Analysis of digital discourse on male cosmetic surgery on platform X
Keywords:
Aesthetics; Gynecomastia; Masculinity; Plastic Surgery; Social mediaAbstract
Introduction: male cosmetic surgery has experienced global growth, driven by increased visibility on digital platforms where contemporary masculinity standards are negotiated.
Objective: to analyze the discursive construction of the normalization of male cosmetic surgery on the X social network.
Methods: a convergent mixed-methods study. 320 posts on X (2024-2025) were analyzed using sentiment analysis and reflective thematic analysis. Data were contrasted with official statistics from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Results: asymmetric normalization was identified. Gynecomastia reduction shows a 65% acceptance rate, associated with the recovery of self-confidence. Abdominal etching generates 45% rejection due to perceptions of artificiality and transgression of the "effort ethic." Qualitative analysis revealed that X acts as a space for validation and medicalization of male insecurity.
Conclusions: digital masculinity integrates surgery as a legitimate restorative tool but maintains stigmas toward procedures perceived as unnatural. There is an aesthetic pressure mediated by algorithms that requires clinical and educational attention.
Downloads
References
1. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2023-2024 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report [Internet]. Arlington Heights: ASPS; 2024 [citado 20/11/2025]. Disponible en: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics
2. Mironica A, Popescu CA, George D, Tegzeșiu AM, Gherman CD. Social media influence on body image and cosmetic surgery considerations: A systematic review. Cureus [Internet]. 2024 [citado 20/11/2025]; 16(7):e65626. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.65626
3. Diaz-Campo J, Cambronero-Saiz B, Chaparro-Domínguez M-Á. Use of twitter for health communication: A systematic review. Rev Esp Comun Salud [Internet]. 2023 [citado 20/11/2025]; 14(1):95-105. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/recs.2023.7049
4. Kalandar A, Al-Youha S, Al-Halabi B, Williams J. What does the public think? Examining Plastic Surgery perceptions through the twitterverse. Plast Reconstr Surg [Internet]. 2018 [citado 20/11/2025]; 142(1):265-74. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004484
5. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2018.
6. Ahmed SK, Mohammed RA, Nashwan AJ, Ibrahim RH, Abdalla AQ, M. Ameen BM, et al. Using thematic analysis in qualitative research. J Med Surg Public Health [Internet]. 2025 [citado 20/11/2025]; 6(100198):100198. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2025.100198
7. Das RK, O’Sick N, Braun SA, Galdyn IA. Operative management of gynecomastia and pseudogynecomastia in the ambulatory surgery setting from 2016 to 2019. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg [Internet]. 2023 [citado 20/11/2025]; 87:224-8. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2023.10.108
8. R, White P. Modifying the body: Canadian men’s perspectives on appearance and cosmetic surgery. The Qualitative Report [Internet]. 2014 [citado 20/11/2025]. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2011.1115
9. Digennaro S, Tescione A. Scrolls and self-perception, navigating the link between social networks and body dissatisfaction in preadolescents and adolescents: a systematic review. Front Educ [Internet]. 2024 [citado 20/11/2025]; 9(1390583). Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1390583
10. Castellanos Silva R, Steins G. Social media and body dissatisfaction in young adults: An experimental investigation of the effects of different image content and influencing constructs. Front Psychol [Internet]. 2023 [citado 20/11/2025]; 14:1037932. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1037932
11. Rahman E, Webb WR, Rao P, Yu N, Garcia PE, Ioannidis S, et al. A systematic review on the reinforcement loop in aesthetic medicine and surgery: The interplay of social media, self-perception, and repeat procedures. Aesthetic Plast Surg [Internet]. 2024 [citado 20/11/2025]; 48(17):3475-87. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-024-04016-y
12. Felimban M, Shaikh AH, Jamal A, Timraz JH, Khan AA, Rashid W, et al. The impact of social media on beauty standards: A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient and cosmetic provider perspectives. South East Eur J Public Health [Internet]. 2025 [citado 20/11/2025]; 4045-67. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.70135/seejph.vi.5978
13. Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6pt2):2134-2156. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12117
14. Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Marconi VC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qual Health Res. 2017;27(4):591-608. doi:10.1177/1049732316665344
15. O'Connor C, Joffe H. Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and practical guidelines. Int J Qual Methods. 2020;19:1-13. doi:10.1177/1609406920908990
16. Viveros M. El reto de la diferencia: los estudios de género en Colombia y la configuración de las masculinidades. Rev Estud Soc. 2002;(14):9-20. doi:10.7440/res14.2002.02
17. Núñez L, Díaz R, Solar A, Díaz C. Imagen corporal y prácticas de cuidado del cuerpo en hombres chilenos. Rev Méd Chile. 2019;147(8):1007-1014. doi:10.4067/S0034-98872019000801007
18. Gutiérrez J, Sánchez I. Representaciones sociales de la ginecomastia en hombres mexicanos: un estudio cualitativo. Cir Plast Iberolatinoam. 2022;48(3):245-253. doi:10.4321/S0376-78922022000300005
19. Golder SA, Macy MW. Diurnal and seasonal mood vary with work, sleep, and daylength across diverse cultures. Science. 2011;333(6051):1878-1881. doi:10.1126/science.1202775
20. Corduff N, Taylor GI. Innovations and risks in abdominal etching: a systematic review. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;42(5):545-556. doi:10.1093/asj/sjab364
21. Veale D, Miles S, Read J, et al. Psychosexual outcome after reduction mammoplasty in men with gynaecomastia: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg. 2021;108(8):954-961. doi:10.1093/bjs/znab069
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Christian José Arencibia-Pagés, Yayné Pérez-Valdés, Orlando Bismark Rodríguez-Salazar, Circe Pagés-Rubio
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms: The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Recognition License. Creative Commons that allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication in this magazine are indicated. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the published version of the work (e.g.: deposit it in an institutional telematic archive or publish it in a monographic volume) as long as the initial publication in this journal is indicated. Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g.: in institutional telematic archives or on your website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations of the published work.
