The physique sport community has its own cultural bubble with distinct aesthetics, values, and norms. Generally, athletes train consistently, maintain a regular sleep schedule, are disciplined with their diet, and likely have an impressive physique compared to the average person.
Bodybuilding has been intertwined with concepts of beauty since its inception. However, despite the definition of beauty evolving throughout time as well as greater empirical knowledge of fitness and health, we’ve yet to shift the perpetuated assumption that beauty and health go hand-in-hand.
The ultimate symbol of health and well-being, even for the general population, is a lean and muscular body. As a result, the pursuit of becoming fit has gravitated instead towards prioritizing aesthetics over health. Though, have we ever stopped to question whether this concept of beauty in relation to bodybuilding is genuinely justified and if it’s a healthy and sustainable approach?
Early Concepts of Beauty’s Influence on Bodybuilding: A Situationship?
The connection between beauty, virtue, and the divine has remained influential in certain Western subcultures, one of which is bodybuilding.[i] Its earliest appearances can be traced back to the ancient Greek ideal of bodily symmetry as an expression of human superiority.
The idea of symmetry, which we associate with beauty today, originated with the philosopher Plato in ancient Greece. In his work, Plato emphasized the importance of proportion and harmony in the human body, as well as in solid geometric forms.[ii] Plato believed that physical beauty was an inferior version of ideal beauty, which he considered to be one of the highest ideals.[iii] He argued that physical beauty could lead people to knowledge of the divine, bringing them closer to the ultimate idea of beauty.
Plato also believed that there was a connection between inner goodness and outer grace and harmony. He maintained that while the quality of the soul did not affect the body, a good soul could improve the body’s appearance. Additionally, physical beauty was seen as a pathway to the “beauty of the forms”, meaning a way to achieve virtue and happiness, and ultimately the perfection of human existence.[iv]
Moving into the Roman period, the concept of ideal beauty changed. The rise of powerful individuals who were not perfect in terms of physical beauty gave way to the idea of political power. Portraits from this era depicted bodily faults, signs of old age, or various “deformities,” and beauty could be “covered” with wealth and power.
Soon, the rise of Christianity initiated a shift in the concept of ideal male beauty. The nudity appreciated by the Greeks and Romans was soon viewed as shameful and needed to be hidden. The ideal man was not as muscular or intellectual during prior eras, but as someone representing spiritual perfection. Visual art focused on the inner human world rather than its external demonstration, and people were encouraged to care for their souls more than their bodies.
With an increased emphasis on scientific observation, the Renaissance period brought a resurgence of the idea that the human body was an example of perfection. Vitruvius, a Roman architect and engineer, wrote in his book “De Architectura” that a building’s design should be based on the proportions of the human body.[v]Leonardo da Vinci took this concept a step further and applied it to the human body itself, creating a new ideal of proportionality. He drew the Vitruvian man as an homage to the ancient Roman architect. The Vitruvian man was not just a visual representation of the ideal human body; it also demonstrated the connection between the human body and the universe. The circle and square around the figure were believed to represent the perfection of the human form, which was both rational and divine. This work had a profound influence, and his concept of proportionality became a standard in art and architecture. The ideal man of the Renaissance was not just physically perfect; he also possessed intellectual and moral virtues.[vi]
Reviewing the Literature on the General Perception of Beauty
The concept of timeless beauty seems plausible from an evolutionary perspective. Certain biological traits could serve as indicators of health, fitness, and fertility—the very qualities we seek in a potential mate. However, despite extensive research by biologists and psychologists, establishing a purely biological foundation for beauty has been elusive.[vii]
Take, for example, the widely held belief that symmetrical features are preferred. The scientific explanation is compelling: childhood diseases and stress might subtly affect the development of the body, resulting in slight asymmetry. According to this theory, a symmetrical face would indicate physical strength, making it more attractive as a potential parent. However, previous studies assessed small sample sizes, so the findings were more than likely skewed. When Stefan Van Dongen of the University of Antwerp conducted a large-scale meta-analysis, he found that the perceived effect of facial symmetry nearly disappeared when considering a sufficient number of individuals.[viii] Furthermore, symmetrical features do not necessarily correlate with better health.[ix]
Another hypothesis posited a general preference for faces that embody the typical traits of masculinity or femininity, such as the strong jaw of Henry Cavill for men and the delicate features of Miranda Kerr for women. This notion is grounded in the idea that bone structure reflects the sex hormones coursing through our bodies, serving as advertisements for a woman’s fertility or a man’s dominance—important considerations when choosing a partner. However, most studies have focused solely on Western societies.[x] When researchers, led by Isabel Scott at Brunel University, expanded their investigation to encompass communities in Asia, Africa, South America, and Russia, they found a range of preferences[xi]. Surprisingly, the strong attraction to more masculine men and more feminine women was only prominent in highly urbanized regions. In smaller, more remote communities, many women actually preferred men with more “feminine” characteristics.
Similar variations exist when it comes to body shape. Western cultures may value longer legs in women but prefer less lanky men. However, the nomadic Himba society in Namibia exhibits opposite preferences.[xii]Even within Western societies, beauty ideals have shifted over time. Botticelli’s Venus, once the epitome of Western beauty, has shorter legs relative to her body compared to the desired model shape of today. Moreover, the extremes of the hourglass figure in women and the broad, V-shaped shoulders tapering at the waist in men are subject to societal influences.
The variation in beauty standards can be attributed to the adaptability of our mate choices. Depending on our circumstances, the ideal partner might differ. For instance, in cultures where the risk of starvation is high, individuals who carry more weight may be perceived as attractive because they demonstrate greater resilience to food scarcity. Similarly, individuals who face a higher risk of illness may prioritize indicators of good health, such as facial symmetry. Additionally, when dominance is valued, women may prefer men with squarer chins and higher testosterone levels. Exposure to cues of male-male competition, such as witnessing fights between men, can amplify women’s preferences for more masculine male faces, as observed by Anthony Little at the University of Stirling.[xiii]
With that, our notions of beauty, although often perceived as ethereal and timeless, are likely shaped by our immediate circumstances. Thus, another influential factor is group conformity. Numerous studies have demonstrated that when we learn about someone else’s attraction to a particular individual, we are more inclined to find them attractive as well.[xiv] [xv]This phenomenon can contribute to the spread of specific beauty preferences throughout a population, ultimately shaping societal norms regarding beauty. With the introduction of social media, this process of learning and conformity has now occurred on a global scale.
A recent experiment conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins Carey Business School exemplifies the power of herd behavior.[xvi] Using a dating website where users could rate random people, the researchers presented the average scores given by other users to some participants. As individuals learned which types were more popular, they began to rate other faces accordingly, leading to a convergence of tastes and a shift in their concept of beauty. Remarkably, this effect occurred despite the anonymity of the ratings, demonstrating the potency of collective influence.
The impact of familiarity on attraction is also noteworthy. The more frequently people see someone with a particular appearance, the more attractive they tend to perceive that person.[xvii] [xviii] In a time when Brazilian butt lifts and calf implants have become even more common, this finding carries significant implications. Rather than conforming to the prevailing fashions of the time by altering one’s unique features, there is an opportunity to leverage those distinct features to shape and redefine societal standards of beauty.
Upon closer examination, the subjectivity and malleability of attractiveness becomes apparent.[xix] While evolutionary factors and biological indicators play a role in shaping our preferences, beauty standards vary across time, cultures, and individual circumstances.[xx] The influence of conformity, familiarity, and cultural norms further contributes to the fluid nature of beauty. Our understanding of beauty is not fixed but evolves alongside societal changes and individual experiences.[xxi] Recognizing and embracing this dynamism can empower individuals to redefine beauty on their own terms rather than conforming to external ideals.
Challenging Current Concepts
Bodybuilding has long been associated with the pursuit of an ideal physique, characterized by bulging muscles, low body fat, and symmetrical proportions. For many, the ideal physique associated with those of bodybuilders (higher muscle mass, low body fat, and symmetrical proportions) and has become the epitome of beauty, but is this really the case? Should we continue to uphold narrow and exclusive standards of beauty in bodybuilding, or are we ready to challenge these concepts?
We want to first acknowledge that the idea of a “perfect” body in bodybuilding is largely a social construct that has evolved over time.[xxii] In the early days of the sport, bodybuilders were judged based on not only their bodies, but also their athleticism, character and had more emphasis on specific proportions . However, as the sport grew in popularity and became more commercialized, it became more exaggerated, with judges placing greater importance on factors such as muscle size, extreme leanness, and vascularity. Notably, physique sport has evolved as well, with far more divisions today than originally, highlighting the fact that there are various views of what type of aesthetic one would want to strive for.
While there’s nothing inherently wrong with striving for a particular aesthetic, it’s important to recognize that these standards of beauty are not universal or objective.[xxiii] What may be considered beautiful in one culture or context may not be in another, and even within a given culture, different people may have different preferences when it comes to physical appearance.
By defining beauty in narrow terms, we risk excluding and devaluing a wide range of body types and features that don’t fit into this ideal. In many Western cultures, for example, thinness is often equated with beauty and success.[xxiv] This has led to a rise in eating disorders and other unhealthy behaviors as people try to conform to these standards. Moreover, beauty standards in bodybuilding are arbitrary and subjective because they are based on personal opinions and preferences that can change over time and vary across cultures and contexts.[xxv] For example, some people may prefer a lean and well-defined look while others may favor a bulky and massive look. Some people may admire a natural appearance, while others may appreciate an enhanced appearance.
Another criticism is that beauty standards in fitness industry are influenced by commercial interests that seek to profit from the industry. For example, some sponsors, magazines, websites, and supplement companies may promote certain products, services, or images that appeal to the masses or create a demand. They may also manipulate or distort the information or representation of bodybuilders to fit their agenda or ideology. Media outlets may use Photoshop, filters, lighting, or angles to alter the appearance of bodybuilders or create unrealistic expectations for consumers. Further, the beauty industrial complex thrives on creating and perpetuating insecurities to sell products that promise to fulfill those insecurities. It fosters a culture of consumption where individuals are encouraged to constantly seek external validation through their appearance. This affects not only our self-perception but also our relationships and overall well-being.[xxvi]
Additionally, the present-day concept of beauty in bodybuilding often prioritizes aesthetics over function. People are encouraged to focus on achieving a certain look or physique rather than on building functional strength and mobility. There is a higher potential to develop imbalances in the body, an increased risk of injury, and a focus on aesthetics over health.
Establishing unattainable goals can lead to feelings of shame, inadequacy, and low self-esteem. It can also contribute to a culture of body shaming and discrimination in which people who do not fit the mold are at greater risk of being marginalized and excluded.[xxvii]
Appreciating The Beauty of Bodybuilding
In the world of bodybuilding, achieving pro status can sometimes seem less based on skill and more influenced by the rise and fall of personal opinions. A member in the audience may challenge the evaluation of the judges. Interestingly, that individual’s viewpoint cannot be deemed absolutely wrong. Even though there is a scoring system to create some objectivity to bodybuilding, the sport remains largely subjective. Perhaps bodybuilding can be regarded as more than a competitive sport.
When taken into account that a primary objective of bodybuilding is the act of creation, it bears resemblance to art in addition to sport. Most individuals who engage in some form of bodybuilding do not do so competitively, yet they are still engaged in the process of creating something.
Although distinct from paintbrushes or musical instruments, a bodybuilder’s tools – such as barbells, machines, and food scales – enable an outcome that transcends the mere utilization of the tools themselves. They are employed to craft a physical form that evokes an emotional reaction from a viewer – a figure that may be favored by a judge or elicit responses on social media. The capacity to produce an impressive physical form is arguably just as indicative of an artistic endeavor as it is a physical feat of sport.
How could one possibly equate bodybuilding with art?
Aesthetics is a branch of philosophy that explores the concepts of beauty and taste, as well as the philosophy of art, which is a distinct subfield of aesthetics. It analyzes aesthetic values, often expressed through judgments of taste. Aesthetics encompasses both natural and artificial sources of experiences and how we form judgments about those sources. It examines the cognitive processes that occur when we interact with objects or environments, such as viewing visual art, listening to music, reading poetry, experiencing a play, watching a fashion show or movie, participating in sports, or exploring nature. The philosophy of art specifically investigates how artists conceive, create, and perform works of art, as well as how people use, enjoy, and critique art.
Aesthetics seeks to understand why people appreciate certain works of art and not others, and how art can influence our emotions and even our beliefs. Both aesthetics and the philosophy of art strive to answer questions about the nature of art, artwork, and what constitutes good art. It aims to establish the meaning and validity of critical judgments concerning works of art, and the principles underlying or justifying such judgments.
In essence, aesthetics is the discipline in which we continually scrutinize our perception of beauty – and the classification of what is beautiful – as it applies to all things both man-made and natural. It concerns itself with the definition of “taste.” It enables us to determine that one object is more aesthetically pleasing than another. It provides us with a benchmark for beauty against which we evaluate all manner of things and individuals.
The sculptors of ancient Greece aimed to create three-dimensional art that depicted the human body in its most defined and muscular state. Their goal was to capture the essence of superhuman excellence, forms that were seemingly unattainable for any mere mortal. Today, we have bodybuilders who are essentially living embodiments of those stone statues. Like sculptors, bodybuilders must chisel their physiques to produce a defined and muscular representation of the ultimate human figure. The effort required is far from easy, with each athlete undertaking the challenge of shaping clay into a flawless stone-like masterpiece.
Bodybuilders are indeed athletes, yet simultaneously what they are practicing is an art form. They create something to be observed, which can also evoke opinions or emotional responses. These responses can come from competitive judges being impressed or someone simply liking a photo on Instagram of a physique they admire. It can inspire someone to lift weights when they go to the gym or imagine powerful superheroes. The emotional response is a significant element when witnessing the dynamic art of bodybuilding.
Examining Our Own Beliefs
Given the complexities of the current concept of beauty in bodybuilding and the fitness industry, it would be beneficial for each of us to examine our own beliefs with curiosity and as objectively as possible, while also considering how they align with our subjectivity.
Here are some questions to consider:
- What messages have I received about body ideals throughout my life? Where have these messages come from?
- How do I feel when I look at images of “perfect” physiques and other desirable features? Do these images motivate me or make me feel inadequate?
- What are my goals when it comes to bodybuilding? Am I primarily focused on aesthetics, or am I more interested in building functional strength and mobility?
- How do I define “health” in my own life? What does it mean to me to be healthy?
- Am I able to appreciate the diversity of body types and shapes, or do I judge people based on their appearance?
By examining our own beliefs and attitudes, we can begin to see where our ideas about beauty within the sport come from, and how they may be impacting our own health and well-being.
Promoting a More Inclusive and Holistic View of Beauty
Ultimately, if we want to create a more inclusive and holistic view of beauty within bodybuilding, we then want to challenge the current concepts and norms within the industry.
Here are some ways we can do this:
- Promote diversity and representation in the sport.
- By supporting people of all body types, shapes, sizes, and abilities, we can create a more inclusive and welcoming environment for everyone.
- Place a greater focus on functional fitness.
- Rather than just achieving a certain look, we can support others to develop a healthier relationship with their bodies by emphasizing the importance of building functional strength and mobility.
- Celebrate health, rather than just appearance.
- By promoting a holistic view of health that includes mental, emotional, and physical well-being, we can help people to see that beauty and fitness are not just about appearance, but about feeling good and living well.
- Separate your physique from your view of self-worth and personal beauty.
- In training, preparation, and competition, view your body as a work of art, where you are striving to create an aesthetic based on the bodybuilding standards of your division if you compete. This perspective creates a boundary between your view of your “attractiveness” and your sense of self-worth and beauty, enabling your bodybuilding journey to be positive, rather than a source of shame or pressure.
- Challenge harmful stereotypes and biases.
- Speak out against body shaming, discrimination, and prejudices to create a more compassionate and supportive environment for everyone.
- Sharpen your critical eye.
- Don’t take everything at face value. When you encounter messages that promote unrealistic standards, ask yourself who is behind them and what their motives might be. Are they trying to sell you a product or service? Is their message evoking a particular emotion that is leading you to covertly believe you’re lacking in some way, and they have the answers? Remember, what you see on any media platform is often heavily edited and curated.
- Be mindful of the content you consume.
- In a multiverse utopia, we would have the highest self-awareness and never find ourselves doom scrolling. So, until we transcend our humanity, noticing how the content we consume affects our experience will take practice. While it’s unlikely you’ll completely avoid content that has weight bias and unrealistic body standards, you have the choose where to focus your time and attention.
I encourage us all to challenge and question the illusion of appearance and redefine our understanding of beauty to embrace our authentic selves. Beauty is not a fixed state and encompasses a broader range of qualities, such as kindness, intelligence, compassion, and authenticity. We have the choice to dismantle the narrow definitions and stereotypes associated with beauty and create a more inclusive and accepting society.
Bodybuilding already stretches the narrow definitions and stereotypes associated with beauty within society. Breaking down the harmful narratives that perpetuate global unrealistic beauty standards within ourselves can potentially maintain integrity in the sport of bodybuilding.
Furthermore, it is essential to amplify diverse voices and perspectives in the industry. Representation matters, and we need to see a broader range of body types, ethnicities, genders, and ages reflected in media and advertising. By doing so, we can begin to break down the harmful narratives that perpetuate unrealistic standards.
I advocate that the pursuit of beauty is meant to be a personal journey guided by self-acceptance and self-love. It is about embracing our unique features and celebrating the diversity that exists in humanity. It requires us to prioritize our mental and emotional well-being over external validation. Creating and maintaining an internal boundary between the external ideologies around beauty and our bodies, the criteria for competitive bodybuilding, and our evaluation of the self, can allow for an experience that is constructive, sustainable, and possibly more enjoyable!
Perhaps we’d benefit from remembering that value of beauty lies in our individuality, our strengths, and the impact we make in the world. We can break free from the constraints of societal beauty standards and the demands of bodybuilding to find true fulfillment in our lives. As we promote a more inclusive and holistic perspective, as well as prioritize inner qualities and personal growth, we can create a healthier and more welcoming environment for everyone.
[i] Sartwell, Crispin, “Beauty”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/beauty/>.
[ii] Symmetry and Beauty in Plato. (2010). Symmetry, 2(2), 455-466. doi:10.3390/sym2020455
[iii] (Fitnosophy. (n.d.). Beyond an Aesthetics of Bodybuilding: Beauty and Symmetry as Expressions of Virtue – A Platonic Reading. Retrieved from https://www.fitnosophy.com/beyond-an-aesthetics-of-bodybuilding-beauty-and-symmetry-as-expressions-of-virtue-a-platonic-reading/)
[iv] Zeyl, D. (2022). Beauty. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
[v] Vitruvius. (1914). The Ten Books on Architecture (M. H. Morgan, Trans.). Harvard University Press.
[vi] Roick, M. (2017). Pontano’s Virtues: Aristotelian Moral and Political Thought in the Renaissance. Bloomsbury Academic.
[vii] Jabr, F. (2019). How Beauty Is Making Scientists Rethink Evolution. The New York Times.
[viii] Ekrami, O., Claes, P., Van Assche, E., Shriver, M. D., Weinberg, S. M., Marazita, M. L., Walsh, S., & Van Dongen, S. (2021). Fluctuating Asymmetry and Sexual Dimorphism in Human Facial Morphology: A Multi-Variate Study. Symmetry, 13(2), 304.
[ix] Ekrami, O., Claes, P., Van Assche, E., Shriver, M. D., Weinberg, S. M., Marazita, M. L., Walsh, S., & Van Dongen, S. (2021). Fluctuating Asymmetry and Sexual Dimorphism in Human Facial Morphology: A Multi-Variate Study. Symmetry, 13(2), 304.
[x][x] Scott I. M. L., Clark A. P., Josephson S. C., Boyette A. H., Cuthill I. C., Fried R. L., et al. . (2014). Human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces may be evolutionary novel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 14388–14393. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1409643111 – DOI – PMC – PubMed
[xi] Scott I. M. L., Clark A. P., Josephson S. C., Boyette A. H., Cuthill I. C., Fried R. L., et al. . (2014). Human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces may be evolutionary novel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 14388–14393. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1409643111 – DOI – PMC – PubMed
[xii] Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., & Mberira, M. (2012). Are preferences for legs length universal? Data from a semi-nomadic Himba population from Namibia. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(5), 667-671.
[xiii] Little, A. C., Burriss, R. P., Jones, B. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2007). Facial appearance affects voting decisions. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(1), 18-27.
[xiv] Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Little, A. C., Burriss, R. P., & Feinberg, D. R. (2007). Social transmission of face preferences among humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1611), 899-903.
[xv] Zebrowitz, L. A., & Rhodes, G. (2004). Sensitivity to “bad genes” and the anomalous face overgeneralization effect: Cue validity, cue utilization, and accuracy in judging intelligence and health. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28(3), 167-185.
[xvi] Laurens Rook. (2006). An Economic Psychological Approach to Herd Behavior. Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1), 75–95. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4228225
[xvii] Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265-289.
[xviii] Zajonc, R. B., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Neural evidence for reduced apprehensiveness of familiarized stimuli in a mere exposure paradigm. Social Neuroscience, 7(4), 347-358.
[xix] Ibáñez-Berganza, M., Amico, A. & Loreto, V. Subjectivity and complexity of facial attractiveness. Sci Rep 9, 8364 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44655-9
[xx] Boston University School of Medicine. (2019, June 5). What constitutes beauty and how is it perceived? Role of social media may create unrealistic expectations for cosmetic procedures. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 9, 2023 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190605133549.htm
[xxi] Robson, D. (2015, June 23). The myth of universal beauty. BBC Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150622-the-myth-of-universal-beauty
[xxii] Markula, P., & Pringle, R. (2007). Foucault, Sport and Exercise: Power, Knowledge and Transforming the Self. Routledge.
[xxiii] Swami, V., & Tovée, M. J. (2007). Perceptions of female body weight and shape among indigenous and urban Europeans. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48(1), 43-50.
[xxiv] Weiss, Mitchell G. 1995. Eating Disorders and Disordered Eating in Different Cultures. Psychiatric Clinics of North America 18 (3): 537-553
[xxv] Dakanalis, A. (2017). Social Standards of Beauty, Body Image and Eating Disorders. doi: 10.4135/9781483365817.n1289.
[xxvi] Blue, L. (n.d.). How The Beauty Industry Exploits Your Insecurities. Medium. Retrieved from https://medium.com/illumination/how-the-beauty-industry-exploits-your-insecurities-6e86c965bdf
[xxvii] Schlüter, C., Kraag, G. & Schmidt, J. Body Shaming: an Exploratory Study on its Definition and Classification. Int Journal of Bullying Prevention 5, 26–37 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-021-00109-3
Leave a Reply