The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) to investigate the moral orientations of professional female bodybuilders and (b) to explore the relationship between professional female bodybuilders’ moral orientations when reasoning about self-identified and standardized hypothetical (steroid) moral dilemmas. Ten professional female bodybuilders ranging in age from 26 to 40 years participated in the study. Results revealed that female bodybuilders used both justice and care reasoning in their considerations of moral dilemmas encountered in the bodybuilding context; however, one moral orientation predominated over the other for each participant. Although Gilligan and colleagues (Brown et al., 1988) claim that women tend to use predominantly care reasoning, the present study found that half the participants used a justice perspective. Results are discussed in light of Rest’s (Rest, Narvaez, Bebeau, & Thoma, 1999) supposition that care and justice are ideals appropriate to different kinds of social situations and are complementary rather than rival moralities.
Search Results
Leslee A. Fisher and Brenda J.L. Bredemeier
Greggory Ross
, one does not require such a sprawling recounting of Stanley’s life to understand his political motivations for donating the Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup. At the same time, Goldstein presents the numerous factors that impacted Stanley’s intellectual and moral orientation in rare detail, offering the
Yilin Li and Weidong Li
applied to women, it seems that they are deficient in moral development. Gilligan argued that Kohlberg’s theory is biased toward males and the “justice orientation,” which is a type of moral orientation that is in favor of abstract principles of justice, equality, and fairness in moral decision making. It
G. Matthew Robinson, Mitchell J. Neubert, and Glenn Miller
, 17 ( 2 ), 180 – 197 . doi:10.1080/13594320701743558 10.1080/13594320701743558 McCuddy , M.K. , & Cavin , M.C. ( 2008 ). Fundamental moral orientations, servant leadership, and leadership effectiveness: An empirical test . Review of Business Research , 8 ( 4 ), 107 – 117 . Mumford , M
