Niall Hanlon

A Caring Society Needs Care Masculinities

By Nial Hanlon, 

For much of history, masculinity has been understood in opposition to care. The ideal man has been framed as independent, self-sufficient, and strong, while care has been feminized—associated with dependence, emotional labour, and the private sphere. Yet, my work over the years has sought to challenge this rigid divide, exploring the realities of caring masculinities and the social structures that enable or constrain them.

Caring masculinities are not new. Men have always been caregivers, whether as fathers, partners, sons, or professionals. Men can care about their families, friends, neighbours, their work colleagues, their communities and the environment. But their roles in care work have often been overlooked or undervalued. At the same time, the dominant cultural norms of masculinity continue to pose challenges for men who engage in care work. The tension between these norms and the emotional demands of care can lead to struggles with identity, recognition, and societal expectations.

One key issue I have explored is how the expectations of traditional masculinity shape men’s experiences of care. Many men who take on caring roles—whether in the home or in professional settings—find themselves navigating conflicting pressures. On one hand, they may be praised for their ‘exceptional’ commitment to care. On the other, they may face suspicion or even resistance, as if care work somehow undermines their masculinity. This paradox reinforces the idea that care remains an ‘unmanly’ pursuit, despite the clear necessity of male caregivers in families, communities, and professions such as social care, nursing, and education.

The way society organizes care also plays a role in shaping caring masculinities. The broader economic and political structures that govern care work—whether through unpaid labour in the home or low-paid work in social services—often reflect gendered assumptions. These structures can limit men’s participation in care by failing to support or recognize their contributions. For example, workplace policies and practices that discourage men from taking parental leave reinforce the notion that care is ‘women’s work.’ Similarly, the underfunding of care professions devalues the work of men who do choose to enter these fields, just as it does for women.

At the same time, not all men’s relationships with care are the same. Some embrace care as part of a broader shift towards more gender-equal identities. Others experience care as an imposition, something that conflicts with their understanding of what it means to be a man. And still others reject care work altogether, clinging to traditional ideals of masculinity that position them outside the realm of emotional labour. This diversity highlights the need to move beyond simplistic narratives and recognize the complex ways in which masculinity and care intersect.

A key concept I have developed in my work is ‘care-free masculinities’—forms of masculinity that distance themselves from care, either by actively resisting it or by benefitting from the unpaid labour of others. In many ways, these masculinities are reinforced by neoliberal ideologies that emphasize self-reliance and competition over interdependence and support. When care is devalued, men who avoid it are often rewarded, while those who embrace it may face marginalization.

However, there is growing recognition that caring masculinities can play a crucial role in creating a more equal society. When men engage in care, they not only challenge restrictive gender norms but also contribute to more balanced relationships and fairer distributions of labour. This has implications not just for gender equality but for the broader politics of care—how we value and organize the work of looking after others.

In my more recent work, I have turned my focus to the question of affective equality in professional caring. While much of the discussion around care and masculinity has centred on domestic roles, professional care work also reveals important insights about gender and affect. Professional caregivers—whether men or women—engage in emotionally demanding labour that is often undervalued and underpaid. For men, this work can present additional challenges, as they navigate assumptions about their capability, motivations, and legitimacy as caregivers.

Affective equality refers to the fairness of emotional and relational resources in society. In professional care settings, it means recognizing and valuing all aspects of caring including the emotional labour that workers perform. When we fail to do so, we reinforce a system that extracts care from workers—especially those in feminized professions—without providing adequate recognition or support. This has consequences not just for individual workers but for the entire care system.

In my research I have explored the ambivalence many caregivers experience in practice. While care work is deeply rewarding, it also places emotional and psychological demands on workers that are often unacknowledged. Care professionals must constantly manage their own emotions while responding to the needs of others, a balancing act that can lead to stress, burnout, and emotional exhaustion. This ambivalence is particularly acute for men in care roles, who may struggle with both the expectations placed upon them and the lack of societal validation for their emotional labour. Understanding this tension is crucial for building workplaces and policies that support sustainable, fulfilling care work.

If we are serious about fostering caring masculinities, we need to address these deeper structural inequalities. It is not enough to encourage individual men to be more caring; we must also create social and economic conditions that make caring work visible, valued, and sustainable. This means rethinking policies around parental leave, workplace flexibility, and pay structures in the care sector. It means challenging cultural narratives that equate masculinity with detachment and independence. And it means fostering an ethic of care that is truly inclusive, one that recognizes care as a shared social responsibility rather than a gendered burden.

Yet, this vision of caring masculinities faces growing resistance from far-right gender ideologies, which seek to reassert traditional forms of masculinity by attacking gender equality and progressive notions of care. These movements frame care as a threat to male authority, portraying it as a weakening force rather than a vital social good. Even though women can be part of this movement, their vision is one that reinforces affective inequalities and women’s subordinated position. Such narratives not only undermine efforts to create more inclusive masculinities but also contribute to the broader devaluation of care in society. Challenging these regressive ideologies is essential if we are to build a future where care is valued and shared across gender lines.

By shifting how we think about care, we open up new possibilities for both men and women. We create a world in which caring masculinities are not the exception but the norm, and where care itself is valued as the foundation of a just and equitable society.

Dr. Niall Hanlon (He/Him)
Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Law and Education
Technological University Dublin

(opens in a new window)https://researchprofiles.tudublin.ie/en/persons/niall-hanlon-2