Sexual (dys)functioning is related to drive for thinness, not drive for muscularity.

Background Negative body image can result in sexual dysfunction for both women and men. Drive for thinness, drive for muscularity and drive for leanness have all been associated with poor body image. However, research to date has not examined which is the strongest predictor of sexual problems in each gender. METHODS: The present study used measures of drive for muscularity and drive for thinness simultaneously to predict sexual functioning in both genders. Participants (n=519) completed measures of drive for thinness, drive for muscularity, sexual esteem, sexual assertiveness, discomfort exposing their bodies during sex and genital satisfaction. The interaction between drive for thinness and drive for muscularity was used to approximate drive for leanness. RESULTS: Drive for thinness, not drive for muscularity (or any combination of the two), predicted men's and women's sexual problems. CONCLUSIONS: We add to the growing body of literature on the destructive nature of excessive drive for thinness, and highlight that it may be a core factor in promoting and maintaining men's (as well as women's) sexual problems.

Applying the contact hypothesis to anti-fat attitudes: contact with overweight people is related to how we interact with our bodies and those of others.

This paper is the first to apply the contact hypothesis, a social psychological theory of prejudice reduction, to the field of weight bias. It aims to investigate whether contact with overweight people is associated with the extent to which people report weight bias, as well as vigilance around their own bodies. In 2013 we recruited 1176 American participants to complete surveys regarding prejudice toward overweight people, as well as a suite of measures capturing people's relationships with their own weight (fat talk, drive for thinness, and body-checking behavior). Positive contact with overweight people predicted decreased prejudice, regardless of whether participants were overweight (p < .001) or not (p = .003). However, negative contact was a stronger predictor of increased prejudice (p < .001 for both samples). For non-overweight participants, any contact with overweight people (whether positive or negative) predicted increased body-checking behaviors (positive-p = .002, negative-p < .001) and fat talk (positive-p = .047, negative-p < .001), and negative contact predicted increased drive for thinness (p < .001). However, for those who were overweight a different picture emerged. While negative contact predicted increased body-checking behaviors (p < .001) and fat talk (p < .001), positive contact was protective, predicting decreased drive for thinness (p = .001) and body-checking behaviors (p < .001). This paper demonstrates that the interactions we have with overweight people are inherently tied to both our attitudes towards them and our relationship with our own bodies.