IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v55y2002i5p695-708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vocabularies of motive for illicit steroid use among bodybuilders

Author

Listed:
  • Monaghan, Lee F.

Abstract

Illicit steroid use, for purposes of performance and physique enhancement, is widely deemed unnecessary, wrong and dangerous. Such activity would appear especially foolhardy when engaged in by non-professional athletes who otherwise adhere to 'healthy' exercise regimens. Here a gap exists between many illicit steroid users' actions and societal expectations. Using qualitative data generated in South Wales, this paper explores bodybuilders' vocabularies of motive for illicit steroid use. These accounts which justified, rather than excused, steroid use were predominant during question situations between the participant observer and the researched. In supporting the fundamental tenets of their drug subculture, and as part of the underlying negotiation of self-identity, respondents espoused three main justifications for their own and/or other bodybuilders' illicit steroid use; namely: self-fulfilment accounts, condemnation of condemners and a denial of injury. Here steroid use was rationalised as a legitimate means to an end, observers passing negative judgements were rejected and it was claimed steroids do not (seriously) harm the user's health or threaten society more generally. These vocabularies of motive, acquired and honoured within bodybuilding settings, comprise a complex of subjective meanings which seem to the actor to be an adequate ground for the conduct in question. Similar to other sociological studies, this paper states that it is imperative to explore the social meanings which illicit drug users attach to their 'risk' practices. Without these understandings, researchers and health promoters may struggle to appreciate fully why illicit drug users behave as they do.

Suggested Citation

  • Monaghan, Lee F., 2002. "Vocabularies of motive for illicit steroid use among bodybuilders," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 695-708, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:5:p:695-708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(01)00195-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fraser, Suzanne & Fomiatti, Renae & Moore, David & Seear, Kate & Aitken, Campbell, 2020. "Is another relationship possible? Connoisseurship and the doctor–patient relationship for men who consume performance and image-enhancing drugs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    2. Heikkinen, Hanne & Patja, Kristiina & Jallinoja, Piia, 2010. "Smokers' accounts on the health risks of smoking: Why is smoking not dangerous for me?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(5), pages 877-883, September.
    3. Peretti-Watel, Patrick & Moatti, Jean-Paul, 2006. "Understanding risk behaviours: How the sociology of deviance may contribute? The case of drug-taking," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 675-679, August.
    4. Andrews, Gavin J. & Sudwell, Mark I. & Sparkes, Andrew C., 2005. "Towards a geography of fitness: an ethnographic case study of the gym in British bodybuilding culture," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 877-891, February.
    5. Ellen Sverkersson & Jesper Andreasson & Thomas Johansson, 2020. "‘Sis Science’ and Fitness Doping: Ethnopharmacology, Gender and Risk," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Jesper Andreasson & Thomas Johansson, 2016. "Gender, Fitness Doping and the Genetic Max. The Ambivalent Construction of Muscular Masculinities in an Online Community," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:5:p:695-708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.