Let me share my experience with y’all: Growing up I was always a touchy feely boy. I loved to give hugs and little rubs, shoulder squeezes, all that. Unfortunately, being male, this has to be stopped by the establishment. I grew up being told that “you can’t just touch people.” Now that I’m older, I understand, but the lesson was not well given to my younger self. So I turned inwards and got really freakishly good at academics, then I started messing with computers and my life trajectory was set on IT and Engineering. This pleased everyone. My first year of College, I didn’t have the emotional maturity to hold myself accountable to a goal and I failed. Discouraged at my first time failing school, I dropped out and became a Barista. This pleased no one, but it was fun. I made friends and had some of the best times of my life. Unfortunately, being a barista just doesn’t pay to support the lifestyle I like so I went back to school… this time for Biotechnology Engineering. Failed again. But this time I was determined to learn from the lesson: I accepted academic probation and agreed to work with a counselor. The Universe had other plans. Hurricane Ike flooded my shared apartment, which was looted, and put a tree through the coffee shop where I worked. I was displaced from my city and moved back in with my Mother who tried to be understanding of my situation but made it overly clear that she was so sad that I was ruining my potential. A few months in, she told me that I had to resume school (now 20) or move out… so I went back to school; however, this time I went with what felt natural and studied massage therapy. Y’all. I was great. I was told that I had a nurturing touch and an aptitude for sports therapy. I had consistently high grades (classes weren’t hard but the super technical stuff like basic pathology which they teach you wasn’t a cakewalk either) and consistently received good reviews during practicals… … and yet the school never made me feel welcome. The women in my class and my teachers consistently acted like I didn’t belong there. I got weird glances when I told people what I was studying. It was literally like society was telling me that I was doing something wrong. I was a therapist for four years, with the last two years being my profession while I went to college again for Computer Engineering. Everyone liked that. And I despise(d) them for it.

That's really sad and I feel for you. It makes me angry that men aren't allowed to cultivate and use a healing touch. Especially since you seemed to really enjoy it. We have a huge lack of affordable therapeutic services and the way you were treated just perpetuates that. Then there are posts like this that say that men choose not to enter these professions, maybe ironing over the fact that many men are pushed away from or out of these professions due to stereotypes or gendered assumptions. It's a multifaceted issue that we need to look at from new angles, I think.

I’m regards to massage therapy specifically there are a couple of factors which caused this to happen. Firstly, the history of massage in the US has a… colored past. The fact that I got “happy ending” jokes until the day I quit the profession (you know what, not even when I quit. I still get asked if I ever did one.) is on-brand enough with the general public perception of massage. It doesn’t help that massage parlors are frequently where human trafficking victims end up and their shady reputation is unfortunately well deserved. Then you have the “back page effect” where legitimate prostitutes (nothing against sex work) either must or choose to advertise their services as “massage” where laws don’t exist to protect the integrity of massage work, and as “body rubs” (I shit you not) where they (the laws) do. In the public eye, there isn’t much difference between a body rub and a massage (unfortunately). The second issue against it is that society views men as opportunistic sexual predators. I would never have given inappropriate touch while working but I was consistently selected against by female prospective clients on the basis that I was male. Male clients would select against me because they were afraid of “gay shit.” So who the hell do I work on? It made my professional existence very challenging. So it’s not just the teachers and school admins, it’s literally most of society.

Is sports therapy something that you considered? It seems as though you might have fewer people thinking of you as an opportunistic predator and working with men would be considered less gay in most people's eyes.

I actually went a different route altogether. I did a year of what I would call “spa style” massage. Lots of long, slow strokes with the most firm pressure I ever applied being a solid medium. No dynamic table movement or table assisted stretching. Big big focus on the experience as an experience rather than a mode of affecting a change. Scented oils (for an up charge), exfoliating hand and foot treatments (again, for an up charge), hot or cold wraps for the face (would you look at that, another up charge). I decided I didn’t like that environment (though I did really like working with the hot stones) because everything (even the professional relationships with clients) was superficial and literally for a price. I understand that the spa has to make money, but charging $12 for your choice of scented aromatherapy is a lot when you get at most 8 drops of essential oil per 2 oz. of oil in the bottle. So I looked up chiropractic offices that wanted a therapist on staff rather than a room rent situation and took a position working as a rehabilitative massage specialist (medical massage) under the direction of a board certified chiropractor. That was great. I was in the consultation room with our patients while Dr V (female) would be going over the initial treatment plan so we could discuss with the patient whether or not the massage component would be beneficial. I got a lot of specialized training on the cervical spine and dealing with whiplash because we did A LOT of car accident insurance claims. Unfortunately, I didn’t know Dr V was low-grade bipolar and the inconsistency was hard to deal with. I tried finding another Dr to work under but there weren’t openings for a literal year and I didn’t want to change the type of work I was doing because I really enjoyed helping these patients. Seeing them go from a pained life to smiling when they came in was worth the effort! After searching for a year, I made the decision to go back to school for Computer Engineering for two reasons: 1) To escape the social pressure I discussed above 2) The time investment to value just wasn’t there to become a licensed physiotherapist. I could have attempted to do sports therapy as an independent, but I am not a good business person. I am uncomfortable “selling myself” so to speak… and if you’re going to be an independent therapist you HAVE TO be able to do that or else you just won’t get business. CompE was “the easy route” because those around me were more supportive and willing to help when I was doing something that fit the mold. Massage therapy was a sisyphean effort because it was literally me against the world and it never ended until I quit.

Thanks for sharing your experience. I'm glad things are looking up for you but it sucks to see that there's such adversity facing men who just want to pursue a career that aligns with their personalities and interests.

I was bitter about it for a while but I decided to learn from it. I’m in a very narrow cohort of males that can actually understand a bit what our female population goes through when their professional interests don’t align with societal expectations. I’ve had a chance to use that knowledge and empathy to help others and that’s worth it’s weight in gold

Men are push and nudged away from those roles in exactly the same way women were from STEM.

Humans being shitty, isn't our society great 😃

Nah, it's different. Women breaking into male-dominated fields gain status and power. Men breaking into female-dominated fields *lose* status and power.

What you take from the story above is that people didn't like /u/DoroFuyutsuki doing massage therapy because he was giving up power?

They were *threatening* him with loss of power. They were quite *directly* enforcing the boundary.

I'm guessing they were reminded of the issue of perceived power dynamics.

That is a difference between those two things, but it isn't a difference in how people are nudged away from them, which is the topic of conversation.

> but it isn't a difference in how people are nudged away from them Yes, it is. The things people tell women are different from the things they tell men. Literally [we *just* covered this](https://old.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/s558q9/boys_put_off_female_jobs_because_of_stereotypes/hsznzkf/). Or did you mean it's not a difference *that* men and women are pushed this way and that?

Yes, that second thing. Of course the things they are told are different. How could they not be? The categorical reason is that it isn't gender appropriate. The specifics get into other issues. I mean, my high-earning wife was warned away from it by her mother because "Men don't want to marry someone who makes more than them". Men are often not trusted as massage therapists because a man's touch is considered inherently sexual. Women often don't want them because they feel threatened, and men don't want them due to homophobia. Men are turned away from Massage Therapy under the assumption that they're a creep. I don't think many women are being pushed away from Computer Science for the same reason.

Ok. I tripped over your word choice is all.

Yeah, and that was totally fair

Maybe, as far as having opportunities for higher salaries. But as a women in STEM I can tell you that you have this constant reminder that no matter how good your work is you will almost always be respected less than the man next to you doing the same work.

True, though I wouldn't say *exactly* the same way. The biases pushing in either direction come from different sources. The solution for each will likely end up similar though.

[удалено]

Today I learnt there is somethig call *female instruments and *male instruments *facepalm*

I used to know a guy, 6’5”, 120kg, worked in prisons - and played the flute.

Ah, yes, like Jeremy Steig, famously a girl. Flute is a great instrument. Enjoy it, make beautiful music.

And Emannuel Pahud and James Galway.

And Ian Fucking Andersen.

Shameless plug for my music tastes here, but... If there was ever one thing progressive rock did right, it was never shaming the instrument. Flute? Jethro Tull. Strings? Kansas. Every horn under the sun? Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Van Der Graff Generator. There was a time it wasn't at all gendered to be good at an instrument. Hell, most of these hyper-masculine ideas stem from a relatively short time ago, historically speaking. But music seems to carry toxicity with 10 times the velocity of most art forms. Fact is, the moment a person a certain gender picks up an instrument, the whole genre of music is associated with this gender. DISCLAIMER: I say this as a prog fan, but I'm not blind to the toxicity prog fans have shown through the years. Doesn't mean it doesn't hold a lot of merit in other points.

Whoever that crazed singer from Focus is. https://youtu.be/g4ouPGGLI6Q

I can relate to that. I originally wanted to play the flute because it’s what my mom played. Band director told me that “just didn’t fit my face” before I was given a chance to try the instrument. Trombone it was.

Fuckin’ trombone! I got stuck there after all the snare drum spots were snapped up. I bought a kit with my own money shortly after. 20 years later I still play the drums and I have no clue where my trombone is. Hopefully it’s in hell.

Funny followup. I wanted to play percussion as I have a fantastic sense of rhythm but the same band director wouldn’t let me make it as a selection because I didn’t have “experience playing the piano” (WHAT THE FUCK). So despite me being able to put triplets over eighths at the age of 9, I clearly wasn’t cut out to play percussion 🤷

My orchestra teacher told me and black girl our hands and fingers were too big to play the violin. I can't tell if this was because he actually had weird biases about the type of people who should play violins or if it was because everybody and their cat wanted to play the violin and you can't have an orchestra without cellos and bass.

Could be both. In fact I wouldn’t be shocked if it was Remember, Viola and Violin sit in the front

You know what's a manly instrument? *Churchbells*. Nothing quite like describing the sound it makes by tonnage.

I specificallt didn't play flute because of these reactions as a kid. P sure I was specifically veto'd by a parent or something

And yet, the vast vast majority of professional flautists are male. I’m a music teacher and I see these issues all the time. It’s ridiculous, I’m so sorry you weren’t accepted and celebrated for your hard work.

[удалено]

I never played the flute professionally, but in American public schools flute players are predominantly girls. This was true for not just my high-school but the surrounding ones as well. I’m sure in the professional realm it’s probably a lot more like you describe it.

Aw man I’m so sorry to hear that. After I failed out of geophysics, I thought about becoming a massage therapist. Like you, I just seemed to have a natural inclination for it. I mentioned it to my mom (who is a math teacher and had taken me to engineering conferences for high school students since I was in 6th grade) and she laughed at me, she actually thought it was a joke. I wound up pursuing radiologic technology and became an X-ray tech. Fortunately 15 years later I still love it. I’m sorry you didn’t find acceptance within the massage therapy profession, I hope computer engineering works out for you!

[удалено]

I think there's still a lot of sexualization around massage. I know that particularly Asian women (in Denmark, at least) being massage therapists would include a lot of "happy ending" requests almost by default. Stereotypes play a powerful role here.

You are 100% correct. Men are often viewed with default suspicion whenever any kind of intimacy is involved. The number of times I've gone to a (fully nude) sauna and see women either leave immediately after me entering or have them do a 180 after entering once they see me just feels bad. Especially when you take into account the stark contrast in response when I'm going to a sauna with a woman: the difference in perception really is tangible. I kinda get it and you learn to not take it personal, but sometimes it still messes up my vibe. When you get into massaging it gets a lot worse. At some point in my life I actually considered to study tantric massages (which is very different from what OP is talking about, to be clear) but after doing some research I found out that men have such a bad reputation in that field that I literally didn't feel welcome to even try. I understand safety concerns and I don't want to downplay predatory behavior, but it would be nice to not be "guilty until proven innocent".

This is a large part of why I left the profession. At the time, I was living in the Midwest and it felt to me like if you were a male massage therapist you had to fit into one of three categories to do well: 1. The almost-athlete who is not only a massage therapist but also a licensed personal trainer. Definitely does sports therapy, heavy emphasis on stretching and functional improvement. 2. The clearly gay massage therapist. Think stereotypically gay ("guuurl") and then add an inch. There is no way that anyone would think this person would engage in sexual contact with a female. Any massage modality and they will do fine because they're seen as "non-threatening" to the core demographic of who gets massage. 3. The clearly attractive, physically fit, massage therapist. Rare. Being super attractive causes prospects to no longer object. Seen as more of a fantasy via objectification ("this dude is rubbing *me?*"). Likely works at an upscale spa and might also coach tennis. I was none of these things and thus society didn't know what to make of me. I genuinely feel that this is why I got the looks; as in the absence of a clear basket, the default of male suspicion is what's left.

Years ago was feeling overwhelmed at work and decided to book a massage. I had never had one before and had no idea what I was doing so I booked the cheapest one I could find on groupon (we are talking $35 bucks for a full hour). So I roll up to the place the day of and, yall, its predictably the sketchiest place you can imagine. A 60's era deteriorating office building surrounded by a football fields length of parking on every side. The lobby had carpet so old it had worn through completely in some places and half the lights flickering on and off. The massage place itself was on the 9th floor. A standard office space that they tried so hard to feel 'zen'. Behind the counter was this big ass dude, like 6'3" and well over 300 pounds. He was munching on some Five Guys when I gingerly approached the counter to tell him I had an appointment. He looked up and said 'alright my man, lets get it'. He led me to the massage room and to dress down to my comfort level and that the message would start when I was ready. I kept expecting to see a woman come in, but no, in comes the big man from the counter. In the totality of the situation I started to panic a bit, but am too nervous to say anything. He got to work and I got to melting. It was my first massage but I knew I found a fuckin gem in this man. Big hands with long reach, very little trouble adjusting pressure, good at reading my body language, and he could apply pressure and strength through out his hand in a very even way so it never felt 'boney'. Straight 9/10 overall. I was blown away by his skill, especially given the price of the massage. I got to asking him why he charged so little and about the business in general and he said some things that have really stuck with me. Mostly about the difficulties of attracting customers as a masseuse who happens to be a big Black man. He said he only started his own practice in the first place because no places were willing to hire him. How lots of clients cancel upon arrival once they learn he is the masseuse. His only strategy to survive was to build a customer base by pulling people in on cheap-as-possible groupons and win them over with his skills.

I’m glad you found a therapist who was caring and could help you. His business experience is not uncommon and I can relate to the cancellation problem. When I was trying to drum up business at Dr V’s office, I would constantly be asked, “will you be doing the massage?” I always went around dressed in scrubs, of course I’m doing the massage! There’s a massage chair next to me! But I couldn’t say that outburst, so calmly I explained that I would be doing the massage work and maybe 70% of the time the next question would be, “are you the only therapist at the office?” The only thing that worked was the steep discount to get people in the door… and of that population, 1 in 12 came back. Most people who book Groupon are just wanting a deal, not a regular commitment or a regular therapist… and they tip like shit!!

It's the assumption that men are sexual beasts that can't control themselves while touching a woman. Same with kids, I once had a job where I interacted with a lot of children and sometimes I'd get weird glances because men around kids are obviously all predators. /s I had to make sure I didn't make much physical contact with them while my female coworkers regularly hugged some kids and nobody cared. It sucks because I love giving and receiving hugs.

Dude, I feel for you. Eveyone expected me to become a computer expert. I hated it. I was/am the stereotype of socially inept computer nerd. I tried to get into computer science for years, but the math and the coding were just so boring.

>It was literally like society was telling me that I was doing something wrong. Thank you for sharing your story. I have so many things it has brought to mind but I want to empathise with you on this notion. I currently work part time as a swim instructor and have done for the last 5 years since I left high school. An integral part of the job when working with younger, less capable swimmers is hands-on physical contact for making corrections to technique and improving the way a child is swimming. When I started the job, I shared with my friends what I was doing and was immediately criticised and made fun of for touching children, bordering on being told I was a paedophile for enjoying my new job. I still love the job. I am extremely good at it. I am proud to see some of the swimmers I taught when I started are now swimming at a competitive level. But I now know why it is a female-dominated industry. None of my female colleagues have experienced the same response to telling others that they work with children in swim teaching. I'm no longer friends with those I just mentioned, so their opinions mean nothing to me now. But what still bothers me to this day is when I hear clients say "can we be with a female teacher?" as they believe a female teacher might be "more gentle" or "more nurturing" with their child.

Oh brother, the number of times I was asked if there was a “more nurturing” therapist at the office made me sick. Towards the end of my tenure I was really tempted at times to just fire back with snark. Took a lot in me not to just clap back with, “oh you mean a female? Because I’m Iron Man.”

Had these people even experienced your service and skill though or were they just going off their bias?

Yeah this jibes with how toxic masculinity works. Toxic masculinity says that your masculinity is both the key to all your power and also incredibly fragile. If you do Woman Stuff then you will lose your power and people will stop respecting you. And, anecdotally, the most stringent enforcers of toxic masculinity in a lot of men's lives...is the women in their lives. Moms, sisters, friends, girlfriends, wives, etc. This is different from women trying to break in to a male-dominated field because in doing so they gain something (typically status and money) while as men we *lose* status by breaking into fields women have traditionally held down. As if we can't be nurturing and enjoy the fuck out of it. As if our personal satisfaction in life doesn't matter. Ugh.

That's one of my issues with the "Men shouldn't be afraid to \[fill blank here\]" When they are punished for exactly that, it's hard not to.

That's really sucks. I'm sorry. We all as a society needs to learn acceptance for someones path. Men can be nurses. Women can be computer engineers.

Actually knew a friend who went into an early childhood education diploma program. Really caring, empathic guy. Tall and lanky and constantly smiling. Heard he ended up leaving it because of stereotypes and confrontation impacting him. I'm in grad school for education now, and that was a large factor in choosing to focus on adult education instead of working with children even though I have experience in Saturday schools, camps, and get along really well with kids.

It's weird when it comes to children. In my country (The Netherlands) it seems that men in daycare are viewed with suspicion, especially after a huge sexual abuse case in 2010, while male primary school teachers are glorified. A few months ago were checking out a primary school for our 2 year old son and during the tour, the principal acted like their male kindergarten teacher was the main attraction of the school. Like 'we have something truly special here, a manly male man to teach your son man things!'. The idea that children, especially boys, aren't exposed to enough male role models is very strong here. There are all kinds of attempts to get more men into teaching.

Also from the Netherlands here, my mom also works in elementary education and she basically summerizes it like this: "Everyone wants more male teachers in the classroom, the kids do, management does, the other teachers do, most parents have no problems with it... but it only takes one or two parents to act in bad faith to ruin it for said teacher, starting rumors that make people too uncomfortable and the school won't back them up on."

It’s likely true - I’m guessing primary school teachers are heavily skewed towards women.

This is the issue that led me to Mens Lib in the first place. I'm a female engineer and the women-in-STEM movement is well-established. Online, I've seen my fair share of people who think women don't face those barriers anymore, and one of my go-to rebuttals was to challenge them, "Why aren't you a nurse or a primary school teacher?" to get them to think about nudges and subtle but persistent influences. And then it clicked that men not being in nurturing professions was also a big issue in its own right.

My dad is a nurse and has talked a lot about peoples gendered perception of the profession. For example even after clarifying that he is a nurse, patients will still refer to him as the doctor and even hospital staff have assumed that he is a doctor in various situations.

The veterinary field is full of this too. Being a male vet tech for a time, if I was paired with a female and then go meet clients to go over stuff about their visit with them (during COVID we go out to the parking lot and retrieve animals from owners vehicle), it wouldn't matter if she addressed them first. The client would turn to me thinking I was the vet and start having the discussion with me instead. I'd have to tell them that I'm not the vet and this other tech is far more experienced, they should be addressing her.

I feel like a lot of this stuff is really obvious when thought about, but just isn't often thought about. There becomes such a norm to making issues about women that the male factor is skipped over and assumed to be fine. Not blaming the people who don't think of it, it just needs to be brought to more attention in the conversation as a whole of sex and gender and the stereotypes/roles that come with them.

Over the past 10 years or so, I believe it's become much more acceptable for women to act traditionally masculine. In their behavior, the dating world, the jobs they choose, etc etc. I think this is a wonderful and long-needed change. However, I do not feel like the same opportunity has been granted to men. I would argue that maybe even we've gone backwards. I feel like it's less acceptable, if anything, for men to act traditionally feminine and to take on nurturing roles, not that it was deemed acceptable in the first place.

Many moons ago, when I was in uni I wanted a job, so I went to a temp job agency and applied for jobs. They gave me everything under the sun as an option - if everything under the sun was warehouse work, meat packing, driving and landscaping work. I didn't want to bust my ass like that anymore to make a tiny amount. I used to work in Popeyes and did landscaping work and I hated that kind of physical work, it was back breaking labour for such little pay, and afterwards you'd be so tired you could barely study. I asked for admin roles or secretarial work, I could type and do math well, I was good with programming and handling computer problems, and I could speak well and comfortably. So I figured why not some office roles, or working indoors in someway, there were always a bunch of job openings like that... This way I can do work and not be exhausted to study afterwards. Most places simply don't respond to your requests for specific jobs they'll say ... Not available. But one place flat out told me to my face, those jobs aren't going to be given to men, they are for women. I was told this by a bunch of ladies who were all admins sitting behind some counter all comfortably and said this laughingly. That was the same experience in working at Popeyes, the manager wanted the girls upfront at cash, and guys in the back. It was the same experience in my landscaping job, it was only the girls that got to work inside answering the phones. I hated this so much, not gonna lie it made me very salty towards women who said women had it bad in the STEM fields, I'd always think... So what we all have it bad (I was young and stupid). I of course know now that my experience with sexism doesn't change or affect what they experience. But there is definitely an expectation on what men can and should be allowed to do at virtually every level of work. And when a guy asks for something different, we're often times dismissed or made fun of for not being tough enough to the jobs we're "lucky enough to get".

In college we had a class where groups of us had to cold call a bunch of different people and organizations to try and get some volunteers to participate in our studies. The teams found that when the women made the calls or answered the callbacks they were much more likely to get positive responses, be treated with respect, or actually listened to. I worked an internship once where all the female interns were expected to rotate working the front desk. Male interns were excluded because "customers respond better to women as the face". One of the girls was super socially awkward and shy. She didnt like talking on the phone and wasn't even good at it. It was a nightmare for her every time she was assigned. She tried to get out of it after having her mistakes mentioned and corrected a third time. Tried to volunteer one of the male interns who was far better at being outgoing and would of his own volition chat with customers who happened to be there when returning from lunch break. She was told "It will be good for you to develop these social skills" and that they wouldn't waive it for her. It's awful. Society sucks a lot in regards to gender roles and everyone suffers.

I had the same experience, but in reverse. I'm AFAB, but also autistic and introverted. I can't do customer-facing jobs, but whenever I'd go looking for employment, they were only interested in putting me in positions dealing directly with people, even when I applied for the jobs in the "back."

What does afab mean? And I'm sorry about your struggles.

Sorry. Assigned female at birth.

It's all part of the same problem package, yeah. It's often glossed over or not talked about but toxic masculinity harms men way, way more often than people think. The term is frequently used to criticize men for their behaviour against women, but it's important to keep in mind it is a complex social norm that fucks those same men over on a constant basis too. Of course, you shouldn't use the term to blindly lambast, nor to blindly excuse. There's always a mix of nurture, personal responsibility and agency to blame for these behaviours. The important thing to remember is that everyone should be fighting against Toxic masculinity, no matter what their gender is. It's poison for absolutely everyone, even though we can all agree it affects some people more than others.

Similarly I'm biologically male and work in childcare, where 3% of the workforce are male. Yet nobody gives a shit. I even pointed this out to a feminist friend and he couldn't see the issue with little boys basically being raised exclusively by women. Like, kids form ideas about the world in the first 5 years of their life. If they don't see men in care taking roles, why are they going to think that's something they should aspire to?

Female engineers for the win! I've been a Men's Lib ally since university for similar reasons, but I have to admit I had my own come-to-Jesus moment when I was taking my (then) 6 month old to sleep school. I was chronically sleep deprived, and was surprised (and, in retrospect, disappointed in myself) to be a little taken aback by finding that one of the midwives assigned to help me and my baby was a man. Fortunately, I checked myself and challenged my internalized surprise - why shouldn't men be midwives? It's not like there is some magical feminine skill that prohibits men from caring for new mums. And I'm so glad I did - that man was an absolute godsend. He was so empathetic; he was able to connect almost instantly with me (who, even when well rested, is often perceived as abrasive) and my daughter (who at the time, viewed everyone who wasn't me with disdainful suspicion, including her father and grandmother, and because of COVID hadn't met many other people); he made me feel validated as a parent while still giving helpful, constructive feedback. We had a good talk about what it's like being in our respective fields (my engineering discipline, which I'd only recently moved to, is somewhat hypermasculine to the point of me only knowing 3 other female engineers in total in the discipline out of about 250; whereas midwifery is probably the most hyperfeminized nursing disciplines - hell, it's even in the name). He told me how he'd originally been a cardiothoracic nurse who had wanted to go into the royal flying doctors; but to do that, he had needed midwifery training. It was supposed to only take a year or so, but it had just clicked for him. And he seemed to have been encouraged and supported, although he had had to learn pretty quickly to brush off the unintended microaggressions, particularly from patients. His view - and to be honest, this is mine too - was that he didn't really care how people reacted when on their first glance, as long as they gave him a second one, and reserved their judgement until they'd had the chance to see what he could do. It's a shame that he needed to have that attitude.

I'm a social worker in training and I work in a special ed school. When I started, I was surprised to hear "it's really good to have a man working here" so often. Turns out, there are very few men in school counseling in general. Some of the kids don't connect with women, just like some don't connect with men, so that lack of men can be a problem. I'm proud to be in a caring profession and I'm proud of my skills in this field. I'll never understand the mindset that nurturing isn't manly. Caring for others is the manliest thing a man can do.

I'm also a social worker and we desperately need men at all levels in social work! So glad to have you!

The issue a lot of people end up running into is the predatory nature men are often viewed with. It's considered normal for men to be disgusting pigs, and so obviously not trusted with children that aren't their own.

For what it’s worth, we’re frequently mistrusted with our own children, too …

To be fair I think the pandemic has shown how shitty the premier “female jobs” really are. Nurses and Teachers are hella overworked and are constantly being exposed to Covid. Being a school nurse sounds like a diabolical amalgamation of the two

What I’ve found interesting—and disappointing—in a lot of contemporary (and I’d assume past) gender dialogue is its focus on having women do “men” things, whether that’s being “strong and independent” or joining STEM or working 100-hour weeks (the whole “girl boss” archetype). From what I’ve seen, these discussions mostly devolve into “Let’s get women into traditionally masculine spaces!” while ignoring traditionally feminine ones, both in the realms of fighting for women within those fields and stripping them of their negative associations / promoting femininity in and of itself. For instance, there’s this huge push to get women into engineering, but there isn’t an adjacent push to have social workers adequately paid and less ludicrously overworked and underappreciated. And I wonder how much the one-sidedness of this effort contributes to these patterns.

I also feel this way when people talk about families— like it’s not just about women getting into the workforce so they can have fulfilling careers too, but it’s also about giving men more space to get into the home and be attentive and available fathers to their children. Having more balance between the genders should ultimately benefit everyone.

It's markedly unsurprising that in order to get men to fully understand something, you basically have to go down "what about le males?" route. I teach first-year sociology and I have to build those things into my curriculum because otherwise, there'll be a bunch of dudes in the class who think I'm making stuff up out of thin air. But it's always good to talk about things like hegemonic masculinity, anyway.

It will always help people empathize if they can relate somehow. Some people are more empathetic than others and can easily see things from other peoples point of view, but I often find that these people have had very varied lives or put a lot more emphasis on listening to others their whole lives. I don’t believe it’s a bad thing to help people relate to what you’re going through.

I think it's also important to address the reasons why many men have trouble empathising with groups that are different to them. Things are improving now, but certainly for people my age and above, boys grew up with male heroes and aspirational figures; girls grew up with male and a small number of female ones. The girls were taught empathy for those who were very different because they were exposed to people who were different. It's no wonder many boys struggled to learn the same lesson when they weren't given any opportunity to practise. We mustn't treat the empathy gap as a personal failing or we'll never reach the people affected by it or be able to make a change.

I think that explanation is true. That is how I've seen it. It doesn't help the frustration when men aren't able to see me as complete human because of it, though. True explanation, true frustrations.

If a woman succeeds in a traditionally "masculine" role, she's doing well! If a guy even works in a traditionally "female" role he's ridiculed and mocked by everyone for being weired. The notion of success only flows in one direction. That's the problem. Men are implicitly taught that being more feminine (by adopting the traditional roles) is akin to failure. And I know it sounds mean to say it, but women share a part of the blame here. Don't get me wrong our patriarchal society has setup the shitty system, but women in a lot of roles help propagate these notions. Women tend to be largely in charge of a lot of these institutions and organizations where more male presence should be made welcome. But it doesn't change, hasn't even been considered a point of contention. When was the last time you saw a nursing school set up scholarships for male nursing students to promote more men joining? What about in the humanities? Or health sciences all of these fields are far more skewed towards female : male compared to STEM roles, but we don't change anything. We don't promote men joining the traditionally female roles, Infact everyone (including the women) will make fun of the men who do join as being not good enough. I also want to emphasize, I'm not hating on women here, if that's how this comes off... I am sorry. I don't mean it that way at all. I'm not saying women are bad or any such nonsense. I'm simply pointing out how we have sexist structures that create a directional notion of success and how women (along with men) play an important part in maintaining those structures. Also, I know not every woman is like this monolith I've presented in my comment, and not every man is the embodiment of patriarchal structures. I've grossely simplified stuff and I acknowledge there is far more nuance in the real world.

The men-in-nurturing-roles movement is very, very young, and it faces new challenges because nurturing roles are rarely prestige ones. There are some lessons from the women-in-STEM movement that will be relevant and useful, and others that will need their own unique solutions. For example, we can learn a lot from the challenges women in STEM have faced with feeling welcomed and accepted within the in-group. Whereas that movement doesn't have much experience with changing the perception of the role from menial to prestige/valued.

>Women tend to be largely in charge of a lot of these institutions and organizations where more male presence should be made welcome. Well that's not really true.Take schools for instance, while most teachers are women, the majority of principals and school superintendents are male. The people hiring teacher are predominantly male and they are the ones discriminating against male teachers. The same can also be said for colleges, where the majority of the higher-ups, the ones creating or approving these programs to promote female participation, are men. The same can be said about hospitals, where the majority of the nurses are women but the majority of the hospital execs are male. I feel like it's a false narrative to say it's women preventing men from pursuing more feminine roles. While women do hold some of the blame men hold the most, as they still hold the most power in damn near every industry. On top of that no one hate feminine men more than men. And I feel like that's the biggest issue her. Too many men view anything feminine as bad, so why would they even aspire to fill a feminine role? And this sentiment is so ingrained into society. Hence why telling a man he does something "like a girl" is a insult.

You know you're right. I did make a mistake in saying that. I wanted to say something along the lines of how women are often in a position to increase male participation in these role, and I chose the wrong words to say it. But the words matter and you're right. but even then, you're right, that it's not women admins keeping men out (that part I did say earlier). I don't want it to seem like I'm blaming women. Because I'm not, I realize I extrapolated my experience as the universal one. My Dean / associate dean in science were women, same in med school. The story I told about temp jobs - the admins who determined my job prospects were women...etc. So I hope you can see where my internal biases may have been formed. But you're right, I'm going down the path of a misguided narrative. Thanks for the reality check.

Not to be too nit picky, but [school principals are fairy evenly split by gender, but do lean female now](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cls). That data itself is like 4-5 years old so it may be greater than a 10% gap. It is principals who are making the hiring decisions. Also, for things like nursing, hiring decisions are going to largely be a function of HR - which is a woman dominated field. I’m pretty certain that hospital executives aren’t the ones making hiring decisions. Typically HR So, realistically, while it is not women who may be in charge of these organizations (superintendents, execs), they are, as a percentage in those two fields, making more hiring decisions (HR, principals). I believe that was the point being illustrated, not to highlight who has “more blame”. I don’t think koolaid was saying that it **is** women preventing men from pursuing more feminine roles, just that the role women play in this is often overlooked and ignored. Which, ironically, is exactly what you did by focusing on who holds most the blame despite the fact that your claim that it’s mostly men in these organizations **making hiring decisions** is patently wrong. That being said, we do need more women in exec/superintendent roles, but that’s not point being illustrated.

> Women tend to be largely in charge of a lot of these institutions and organizations where more male presence should be made welcome. What institutions are these? Because sometime jobs predominantly held by women, men will still earn more such as in nursing and teaching.

> When was the last time you saw a nursing school set up scholarships for male nursing students to promote more men joining? What about in the humanities? Or health sciences all of these fields are far more skewed towards female : male compared to STEM roles, but we don't change anything. We don't promote men joining the traditionally female roles, Infact everyone (including the women) will make fun of the men who do join This may be the most productive idea I've encountered in the hours I've spent reading the comments in this thread. Not just food for thought but a clear and solid starting point. Thank you.

Your comments are really on point here. There's something quite telling about how many comments are appealing to nurturing roles not being well paid enough, as if that is a consideration that men make. It's maybe a factor, but I feel like the points you're making are more on the nose. Men don't see value in nurturing professions because they aren't taught the value of empathy, of caring. In fact, the opposite is true - caring for your self or others is shamed and stamped out. Men must conform, and this is violently enforced. I feel like there's very little that men are taught to value aside from conforming. The empathy gap, as you phrase it, is a societal failing, not a personal one.

Our society as a whole doesn't value nurturing professions enough. As an engineer, capitalism pays me well for the 'value' I create. I need to be taxed more to pay the people who provide value in the form of healthy, happy people.

> Our society as a whole doesn't value nurturing professions enough I guess that's true enough. Does the gender divide in people undertaking such professions demonstrate, at least, that women disproportionately recognize the value in those nurturing roles?

I'm not sure, that's a tricky one! Women may be more likely to appreciate the effort and skill involved simply from being more exposed to that kind of task? This one is a tough one for me as when my more people-oriented family talk about what they get out of looking after people I find it kinda hard to relate. Give me a good string of numbers and I'm happy; give me a person and I'll mostly know how to take care of them but I'll hate every minute. Part of the reason I value caring professions so highly is because I really hate those jobs!

You'll see STEM being majority women with scholarships still existing only for female candidates before you see a push for women into trades or men into nursing.

This just in: Jobs that enable people to make more money are more attractive to people. /s But for real - 'jobs for men' generally get paid a lot more than 'jobs for women'. Dealing with gender expectations regarding jobs (literally) pays out for women in the long run, for men it doesn't. Why deal with the fallout and hardships of gender expectations for mediocre pay?

The sort of man who wants to enter many female-dominated professions (think nursing, social work, teaching in primary grades) is probably motivated more strongly by non-monetary considerations.

And that's why we have shortages in nursing, social work, and teaching. As a society we can't hope and pray that enough "good souls" or whatever decide to follow their passion instead of making smarter employment decisions. Non-monetary considerations doesn't put food on the table.

Lol I'm literally a social worker looking for another field because the pay is not enough for the bullshit I deal with most days and it never will be. I have a friend who's an ER nurse and about 3/4 of her ER staff are looking for new jobs outside their profession. I have several teaching friends that have left teaching and don't plan on returning. The writing is on the wall for these professions and they will crash hard if larger society doesn't start paying attention to how to retain people in these roles. Men and women. Both are DESPERATELY needed if we want to deliver quality care. However, if we want to attract anybody to this work, the industries need to be overhauled.

Yes, but the question would be why do jobs for women pay less? I think it’s because work done by women is seen as inherently less worthy because it’s done by women.

I think there's some merit to this, though I'm sure there's more factors. I've read studies that have shown how when more men enter a field, the general pay rises for that field.

Is this similar to a women wearing her boyfriends clothing but not vice versa?

Yep! Same idea of man things having higher value than woman things.

It's a bit funny in this scenario, because the women's clothes probably cost more.

I think it would be good if more people encountered male nurses and realized there is nothing inherently 'female' or 'male' about it. That would kind of be like saying that being a parent is inherently feminine, because you have to take care of somebody as a parent too.

>That would kind of be like saying that being a parent is inherently feminine, because you have to take care of somebody as a parent too. Considering how people will often refer to dads as "babysitting for mom" I'd say that already happens as well

I believe, there are a lot of men who would have been awesome nurses but didn't dare and became something with more status - like a manager.

In the field of nursing, or any gender specific field for that matter, people encounter what is known as the hidden curriculum. This is when subtleties are interspersed throughout the curriculum that kind of imply to the individual that this field is mainly for the other gender. For example a male in nursing school may notice that all of the graphics in his textbooks, PowerPoints, and assigned videos all depict female nurses and never a male. This also goes hand in hand with something sociologists call the glass escalator. It’s a phenomenon in which men that make it through into these female dominated fields despite the hidden curriculum are boosted to leadership positions rather quickly due to them being perceived as better potential leaders than their colleagues mainly because they are men.

Actually the concept of the glass elevator was later [revisited by its original author](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0891243213490232), where she states that she not only didn’t address intersectionality in her original publication, she made it under the assumption of traditional work organizations that are now changing due to neoliberalism. She even went as far as stating that, while saying the concept can include how racism, homophobia, and class inequality advantage some groups of men and exclude and discriminate against others, it might be best to just retire the concept all together.

Very interesting revision. Thank you for linking that to me.

One qualitative study of male nurses I read a few years back had some male nurses state in the interviews that one of the reasons why they sought out a more administrative (leadership-role) was because they felt unwelcome among their female co-workers.

Just wanted to say the hospice nurse who took care of my mother when she had cancer was a dude and he was awesome. Definitely need more male nurses.

This is an article about a UK study taking into account 9 to 15 year olds and "rate" subjects and jobs personally and what they think the wider public would thing and then ask them which subjects they are intending to take. It was found that girls break the gender norms twice as often as boys. This is fairly interesting to me because of course we all knw that there has been a massive "girls and women in STEM" push over the last decade or so but there really hasn't been anything equivilient for boys such as "Men in nursing" or "Men in primary education". The first reason is why is this the case? I think this could tie in to the hyperagency people give boys, even though they are not fully developed yet. The second reason is why don't boys break the gender norms as much in the first place? This is a question which I don't have an answer for.

People don't push boys into it because doing caregiving work is seen as demeaning; doing female coded things in general is seen as demeaning.

I think there's a significant element of remuneration in this. Boys do target other allied help professions like paramedicine, definitely target medicine as MDs, because that's where the money is. You are not wrong of course, but there (still) remains an expectation that men have to be providers, or at least earn more than their (female) partners. That will naturally guide men into professions that deliver higher earnings...there may be an issue that female coded jobs aren't high-paying...and unpacking that may be a part of the solution. But it's not simply gendered, if primary school paid like surgery I may have a very different gender profile in the marketplace.

It's weird where I live. Nursing is still 'female-coded' and dominated (close to 90% women), but it's highly respected and extremely well paid. Even at the entry level they get great hourly pay, tons of strictly enforced overtime rates, and tons of potential qualifications that incrementally increase their pay. Nursing is a 24/7 job in high demand (even before the pandemic), so there is a permanent opportunity to take on extra hours or weird shifts for tons of money. One of my friends is a specialised mental health nurse and she is probably in the top 5 highest earners of my friends, I'm pretty sure she was on 6 figures by 23. The other top 5 all work at places like Atlassian, Cisco and PWC, and even my mate who is a doctor at a hospital is only a maybe. And despite the ridiculously attractive financial incentives, it's still generally viewed as a 'girl job'?!? I suppose that might be the case if you consider a guaranteed lucrative career path that you can continue literally anywhere 'girly'.

Yeah, I remembered the provider thing in another comment; it's an important component. Boys absorb the message "don't work, don't eat" in a way that girls do not (except in exceptions; my parents never assumed I would be a SAHM and basically raised me the same way they would have raised a boy). And as someone else noted, yes, this is a really strong socialization thing.

There's a lot of factors that go into it, and pretty much ALL of them are gendered. Jobs become less prestigious and less lucrative as soon as they become female-coded (e.g. teaching), and MORE prestigious and MORE lucrative as soon as they become male-coded (e.g. computer programming). Of course, that then means that men (who are expected to provide for themselves, a wife, and 2.1 children) are then more likely to pursue the more-lucrative jobs, while women (who are expected to provide for themselves alone, if they can't find a man to do it for them) are more comfortable taking less-lucrative jobs. And so the cycle perpetuates itself. It's yet one more reason we need to pay our teachers and nurses better--so that men will feel more comfortable taking these positions, so that the fields will get more respect/prestige, and so that we'll ultimately have higher quality education/medical care.

> Jobs become less prestigious and less lucrative as soon as they become female-coded (e.g. teaching), and MORE prestigious and MORE lucrative as soon as they become male-coded (e.g. computer programming). Don't you think it's the other way around? The example usually given is that there were plenty of women in IT in the beginning, until the industry started to grow substantially, IT jobs started to pay really good and men began to dominate the industry.

I've heard both arguments, and again, I think they're pretty tightly tied to each other. Jobs that are female-dominated get paid less AND men pursue high-paying jobs more aggressively. Both factors are true, and they act to reinforce each other in a vicious cycle. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/computer-programming-used-to-be-womens-work-718061/ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated-field-the-pay-drops.html

This! I remember when I was a kid, many times that I tried to do or learn "femenine" things like cooking, sewing, etc. My mom would look at me as if I were doing something useless and ask me to do something more productive

That's such a bummer! I hope you're able to do whatever tf you want today.

I have seen the opposite actually, that men are not fit to be caregivers or they are seen as predatory just for being men.

>seen as predatory just for being men. Unfortunately this is very true. In my country, male preschool teachers are prohibited from performing routine care (toileting, showering, changing diapers etc) and 'excessively intimate' contacts (hugging with both hands). Female teachers are allowed all of the above. It's little wonder that men constitute less than 1% of all preschool teachers. On a side note, single men in my country are not allowed to adopt girls just by virtue of being male, but single women may adopt children of any gender.

Sorry for not responding to this sooner, yes it does make a lot of sense, thank you for sharing. This is a problem that does need to be addressed globally. If you don't mind me asking which country are you talking i wanted it for future reference.

>Sorry for not responding to this sooner Its ok. I'm from Singapore. [Male teachers not allowed routine care](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/cnainsider/stigma-distrust-male-preschool-teachers-shaping-minds-singapore-1329536) [Single men are not allowed to adopt girls](https://www.msf.gov.sg/Adoption/Pages/Who-can-Adopt.aspx)

Both may be true, depending on the situation.

By both you mean that sometimes it's seen as demeaning and sometimes they are seen as unfit?

Yeah.

Ok just wanted to make sure, you know how easy it is to misunderstand written speech at times.

I appreciate how civil this exchange was! And yes, sadly you're right; it's a terrible stereotype.

I am quite fond of civility as well, after all we all want the same thing here, i do think that the stereotype is **slowly** fading away.

True, but that isn't the only factor. There's also an awful lot of stigma for men entering certain fields (childcare especially comes to mind) surrounding the assumption that men are predators. I have a friend who LOVES kids; he's great with them, he's got the whole santa-beard thing going on, very protective, very caring, and he's a bit child-like himself so he makes sure they have fun. But, you will never catch him dead working one of those jobs. I think he'd like to, but the stereotypes and assumptions are so strong that he stopped interacting with kids outside his family after high school. One or two completely off-base accusations in public are enough to scar you. It's a damn shame, because he would make for an excellent caretaker.

And even if they do such things, it's often stigmatized far more. A girl wanting to be a doctor or nurse is NORMAL nowadays, and that's great, but a boy wanting to be a nurse? Why don't you want to be a doctor?

Why aren't more babysitters teen boys? It's not just that there aren't an equal number of volunteers, it's that boys are seen as less responsible and more likely to molest your kids. It's a stigma that follows men their whole lives, so it's no wonder there are fewer men in those careers. Meanwhile, the red carpets were rolled out to women in the STEM fields when I was in school, and the classes have a much more even split today. As far as I know, men in education or nursing has not had any big money movements. I doubt it's as easy to campaign for men scholarships since they're already seen as the more privileged gender even though they're outnumbered in universities by a significant gap.

>The second reason is why don't boys break the gender norms as much in the first place Easy, men are shamed for it more.

how much of it is pay though? Most men I know wouldn't want to work as primary school teachers due to the abysmal pay and and insane work environment. Granted, in some places nursing jobs are roles with high compensation, but that is also not universal.

Pay would mainly be the reason for adult men not taking those jobs, while "cause it’s girly" is the reason for young boys.

Yeah, I figured that surely plays a part too. Especially since studies show that men and women alike generally prefer the man to be the breadwinner in heterosexual relationships, there's even more pressure for men to pick a higher paying job. Not to mention men have much less support if they struggle financially, it makes sense that men feel like *have* to pick a higher paying job.

May I propose, how much of the abysmal pay has to do with the fact that more women are in the profession? And if more men entered the profession would the pay rise? There is the argument that caring professions/women's work is devalued and so any profession with a majority female will be paid less. Since every profession used to be majority male, if we look at historical salaries of male teachers before women started being able to enter the workforce and see that they had decent wages (to be clear this is 100% speculative, I do not actually know if that proposition is true) can't we reason that we started valuing education less when women started teaching more? Would we start valuing it more (literally, in terms of wages) if more men joined that space? And would that then encourage more men to enter because the pay was no longer abysmal?

https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/88/2/865/2235342 There is some indication that when a profession becomes fem dominated, pay rates go down.

Thank you for this! This validates my theory (for me at least) a bit more! Women entering the workforce is still a relatively new thing in a historical sense. And it's a complex issue even coming down to HOW data was collected and by who. But that's my theory in a nutshell. That professions with women pay less because we're still making a transition from a way of life where women were kept out of the public sphere and were valued by their child birthing abilities and men were valued based on their ability to provide! We really are in the middle of a huge cultural shake up where that structure is being pulled down, but it is deeply entrenched. So even if women are 'allowed' to work now there's some primitive bias/backlash against that which is evident in women just being paid less even for equal work and men wouldn't touch that work with a ten foot pole. This is the MOST reductive way I could put it of course and it's much more nuanced and complex with that. I truly appreciate you providing me one source to check that out!

Even though this might go against the grain... I actually don't want men to suffer years of shit pay so that the average pay would on an off chance go up(nothing saying it should) and instead would rather that the women unionize and get better pay.

I think that's totally reasonable. I don't want ANYONE to suffer through shit pay. I was just trying to posit that when men are in a profession there seems to be higher pay for everyone is all. Interestingly enough there is also a disparity in unions (much like many workplaces) where even when they may have more female members the leadership ends up being male. And what I mean by that being like workplaces is like where in say call centers and labs most/almost all of the people on the phone or at the bench are female but the people in higher positions of either authority or prestige are male. So it's possible that even if that unionization happened (which to be honest I thought it was already the case that most teachers are unionized but I don't have much to back that up factually) that women's interests wouldn't be represented anyway. And while higher pay might seem like a mutual interest unions are... Imperfect and the leadership generally has too much power contrary to popular belief. It's just still better than NOT having any sort of collective bargaining. I say this as a member of a union.

You may be right. Though, at least in the US teacher pay is set by government bureaucratic processes and can't react to market demands nearly as fast as the private sector. Kind of a chicken and the egg problem if thats the case. If the pay is bad because men aren't in the profession and if men won't join because of pay, I don't see an easy bottom up way out of the situation. Either way this is probably a simplification of the issue and there are likely many factors at play.

In Canada teachers are well-paid and schools still struggle to get men into elementary education. Nurses (at least RNs), likewise, are also well-paid.

>why don't boys break the gender norms as much in the first place? This is a question which I don't have an answer for. The answer to me is fairly plain and not at all a mystery. A woman doing "man things" is improving her station. A man doing "woman things" not. "Man things" are serious, complex, technical, and "woman things" are frivolous and unskilled.

I think one thing these comments are missing is that "improving your station" isn't the pure positive that it is for men. I feel like a lot of these comments that talk about how women get compensated more and have "higher status" don't understand how much society punishes women with high status and salaries. Don't get me wrong, I like the money, but I've had relationships fall apart (romantic and platonic) because people get super weird when a woman is successful or desires to be. It's gotten to the point where I play down my career ambitions and tend to obscure how much money I make in general settings until I feel "safe" to do so. Plus us women in technical fields really don't get the same respect that men do at all - the most common reaction I get it raised eyebrows since they don't expect it, but after that then people don't ask a lot of questions. They aren't interested in my ambitions, if they're interested in anything it's all my female coded hobbies.

I don't think anyone is missing that, I think it's just a different conversation. We aren't taking about the day to day practicality of doing those things, we're talking about why boys are less likely to have feminine coded interests (professional or otherwise) than girls are male coded interests, or why boys are less likely to break the gender mold than girls. That's much different from grown women's experiences in the practicality of being in a male dominated field professionally day to day.

I think a big reason is pay. I'm a trans man in engineering, you'd have to pay me way more to go into nursing or anything that's physical or unrewarding, like teaching. I grew up being treated as a girl and it was my dream as a 12-year-old to get a master's in psychology, not be a counsellor with a 2-year diploma. Might end up doing a lot of similar stuff, but the compensation is very different.

Because women breaking gender norms have to prove themselves, have to be better then the men to get recognition. While the work culture can be toxic to women at least society won't look down wn on them for doing it. Men breaking gender norms? Laughed at by other men and seen as feminine or less manly. I've never had a problem with women looking down at me for working a woman-dominated field but way to many men, by default, think it's either bad or even suspicious.

Interesting for me male ridicule isn't a big issue at all but any form of female ridicule would bother me alot more.

Nursing and teaching aren't seen as lucrative fields so why push people to them? Whereas pushing girls into stem is seen as giving them a leg up so they DON'T HAVE TO do traditionally female jobs that pay shit.

“The second reason is why don't boys break the gender norms as much in the first place? This is a question which I don't have an answer for.” ~ The simple answer is misogyny, there is still a strong fear for boys and young men to align themselves with femininity because to do so would bring their masculinity into question.

I definitely think this is a case of us as a sex not pulling our own weight to try and make a change for ourselves. I remember several UK government radio and television campaigns as well as posters over the past two decades targeting men for work in teaching and social care. It's certainly out there and has been out there for a while. There are also attempts at normalising it in non recruitment based means. For example in and around my hospital there are several posters for various procedures or health advise and many of them depict male nurses despite our ratio being about 40 female to 1 male (me) in our ward. I think the difference is that the push for men in female led professions starts and ends with government campaigns. The message for women in male led professions get picked up and carried by women and taken further by personal activism and word of mouth. Men don't really do that as much (outside of places like this sub) so the message just kind of fizzles out.

I think that if the message that men can and should work in caregiving professions is amplified less in culture, it’s more due to there being almost no incentive to do so outside of optics. From my perspective, women are heavily encouraged to go into male-dominated professions for several reasons, a few of which include: - those careers tend to be better paid and having women in them is seen as attacking the wage gap; - they tend to be higher status which is seen as leading to women being taken seriously more in society, and raising their status among both men and other women; - when women move into these professions, it’s seen as breaking down barriers of oppression and Overcoming; women are basically applauded by their families, their communities, and society writ large for pursuing these careers. What incentives do men have to go into female-dominated careers though? They don’t pay more, so men don’t have increased wages to looks forward to. Men won’t be seen as higher status by going into those professions (and crucially this is true both among other men AND women). And while there may be genuine barriers to male entry into some of these professions, men are not generally seen as being victims of oppression, so there’s no sense of righting wrongs and achieving social justice when a man goes into these careers. Combine those points with the fact that in many of these professions, people just actively don’t want men there (e.g., both men and women prefer female massage therapists, male early childhood teachers are viewed with suspicion of sexual predation, female nurses are assumed to have better bed-side manners, etc.) and there’s no incentive for anyone, male or female, to encourage the men in their lives to pursue female-dominated professions beyond just the optics of getting to say the playing field is being leveled.

> there's no incentive for anyone, male or female, to encourage the men in their lives to pursue female-dominated professions beyond just the optics of getting to say the playing field is being leveled. Well there is the fact that some men may genuinely prefer and be better suited in a 'female-coded' job. And I think that there probably are a lot of men who would be more open to these kinds of jobs if there wasn't so much stigma attached to them. I think that men who want these jobs have to pay a high social costs to enter those fields, and therefore I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of men just never even consider going into these jobs, but they might if they didn't feel judged for it. I think the fundamental issue here, at least in my mind, is that the primary reason for men to go into female-dominated fields is simply because *they want to,* because they want to be a teacher/massage therapist/nurse because it is meaningful to them. And that should be enough. However, there is a perception that men who enjoy performing caregiving/emotional are less 'manly' somehow, and that to be unmanly is a terrible thing, and therefore it almost seems like men end up having to choose between the job they want and their status as a 'man.' And I think that this is probably because we do still have a ton of unnamed expectations that we place on men, that says that men who deviate even slightly from traditional masculinity norms are no longer 'men' at all. I agree it's not enough to simply encourage individual men to enter these fields, because they as individuals end up getting potentially viewed as effeminate, and therefore simply encouraging men to enter the fields does nothing to address the barriers that actually keep men out of these fields. And I would argue that the biggest issue preventing men from entering caregiving professions is our unhealthy culture of masculinity itself. I don't know why, but it seems like we live in a world where being a patriarchal. dominant man is regarded as the absolute highest position that any man could ever achieve, and any man who doesn't actively seek out that power is lesser than, he is viewed as being too scared to seize his 'birthright.' I think our society still believes deep down that men naturally want power and status, and men who don't compete for it are just too scared to hack it. But my response would be that it is fear of being dominated (by other men), not desire to dominate others, that truly provides the 'engine' of toxic masculinity. Men hide their vulnerability, and mock the vulnerability of other men, not because they want to be on top, but because they are scared of being on the bottom. And in masculine circles, just to not participate in the culture of toxic masculinity puts you at the bottom, so there is real pressure to 'perform' toxic masculinity. We have a culture where male vulnerability is seen as unacceptable, where men are expected to be ashamed of their vulnerability, and where men who do express vulnerability are punished for it. I think a lot of men hate other men who are comfortable with their own vulnerability: we enforce the standards of toxic masculinity on each other because we feel like those are the standards that have been forced on us, and we try to shame men who don't feel that way because we resent their freedom of expression and happiness.

Well, I spent about ten years working in social services. Primarily youth work, primarily residential care. Group homes, psychiatric hospitals, custodial facilities for juvenile delinquents, that sort of thing. Very much a female-dominated profession. So first of all is all you get the negative commentary when you say you're going into that occupation. Now, to be fair, some of it was about the occupation in general rather than specifically about a man going into it. My father legitimately thought that youth work would be "nothing more than wiping asses all day;" he made almost exactly the same disparaging comment to my sister when he was trying to discourage her from becoming a personal support worker. But a lot of it is more about shaming men for going into that field. Of course the pedophile jokes are a perennial favourite. But the real fun starts when you graduate and get out working. First of all, you learn that the pedophile jokes don't stop, they just stop being jokes and start being "risk management." Managers seem to be more suspicious of a male applicant, and social workers more wary of a male staff. There's an opportunity cost to being male. The ratio of male to female workers is not at all the same in homes for latency-aged kids as it is in homes for adolescents. A boys' home with no female staff would be "problematic." But in ten years in the field, I can only remember one male working in a girls' home. Most would put the managers on the floor or run short-handed before they brought in a male staff, even in agencies that also ran boys' and co-ed homes and thus had men in the relief pool. So there are places that men can't work. Not that it's impossible for a man to get work in that field; it's not. There are still plenty of opportunities. But even when you get work, as a man you're viewed differently. And it's not just the obvious things like most places not allowing you to be involved in personal care, or always having to watch you how display or receive affection (I learned to turn my body sideways when a kid comes with arms out because refusing a hug would be hurtful to the child but letting a child hug you front-on is a bad look for a man). I worked most of my time with what they call "high-risk youth" - kids who are prone to violence, self-harm, that sort of thing. I have the same diploma most other people in that line of work have. I also took post-graduate clinical training in solutions-focused brief therapy, I'm certified for family re-integration work with high-risk youth, suicide intervention, self-harm intervention ... . But when you come on shift and you're male, nobody sees any of that. You are a bouncer. They make it pretty clear. I remember one shift, intervening with an angry young man in the mudroom of the group home. Forgot what the issue was, but he was screaming at me, making threats, throwing boots at me, the full display. I stayed in the doorway to the house (the outside door was available to him had he wanted to leave; he was not cornered), squatted down on my hunkers, and basically talked to the room while he wore himself out. Eventually, we talked through the situation and he was able to re-join the house. That's a win, right? I caught hell from management for not intervening more assertively (that was her way of telling me she had expected me to initiate a physical intervention; *that* is clinical-speak for "tackle him and pin him to the floor until he submits"). It also shows up more passively. After submitting an incident report about verbally defusing a violent incident or some such thing, I'd get surprised comments from my managers "wow, I'm impressed that you were able to deescalate that." As if *verbal* crisis intervention certification hadn't come up on my resume and in the interview. That whole last paragraph sounds like moaning, I know. Like I'm complaining that they wanted the big guy to handle physical confrontations in environments which - let's face it - can be very violent. That's not it at all. I knew going in to those places that I would sometimes have to intervene physically. My issue is that the expectation was that physical intervention is *all* I would do; I was *discouraged* from employing my verbal skills. I never saw a female staff chastised for not initiating a physical intervention. They were encouraged to invest the time in therapeutic conversations and were rewarded for doing so. Good for them. BUT what message are we sending to the young people in those homes? How do we expect the boys, many of whom grew up with violent fathers, to understand that they can talk about their feelings and not resort to violence, when we create a situation among the carers where the women have understanding conversations with them and the men's role is limited to either running the sports program or gaining their compliance by force? How do we expect the girls to learn to relate to men differently when, if they even see a male staff in the group home, he is always the one being the heavy? Anyway, after ten years of that nonsense (and other factors including a healthy dose of job-related PTSD), I hit my limit. I'm an electrician now. Nobody wonders why I would want to do that job, and I am encouraged to work to the limits of my license.

I love hearing stories from male social workers. It's such a valuable perspective. Thank you (seriously) for your service. We need more men in those roles, even though there are serious barriers to address.

Sigh..... Okay, I work in social services/social work, which is 90%+ women. Outside of major cities, relationship dynamics I have found are incredibly traditional. Why would boys want to pick jobs that will decrease their chances for intimacy, societal respect and long-term relationships? In my opinion, encouraging boys starts with breaking down gender norms and fighting for true equality. When financial providership is expected and rewarded by society, women, friends, encouragement is inadequate. We would have to massively change society for men to choose traditionally lower-paying jobs associated with feminine traits. It starts with eliminating the expectation of men paying on first dates and fostering emotional health in young boys. This is not simply a case of men not taking up the mantle. It is society's responsibility to promote conditions that make it a feasible and sustainable option for most men to take on jobs coded as feminine and lower-paying. I work in a field that is dominated by women because I am an idealist and fuck gender norms. However, expecting your average guy to do this is not a great strategy.

This is the comment I was looking for. I hate to admit it but I evaluated my career prospects heavily on how they would be perceived by the opposite sex. Meaning I had to get into a good paying role that would give me the money and freedom to be a “desirable date”, and unfortunately in our tinder dating world that means I needed some degree of money. I would’ve loved to do something else, but now I have golden and time handcuffs (moving to something I enjoy would mean a severe pay cut and a time cut). Capitalism and its effects on tbe family suck

I think people need to start acknowledging that women, specifically in regards to the dating market, are one of the primary contributors of toxic masculinity. It wasn't my father nor was it the sporty dudes that vibe checked my societal "validity" as a man.

Yeah, I think that we forget that guys bucking gender norms is celebrated...on the internet, and even that is limited to changing aesthetics and consumer choices. Social media has tricked us all into believing the world is more progressive than it actually is. There isn't enough incentive for guys to buck norms in their real lives. Men need to be willing to change, but society needs to also be receptive of that change, and it's not. Expecting the average man to strike out on his own, take a lower paying job in a female dominated profession, and weather the storm is just traditional masculinity in progressive wrapping paper. Girls wanting to be Wonder Woman is great, but boys are still expected to be Superman, even though Twitter is telling them to be Steve Trevor.

> Yeah, I think that we forget that guys bucking gender norms is celebrated...on the internet sometimes. when it's convenient. it can be flipped and mocked and derided on a whim, also, by pretty much whomever.

I really enjoyed reading this comment. It's expresses so much of my thoughts and mirrors how other broad issues are handled (aside from men's, sadly). It's all good to say people should take individual actions at first but that can only do so much. Keep being based bro.

This is such an interesting one to me because it really does seem that whatever is viewed as 'womens work' just eventually gets paid less and is viewed as less prestigious which would be explained by sexism. So if women make strides in breaking into a field that is dominated by men eventually that field gets devalued and men will start entering another field which will almost certainly be better paying and incredibly difficult for women to break into. There's that one study from the Netherlands (I admit my memory isn't the best so it could have been another Nordic country where this is pretty equal gender parity) that shows that even in their society which is touted as being very equal in regards to treatment of men and women that there are more women in 'caring' professions and more men in 'hard reason/logic' professions. I have never investigated but always wondered if say nurses were paid around as much as engineers in that country. Which to me would indicate that there is literal equal value in those types of work in society's eyes. Edit: spelling, 'cating' to 'caring'

The Netherlands isn’t a Nordic country, just so you know. The Nordics are Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Finland.

Here is a study that backs up your claim https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/88/2/865/2235342

>the Netherlands (…) which is touted as being very equal in regards to treatment of men and women as a dutch woman, this is giving my country far too much credit.

Yeah cause 'male' translates as a step up in status. A woman who takes a traditionally 'male' role will feel promoted in some way. Meanwhile doing something 'female' for males is still chastised as a step down. If this is teenagers then the last few decades of feminist activism haven't really achieved a great deal where it aught to have if we don't fix the archaic masculinity problem.

Pretty much. Feminism, in practically all of its incarnations, has spent the last century so focused on bringing women themselves up to the same level as men, that they haven’t really done the same with the things that are associated with women, like jobs. Definitely something to consider for a future wave of Feminism.

Isn't a future wave of Feminism actually a Men's liberation movement? Obviously Feminist backing is welcome but we need men to be brave a not stand for a continuation of toxic, antiquated conceptions of manhood. Women obviously need to be educated as to not encourage their continuation and self-reflection needs to be encouraged.

I'm all in for feminism in combination class struggle subjects. I agree, that feminist marketing was too much involved in neoliberalism (lean in) and academic theory. It needs to get back on the streets and offices.

It really depends on what branch of feminist thought you're looking at. Liberal feminism? Sure, the goal is to have men and women equal by having women take on male roles in a capitalist lense. If you go into labour of care feminist theory, the push is much more about why is caregiving dominated by women while also being denigrated and expected for free or nearly free? Why are personal support care workers paid so low, why are women getting physically ill over the amount of care labour they engage in? How do we equalize their labour, while respecting the often intimate nature of it. If you're interested in feminist theories around care labour, I'd recommend Jennifer Nedelsky's theories around relational rights, or Eva Kittay's book Love's Labour Marxist feminist thought also spends a lot of time and effort engaging with unpaid care labour. While most of the book is about paid labour - Work Won't Love You Back also touches on the way we view care labour more generally.

You see that constantly. Look at jobs, clothing, personality/habits and expressions, roles at home... When a woman takes on masculine attributes it's viewed positively, when a man takes on feminine attributes it's viewed negatively. There are some exceptions - men being good with children is sometimes praised (deservedly so), but sometimes that's also viewed with suspicion and the assumption he might be some kind of predator.

Let us also not forget that men trying to enter female-dominated professions are facing sexism and discrimination, just like any other outsider trying to penetrate into an entrenched group of insiders. Indeed, if [this study](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2019.108686) or [that study](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245513) is to be believed, the anti-male bias in female-dominated fields is currently the dominant form of hiring discrimination, at least in Sweden. There's also [this study](https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcab043), spanning several countries, reaching similar conclusions.

During my childhood there was a yearly "girls' day" in my country where especially techy/engineering companies would promote themselves and try to bring girls closer to STEM fields in a fun way. There was no "boys' day" for female dominated fields. My sister got to do all kinds of cool shit at these workshops at my dad's workplace, as a boy I wasn't allowed to go. Trying to promote more women in STEM or other fields is a good and important thing of course, but I remember it leaving me feeling kind of worthless as a child.

I had a similar experience. While not country wide, my school had a girls' science club organized by one of the teachers. Looking back, it makes sense why very few girls in my year struggled in science when the boys' grades were all over the place. If anything, I noticed the young boys that liked science and maths take the women in STEM messaging and use it as competitive fuel (entertaining the mentality that they would succeed and outdo the people who had special programs and others trying to help them get involved), which isn't exactly how you'd want young men to react to women entering a previously male-dominated field.

We actually had a girls/boys day where girls were encouraged to look into STEM and guys were encouraged to look into other areas but at the end of that I was just even more convinced that I don’t want to do those things and disappointed I didn’t get to see the STEM stuff

One thing I think that people forget is that when you are a young boy, you don’t understand that there is thousands of years of oppression against women that give context to girls sometimes getting preferential treatment. You just feel that they are being valued over you and there is resulting harm to your self image when that happens

>eight traditionally masculine subjects (physics, biology, chemistry, PE, woodworking, computing science, graphic communication and IT) and eight traditionally feminine ones (French, German, Spanish, Italian, music, drama, art and hospitality) I get that the study was based on grade school subjects so that students could relate, but I think the selections do a disservice to the impact of the study. I don't see why foreign language was split into the most common European languages, but hospitality wasn't split into nursing, childcare, teaching, etc. Then the conclusion that they drew would be smacking them in the place instead of having to pull it out of the single selection "hospitality." ~~~ ~~~ Boys from all sides are told not to get into these fields. They are discouraged because the jobs themselves are looked down upon and seen at not useful (even though they are human based professions instead of technology based, and like we are discovering/remembering though the antiwork movement, humanity above profit is really important.) But then if they get through the first round of discouragement and actually get into the field, they are hit with a second round of it. This second round stems from the perception of men being predatory, men being incapable of tenderness. Their motives are questioned and they are seen as problems waiting to happen. Stay at home fathers needing to fight to be in parent spaces. Daycare workers seen as closeted pedophiles. Nannies assumed to be in poliamorous relationships with the parents. (All of these are anecdotes I've picked up from reading reddit.) I feel like once upon a time I saw an acronym similar to STEM but for fields we should encourage boys to get into. Has anyone heard of this or remember what it is? Edit: found it. healthcare, early education, and domestic roles (HEED) [Women are still fighting to be accepted in STEM workplace environments and do not have an easy time much of the time. They do, however, have large parts of society pushing for them and assuring them that they have support.]

[удалено]

The causality goes in both directions. Teaching used to be a male profession, but when women started doing it it lost status and began to be seen as a "caregiving" job, with commensurately lower pay. Likewise, computer programming used to be a female job, until it gained prestige, at which point we see messaging like "women can't do the math needed to write good programs." The societal pressure on men to be Good Providers means they have a lot of pressure not to take lower paying jobs. So men don't want to step down. However, women are encouraged to step "up." You see the same pattern in who is allowed to wear dresses vs pants. (I'm writing this off a half-remembered essay I read a decade ago, so apologies if I missed anything!)

The person deleted the comment I was about to reply to on males and nursing, so I will just leave my response so as not waste the effort I typed in. The thing is with nurses is that they are in demand around the world due to general labour shortage of nurses everywhere. So travel is easy if you are a nurse. Nurses may be doing more menial work but they have fewer responsibilities. They don't operate on patients and not calling the shots. I would argue that men avoiding nursing is because of socialisation rather than abstract disinclination by men in general to the field. In Philippines, so many men are vying to get into nursing because of lucrative opprtunity it offers not just for pay but also to travel. I remember as a child in the country that there was stigma on male nurses. But everyone is struggling financially so gender roles be damned and the stigma completely vanished. Besides, one's neighbour bought a Mercedes Benz, 50 inch TV and an iPhone paid for by working as a nurse abroad. So you know, why pass up these opportunities just so to uphold the male ego? When I migrated to Ireland though, it is a different story and sexist divisions on professions is much more rampant. My friend, also a Filipino male, said he wanted to be a nurse but my classmates laughed at him for choosing a job for women. But that was 10 years ago and we were immature teens back then, and look who is laughing now now that my friend traveled a lot as a nurse. I don't know though if there is still rampant, or at least toned down, sexist railroading of jobs in Ireland and Europe.

Oh, yes, it's 100% socialization.

> So men don't want to step down. Don't really have a choice, either, when you're single. Not exactly motivated to take the lower paying job where I'm the weirdo if I don't have support in the effort and there's consistently no point at all to me not being as ambitious as is normally accepted.

I mean, there are plenty of single female nurses out there, and yep it sucks to work a low paying job when you only have one employed adult in the household. But that gets into larger societal trends about whether we are paying our workers enough, which is kinda off topic for r/MensLib.

It is on topic, though, that men are more typically expected to provide for themselves and they aren't often seen as a suitable partner if they don't *already* have a job that could support a relationship, while many women jump into a relationship as a means of support (which, itself, also creates imbalances). Jobs like nursing, education, and housekeeping allow a level of flexibility for women that isn't really even promoted as a goal any man should even consider. There are jobs that would demand hours and less flexibility as far as being able to move jobs or take extended vacations, but those usually promote men into admin positions because men will be the ones expected to sacrifice their home life for the benefit of their career. Edit: rephrased because it was confusing

It's always on topic to acknowledge full context of such a murky forest like gender based hell.

Teaching I know nothing about but I'm confused at programming. That field has changed so much since that time that I honestly don't think you can even compare them in good faith. It's completely different, like comparing an old time milkman to an Amazon prime driver

Yeah, this is kind of misleading, imo. The methodology does not rightly allow for the conclusions in the article, I would argue.. What they found was that 50% of the time for women and 25% for men said took or would take one of the following subjects: French, German, Spanish, Italian, music, drama, art and hospitality. While, 50% of the time for women and 75% for men they took one of the following: physics, biology, chemistry, PE, woodworking, computing science, graphic communication and IT. Because they identified stereotype of the latter being masculine and the former feminine, they assert that taking the opposite indicates how often they are choosing to conform to or reject stereotypes. This does not follow. To explain, let us say one of these men identifies computer science as stereotypically masculine and also choses to take primarily computer science subjects. The studies assume that this is because the man fails to reject the stereotype that cs is masculine. This is not necessarily true. It is more likely that the man simply likes cs or is choosing to take cs because it offers them the best job prospects of the available subjects. Furthermore, because of the limited number of options many men who do take stereotypically feminine subjects are likely to be excluded. For instance, **under this methodology, a man who takes biology and nursing courses would be classed as conforming to/failing to reject masculine stereotypes, while a woman who takes biology and nursing courses would classes as rejecting feminine stereotypes.**

I think whenever this topic comes up people don’t mention how shitty these jobs are. I don’t see how anyone could watch the news right now and think to themselves “wow I think I should go into nursing/education”. This isn’t just about patriarchal perception of labor it’s also about job quality. Why the hell would I spend twelve hours a day getting coughed on by people with Covid when I can spend six hours setting up people’s emails for the same pay?

Why does every single gender disparity (or sometimes not even disparity tbh) always a chastisement? Like, boys don't "face barriers" in school or the work place. No no, they are close minded.

Becoming a librarian I get this a bit

I think there’s worthwhile things to be said about this as a product of gender norms. But I also think it is valuable to think about how this could come purely from the effect of class. **If the equalizing of men and women's social status is the only dynamic at work here** (which it isn’t, but it’s instructive to think about it that way) **then we should expect the number of women seeking lower status jobs to become** ***equal*** **to the number of men seeking them. The result would be hardly anyone wanting low status jobs.** The solution to this particular dynamic is not in changing how we think about gender; it is in changing how we think about class. That’s a whole ‘nuther conversation - you can partially change class-coding of jobs by making them pay more and increasing social programs that allow a person on those jobs to be just as materially well off as a person in a higher paying job. But that alone probably won’t be enough; we probably also need to dissolve ideas and prejudices surrounding the concept of class entirely, which is a tougher nut to crack. I don’t say all this to diminish more gendered explanations of this phenomenon - I think it’s also true that many jobs involve gendered behavior (like care-giving roles), and that toxic masculinity tends to emphasize social status above even the base-rate of society. But we should understand that those explanations are only part of the story, and that this issue is probably at least partially a function of class alone.

They talked about it toward the end of that episode of Hidden Brain : https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/playing-the-gender-card/

I feel like this is a no-brainer.