Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Body Concerns In and Out of the Bedroom: Implications for Sexual Pleasure and Problems

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectification theory (Fredrickson B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206) proposes that body image concerns impair sexual function and satisfaction. The present study was designed to test whether body shame was related to sexual problems and pleasure among heterosexual men and women (N = 320). Using structural equation modeling, we tested whether adult men and women’s body shame was linked to greater sexual problems (lower sexual arousability and ability to reach orgasm) and less pleasure from physical intimacy. Although women were significantly more likely to report appearance concerns than men across sexual and non-sexual contexts, appearance concerns were positively related to both men and women’s sexual problems. The relationship between body shame and sexual pleasure and problems was mediated by sexual self-consciousness during physical intimacy. Men and women’s body shame was related to greater sexual self-consciousness, which in turn predicted lower sexual pleasure and sexual arousability. Results persisted controlling for relationship status and age. Being in a relationship was associated with less sexual self-consciousness and less orgasm difficulty for men and women. Although some paths were significantly stronger for women than for men, results largely supported the proposition that body concerns negatively affect sexual pleasure and promote sexual problems for both men and women. Findings were discussed in terms of objectification theory and the increased cultural emphasis on physical appearance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Participants were asked whether they had ever had sex and, in a subsequent question, participants were asked to define sex. Ninety-four percent of the sample included penile-vaginal intercourse (N = 301) in their definition of sex; 6% indicated oral sex and other acts of physical and emotional intimacy between sexual partners (N = 18). Thus, we can be confident that the majority of our sample had previously experienced penile-vaginal intercourse.

  2. For the structural equations analysis, we randomly divided the scale into two indicators that were created by averaging half the items, a procedure commonly referred to as parceling. Parceling improves the goodness of fit and reduces bias in estimations of structural parameters in comparison to individual item use (Bandalos, 2002).

  3. Prior to testing the structural equation models, variance inflation factors (VIF) were examined in multiple regression equations with the observed variables. As a rule of thumb, VIF should not exceed 5.0 (Stine, 1995). Our VIF factors fell in the range of 1.0–1.69, which suggests that multicollinearity was not an issue in these data.

  4. Structural equation modeling must satisfy four conditions: (1) specification (determining the indicators for latent variables and causal paths between latent variables); (2) identification (determining whether there was adequate information to estimate the model); (3) estimation (testing the paths via structural equation modeling); and (4) model evaluation (see Kenny, Kashy, & Bolger, 1998). To determine identification, we first scaled the latent variables. Then, in accordance with Kenny et al. (1998), we fixed one indicator per latent variable. Because we had two indicators per construct, we confirmed that the indicators’ errors were uncorrelated and that the indicators of the construct correlated with a separate indicator of another construct, while their errors were uncorrelated.

  5. Controlling for socially desirable responding using the Marlowe-Crown social desirability scale did not alter the results.

References

  • Adams, A. E., Haynes, S. N., & Brayer, M. A. (1985). Cognitive distraction in female sexual arousal. Psychophysiology, 22, 689–696.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, B. L., Broffitt, B., Karlsson, J. A., & Turnquist, D. C. (1989). A psychometric analysis of the Sexual Arousability Index. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 123–130.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aubrey, J. S. (2006). Effects of sexually objectifying media on self-objectification and body surveillance in undergraduates: Results of a 2-year panel study. Journal of Communication, 56, 366–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baghurst, T., Hollander, D. B., Nardella, B., & Haff, G. G. (2006). Change in sociocultural ideal male physique: An examination of past and present action figures. Body Image, 3, 87–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baird, A. L., & Grieve, F. G. (2006). Exposure to male models in advertisements leads to a decrease in men’s body pleasure. North American Journal of Psychology, 8, 115–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. (2002). The effects of item-parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlow, D. H. (1986). Causes of sexual dysfunction: The role of anxiety and cognitive interference. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 140–148.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J. G., Barlow, D. H., Sakheim, D. K., & Abrahamson, D. J. (1987). Shock threat and sexual arousal: The role of selective attention, thought content and affective states. Psychophysiology, 24, 165–172.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software.

  • Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byely, L., Archibald, A. B., Graber, J. A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). A prospective study of familial and social influences on girls’ body image and dieting. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 28, 155–164.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calogero, R. M. (2004). A test of objectification theory: The effect of the male gaze on appearance concerns in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, F. S., & Sprecher, S. (2000). Sexuality in marriage, dating and other relationships: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 999–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohane, G. H., & Pope, H. G. (2001). Body image in boys: A review of the literature. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 373–379.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Beauvoir, S. (1952). The second sex (H. M. Parshley, Trans.). New York: Knopf.

  • Dickson, N., Paul, C., Herbison, P., & Silva, P. (1998). First sexual intercourse: Age, coercion, and later regrets reported by a birth cohort. British Medical Journal, 316, 29–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dove, N. L., & Wiederman, M. W. (2000). Cognitive distraction and women’s sexual functioning. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 26, 67–78.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duenwald, M. (2004). How young is too young to have a nose job and breast implants? New York Times, September, p. F5.

  • Edwards, J. N., & Booth, A. (1994). Sexuality, marriage, and well-being: The middle years. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Sexuality across the life course (pp. 223–259). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. N., & O’Donohue, W. T. (1997). The effects of anxiety and distraction on sexual arousal in a nonclinical sample of heterosexual women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26, 607–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faith, M. S., & Schare, M. L. (1993). The role of body image in sexually avoidant behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22, 345–356.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, B. L., & Harrison, K. (2005). Throwing like a girl: Self-objectification predicts adolescent girls’ motor performance. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 29, 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, B., Roberts, T., Noll, S., Quinn, D., & Twenge, J. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, H., & Gleeson, K. (2004). Clothing and embodiment: Men managing body image and appearance. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 5, 40–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gapinski, K. D., Brownell, K. D., & LaFrance, M. (2003). Body objectification and “fat talk”: Effects on emotion, motivation, and cognitive performance. Sex Roles, 48, 377–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geer, J. H., & Fuhr, R. (1976). Cognitive factors in sexual arousal: The role of distraction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 238–243.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., & Srivastava, S. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, K., & Cantor, J. (1997). The relationship between media consumption and eating disorders. Journal of Communication, 47, 40–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haussman, A., Mangweth, B., Walch, T., Rupp, C., & Pope, H. (2004). Body-image dissatisfaction in gay versus heterosexual men: Is there really a difference? Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 65, 1555–1558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huon, G., & Lim, J. (2000). The emergence of dieting among female adolescents: Age, body mass index, and seasonal effects. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 28, 221–225.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 252–259). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

  • Kiefer, A., Sanchez, D. T., Kalinka, C.J., & Ybarra, O. (2006). How women’s nonconscious association of sex with submission affects their ability to orgasm. Sex Roles, 55, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klem, L. (2000). Structural equation modeling. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding MORE multivariate statistics (pp. 227–260). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laan, E., & Everaerd, W. (1995). Determinants of female sexual arousal: Psychophysiological theory and data. Annual Review of Sex Research, 6, 32–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laan, E., Everaerd, W., van der Velde, J., & Geer, J. H. (1995). Determinants of subjective experience of sexual arousal in women: Feedback from genital arousal and erotic stimulus content. Psychophysiology., 32, 444–451.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Labre, M. P. (2005) The male body ideal: Perspectives of readers and non-readers of fitness magazines. Journal of Men’s Health & Gender, 2, 223–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laumann, E. O., Paik, A., Glasser, D. B., Kang, J., Wang, T., Levinson, B., et al. (2006). A cross-national study of subjective sexual well-being among older women and men: Findings from the global study of sexual attitudes and behaviors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 145–161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laumann, E. O., Paik, A., & Rosen, R. C. (1999). Sexual dysfunction in the United States: Prevalence and predictors. Journal of American Medical Association, 281, 537–544.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, H., Sweeney, D., & Wagner, S.H. (1999). Depicting women as sex objects in television advertising: Effects on body dissatisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1049–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leit, R. A., Pope, H. G., & Gray, J. J. (2001). Cultural expectations of muscularity in men: The evolution of Playgirl centerfolds. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 90–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. (1992). Shame: The exposed self. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, S. M., Hyde, J. S., & McKinley, N. M. (2006). A measure of objectified body consciousness for preadolescent and adolescent youth. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1970). Human sexual inadequacy. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2004). Body image dissatisfaction among men across the lifespan: A review of past literature. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 56, 675–685.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, M. (2002). Botox maker plans $50 million ad campaign. USA Today, April.

  • McKinley, N. M. (1998). Gender differences in undergraduates’ body esteem: The mediating effect of objectified body consciousness and actual/ideal weight discrepancy. Sex Roles, 39, 113–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinley, N. M. (1999). Women and objectified body consciousness: Mothers’ and daughters’ body experience in cultural, developmental, and familial context. Developmental Psychology, 35, 760–769.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McKinley, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The objectified body consciousness scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meana, M., & Nunnink, S. (2006). Gender differences in the content of cognitive distraction during sex. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 59–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meston, C. M., Gorzalka, B. B. (1995). The effects of sympathetic activation on physiological and subjective sexual arousal in women. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 651–664.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Morry, M. M., & Staska, S. L. (2001). Magazine exposure: Internalization, self-objectification, eating attitudes, and body satisfaction in male and female university students. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 33, 269–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noll, S. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame, and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 623–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J., & Roberts, T. A. (1992). Toward a his and hers theory of emotions: Gender differences in visceral perceptions. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 11, 199–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plastic surgery catching on with men. (2003). MSNBC. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077114/.

  • Pope, H. G., Gruber, A. J., Mangweth, B., Bureau, B., deCol, C., Jouvent, R., et al. (2000). Body image perception among men in three countries. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1297–1301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, H. G., Olivardia, R., Borowiecki, J. J., & Cohane, G. H (2001). The growing commercial value of the male body: A longitudinal survey of advertising in women’s magazines. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 70, 189–182.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, H. G., Olivardia, R., Gruber, A., & Borowiecki, J. J. (1999). Evolving ideals of male body image as seen through action toys. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 26, 65–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Przybyla, D. P., & Byrne, D. (1984). The mediating role of cognitive processes in self-reported sexual arousal. Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 54–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raykov, T., Tomer, A., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1991). Reporting structural equation modeling results in Psychology and Aging: Some proposed guidelines. Psychology & Aging, 6, 499–503.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, T. A., & Gettman, J. Y. (2004). Mere exposure: Gender differences in the negative effects of priming a state of self-objectification. Sex Roles, 51, 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, T. A., & Pennebaker, J. (1995). Gender differences in perceiving internal state: Toward a his and her model of perceptual cue use. Advances in Experiment Social Psychology, 27, 143–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. H., & Holden, N. L. (1986). Bulimia nervosa in the male: A report of nine cases. Psychological Medicine, 16, 795–803.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rohlinger, D. A. (2002). Eroticizing men: Cultural influences on advertising and male objectification. Sex Roles, 46, 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). Human health: New directions for the next millennium. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salusso-Deonier, C. J., Markee, N. L., & Pedersen, E. L. (1993). Gender differences in the evaluation of physical attractiveness ideals for male and female body builds. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 1155–1167.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, D. T., Crocker, J., & Boike, K. R. (2005). Doing gender in the bedroom: How investment in gender norms affects the sexual experience. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1445–1455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T. K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). Universal dimensions of human mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheets, V., & Ajmere, K. (2005). Are romantic partners a source of college students’ weight concern? Eating Behaviors, 6, 1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Siever, M. D. (1994). Sexual orientation and gender as factors in socioculturally acquired vulnerability to body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 252–260.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breasts, and hips: Role in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology & Sociobiology, 16, 483–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. E., Waldorf, V. A., & Trembath, D. L. (1990). ‘Single White male looking for thin, very attractive…’. Sex Roles, 23, 675–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprecher, S., Sullivan, Q., & Hatfield, E. (1994). Mate selection preferences: Gender differences examined in a national sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1074–1080.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stine, R. A. (1995). Graphical interpretation of variance inflation factors. The American Statistician, 45, 53–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strelan, P., & Hargreaves, D. (2005). Reasons for exercise and body esteem: Men’s responses to self-objectification. Sex Roles, 53, 495–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St. John, W. (2003, June 22). Metrosexuals come out. New York Times, p. F9.

  • Tangney, J. P., Millers, R. S., Flicker, I., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70, 1256–1269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Thompson, J. K. (1995). Romantic partners and body image disturbance: Further evidence for the role of perceived-actual disparities. Sex Roles, 33, 589–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trapnell, P. D., Meston, C. M., & Gorzalka, B. B. (1997). Spectatoring and the relation between body image and sexual experience: Self-focus or self-valence? Journal of Sex Research, 34, 267–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiederman, M. W. (2000). Women’s body image self-consciousness during physical intimacy with a partner. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 60–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, N. (1990). The beauty myth: How images of beauty are used against women. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yelland, C., & Tiggemann, M. (2003). Muscularity and the gay ideal: Body dissatisfaction and disordered eating in homosexual men. Eating Behaviors, 4, 107–116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zelman, K. (2005). More men developing eating disorders. WebMD Medical News. Retrieved November 8, 2005, from http://www.webmd.com/content/article/114/111178?src = RSS_PUBLIC.

  • Zucker, K. J., Bradley, S. J., Oliver, G., Blake, J., Fleming, S., & Hood, J. (2004). Self-reported sexual arousability in women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 30, 343–355.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Barbara Fredrickson, Adam Grant, Carrie Langner, Jana Haritatos, Sonya Brady, and Lora Park for their helpful comments on this article. We are also deeply indebted to Amiram Vinokur for his statistical assistance. Amy Kiefer was funded by a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship and a National Institutes of Mental Health Postdoctoral Fellowship during the preparation of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, 53 Avenue E, Piscataway, New Brunswick, NJ, 08854-8040, USA

    Diana T. Sanchez

  2. Health Psychology Program, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Amy K. Kiefer

Authors
  1. Diana T. Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy K. Kiefer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana T. Sanchez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanchez, D.T., Kiefer, A.K. Body Concerns In and Out of the Bedroom: Implications for Sexual Pleasure and Problems. Arch Sex Behav 36, 808–820 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9205-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9205-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation