Issues relating to men and masculinity are addressed in twelve gender equality policy reports published by the Nordic Council of Ministers between 2019 and 2024. These cover a wide range of topics such as education, the labour market, climate, health and the internet, demonstrating that issues pertaining to masculinity are relevant to gender equality policy in general. The compilation shows that the discussion goes beyond the issue of fatherhood, which has historically been dominant when it comes to men and gender equality in the Nordic region.
The term ‘masculinity’ is used in a number of different ways in the reports, reflecting a variety of approaches within the referenced scientific literature. Within the reports, there is no clear link between the use of concepts and policy recommendations. However, international analyses show that different uses of concepts can lead in different directions, and as such a clearer awareness of concepts may be preferable. It is recommended that, where possible, essentialist assumptions (that masculinity is always a bad thing or that men always do masculinity) and concepts that downplay men’s agency be avoided. Instead, a more flexible view of gender that emphasises how different characteristics, occupations and so on are gender coded as masculine or feminine may be constructive.
There are clear examples of different approaches and emphases in the report material. Several reports focus on problems men create, primarily for women but also for society in general. This includes, for example, men preventing women from participating equally in male-dominated industries and democratic discourse or men’s preferences for eating meat and driving cars standing in the way of addressing climate change.
Another focus that is also clear in the material is problems men experience. This includes, for example, an understanding of norms of masculinity as preventing men from seeking help when they are feeling unwell. It may also include analyses of the unequal take-up of parental leave that highlights what men lose from inequality rather than what they gain. Further examples include descriptions of men’s sexist behaviours online that focus primarily on these men’s vulnerability and universal human needs.
Several reports emphasise the importance of an intersectional perspective to capture differences between men (and between women), and the complexity involved in the interplay between factors such as class, sexuality, race/ethnicity, ability and age. Age appears to be the most well-represented category, even though none of the reports focus on older men. An intersectional ambition is sometimes difficult to realise in practice. One reason for this is a lack of relevant knowledge, which is why investing in more research based on intersectional perspectives may be justified.
Research with intersectional perspectives often takes as a starting point the experiences of marginalised groups. However, analyses based on men from minority groups are largely absent from the reports. There is therefore untapped potential in terms of focusing more explicitly on men who belong to various minority groups, including men in economic vulnerability; religious men; gay, bisexual and transgender men; men with disabilities; and men who belong to racial, ethnic and national minorities.
Examples of issues that are not addressed in the reports but could be explored in the future are violence and abuse in intimate relationships, including preventive and promotional measures; leisure interests and associations, such as culture and sports; and male-dominated spheres characterised by legal or illegal use of violence, such as the military and criminal environments.
There is a recurring tendency – although this differs between the reports – to describe what could be called a problem without conflict. Despite taking the existence of a gender equality problem as a starting point, the reports are reluctant to portray gender inequality as a question of power or potential conflict. On occasions, the implication is present that there is universal agreement that we should all be equal: if men are still unequal, it is more because they have not liberated themselves from traditions than because they gain something from, for example, not sharing parental leave equally. This ‘post-political’ approach, which is focused on consensus, lacks clear support in current gender research but raises the question of what is most effective in bringing about change.