MINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓN

“…I tried to impress my friends…just to fit in I guess”

There was the need for footballers to “fit in” with peer groups and following the crowd was a conduct that was reinforced. Other studies have deemed this as “seeking mateship” and conformity amongst males (Law, Campbell and Dolan 1999). Peer group pressure or the need to be accepted by peers would lead the footballers to participate in both beneficial and detrimental activities; however, what is clear is the significance of socializing and conforming as well as being accepted.

AFL 3 illuminated his activities with his peer group: “Playing computer games and X-box and all that, going to the beach and stuff like that, because I kind of do surfing, so we all do all surfing and yeah just chilling out with mates.” Notably, this player has a separate football peer group. AFL 2 noted most of the activities with his peer group such as surfing, partying, clubbing, listening to music and sporting. AFL 1 noted that following high school he cultivated different groups of friends and, similar to AFL 3, he had a separate group of football friends whilst his school friends also had similar interests such as partying and driving. He clearly asserted that the football players helped him find a party scene. AFL 4 had an established peer group “playing sports around or getting drunk with friends” and declared a “huge effect” of peer group pressure which was about “following the crowd”. This influence became less significant with age.

League 2 would go to rugby league games to watch the local NRL team and/or go to other predominant public domains, such as shops. He found that his peer groups influenced him to participating in mischievous activities that nearly led to arrests. League 3’s peer group revolved around the gym and playing football or swimming at the beach and he felt that his peer group necessitated the idea: “lose some weights to fit in”. League 4 would drink, ski, “play footie” and meet girlfriends with his peer group. Similar to several other players, he felt a need to fit in and impress his friends by drinking or skipping games.

Union 1 noted that living close to a national stadium meant that attending sports activities was important. He also enjoyed visiting the beach or discos. He noted negative aspects of socialising with delinquent peers, pronouncing that “some of those boys were

flat out trouble makers and I think probably every second weekend we probably got into a dust up at the footie.” These notions are confirmed by Fitzclarence and Hickey (2001, 118) who found that what is often overlooked is that the “important force within the dynamics of masculinity making and sport” is namely peer group power.

League 3 even stated that the biggest influence on his household was geographical change because he struggled to make friends, hence illuminating the importance of having peer groups Flood (2011) also noted the important role of peer group pressure in shaping roles and reducing sexiest, homophobic and violent attitudes. Flood states (2011, 267) “If men fear reactions to their positive interventions as bystanders, build their skills in bystander intervention. Offer men a language for articulating their involvement in preventing violence against women, one that negates homophobia and anti-feminist stereotyping.”

Furthermore, Flood (2008) notes that importance of male groups in influencing behavior, “Male-male social bonds have a powerful influence on the sexual relations of some young heterosexual men. Qualitative analysis among young men aged eighteen to twenty-six in Canberra, Australia, documents the homosocial organization of men’s heterosexual relations. Homosociality organizes men’s sociosexual relations in at least four ways. For some of these young men, male-male friendships take priority over male- female relations, and platonic friendships with women are dangerously feminizing. Sexual activity is a key path to masculine status and other men are the audience, always imagined and sometimes real, for one’s sexual activities. Heterosexual sex itself can be the medium through which male bonding is enacted. Last, men’s sexual storytelling is shaped by homosocial masculine cultures. While these patterns were evident particularly among young men in the highly homosocial culture of a military academy, their presence also among other groups suggests the wider influence of homosociality on men’s sexual and social relations.”

AFL 1 stated that his peer group all had power; however, his peer group focused on excelling in power. He viewed that boys were more concerned with power than girls. He explained that most of his peer group activities included underage drinking. AFL 2 felt that a louder, extroverted character had power in peer groups, with equal power between the sexes, predominantly in undertaking benign legal activities; however, similar to AFL 1, he stated the importance of socialising or partying: “It definitely put me in the party kind of world a lot more than I would have gone to without my friends, so they

Page 96 of 230

probably got me out there a bit more what I was going about [sic] yeah.” AFL 3’s peer group consisted mainly of boys who didn’t have power hierarchies, but regarded males as supreme to females. This group centred on sport and “chilling out” and try to go out and “pick up chicks”. He had an egalitarian or equal group where “no one’s better than you, no one’s less than you.” Finally, AFL 4 had an oligarchy, with a few dominant members of the peer group who managed and decided activities for the group. Boys who were better at sports had the power and had a greater role within the group.

League 2 established the hegemony amongst male peers who were arrogant “footie boys” as they were the largest and the strongest and said, “no one is going to mess with you.” Activities outside of football were sex with girls and underage drinking. League 3 had equal power in his peer group amongst all cronies, with the boys being physical and belligerent. He asserted that legal activities were playing rugby league and that he was influenced by his peer group, particularly in underage drinking. This hegemonic practice—the need to consume alcohol—was promoted even at a minor and illegal age. It was obvious that footballers felt the need to socialise with friends by consuming alcohol. This supports the literature outside the football context that men seek to gain masculinity via excessive alcohol consumption and girl chasing (Anderson, Daly and Rapp 2009, 315). Similarly, the male university football team study found that the capability to consume large amounts of alcohol was coveted and promoted. Hence, the inability to consume large quantities was deemed effeminate (Clayton and Humberstone 2006; Schmidt 2009; Cassino 2007). Although there were instances where footballers distinguished themselves by not conforming, this nominal masculinity was not wholly promoted. Donaldson (1993) contended that the reason why multitudes of young males take up sport is motivated by the “hunger for affiliation”. This hunger to be affiliated, connected and close was irrefutably supported by the Australian footballers in this study; it was a widely accepted and mandated hegemonic practice by their peers. However, the most lauded practice was fornicating with women.