Feminism Benefits Men Too

Pushing back against the idea that gender equality is a zero-sum game

Gender equality has benefitted men in their relationships with their children

As a Norwegian living in a country that is at the forefront of the push for gender equality, I want to tell my experience as a man, and compare it with living in countries where gender equality has been lagging, such as the US.

I think it is important to talk about this because it is very hard to get men onboard with gender equality if they think it is a net loss to them. I am here to make the case that it is actually a net gain.

I got inspired to write this article based on this quote from from Lemon Curd:

Men have more free time, disposable income and freedom from obligation, responsibility and accountability because women have less. If men do equal work in relationships, families, workplaces and communities they WILL lose free time, disposable income, work opportunities, freedom from stress and obligations etc etc. that’s what equality IS

I will make the case that this simply isn't true by appealing to actual experiences, statistics, and logic.

Work Time Benefits of Gender Equal Societies

Let us look at this chart. It shows average work hours for different countries. I picked modern countries known for being wedded to gender equality and countries known for being more traditional.

What do you see? Countries emphasizing gender equality work less. Not surprising. Everyone needs to work less when women work as well. It is not that earth-shattering. But that is not the whole story. As women gain more power and influence in society, emphasis shifts towards family life and away from maximizing profits and status.

You can see this in the cultural dimensions' comparison. The metric "Motivation towards Achievement and Success" measures typical masculine values such has gaining a top position, prestige, making more money and having more stuff.

A lower value indicates more typical feminine values such as valuing cooperation, caring for the sick, quality time together, work-life balance, family, and nature. One can see that reflected in Scandinavian politics. Look at almost any area. Take school, for instance. In places like Japan and the US, emphasis would be on maximizing academic achievement. Scandinavians will care far more about the happiness of their students. Do they have friends? Are they bullied?

We see this in school curriculum which has far more practical courses such as cooking, wood working, art etc. Schools will arrange things like friend groups for students to make friends. There are many school trips to help kids socialize. School days are often shorter to give time for play.

This attitude seeps into work life as well. I got many stories for foreigners coming here to Scandinavia and getting shocked when their boss tells them they work too much and need to take some time off. Spend time with the family. To many, this is a cultural shock. It is so ingrained that they have to keep pushing and pushing and pushing to show they are dedicated. But being a badass macho man taking on the world is just not a Scandinavian value, and part of the reason for that is that we have been transformed by letting women play a much bigger role in politics.

This shift became very clear from the first female prime minister in the early 1980s, Gro Harlem Bruntland. Focus on things like parental leave, childcare services etc came into focus. And women know that if men are to help out in the home, they cannot be working overtime all day.

What men do you think is most overworked and stressed? Men in patriarchal Japan or men in gender equal Norway? Japanese men often don't even have time to come home. They are home in the weekends. Norwegian men, especially those with children, then do go home early. To them, it is natural to pick up kids in childcare facilities, help make dinner and similar.

So yes, it is true that in Scandinavia men do more work at home. But that has not been a net burden because men in Scandinavia also work much less than men in patriarchal societies.

I experienced this myself when asking for some leave while my son was young. My boss was immediately supportive and very clear that family comes first. There was just no question in his mind. That is not what an American or Japanese man would experience. They would ask if you take your job serious. And that is not what I speculate, but what Americans say themselves. I mean many Americans actually work here in Norway, and we have a chance to talk to them about how their experiences differ from the US.

And this is not just from the US to Europe. British men will tell the same story. I have lied in the Netherlands and know Dutch men living in Scandinavia. They also have similar stories. They also experience that family life has much stronger emphasis and you are actually encouraged to work less.

And the thing is, this actually helps productivity. Countless studies have been done on productivity which shows that working really long hours is counterproductive. It may work for some days, but ultimately overall productivity will fall.

Family Advantages for Men

I am a father of two boys, and some of my happiest times is spending time with them when they were small. The months I spent with them full-time the first year were invaluable.

The fact that I got to spend a whole 3 months with each son the first year of their life, fully paid, is an outcome of feminism and the push for gender equality.

Are children a lot of work? You bet. Those first years of their lives was the most stressful in my life but also probably the happiest. It is important for men to have this experience for two reasons:

1. You get to realize how much work women have historically done taking care of kids. You learn that it is hard work.

2. You experience the joy of caring for your own children.

Being a parent is a contradiction. Children are both an immense burden and joy. Evolution wired us so that we would actually enjoy this burden. If I had lived the 1950s family man life I guess I would not have had the same burden looking after my kids. But I would also have been deprived of the joy I experienced from it.

If it were purely a negative, I would not like most other parents to have chosen to get child number two. Most of us parents are not getting children for the glory of the nation, but because children give us joy.

I will strongly push against the implication that it has been a loss for us men in Scandinavia that we have to step in and share the burden of child raising. It also means sharing more of the joy.

Basically, no man would want it any different if they could decide over again. The men who strongly oppose this have simply never had this experience. They oppose the unknown.

The Benefit to Men's Income

I want to address another one of the points made:

If men do equal work in relationships, families, workplaces and communities they WILL lose free time, disposable income, work opportunities

I cannot say being married or in a relationship in any way has hurt my work opportunities. That women work creates a bigger economy with more opportunities, not less.

And because women work, the family gets a higher income. When your wife shares the bills you get more disposable income, not less. When women have their own income it also means there is no alimony payment after a divorce. That helps men economically.

Frankly, I had never heard of the concept of alimony until I came to the US because it is so rare for women to not work here in Norway that paying alimony is a historical anachronism here.

Benefit to Boys

Ironically, when 1950s style traditional family pattern arose with mother at home watching children and cooking while the husband was away working in the factory arose it was considered radical and something that would make boys feminine. What? Are you surprised?

You see, the 1950s family pattern and gender roles is not traditional at all. Historically, men and women worked together on a farm or in a workshop. For instance, a shoemaker or hatmaker would do his trade in his own home together with his wife.

They would both participate in raising their children as they were both present in the home. The same applied to traditional farms. Yes, men and women did not do exactly the same types of jobs, but there was a lot of overlap, and they were in proximity of each other.

That is why when modern industrialism arose many commenters warned that it would be.a disaster that boys would be left entirely to their mothers. Conservatives of that era fretted that boys were becoming feminized.

Ah, so you think the dread of decline in masculinity is a new thing? Oh, no! You can read stories and newspaper articles all through history where men fret that men are not masculine enough. It is akin to how Socrates complained 2500 years ago about "young people these days are lazy and impolite."

So the irony of the situation is that what Scandinavia has been doing is actually bringing society more back to its original form. The 1950s is not in any shape or form the traditional and natural way for humans to live or families to be organized.

Today in Scandinavia, it is far more common that men work in pre-school looking after children. And I know typical guys who love shooting, cars, bowling and similar who actually work in pre-schools. These guys engage in a lot of the rough and tumble play boys love. I could see that with my own boys, great it was to have men in pre-school. They taught boys kicking a ball. Going down slopes on a snowboard.

Compare that with a traditional patriarchal society like Japan where husbands work so long they only see their family in the weekends. Those boys are spending most of their time only around women. Yet somehow traditionalists claim this is natural and normal. No it is not. Men being away from the family for 10 hours a day due to work and commutes was never the norm in the societies humans evolved in historically.

Now, I am not claiming the societies we live in today are "normal". But we have to keep in mind that humans are very adapt at different situations and conditions. But a difference is that on the left we are not generally arguing you must live a particular way because that is the "natural" and "right" way to do it.

We All Win

This gender debate reminds me of the debate around Trump's tariffs. People keep arguing about how the rich will get even richer from it. Somehow, people always assume that every policy has a winner and loser. Reality is that some policies have all winners and others have all losers. We assume too often that certain policies are always pushed from a rational perspective rather than from ignorance.

The Trump tariffs are pushed based on ignorance. Both the poor and the rich will be worse off from it. It is not without reason that American corporations and tech bros are loudly objecting to it. It is not without reason, there is a rift between Trump and Elon.

I see people also claim that Elon Musk wants to colonize Mars, so the rich can run away from Earth and its climate problems. Only problem is that the environmental conditions on Mars is like 1000x worse. The soil is radioactive. Nothing grows there. You need to live underground due to constant radiation. It is cold. Has little sunlight. No atmosphere. Painting Mars as an escape paradise for the rich is absurd. But why does he do it then?

Do you see the underlying problem? We assume a selfish, hyper rational choice behind every decision. Reality is that sometimes things are done for stupid reasons. Other times, for noble causes. Yet again for status, reputation, or the reasons are a bit of everything.

Trump push tariffs because he thinks it is good for himself and America. Likewise, men oppose gender equality because they think it is bad for them. It doesn't mean it actually is.