Metrosexuality and hegemonic masculinity

By Matthew Hall Today, as never before, there are a plethora of men's beautification products, ranging from simple shaving related products, to hair styling products, moisturizers and at the more extreme end of the male beautification market, men’s cosmetics. Indeed 2008 saw a flurry of men’s cosmetics launched including top names such as YSL’s ‘touche éclat for men’, Jean Paul Gaultier’s ‘Monsieur’ range and Superdrug stocking ‘Taxi Man’. In 2010 the market for men's toiletries accounted for a record £868 million, a 20% growth rate in the market since 2005 (Mintel, 2010). This trend is set to continue with current market analyst forecasts suggesting that although this phenomenal growth rate is set to slow to a modest 5%, market revenue will still reach £920 million. Recent research by the UK’s second largest health and beauty retail chain - Superdrug, amusingly entitled ‘Manity Case’ also suggest men are now dedicating ‘83 minutes of every day to their personal grooming - which includes cleansing, toning and moisturising, shaving, styling hair and choosing clothes’. This figures is in contrast to the 79 minutes for the average woman’s daily beauty regime (Superdrug, 2010). Men’s grooming and presentation practices are, of course, nothing new and can be dated back to the Victorian era, but it was then in the main relatively invisible due to societal perceptions of ‘a ‘feminine’ realm of consumption and a ‘masculine’ realm of production’ (Osgerby, 2003: 59). Moore (1989: 179) observed that in the 1980s, consumption patterns began to be ‘redefined as an activity that is suitable for men – rather than simply a passive and feminised activity’. Various explanations have been put forward to account for this, crediting the gay movement (Simpson, 1994, 2002), feminism (Collier, 1992/1993), late capitalist consumer society (Featherstone, 1991) and the style press (Gill, 2005). But what is without a doubt, men are now confronted on a daily basis, as never before, with stylised images of other men’s bodies (models and celebrities) on advertisements, in the popular and style press, on TV and film constantly emphasise the cosmetic benefits of body maintenance. The reward marketed for participating in this ascetic enhancement is a more marketable self. The British columnist Mark Simpson in his now well-cited article ‘Here Come the Mirror Men’ (The Independent, 1994) categorised these ‘new, narcissistic, media-saturated, self-conscious’ men as ‘metrosexuals'. The emergence of these ‘metrosexuals’ suggests a new kind of representational practice in mainstream popular culture, depicting male bodies as idealised and eroticized, which gives permission for them to be looked at and desired (Gill et al, 2005:38). While this new climate of body-consciousness offers men previously unthinkable opportunities for self-care, interview research by Gill et al. (2005), research on men in feminised work environments (Simpson, 2005) and my own doctoral research (Hall, 2009) focusing on online modes of communication, suggests that for men to engage in health and beauty practices is to risk appearing vain, effeminate or homosexual, while failure to ‘look after yourself’ may be construed as a loss of self-respect. The shadow of conventional or ‘hegemonic masculinities’ looms large here in that men seemingly still feel the need to frame these typically feminised activities (e.g. moisturising and hair care) in more conventional masculine ways such as for self-respect and for sexual prowess.