Resolving the masculinity dilemma: Identifying subtypes of male meat consumers with latent profile analysis.

• 3 latent profiles of male consumers: Resistant, Meat-averse, and Ambivalent. • Profiles differed in meat intake, willingness to reduce, & 20 psychosocial factors. • Resistant men justify & defend eating meat & are resistant to meat reduction. • Meat-averse men are repulsed by meat, eat little meat & are very willing to reduce. • Ambivalent men are conflicted about meat & show potential for meat reduction. Reducing meat consumption is necessary to meet Paris Agreement climate change targets. Efforts to reduce meat consumption should target male consumers, who are the biggest meat-eaters worldwide. However, men are often unwilling to reduce their meat intake, due partly to pressures to conform to dominant masculine ideological expectations that "real" men should eat meat (i.e., the masculinity dilemma). To build theoretical insights and more accurately inform interventions, the current study sought to identify latent subgroups of male consumers based on 20 psychosocial indicators related to meat consumption. A latent profile analysis of 575 Australian and English participants who self-identified as male yielded three distinct latent subgroups that differed significantly in indicator variables, self-reported meat consumption, and willingness to reduce their meat intake: "Resistant" consumers ate the most meat and were very unwilling to reduce, "Ambivalent" consumers ate moderate-to-high amounts of meat and were slightly unwilling to reduce, and "Meat-averse" consumers ate minimal quantities of meat and were very willing to reduce. Results suggest that previous meat-reduction intervention attempts may have been impeded by failing to target latent male consumer groups. Efforts to reduce men's meat consumption will require further focus on within- rather than between-gender differences in male populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]