on the base of sex within (most) gyms, it is a social boundary which triggers a social disruption when someone crosses the unwritten laws. This is also identified by the female bodybuilders:

‘In the gym sometimes, like the other day when I was training chest and shoulders, my chest and shoulder got pretty humped (laughs) and some guys think like; ‘hmm why are you doing weights here? This is our section kind of thing’ (Naomi).

Women such as Naomi, who cross the social boundaries in the gym, create a double disruption in the conception of the experienced ‘natural’ order of masculinity and femininity, of the male gym member (Johnston 1996: 331). First, because the natural and cultural body of women are often perceived as intertwining, any attempt to reform the body is seen as an act against the ‘nature’ of the female body. Secondly, by using gym equipment that enables

83 the development of muscularity and is seen as male privilege, they transgress the traditional order of their sexed identity (Johnston 1996: 331). The social disruption of the ‘natural’ order becomes even greater when women are able to display more athletic prowess than their male counterparts:

‘Today, during my training session I accidently confronted a young male (probably around 25/26 year old, normal posture, around 180 m height) with my physical dominance. I saw that this man just finished his sets on the hip thruster and I wanted to take over the exercise. Since the hip thruster normally takes up a lot of time to build up, by installing a bar with the right amount of plates (weights), it really saves a lot of time to take over the weights over from another person. So we had a short conversation to arrange this:

Hey are you done here? -Yeah this was my last set.

Ah great. You can just leave it like this then, thanks! – how much should I take off?

Ah no worries it’s good like this- You’re sure? Shall I just take the ten plates off for you?

No, no thanks it’s fine like this- oh shit. You are starting with this weight?!?

Uhm yes but no worries it is fine like this- You know I normally train differently. Just today I am doing more reps and I do kickboxing a lot so I can’t do too much strength training, but I definitely do more weight normally.

Yeah it is all good, don’t worry about it’ (Field diary; the 12th of January 2017).

The direct confrontation with female physical dominance is not only a disruption of the ‘natural’ order of the gym and an act against the ‘natural’ female body, but it also threatens the individual masculinity of men, which is connected to their physical dominance over women. Men who do not conform to this standard are at risk to be seen as weak, feminine or as not ‘real’ men. To limit the consequences of those confrontations men show different coping mechanisms. The man at the hip thruster assured his physical dominance in talk : he might not lifted heavier than me now but he is able to. Others highlight the social position of a woman in the gender hierarchy hidden in a ‘compliment’: ‘You’re pretty strong, for a girl’. In this comment they acknowledge a women’s physical prowess, however simultaneously limit it to the position of the weaker sex. No matter how strong a woman would become, she will always be a ‘girl’, unable to challenge the physical prowess or the hierarchical domination of men. I encountered this ‘compliment’ regularly during my fieldwork (and in the past years of my life), and in a sense it became part of my trainings regime. At a certain point I decided to counter this comment with a small adjustment; I am not strong for ‘a girl’,

I am strong. However, men would then often withdraw their comment and refused to agree. By dismissing the gender boundary, I challenged their physical dominance over me, which often quickly led to hostile situations:

‘During my squats a guy ( upper /mid-twenties, tall, broad built but not particularly lean ) I didn’t know, watched me and came up to me after my set.

You’re pretty strong for a girl –Thanks but I am not just strong for a girl, I strong for a human (said with a smile).

Well I wouldn’t say that. You should just take the compliment.- Well it is not really a compliment. A compliment is saying; you are strong.

Men are just stronger. It is not the same league. Women are just weaker. That’s not bad, it is biology. - So how much is the max you’re gonna squat today?

130 kg- Okay well I assume you weigh around 95 kg? So you squat like 140% of your body weight? At this moment I am squatting 95kg at a bodyweight of 55 kg which is almost 200 % of my bodyweight. So I am not just strong for a girl, right?

There is something wrong with you! You are a girl. Not a man. You’re a crazy feminist or something. Why can’t you just take the compliment!

The guy then grabbed his stuff and walked away. Later I overheard a conversation of him with one of the trainers in which he complained about the crazy feminists in the gym who can’t take compliments from men’ (Field diary: 28th of November 2016).

The way I tried to change the ‘compliment’ into a compliment, was not subtle. Instead I directly confronted the inequality embedded in it. Nevertheless, the firm reaction from this man highlights the hierarchical relationship rooted in this kind of language. It is not about complimenting me or my athletic prowess. It is about creating a distance between them (men) and my transgressive character, to (re)assure their physical dominance over me, which most likely is not present in real life. The examples show how female muscularity is a threat for the masculinity of men and their dominant position in the gender hierarchy. Especially in the contemporary Western society, in which the boundaries between the capabilities of men and women are disappearing due to increasing equality of rights. In this setting, men’s bodybuilding became an ideal site to regain masculinity and the display physical dominance. Yet, the development of female bodybuilding, with the inclusion of women who approached the physical prowess, strength and dominance of men, invented a new hazard for the already threatened masculinity. In

85 order to keep the gender hierarchy intact, bodybuilding federations have limited the muscularity of their athletes and obligates them to display feminine behavior to fulfill the expectations of their natural female body. Moreover, female bodybuilders are reinforced in their subordinated social position by talk during their training sessions. In this type of communication, the emphasis is placed on an imaginary boundary that limits the possible amount of physical prowess for ‘real’ or ‘heterosexual’ woman. Women who do cross gendered and hierarchical boundaries become at risk to be devalued and/ or delegitimized. In this way, male dominance cannot be contested by women, and if they do, they are not ‘real’ women.

The unnatural natural body

As mentioned, female bodybuilders challenge the idea of women as the weaker sex. However, it is not solely their muscular development which challenges the ‘natural’ female body but also their low fat percentage. In all divisions of bodybuilding, the female body is presented while having a low (varying to extremely low) fat percentage. This not only results in so called ‘hard bodies’ in which muscles tissue becomes increasingly visible, but it also creates a decrease of breast tissue. However, in most fitness magazines or on bodybuilding stages, many women still have voluptuous breasts on their lean bodies. This is possible through breast augmentations which are often seen as a lasting solution to the disappearing breast tissue. This medical procedure is especially interesting in the bodybuilding context since small breasts could be seen as a characteristic of the natural lean body. It carries the opportunity to be perceived as a sign of dedication, in the same manner the prevalence of abdominal muscles or veins are. So why is the loss of breast tissue, in contrast to other effects of having a low fat percentage, experienced as negative and unwanted? The answer is connected to the assumed to be ‘natural’ and feminine body. The female body in bodybuilding is ultimately influenced by the cultural notion of what it means to be female and what is expected of women (Bolin 1992). While their athletic prowess challenges traditional values of femininity, they still have to reassure their femininity and womanhood in other ways (Scott 2011: 77-78). This shortcoming is perfectly explained by Freedman (1986) who states that nature itself is unable to satisfy the ideals created by culture (ibid.: 6). In this way, a women needs to incorporate cultural notions of womanhood to be socially accepted as such. The necessity to conform to a ‘natural’, ‘biological’ and ‘given’ identity was already highlighted by Simone de Beauvoir in 1949: ‘One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman’. Now, almost seventy years later, female bodybuilders are still expected to live up to an ideal of the ‘natural’ female body which is naturalized as a biological given

86 and is able to define the ‘normal’ (heterosexual) desirable body. Breasts in particular, represent fertility, womanhood and become a signifier of someone’s feminine selves. When women lose their breast tissue due to their bodybuilding participation, they sometimes feel like they lose some of their femininity and/or their heterosexual desirability. Therefore, I follow Ian ( 2001) in the idea that breast augmentations within bodybuilding can be seen as an attempt to recover the feminine selves. This is also articulated by female bodybuilders:

‘To think they [breast implants] are just circles stuck to our chest is to deny that for others they do mean something. I think most men will agree (and women) that boobs help define female beauty’ (Babette).

Breast augmentations enables female bodybuilders to confirm to the ideal of a ‘natural’ female body which cannot be achieved through dieting and training. Instead of perceiving this medical intervention as an adjustment of the body, they are often rationalized as a restauration of their femininity or as a way to bring their bodies closer to their biological natural destiny:

‘I have got big hips and stuff like that and I found that I was sitting at a peer shape so I did get them. A lot of people don’t realize because they are not big and round and stuff. They are quite natural looking and they move more naturally even though they are under the muscle. ..I don’t mind them if they give you a nice shape…I mean, it does give you a more feminine shape’ (Adrienna).

On the one hand, breast augmentations enable women who are crossing traditional gender norms, to be seen as; women, feminine and heterosexual desirable. On the other hand, the growing presence of breast enlargements reinforces the naturalization of this ideal ‘natural’ female body. When smaller breasts on lean bodies become less present, the risk of being stigmatized increases. Moreover, women might feel unable to live the standard they are surrounded by without surgical enhancement:

‘I kind of want to get breast implants.

Me: why?

I don’t know. I think it kind of enhances your body shape, kind of.. like.. especially in the whole bikini model a lot of girls do have them … it is becoming more popular and especially in the fitness industry a lot of people, a lot of women are getting breast implants, because a

87 lot people lose their breasts when they start training a lot (laughs a bit nervous). But yeah but probably to feel more feminine. For me, I like to feel a bit feminine’ (Naomi).

Athletes highlighted the growing insecurity of (sometimes themselves and) their colleagues about their natural bust and identify a social pressure within bodybuilding to conform to the physical ideal of having bigger breasts. Some athletes actively rebel against the endless discussion of ‘what looks better’ and try to bring the focus back on the development of a muscular yet lean body:

‘This whole boob crap discussion can really make women who don't want to "follow the flock" incredibly insecure! It's rubbish! Let's focus on the body they've built and worked so hard for instead of the superficial crap that the world is so focused on these days!’ (Sharon).

However, the discussion about breast augmentations in bodybuilding is still relevant due to the returning question about the relation between breast enhancements and the placing (ranking) of athletes in competitions. Many female athletes share the feeling that women who have enhanced breasts are placed higher than their natural opponents:

‘But yea I have seen it in competitions. When there is a girl with breast implants and a girl who doesn’t have them, the girl with the breasts won. So I kind of had to think like, oh is that the reason why?’ (Naomi).

The official answer of bodybuilding federations to this question is no. They will highlight their judging criteria is based on the muscularity, symmetry, posing, femininity and the overall look. However, the gut feeling of many women becomes confirmed when an official and active judge shares his view in an online discussion:

‘Judges go for the best look .... Fake boobs look better than no boobs  . It isn't the only factor clearly but if you had identical twins and one has no boobs the other has great fake boobs ..... Great fake boobs wins’ (Michael).

This shows that the judging principle of ‘beauty’ can be taken by (at least some) judges as their own (heterosexual) preferences in which reproductive organs become part of the judged criteria. Many female athletes (with and without enhanced breasts) are against this perception and do voice their disapproval:

‘If there are judges scoring on boobs they shouldn't be judges. I wonder if any guys use padding in their beach shorts / tight pants. Does a larger " package " help them win ? lol’ (Janet).

Here, Janet does not only formulate her position against the judges taking the size of women’s breasts in account as a judging criteria, she also calls out the embedded inequality of the expected display of heterosexual desirability between the male and female variant of the sport. Janet is not alone in this. While almost every female athlete actively opposes the idea of breasts being part of the judging criteria in bodybuilding, there is also a smaller group of athletes who considers the natural (without any medical interventions) body the best representation of a true bodybuilding physique:

‘My breasts decreased in size, for sure. But I still felt very feminine, powerful and strong. It didn't bother me that I lost bra sizes, as for me, I love the idea of having less weight in the chest for running when I do competitive triathlon and just in general. It makes it easier to train. I think having a reduced bust- a lot of women especially in bikini even figure get breast in plants, but for me bodybuilding is about working with what God has given you and making it as good as possible without unnatural interference. So for me, I believe muscle is not masculine or feminine. Health, fitness, muscle and a great body is not male and female dominant. Everyone should be strong and healthy, I believe’ (Lorene).

‘I love my pecks. I love to feel my muscles there. It is like; who cares about boobs, they get in the way when you train and you can’t even train chest properly. Like, I love training. There are a few people I know who had to alter their training completely because of their boobs. Even people with natural big boobs, they get in the way. So I am just happy with my itty bitty muscly boobs’ (Rachel).

Here, Rachel and Lorene, are both aware of the prevalence of breast augmentations and their possible use as a means to regain femininity in their sport. However, they dismiss the naturalized ideal female body and instead create an opposing beauty standard in which the real natural body (without any surgical enhancements) becomes the carrier of beauty and biological purpose. Breasts in bodybuilding have become an important topic of discussion on an emic level, and offer a valuable insight on an etic level. The presence of breasts carry the status of a biological given; as one of the main characteristics which is able to define womanhood, but which is often absent or reduced on bodybuilding bodies. The decline of breasts tissue becomes a marker of deviancy, highlighting their ‘unnatural’ state and therefore threatening

89 their womanhood. Yet, we should not make the mistake of perceiving female bodybuilders as victims caught in naturalized norms. As shown, the athletes are able to dismantle the ‘natural’ female body and counter it with a new self-constructed ideal of beauty. Moreover, they take ownership in the way their bodies should be seen within the bodybuilding community, by openly protesting against the sexualization of their bodies in competitions and rejecting the inclusions of their breast in the judging criteria. Nevertheless, even though female bodybuilders dismiss the traditional feminine body, they still have the desire to be perceived as feminine women. They use the incorporation of femininity in stage performance in to reassure this.

The on-stage performance of femininity

The stage performance of female bodybuilders has been described in multiple social researches due to the unique incorporation of feminine characteristics. The exhibition of femininity by female bodybuilders has become crucial for their the ability to win (Choi 2003) since it is included as an official judging standard. ‘It has become essential for competitors to ornament themselves as ‘suitable’ feminine in their posing suits, make-up and hairstyles’ ( St Martin & Gavey 1996: 52). It has been argued that this display of femininity could be interpreted as evidence of the dominant culture’s attempt to regain the transgressive body by including it in its projects of femininity ( St Martin and Gavey 1996: 55). Others have highlighted this formalized incorporation of femininity as a form of feminine apologetic (Lowe 1998) in which the female bodybuilders exaggerate aspects of their femininity to apologize or compensate for their presence in a masculine domain (Bell 2008: 47). In addition, I argue that female bodybuilders, who participate in the formalized forms of femininity, are able to secure their sexed identity as ‘real’ women for themselves and others. It allows them (to a certain extent) to live up to the expected characteristics of the ‘natural’ female body, in which ideas about culture and biology are closely intertwined. Those cultural notions of womanhood are widely shared and are also incorporated by female bodybuilders. It is therefore not surprisingly that female bodybuilders truly enjoy the display of femininity within their sport, which makes them feel more connected to their identity as women. Female athletes express their love for the required display of femininity in bodybuilding because it offers them the opportunity to dress up on their competition day. They substantiate this feeling with three interlocking arguments. First, the decoration of the body functions as a personal reward. The preparation phase for a bodybuilding competition is extremely difficult. The lives of the athletes revolve around bodybuilding which takes up all their time and energy. For some female athletes this goes to the extent that they feel like they

90 don’t have the time to involve themselves in dressing up or ‘being girly’ on a day to day base. In those cases, the competition becomes their extraordinary day which allows them to be taken care of-, and spend a lot of time on- their appearance:

‘Me: What do you think about the way the body is displayed on stage; the heels, the jewellery, the hair, the make-up-?

I love it! That is the best part of it! Because you spend all of this time- well especially me because I wake up so early, 2:30 am to be precise, to get to the gym by 4 am, because I live so far away from my gym…. So when I am leaving home I don’t really have the time to put on makeup or do my hair, I don’t care about hair, I don’t care about make up, I don’t care about fashion and that stuff. But on stage I get to actually have that day that I am glammed up. My makeup is done, I get photos done, I actually get to feel more female then I have felt pretty much all prep long. And… yea.. I love that!’ (Rachel).

The glamour that is added to their appearance on their competition day is perceived as a personal reward. The women worked hard to attain the bodybuilding physique and therefore it becomes socially acceptable for them to invest a lot of time, money and energy in an (extraordinary) glamourous and feminine appearance:

‘ I LOVE the tan, the makeup, the lashes, the hair, the bling and the heels. It puts everyone on a level playing field regardless of their everyday appearance and allows us to shine and look our best on stage. We deserve to play it up, we worked so hard to be up there’ (Sharon).

Secondly, the women highlight how the glamour and overt femininity in bodybuilding makes them feel more secure before presenting themselves on stage:

‘Yeah, it makes you feel very confident. Like I got my hair done and the bikini. Like yeah, a lot of time and money is put into it. It definitely makes you feel a lot more confident. The tan as well, I really think it enhances your body. It just makes your body look a bit better. It all makes you more confident and that just gives you extra bit of push to get up there’ (Naomi).

The decorations of the body fit into the contemporary knowledge of what it means to be a(n) (attractive) feminine woman and are therefore seen as a form of beauty enhancement that enables them to show the most beautiful version of themselves. This overall look is able to reassure women in their beauty and gives them a bit of extra confidence to walk out on the stage with pride. The third reason why female bodybuilders love the overt display of femininity in their

91 sport, is related to their stage time. Women emphasize that bodybuilding competitions involve a performance; they participate in a show. The ornamented body helps them to become more feminine and feel more confident which eventually supports them to transform in an extraordinary version of themselves. This moment is described by Kiara:

‘Being on stage, for me, feels like home. It is a magical feeling. It is just the most amazing feeling. You walk out on stage, half of the time when you look right in the auditorium you can’t even see people looking at you. Like, sometimes, depending on the lighting , you can see their faces, but mostly you cant. … I look at the judges and I give them a lot of eye contact, because I try to engage them to look at me, that is the attraction; I want them to look at me… You’re up here and everybody is like looking in on a show. It is a performance, it is a presentation, it is probably an alter ego, like when I stake my first step on stage I am, I am another person. - Me: what kind of person do you turn into? Extremely elegant, demeanor, extremely confident, very poised Extremely feminine, very granted. My posing is quite good, it is very polished. …. A lot of people say to me; “you’re really amazing to watch on stage” like I get that a lot’ (Kiara).

The tan, make-up, hair and additional clothing, shoes and attributes, enable women to take the role of femme fatal. They represents an exceptional form of female beauty, desire and strength which overthrows the natural and the normal: The women become divine. They are not themselves but a persona which embodies the overreaching ideal of (strong) womanhood supported by overt femininity. They become an ideal which could never live anywhere else than on a stage where they can be worshipped as goddesses; strong, heterosexual desirable and untouchable. Female bodybuilders are aware of the accumulation of their bodily enhancements and the special position it gives them on stage. They emphasize that bodybuilding is possible without all its glamour but it would lose its element of show:

‘It’s all part of the process, you wouldn’t display it in a long t-shirt, would you ? You could [ do it without the glamour] but it wouldn’t be as fun’ (Elise).

‘If you take away boobs, chicken fillet padding, lip fillers, fake eye lashes, nails, make-up, hair and tans, it would no longer be the extravaganza it is. We would all be a bunch of muscly white ugly people. No one wants to pay to see that’ (Janet).

In bodybuilding, women (and men) are restricted in their on stage performance. Following the official rules and regulations, women require to display a certain amount of femininity in order to do well. While this places a limitation on the behaviour and choices of women, it is not experienced as such. Female bodybuilders express their appreciation of the glamour incorporated within the sport because it gives them the opportunity to invest money and time on their appearance. The adjustments of the body are perceived as beauty enhancements which improve their experienced desirability . The ornamented body, together with the on stage behaviour, are able to create the feeling of divine women, who are physically and behavioural overthrowing the natural ideal.

Balance work

The stage spectacle is not only loved by athletes because it increases their confidence, allows them to spend time and money on themselves, and enables them to become embody the femme fatal persona, it is also a way to control their contesting characteristics. Female bodybuilders often show a combination of attempts to balance traditional notions of femininity and muscularity (McGrath and Chananie-hill 2009: 237). Sport sociologists, critical feminist and postmodernist have highlighted how a balance can be maintained through the use of body technologies. This includes breast enlargements and other plastic surgeries but also the feminizing portrayal of the body through hairstyles, outfits and accessories, to counteract “masculinizing” effects which are developed through their bodybuilding participation (Bolin 1992; Lowe 1998; Shea, 2001; Schippert 2007; Wesely 2001; Williams, 2000). Those body technologies were very apparent in my own research in which most athletes explicitly stated their identity as women was truly important to them. Female bodybuilders are conscious of their transgressive character that is connected to their bodybuilding aspirations. All of the women in my research had been confronted with disciplining comments that marked their deviance to traditional gender norms and the assumed to be ‘natural’ female body, which consequently threatens them as ‘real’ women:

‘I did the bodybuilding mission for myself and not for how other people look at it. At one stage I was accused of being a man on Facebook by a man from Egypt who was actually a doctor. He was quite rude and said: ‘I don't believe you are a woman’. He later apologized after I competed’ (Lorene).

In this case, the feminized appearance of Lorene on stage was enough for this man to change his mind and believe that she did belong to the female sex. This exemplifies the strong intersection of believes regarding gender, sex and the ‘natural’ body. Female athletes are aware of this intersection and use it to counter their perceived masculine characteristics connected to their bodybuilding participation (such as their muscularity, independence and involvement in physical labor). For some women is the adaption of feminizing behaviors a very conscious decision:

‘On a personal level, I think as female athletes we spend so much time in gym clothes, minimal makeup and with sweaty hair that it is amazing to dress up and show off our hard work! The weights corner in my gym is affectionately labelled “man land” and often times I train around men so taking the time to look and feel feminine keeps the balance. In the figure and physique fields I am sure (particularly based on comments I see on social media) that women deal with a lot of criticism in regards to their muscularity and having an overall feminine appearance in combination with their amazing physiques would help them maintain their identity as a woman’ (Sharon).

Sharon highlights how femininity can be consciously used to regulate the incorporated masculine characteristics that are caused by their bodybuilding participation. In this way, the embodiment of femininity has become an essential management technique by which women are able to legitimize themselves as ‘real’:

‘I think it [the way is body is displayed on stage]is to show we are still woman. We are still beautiful and feminine whether the outside world sees it or not’ (Dessa).

Here, the physical ideal that is promoted by bodybuilding federations becomes reproduced: ‘Muscular but still feminine’ (Jade). Nevertheless, a feminine appearance and/or behavior is not able to counter more the more extreme forms of muscularity. It is therefore essential for women to control the development of their muscularity. As highlighted by other scholars, the regulation of muscular size helps women to avoid negative labeled such as ‘too big’, ‘mannish’, or lesbian (Bolin, 1992; Boyle, 2005; Grogan et al., 2004; Lowe, 1998; Monaghan et al., 1998; Wesely, 2001). Even with the participation of female athletes in body technologies and balancing techniques, the disciplinary comment of getting or being ‘too big’ is still present. The first time I was disciplined with the ‘too big’ comment I was only fifteen-years- old. Due to my intensive sports participation (in judo at the time) I gained a slender, yet athletic body (I competed in the -52kg division). At the time, I was at a birthday party dressed

94 in a summer dress. When I was chatting with some guys of my high school, one of them just bluntly stated: ‘You are getting too big. When will you stop playing sports?’ A bit offended and shocked, I replied that I wouldn’t stop playing sports since it was my passion. ‘Well you should. You’re getting too big and manly. If you keep doing sports you will look like a man’. After that evening the comments about being ‘too big’ only became more regular since my physical muscularity developed further. I had to take a stance in this opinion; find a way to counter it, fight it or give in to it, just to be able to participate in sports and legitimize my gender as valid. Most of the women in my research also have grown up with those disciplinary comments and have developed coping mechanisms to reassure the validity of their sexed identity to others but also to themselves:

‘It [the too big comment] used to make me angry but now I just let them know that it's my body and I can do what I want with it. My husband still loves me and that's what matters to me. I feel like sometimes people may be a little jealous as they may want to look more toned or have more muscle but aren't prepared to do the work and get jealous of the fact that I possibly have the body that they want…. I have a limit. Based on how I would like my body to look. If I was to reach say a figure category size, I’m competing in fitness, I would feel as though it isn't how I would want my body to look. It's just how I feel and how I don't want my body being too big. But I guess my husband's opinion does play a part, as he has openly said that he doesn't feel that women that size look good. I think I'd be stopping when for example if I started to get separation in my chest etc. .If I was at that point I would have lost all of my boobs/feminine chest look and that wouldn't be for me’ (Diana).

Here, Diana legitimizes her body by highlighting that she has the right to control her own body and her husband thinks she is beautiful which means she is desirable and feminine. Simultaneously, she tries to delegitimize the ‘too big’ comments she received by highlighting the possible insecurities of those persons and emphasizing on her personal construction of the term ‘too big’ in which she is not classified as such. It is important to note that female athletes do not discard the idea of women ‘becoming too big’. Instead they rely on copings mechanisms by which they accept the term and its existence, but make sure it does not apply to themselves. In addition, more than half of the women in my research highlighted the importance of a traditional physical power hierarchy within their romantic relationships. When I asked them how they felt about dating a less muscular or less fit man, they responded as follows:

‘I think it would just feel weird if I was stronger than the man I was dating. Might be old fashioned but I do think the man has to be bigger, stronger and able to handle more than the woman both mentally and physically. Just my personal opinion though’ (Lorene).

‘I can't do it. I'm a woman and in my likes and dislikes I like a man to be much bigger than me. It's a security thing. Comfort in knowing he can defend me not the other at around’ (Dessa).

‘I would like to say that I don’t care but I know that subconsciously I would care. Like, I wouldn’t want to feel like I am dominating. I like that sense of- “I am here from you”, from that person’ (Rachel).

‘I have dated a skinnier guy before and it was hard to be attracted to him physically’ (Amber).

Other women in my research emphasized that they were open to dating a less muscular man under two conditions. First, he should share a similar health focused lifestyle. ‘I would be fine with that although since fitness is such a massive part of my life I wouldn’t date a man who didn’t look after his health’ (Elise). Secondly, the women stressed the importance of their future partner to accept their muscular development and do not feel threatened by it:

'I think it would emasculate him unless he had real self-confidence. Like the real deal. Like you know what I am saying. So I belief that at the heart of the matter most guys will, probably more from a psychology perspective, are going to be emasculated by my physicality if they are not bigger than me. It is just as simple as that’ (Kiara).

And often those two conditions became intertwined:

‘I don’t mind if he got other qualities that I like but I would prefer someone who shares me the lifestyle so we can enjoy doing things together. I will not want to be in a situation when “who I am” would be an issue. This sport build me to handle life better so it is not just about how I look like but also the lifestyle in which I remain healthy, happy and at peace. It will only matter if us having different lifestyles or interest will cause complications in case he wasn’t supportive. It’s one of my priorities so if I guy finds it intimidating that I look bigger then he is not the one’ (Nicole).

Along these lines, female bodybuilders try to balance social expectations of gender in their most personal relationships, even though their bodies that deviate from the norm. Moreover, even if they are open to transgress those hierarchical boundaries; they have to take in account the willingness of their possible partner to do the same. As Kiara highlights, often men do feel emasculated by a woman who could be physically dominant over them because it undermines their considered to be natural dominant position, which can leads to rejection.

Out & proud

It is interesting that even though female bodybuilders feel like they have to enact traditional femininity to reinforce themselves as women, they are not tempted to hide the most important cause of their perceived masculinity: their muscles. When I asked the women the question: ‘Do you ever feel like it is better to cover up or hide your muscles?’, I got a similar answer of almost every athlete:

‘Definitely not, I flex those babies all the time and love wearing clothes that show off my back and shoulders which are my favorite body part. I worked hard for them, no way would I cover them up’ (Sharon).

‘I have been told to but no way will I do that. I am ME’ (Jade).

‘No I am not covering up! I work too hard to look the way I do’ (Amber).

‘Not at all. I will show them with pride’ (Nicole).

In addition to their self-identification as women, muscles have also become part of their identity. To hide or cover up their muscles becomes an equivalent to hiding their true self. Moreover, having a muscular body is experienced as a source of pride. A trained body can only be developed by giving a systematic stimulus to the muscles. In this way, muscles become a symbol and a representation of all the training activities a women endured. Additionally, female bodybuilders represent (an exaggerated version of) the ideal body within the contemporary discourse of health, due to the presence of muscles in combination with a low fat percentage. This supports their ability to embody their muscles with pride and incarnate them as a positive part of their being. Others recognize the privileged position of this particular body and approach the women as such. Female bodybuilders highlight how strangers often place them in the position of a role model:

‘Some people feel inspired and I honestly feel like people look at me as a role model and asks for advices and tips like if I was professional’ (Nicole).

‘In the supermarket I find people looking at my trolley to see what I eat which is funny’ (Sharon).

However, simultaneously, the female bodybuilding physique is transgressive, because (some) bodybuilders become more muscular than what is seen as acceptable in traditional femininity norms. This is also apparent in daily habitual practices and interactions. Loved ones, acquaintances and strangers use their power, supplemented by their embodied knowledge and desire, to interpret, judge and discipline the female physique:

‘Friends and family told me that I would look gross and asked me why I put myself through that ... I [also] have overheard comments in the gym saying that I am too big and that I don’t look feminine to them’ (Diana).

‘When me and my friend went outside the club to cool down, a guy came up to me. Without asking or hesitating he grabbed my upper arm and said; ‘Wow you’re arms are huge! What are you?! Those are bigger than male ones! You must be a bodybuilder or something?’ (field diary).

The way their (and my) body is judged (positively or negatively), heavily depends on the social context in which they are placed since values, expected performances and ideals differentiate. In sport related social contexts, women’s muscularity is often perceived as a reason for admiration or as a symbol of determination, while in contrast, in non-sport related contexts women fall outside the norms of traditional femininity. Especially the women who participate in the more muscular divisions highlight how their bodily presence alone, in a non-sport related context, can cause moral uproar:

‘I had to drop of my little brother at a pub/club one night and I went in with him and went to the ladies room. I literally had women touching my arms and saying; ‘you are so strong’. So I started posing for them and it was a weird moment. I guess I felt like what it would feel like to be a man and have ladies gloating over you. It was funny, but all it is a different lifestyle in a different setting so because it is different it is attractive to people who just don't have that type of figure as they don't train, if that makes sense’ (Lorene).

Female bodybuilders are aware of the multiple perceptions and readings of their body: ‘Some people aspire to look like me and others I scare!’ (Jade). It might be this realization that makes women take pride in who they are, who they like to be and how they deal with (negative) disciplining comments. Almost every women in my research expressed, with a certain calm, a reflexive analyses of the negative comments she receives and how she perceives them:

‘Some guys would say I should not get bigger and some girls would say it’s too much for girls but it’s all perspective and each individual have their own paradigm and idea of what a person should look like, so these comments wont influence me negatively. In fact, I take this as an opportunity to raise awareness and affirm how happy and proud I am with myself’ (Nicole).

‘Men see muscles and think one of two ways; she looks good, or gross she’s too big, I think that comes down to their own self-esteem and I think women feel the same way, if they don’t feel comfortable in their own skin than they will judge me based on what they think I’m like from the outside and judge the person I am and the personality I have from the way I look’ (Diana).

‘Most of the time people compliment on how I look. If they are negative I am guessing they have some issues they need to sort out for themselves and they are acting out to compensate for feeling bad themselves. I think sometimes males may be intimidated or they have some perverse curiosity. I am by all means not a muscly freak but I just look bigger than most girls in my gym’ (Amber).

The women express confidence in themselves and in their appearance. The negative comments they face, especially from strangers, are not depicted as something that is reflecting their identity but more so the insecurities of the stranger. Women also refuse to let the ‘perverse curiosity’ of others, which refers to males who are interested in their sexual body, define them. Multiple athletes highlighted their sexualized encounter with men due to their muscular appearance:

‘Even though I am around men all the time and I have lots of male friends, I never get asked out on a date. If they do show interest, they just ask you over for a "movie" and never talk to you again after. I think that is just because they are curious what it’s like’ (Jade).

This form of interaction highlights the perception of female bodybuilders as contesting in many social settings, which places them at risk of being seen as a sexual other. Yet, it is

99 interesting that when women find themselves at the borders of social norms, they support each other:

‘I think there is a slight comradery between women who obviously work hard and train hard though and we tend to acknowledge each other in public with a little smile or nod’ (Sharon).

Their bodies become markers of recognition and regulate group bounding. This enables them to feel strengthened and reassured in their own positive perception of their physical body. In sum, women take pride in the source of their perceived masculinity: their muscles. It makes their bodies deviate from traditional cultural norms which causes them to be approached with both admiration and disgust in social environments. However, maybe even due to those controversial and tensed reactions, women develop a sense of pride in who they are and how they look. This goes to the extent that negative comments are perceived as a reflection of other people’s insecurities and a feeling of group bonding comes in to being among muscular women, which supports and reassures them in a positive perception of their bodybuilding way of life.

The ideal body

The trained body requires the display of femininity in order to confirm to certain gendered expectations and to allow female bodybuilders to identify themselves as women. However, despite their work, women unavoidable find themselves in social settings in which their appearance is seen as transgressive and even as provocative. Nevertheless, female bodybuilders express how the sport has changed their perception of the ideal female body. They highlight how they used to think that a skinny body represented the female ideal: ‘I grew up attached to the number on the scale thinking that lower is better and skinny is the goal’ (Nicole). This ideal changed due to multiple reasons. Diana realized that ‘super skinny meant sick, not only physically but mentally and emotionally as well’ (Diana), Nicole recognized that ‘I am enough. Before I thought the better I look the happier I will be. Now it is different. I know myself worth regardless and my body now reflects my happiness, inner strength, dedication and commitment’ and Sharon highlights how her ideals changed because ‘….every time I reach my “ideal body” my goals change and I find myself wanting more and more’ (Sharon). Those shifts in the perception of beauty finds its roots in their bodybuilding participation which offered them new role models and opportunities. My findings therefore support the idea of Grogan et al. who states that, when the most important reference group becomes related to the bodybuilding community, many female athletes internalize a new

100 bodily ideal which is more muscular and which consequently results in an increase of self- confidence and the feeling of personal power (2004) . Moreover, it is interesting that female bodybuilders emphasize female agency and personal desires in what they regard as an ideal body. While they have a certain preference for their individual body; ‘Personally I love capped shoulders, wide back, small waist, strong legs and glutes. A balanced and well-built body that is feminine and strong at the same time’ (Nicole), they first and foremost highlight the idea that an ideal body is subjective and should be determined by its owner. This can be exemplified by the comment of Amber who emphasizes that; ‘the ideal body should be different for every woman. Everyone should have the right to choose how they want to look from what is ideal for them’ (Amber). Or by Diana who states that an ideal body looks; ‘However the female wants her body to look! All women should feel empowered enough to love themselves however they are’ (Diana). Their participation in bodybuilding has lead them to see the multiplicity of beauty and the subjectivity of a physical ideal. In this way, bodybuilding did not only change the ideal body they would like to enact, transforming from a slender ideal into a more muscular, confident version of themselves, but it made them aware of the importance of women’s own agency and freedom in defying their own beauty.

Conclusion

Female bodybuilders are pioneers who are caught between gendered expectations and modern opportunities. Their developed physique is transgressive, but maybe even more important, is considered to be threatening. In modern societies, male muscularity has become less important due to the decrease of heavy physical work and an increase in equality between the sexes. Yet, the superior biology of the male is used as one of the main justifications of social inequality between the sexes. This makes a musculature appearance crucial to reassure the male masculinity and their dominance over women. While men’s bodybuilding fits this aim perfectly, women’s bodybuilding, and therefore female bodybuilders, actively contests it. Their physical muscularity and athletic prowess challenges the idea of women as the weaker sex and therefore directly question the justification of social inequality in society. Within bodybuilding, the gym and mainstream society, men (and women) have developed coping mechanisms to devalue the transgressive and contesting characteristics of female bodybuilders to protect the power hierarchy. This is done by emphasizing on their subordinate gender, reassuring the male biological dominance in talk and by delegitimizing contesting women by labeling them as ‘mannish’, lesbians, or as ‘not real’ women. In this way, male dominance cannot be contested by ‘real’ women.

101

Female bodybuilders are aware of the risk of being delegitimized. It is important to them to be perceived as women and are therefore careful not to cross too many gendered norms. The stage performance in bodybuilding helps them to achieve a balance. The accumulation of ornaments, together with the extraordinary performance of femininity, allows the women to turn into divine beings. On stage, they represent feminine goddesses, who can be worshipped, desired but always stay untouchable. Moreover, women also balance their femininity outside of bodybuilding competitions. This is done in the way they present, shape and move their bodies. Those performances are able to reassure women in their female identity for themselves and others. Based on my research, I have to conclude that female bodybuilders do both; they reproduce and naturalize feminine behavior as an integral part of womanhood, while they simultaneously contest ideas of womanhood by the development of their muscular bodies. Yet by doing both, women adjusted their ideas of what it means to be a women. Female bodybuilders highlight that it is important to them to be strong, healthy and most significantly; whatever they want to be. Female bodybuilders do not only break down boundaries with their physical presence, they create new ideals and opportunities by their behavior and in their communication; like pioneers do.

102

Conclusion

In the introduction of this thesis I proposed the question: How can we understand the simultaneous incorporation, dismissal and adjustment to dominant norms of femininity by female bodybuilders in contemporary Australia? In the former four chapters, I have analyzed the practices, behaviors and motives of female bodybuilders in-depth of which the results support the combined theory of resistance and compliance (Bolin 1992; Hall 1996; St Martin and Gavey 1996). On the one hand, female bodybuilders deviate from dominant norms of femininity and womanhood. They involve themselves in strict regimes of weight training and dieting which allows them to create a muscular and so called ‘hard’ body. Their physique, and their muscularity in particular, become a symbol for their strength. This is connected to the opportunity bodybuilding offers: Female bodybuilders are able to enrich themselves with characteristics that used to be the privilege of men through their bodybuilding participation. In my research, female athletes highlighted that their sport involvement allowed them to enhance their self-perceived identity with the elements of; being in control, empowered, (physically and mentally) strong and part of a community. Moreover, it also changed their beauty ideal which moved away from the traditional ideal of ‘being skinny’ and was transformed into the importance of female ownership over their own bodies. On the other hand, female bodybuilders also incorporate attitudes that represent compliance to traditional norms of femininity and womanhood. Bodybuilding federations have adapted the competitive regulations to reinforce the enactment of traditional gender norms by their female athletes. Female bodybuilders are required to show a prescribed amount of femininity and have to control their display of muscularity in order to do well. This explicit form of control is based upon the perception of muscularity as a masculine characteristic that threatens (the perceived amount of) femininity. This idea is also incorporated by female bodybuilders which explains why they involve themselves in body technologies. Those technologies allow them to regulate and balance their perceived sex. The incorporation of feminine characteristics (which sometimes involves a very conscious decision or the enactment of a formalized standard) enables women to confirm to dominant ideas of how a ‘natural’ female body should look like, which in turn allows them to regulate the risk of being seen as not a ‘real’ woman. In addition, female bodybuilders have developed coping mechanisms to handle situations in which they are perceived as deviating from dominant norms and are confronted with their semi-outside status. The women described the accusation of being ‘too big’ as the most prevalent disciplinary comment they received. Female bodybuilders take a stance in this by conceptualizing the term ‘too big’ in a way that does not apply to themselves but they do not discard or question the existence of the term in

103 itself. In this way women contribute to the restriction of female muscularity and the delegitimisation of the muscular woman. Moreover, female bodybuilders are also part of their own subjugation through the incorporation of self-regulating and self-surveilling practices which are inseparably connected to their bodybuilding ambitions. They involve themselves in activities that function as organizing principles to which their space, time and daily practices are subjected to. This subjugation is experienced to be voluntary. Yet it is the strength of biopower that depends on the willingly participation of individuals to self-monitor and self-regulate their practices to replicate the norms of power. Those elements highlight the compliance enacted by female bodybuilders in my research through their own subjugation and their conformity to (an exaggerated version of) dominant norms. Taken together, it can be stated that my research reinforces the combined theory in which female bodybuilders represent both resistance and compliance in their bodybuilding participation. They display a double enactment of resisting the standards of traditional gender roles while simultaneously being in conformity with the traditional norms of femininity. However, conceptualizing bodybuilding as a combination of resistance and compliance is not comprehensive. Moreover, it mostly reflects a feminist framework concealed in the conceptualization of agency. I here follow Mahmood (2006) in her description of feminist scholarship as both an analytical and politically prescriptive project. The aim of feminist research is not limited to the analyzation of the different cultural and historical locations women find themselves but simultaneously carries the aim to transform their conditions of subjugation (Mahmood 2006: 31). This fundamental aim of feminist scholarship influences the way we are able to perceive the agency of women who voluntary conform to a subjugated position or subjugating practices and therefore effects the way we are able to understand female bodybuilders. I elaborate this further by highlighting the location of agency and moral anatomy within this scholarship. Since the 1970’s, feminist scholars have tried understand the position of (women’s) agency within the structures of subordination. The emphasizes was placed on how women were able to resist the dominant male order and/or redeploy the hegemonic meanings of cultural practices for their own interests (ibid.: 37). Along these lines, cultural norms and/or traditions are conceptualized as resources that women can use for their own benefit, as a site of their agency. This particular framework enabled scholars to restore the absent voices of many women and complicate the oppressor/oppressed dichotomy in gender relations. However, this framework incorporates the binary terms of resistance and subordination in their conceptualization of agency which limits the analysis of motivations, goals and desire that are not necessarily described in those terms (ibid.: 38). Here, the notion of agency seeks ‘the political and moral autonomy of the subject in the face of power’(ibid.: 33) and could be

104 defined as : ‘…the capacity to realize one’s own interests against the weight of custom, tradition, transcendental will, or other obstacles (whether individual or collective’ (ibid.: 38). This definition of agency assumes the universality of the desire to be free from subordination or structures of domination and connects agency to resistance, which highlights the dual character of feminist as both an analytical tool and politically prescriptive project (ibid.: 38- 39). However, if the concept of agency is detached from its progressive politics goals that are embedded in the feminist scholarship, a focus can be placed on projects, discourses and desires that are not captured within those terms. In other words, the reconceptualization of agency is able to broaden our understanding of female bodybuilders outside of the resistance/compliance dichotomy it has been captured in. In this manner, the conceptualization of agency shifts from the binary construction between confirmation and resistance, towards agency as the capacity for action. Here, I follow Butler (1993) who locates agency within the structures of power in her description of the paradox of subjectivation. In this paradox, the reiterative structure of norms strengthen a particular regime of power/discourses while simultaneously offer the means for its destabilization (ibid.). In this way, a subject, who might resist certain norms is enabled, if not produced, by the same ones. In other words, Butler defines agency as a rearticulatory practice immanent to power instead of an a practice which would be an opposition against an external power (ibid.: 15). Along these lines, bodybuilding can be seen as the a modality of action, shown by the athletes, which is constructed, limited and enabled by norms. This framework allows us to understand the multiplicity of relationships between embodied behavior and the present norms which can be lived, reached for and accomplished in a variety of ways. Female bodybuilders are simultaneously produced, limited and enabled by dominant norms. First of all, dominant norms learn girls how to become a woman and to enact womanhood, from the earliest stages of their lives. This affects the way they are expected look, communicate and behave. In the modern Australian culture, there is a strong emphasis on the enactment of femininity which includes characteristics such as being elegant and submissive. Those norms become embodied through the ongoing reproduction of acts, to the extent that they become experienced as natural. Some women experience their enactment of femininity as the exhibition of their true identity; something that comes from inside out. This shows how individuals are not only part of the rearticulatory reproduction and therefore the ongoing existence of norms but also are produced by them. Secondly, those norms also limit the opportunities of individuals. Since women are expected to display traditional notions of womanhood and incorporate femininity, they are prescribed to act in a certain why which simultaneously limits their possibilities in their day to day lives. I have shown how female athletes are affected by this (among other things) through the social conceptualization of certain sports as more suitable for male of females, due to the incorporation of masculine or

105 feminine characteristics (Krane 2001). Yet, the third element of norms offers the means for its destabilization (Butler 1993). Bodybuilding is a combination of incorporation and deviation of norms. On the hand, modern bodybuilding competitions formalized the enactment of femininity by which they confirm to (some) gendered norms. However, on the other hand, the sport in itself perceived a masculine sport due to the development of athletic prowess and muscularity. Yet, it is the combination of gender norms, the health discourse and the incorporation of (an exaggerated version of) the portrayed ideal physical that assure the social acceptability of female bodybuilders. In this way, bodybuilding can be understood as a means of destabilization that is embedded within norms. Along these lines, I argue that women’s participation in bodybuilding should primary be understood as a mode of action. They do incorporate characteristics that can be categorized as deviating or complying to dominant gender norms but this does not capture the complexity of the interconnecting relation of norms. The desires and activities of female bodybuilders are shaped by norms, to the extent that elements of the dominant discourse are often understood as markers of their own identity, as something that comes from inside out. The display of being girly or feminine, has been highlighted by multiple women in my research as an manifestation of their true ‘authentic’ selves. However, women are not only produced by norms, they actively reproduce them and female bodybuilders in particular contest them by their involvement in bodybuilding which should be seen as a means of destabilization. Female bodybuilders are able through their participation, to enrich themselves with characteristics that before were the privilege of men. Their bodies become muscular and have a low body fat percentage which create a so called ‘hard bodies’. Moreover, they are able to perceive themselves, and be perceived as others, as strong, independent and in control, through their involvement and the embodiment of this particular physique. They confront power with resistance which forces it to adjust. Yet, it is important to highlight that the strength of female bodybuilders to adjust power, relays on their existence in, conformity to and the use of norms as a means of destabilization. Female bodybuilders are able to confront power because they are part of the norms and therefore part of the society which is able to resists. If female bodybuilders would stop enacting the norms of femininity or would discard body techniques to regulate their perceived sex, they would become placed outside of the social norms. Their characteristics would then no longer be perceived as being ‘fierce’ but would instead be labeled as ‘freaky’. They would become the ‘abnormal’ (Foucault 1975) in a society which delegitimizes them as women and takes away their reformative power. Women’s bodybuilding cannot be completely understood in the terms of resisting of or complying to certain norms, even though those characteristics can be identified. It is their immediate embodiment and reproduction of norms that allows them to use the means of

106 destabilization that are embedded within them. In this way, women’s bodybuilding can best be understood as a mode of action. Female bodybuilders use their agency to involve themselves in bodybuilding which in turn allows them to create a new adjusted feminine self in which they incorporate characteristics such as (physical and mental) strength and control. Moreover, female bodybuilders challenge the perceived to be natural female body and broaden the definition of female beauty. They embrace slogans such as ‘strong is the new sexy’ and support this with their own physical portrayal. Their agency is supported by their incorporation and reproduction of dominant norms, which enables them to challenge power and adjust dominant norms. In this way, female bodybuilders are not only able to enhanced their own self perceived identity but also open up the opportunities for other women to do so. They support the possibility for women to embody characteristics that were before seen as privileges of men. Moreover, female bodybuilders spread the notion that women incorporate agency and that they should use this: They promote the idea that women should be whoever they want to be. Along these lines, female bodybuilders introduce an adjusted norm that supports other women in finding their own agency and participate in their personal desired life, regardless of the possible subjugated position of those desires. In the end, female bodybuilders show us the definition of power which is driven by agency but cannot be captured in terms of resistance: Female bodybuilders find their strength along the lines of dominant norms but nevertheless show us the true face of female fierceness.

107

Bibliography

Bartky, S.L.

1997 Foucault, femininity and the modernization of patriarchal power. In: K. Conboy, N. Medina, and S. Stanbury (eds.), Writing on the body. Female embodiment and feminist theory. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 129-154.

Bartky, S. L.

1988 Foucault, femininity and the modernization of patriarchal power. In: I. Diamond and L. Quinby (eds.), Feminism and Foucault. Reflections on resistance. Boston: Northeastern University Press, pp. 61–86.

Barrett, F. J.

1996 The organizational construction of hegemonic masculinity. The case of the U.S. navy. Gender Work and Organization 3(3): 129-142.

Beauvoir, S. de.

1949 The second sex. New York: Vintage Books.

Boyle, L.

2005 Flexing the tensions of female muscularity. How female bodybuilders negotiate normative femininity in competitive bodybuilding. Women's Studies Quarterly 33(1&2): 134- 149.

108

Bolin, A.

1992 Vandalized vanity. Feminine physiques betrayed and portrayed. In: F. E. Mascia and P. Sharpe (eds.), Tattoo, torture, mutilation and adornment. The denaturalization of the body in culture and text. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp 79-99.

Bordo, S.

1988 Anorexia nervosa. Psychopathology as the crystallization of culture. In. I. Diamond and L. Quinby (eds.), Feminism and Foucault. Reflections on resistance. Boston: Northeastern University Press, pp. 87–118.

Bordo, S.

1990 Reading the slender body. In M. Jacobs, E. Fox Keller and E. Shutterworth (eds.), Body politics. Women and the discourses of science. New York: Routledge, pp. 83–112.

Bordo, S.

1997 Twilight zones. The hidden life of cultural images from Plato to OJ. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Blinde, E. M., Taub, D. E. and Han, L.

1993 Sport participation and women’s personal empowerment. Experiences of the college athlete. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 17(1): 47-60.

Brace-Govan, J.

2004 Weighty matters. Control of women’s access to physical strength. The Sociological Review 52(4): 503–531.

109

Brady, J.

2001 Is a hard woman good to find? Reconsidering the modern Amazon Project. Studies in Gender and Sexuality 2(3): 215–241.

Bradshaw, A.

2002 Empowerment and sport feminism. A critical analysis. International Sports Studies 24(1): 5-31.

Butler, J.

1986 Sex and gender in Simone de Beauvoir’s second sex. Yale French Studies 72: 35-49.

Butler, J.

1993 Bodies that matter. On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.

Cantor, D.W. and Bernay, T. 1992 Women in power. The secrets of leadership. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Chernin, K.

1981 The obsession. Reflections on the tyranny of slenderness. New York: Harper and Row.

Choi, P. Y. L.

2003 Muscle matters: maintaining visible differences between women and men. Sexualities, Evolution & Gender 5(2): 71-81.

110

Connell, R. W.

1987 Gender and power. Society, the person and sexual politics. Cambridge: Polity.

Connell, R. W.

1990 An iron man. The body and some contradictions of hegemonic masculinity. In: M. Messner and D. Sabo. Champaign (eds.), Sport, men and the gender order. Critical feminist perspectives, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 141-149.

Cornwall, A. and Lindisfarne, N.

1994 Dislocating masculinity: Comparative ethnographies. London: Routledge.

Connell, R. W.

1995 Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Connell, R.W. and Messerschmidt, J.W.

2005 Hegemonic masculinity. Rethinking the concept. Gender and Society 19(6): 829–859.

Courtenay, W. H.

2000 Construction of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being. A theory of gender and health. Social Science & Medicine 50: 1385- 1401.

Crawford, R.

1984 A cultural account of “health”. Control, release, and the social body. In: J. McKinley (eds.), Issues in the political economy of health care. London: Tavistock, pp. 133-143.

111

Deveaux, M.

1994 Feminism and empowerment. A critical reading of Foucault. Feminist Studies 20(2): 223- 247.

Dutton, K.R.

1995 The perfectible body. The Western ideals of physical development. London: Cassel.

Eskes, T., Duncan, M. C. and. Millar, E. M.

1998 The discourse of empowerment. Foucault, Marcuse, and fitness texts. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 22(3): 317-344.

Featherstone, M.

1999 Body modification. An introduction. Body and Society 5(1): 1–13.

Fiscke, J.

1987 Television culture. New York: Methuen.

Foucault, M. and Gordon, C.

1980 Power/knowledge. Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books.

Foucault, M. 1977 Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison. New York: Pantheon Books.

112

Foucault, M.

1978 The history of sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books.

Foucault, M.

2003 Society must be defended. Lectures at the Collège de France 1975-76. New York: Picador.

Glassner, B.

1992 Men and muscles. In: M.S. Kimmel and M.A. Messner (eds.), Men’s lives. New York: Macmillan, pp. 287-298.

Grogan, S., Evans, R., Wright, S. and Hunter, G.

2004 Femininity and muscularity. Accounts of seven women bodybuilders. Journal of Gender Studies 13(1): 49–61.

Gruber, A. J.

2007 A more muscular female body ideal. In: J. K. Thompson and G. Cafri (eds.), The muscular ideal. Psychological, social, and medical perspectives. Washington: American Psychological Association, pp. 217–234.

Guthrie, S. R.. and Casteinuovo, S.

1992 Elite women bodybuilders. Models of resistance or compliance? Play and Culture 5(4): 401– 408.

113

Gutierrez, L. M. 1990 Working with women of color. An empowerment perspective. Social Work 3(5): 149- 153.

Hargreaves, J. 1994 Sporting females. Critical issues in the history and sociology of women’s sports. London: Routledge.

Hartsock, N.C.M. 1983 Money, sex, and power. Toward a feminist historical materialism. New York: Longman.

Hartsock, N.

1990 Foucault on power: A theory for women? In: L.V. Nicholson (eds.), Feminism/postmodernism. New York: Routledge, pp. 157- 175.

Heywood, L.

1998 Bodymakers. A cultural anatomy of women’s body building. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Ian, M.

1991 From abject to object. Women’s bodybuilding. Postmodern Culture 1(3): 1–11.

IHRSA

2013 The 2013 IHRSA Global Report. The State of the Health Club Industry. Boston: IHRSA.

114

Jaggard, E.

2007 Bodysurfers and Australian beach culture. Journal of Australian Studies 31(9): 89-98.

Jeffords, S.

1994 Hard bodies: Hollywood masculinity in the Reagan era. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Johansson, T. and Andreasson, J.

2016 The gym and the beach: Globalization, situated bodies, and Australian fitness. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 45(2): 143–167.

Johnson, A. G.

2005 The gender knot. Unravelling our patriarchal legacy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Johnston, L.

1996 Flexing femininity. Female body-builders refiguring the body. Gender, Place and Culture 3(3): 327-340.

Kimmel, M.

1995 Manhood in America. A cultural history. New York: Free Press.

115

Klein, A. 1994 The cultural anatomy of competitive women’s bodybuilding. In: N. Sault (eds.), Many mirrors. Body image and social relations. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. 76– 104.

Krane, V.

2001 We can be athletic and feminine, but do we want to? Challenging hegemonic femininity in women’s sport. Quest 54: 115-133.

Krane, V., Choi, P.Y.L., Baird, S.M., Aimar, C. M. and Kauer, K.J.

2004 Living the paradox. Female athletes negotiate femininity and muscularity. Sex Roles 50(5-6): 315– 329.

Laqueur, T.

1990 Maxing sex. Body and gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lazar, M. M.

2006 Discover the power of femininity! Feminist Media Studies 6(4): 505-517.

Lindsey, L.

1994 Gender roles. A sociological perspective. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Lorber, J.

1993 Believing is seeing. Biology as ideology. Gender and Society 7(4): 568–581.

116

MacCosham, B.

2016 Conceptualizing leisure within the highly regimented world of elite hockey. Physical Culture and Sport Studies and Research 71(1): 53-62.

Mahmood, S.

2006 Feminist theory, agency, and the liberatory subject. Some reflections on the Islamic revival in Egypt. The Finnish Society for the Study of Religion 42(1): 31-71.

Marzano-Parisoli, M. M.

2001 The contemporary construction of a perfect body image. Bodybuilding, exercise addiction, and eating aisorders. Quest 53(2): 216-230.

McGrath, S. A. and Chananie-Hill, R. A.

2009 “Big freaky-looking women”. Normalizing gender transgression through bodybuilding. Sociology of Sport Journal 26: 235-254.

McWhirter, E.H. 1991 Empowerment in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development 26(2): 29-22.

Miller, L. and Penz, O.

1991 Talking bodies. Female bodybuilders colonize a male preserve. Quest 43: 148-63.

117

Monaghan, L., Bloor, M., Dobash, R.P. and Dobash, R.E.

1998 Bodybuilding and sexual attractiveness. In: J. Richardson and A. Shaw (eds.), The body in qualitative research. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, pp. 39–55.

Mitchell, K.

2011 Gender theory. In: M. Ryan (eds.), The encyclopedia of literary and cultural theory. Blackwell reference online. Blackwell Publishing.

Murray, R.

1996 Dehydration, hyperthermia, and athletes. Science and practice. Journal of athletic training 31(3): 248–252.

Nash, K. 2000 Contemporary political sociology. Globalization, politics and power. Massachusetts: Blackwell publishers Inc.

Paechter, A.

2006 Masculine femininities/feminine masculinities. Power, identities and gender. Gender and Education 18(3): 253-263.

Pascoe, C.J.

2011 Dude, you’re a fag. Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley: University of California press.

118

Ploeg, G. E. van der., Brooks, A. G., Withers, R. T., Dollman, J., Leaney, F. and Chatterton, B. E.

2001 Body composition changes in female bodybuilders during preparation for competition. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 55(4): 268-77.

Pylypa, J.

1998 Power and bodily practice. Applying the work of Foucault to an anthropology of the body. Arizona Anthropologist 13: 21-36.

Robison, V. and Richardson, D.

2015 Introducing gender and women’s studies. London: Palgrave.

Rossi, A. S.

1984 Gender and parenthood. American Sociological Review 49(1): 1-19.

Roussel, P. and Griffet, J.

2000 The path chosen by female bodybuilders. A tentative interpretation. Sociology of Sport Journal 17: 130–150.

Ryan, J.

2001 Muscling in. Gender and physicality in weight-training culture. In N. Watson and S. Cunningham-Burley (eds.), Reframing the body. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave, pp. 166–186.

119

Sassatelli, R.

2011 Fitness culture. Gyms and the commercialization of discipline and fun. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Scott, A.

2011 Pumping up the pomp. An exploration of femininity and female bodybuilding. Explorations in Anthropology 11(1): 70-88.

Scraton, S. and Flintoff, A. 2013 Gender, feminist theory and sport. A Companion to Sport 1: 96-111.

Shea, B.C.

2001 The paradox of pumping iron. Female bodybuilding as resistance and compliance. Women & Language 24: 42–46.

Sisjord, M. K. and Kristiansen, E.

2009 Elite women wrestlers' muscles. Physical strength and a social burden. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 44(2-3): 1-27.

Staples, L.H. 1990 Powerful ideas about empowerment. Administration in Social Work 14(2): 29-42.

Stebbins, R. A.

1982 Serious leisure. A conceptual statement. The Pacific Sociological Review 25(2): 251- 272.

120

Steen-Johnsen, K.

2007 Globalized fitness in the Norwegian context. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 42: 343–62.

Stevenson, D.

2002 Women, Sport, and Globalization: Competing Discourses on Sexuality and Nation. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 26: 209–25.

Stewart, B., Smith, A. and B. Moroney.

2013 Capital building through gym work. Leisure Studies 32: 542–60.

St Martin, L. and Gavey, N.

1996 Women’s bodybuilding. Feminist resistance and/or femininity recuperation? Body & Society 2(4): 45-57.

Thomas, W. I. 1928 The child in America. Behavior problems and programs. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Urry, J.

2003 Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Wesely, J. K.

2001 Negotiating gender. Bodybuilding and the natural/unnatural continuum. Sociology of Sport Journal 18: 162–180.

121

West, C. and Zimmerman, D. H.

1987 Doing gender. Gender and Society 1(2): 125-151.

Whitson, D. 1994 The embodiment of gender. Discipline, domination and empowerment. In: S. Birrel and C. Cole (eds.), Women, sport and culture. Champaign: Human Kinetics, pp 353- 370.

Whitehead, S.

2002 Men and masculinities. Key themes and new directions. Cambridge: Polity.

Williams, J. E. and Best, D. L.

1990 Measuring sex stereotypes. A multination study. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

122