Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Women's Studies International Forum

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif

I'm a real catch: The blurring of alternative and hegemonic

masculinities in men's talk about home cooking
Michelle K. Szabo
University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o s y n o p s i s
Available online 12 September 2013 Domestic cooking has been the subject of foundational feminist work on how gender inequality is
reproduced in the everyday activities of the home (e.g. DeVault, 1991). This work shows that
notions of men and women are symbolically reproduced through women's foodwork. Though
some men have assumed more responsibility in the domestic kitchen over the past few decades,
little attention has been devoted to how masculinities might be affected by changing gender roles
around food. Following traditional divisions of labour, scholarly attention remains largely on
women's cooking in the home and men's cooking in the professional realm. The research
presented here is an attempt to address this gap. I use interviews, meal diaries and observations
from thirty men living in Toronto, Canada with significant household cooking responsibilities to
ask: How does cooking influence participants' sense of what kind of men they are? and What
are the implications for gender relations? I engage with theoretical debates about the nature of
hegemonic and nonhegemonic masculinities. I find that, while many participants drew on what
they saw as alternative masculinities to frame their cooking, these masculinities may in fact have
hegemonic elements revolving around notions of individuality and romantic or sexual allure.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction
Despite ubiquitous images of men's cooking in popular
culture, women still do the majority of home cooking in
North America and Australia (Australian Bureau of Statistics,
2009; Statistics Canada, 2006; US Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2011). In her foundational book, Feeding the Family, sociolo-
gist Marjorie DeVault argues that the everyday activities of
domestic cooking and eating are rituals of dominance and
deference which produce notions of women those who
cater to and serve, and notions of men those who are
catered to and served (1991, p.161). More recent research
suggests that, while people often profess gender-neutral
attitudes about home cooking, the practice continues to be
framed as women's work (Beagan, Chapman, D'Sylva, &
Bassett, 2008; Lupton, 2000). On the other hand, younger
men are cooking more at home than older men, and men in
3359 Mississauga Road North, Mississauga, Ontario, L5L 1C6, Canada.
E-mail address: michelle.szabo@utoronto.ca.
general are cooking more than in the past (Lupton, 2000;
Statistics Canada, 1998, 2006; Wallop, 2009). These com-
plexities raise questions about how home cooking fits with
modern masculinities. While there has been significant
scholarly attention to gender discourses around women's
cooking and that of male professional chefs, little attention
has been paid to masculinity and male home cooking. In
addition, the research that does exist on the domestic realm
typically focuses on men who cook infrequently. How do the
foodwork activities of men who cook often influence their
masculinities? What might this mean for the gendered
division of foodwork? The research presented here is an
attempt to address this empirical gap. I draw on interviews,
meal diaries and cooking observations with thirty male home
cooks of various ethno-racial backgrounds living in Toronto,
Canada with significant home cooking responsibilities.
My goal is also to contribute to theoretical understandings
of masculinity and gender inequality. The notion of hegemonic
masculinity (Connell, 1995; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005)
has been extremely influential to the study of masculinity, and

0277-5395/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2013.08.003
 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
its exact conceptualization is the subject of much debate
(Beasley, 2008; Howson, 2008; Messerschmidt, 2008, 2012).
In a recent article, Messerschmidt (2012) suggests that to
conceptualize fully hegemonic masculinitiesscholars must
unravelnonhegemonic masculinities from hegemonic
masculinities (73). Engaging with critical qualifications of
the term hegemonic masculinity (Wetherell & Edley,
1999), I hope to show that Messerschmidt's proposal may
prove a challenge in some cases. This is because, as I argue
below, some behaviours may draw on both hegemonic and
nonhegemonic masculinities at the same time.
Masculinities & cooking in the literature
Lining up with the public/male, private/female divide,
research on men's experiences in the kitchen has tended to
focus on professional chefs especially as they are portrayed on
food TV (e.g. De Solier, 2005; Hollows, 2003; Parasecoli, 2005,
2008; Swenson, 2009). Researchers have also attended to
all-male non-domestic environments (e.g. fire stations, Boy
Scout troupes) (Deutsch, 2005; Mechling, 2005) and to the
division of foodwork in households (Beagan et al., 2008; Bove &
Sobal, 2006; Carrington, 1999; Kemmer, 1999; Lupton, 2000;
Murcott, 1983). Empirical work on the lived experience of home
cooking for men is not only uncommon but limited in scope. A
few years ago, Kemmer (2000) and Julier and Lindenfeld (2005)
pointed out that empirical research on the topic tended to focus
on heterosexual men in co-habiting relationships, especially
men from privileged groups. Notwithstanding a few exceptions,
where cooking is touched on in broader investigations of men's
eating or domestic work (Aarseth, 2009; Carrington, 1999;
Julier, 2002; Sellaeg & Chapman, 2008), this is still the case. In
addition, few studies focus on men who have significant cooking
responsibilities in their homes, a characteristic which can have a
notable influence on masculinities (Szabo, 2013a).
The few studies that do exist on men's cooking tell us a few
things about masculinity and foodwork. Some studies show
that men may compensate for their involvement in the
traditionally feminine domestic kitchen. They may emphasize
their masculinity by playing up their careers (Carrington,
1999), or by doing masculine things in the kitchen such as
swearing (Deutsch, 2005). They may also draw on what I
describe elsewhere (Szabo, 2013a) as traditional culinary
masculinities to describe their cooking. To be specific, they
may frame their cooking as leisurely entertainment, culinary
artistry, or performance, thereby distancing it from feminine
cooking: mundane care work done for loved ones (Cairns,
Johnston, & Baumann, 2010; De Solier, 2005; Parasecoli, 2005,
2008; Swenson, 2009). Other studies have found that some
men create intimacy with loved ones through cooking (Aarseth
& Olsen, 2008; Szabo, 2013a; Bove & Sobal, 2006; Carrington,
1999; Owen, Metcalfe, Dryden, & Shipton, 2010) or frame
day-to-day cooking as a joint family project rather than a
feminine responsibility (Aarseth & Olsen, 2008). In general,
this research focuses on men's and women's approaches to
cooking. The question has been, to what extent do men and
women cook in traditionally masculine and feminine ways?
There has been less attention to how cooking as a life practice
influences masculinities more generally. In other words, how
might significant involvement in home cooking a traditionally
229
feminine practice influence men's sense of what kind of man
they are? The current study attempts to address this gap.
Masculinities & food: theoretical overview
The notion of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1995) is one
of the most influential concepts in masculinity studies (Beasley,
2008). It is premised on the idea that there is a hierarchy of
masculinities in any particular society-wide context and that
one of these the hegemonic form is more socially central,
or more associated with authority and social power, than
others (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p.846). Further,
hegemonic masculinity structures and legitimates hierarchical
gender relations between men and women, between mascu-
linity and femininity, and among men (Messerschmidt, 2012,
p.58). In this framework, there are multiple masculinities
modelled and enacted by men in different social contexts.
While the hegemonic form is the pinnacle of a pyramid of
masculinities (Beasley, 2008), nonhegemonic masculinities
may be tolerated or even celebrated in particular contexts
(Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p.846, 848).
Food scholar Jeffrey Sobal (2005) combines the concept of
multiple masculinities with the notion of cultural scripts to
understand men's food behaviours. For him, men draw on
different scripts (strong man, healthy man) to suit different
interactional situations around food (meat eating, meat
avoiding) (2005, p.146, 148). Yet men (and women) do not
choose different scripts with equal comfort (Meuser, 2003,
p.143). Masculinities are deeply felt and inscribed in bodily
routines and emotions (Connell, 1995; Meuser, 2003) and
intersect with other elements of subjectivity such as ethno-
cultural background, class and sexuality (Messner, 1997).
Another important point related to food behaviours, espe-
cially cooking, is that one of the main axes of gender hierarchy
has been production/reproduction, where the public/male
realm of employment is celebrated over the private/female
domestic realm (Connell, 1995). As Howson (2008) argues, one
of the three hegemonic principles upon which hegemonic
masculinity is predicated is breadwinning. When men choose to
undertake domestic work such as cooking, this can pose threats
to a breadwinning identity (Carrington, 1999; Hochschild,
1989). However, context is important. Men may receive praise
for involvement in domestic work from those with egalitarian
attitudes, particularly women (Coltrane, 1989; Deutsch &
Saxon, 1998; Hochschild, 1989). This is especially the case, as
Hochschild (1989) notes, if the going rate for men's domestic
work is high. In her landmark study of housework in straight
households, she found: If a man was really rare [in engaging
in domestic work], his wife intuitively felt grateful, or at least
both of them felt she ought to (p.54). This has implications for
the gender division of labour. If men's domestic work is seen as
a gift and women's simply expected, then the economy of
gratitude in a couple (or in an extended family) becomes
unbalanced (Hochschild, 1989). A man's domestic contribu-
tions may be judged appropriate or even fair, even if they
are not equal (Coltrane, 1989). This relates back to the concept
of hegemonic masculinity. All men benefit from male domina-
tion, or collect a patriarchal dividend, even if they do not
themselves practice the most extreme form of masculinity
(Connell, 1995). Moreover, hegemonic masculinity is truly
hegemonic in that those who are oppressed by it, such as
230 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
women and marginalized men, consent to, and perpetuate, it
(Messerschmidt, 2012; Talbot & Quayle, 2010).
In this paper, I take these complexities into account. I
understand masculinities as plural, intersectional, and embodied
in the physical and emotional self. Like feminist scholars of
gender, I see masculinities (and femininities) as not only located
in subjectivities and interaction (West & Zimmerman, 1987), but
as codified and materialized in institutions, laws, policies and the
unequal gendered distribution of resources (Risman, 2004). I use
the term hegemonic masculinity to mean a masculinity which
structures and legitimates hierarchical gender relations be-
tween men and women, between masculinity and femininity,
and among men (Messerschmidt, 2012, p.58). In contrast, I use
the term alternative masculinities to connote masculinities
that appear to legitimate more egalitarian relationships between
men and women and among men, and to treat traditionally
masculine and feminine traits, behaviours, practices and
spaces as equally valuable. I conceptualize hegemonic masculin-
ity not as associated with a specific group of traits but rather as a
fluid and continually shifting counterpoint to the alternative
masculinities that exist in a specific temporal, geographic or
interactional context. As Wetherell and Edley (1999) put it,
hegemonic masculinity may be thought of more as a relative
position in a discursive field than a particular content and set of
representations defined a priori (p.352). In the context (or
discursive field) of my interviews, where cooking was the focus, I
pay particular attention to the breadwinning/domestic work
dichotomy in the construction of masculinity. Participants used
words like macho, clich and stereotype to describe men
with little interest or ability in the domestic sphere, and so,
following them, I use the term macho masculinity to indicate a
type of hegemonic masculinity associated with disdain for the
domestic. I also engage with the association between sexual and
romantic prowess and macho masculinity as this also arose in
participants' talk.
Research: data & methods
I conducted semi-structured interviews with thirty men
living in Toronto, Canada, who cook a significant amount at
home. The interviews took place from the end of 2009 to the
end of 2010. For the most part1, participants cooked at least
half of the weekly meals in their households, and almost two
thirds (19/30) cooked all or almost all of them. Each
participant filled out a five-day meal diary indicating what
they (and others) ate for the main meal of each day, what the
ingredients and cooking methods were, and who prepared
the meal. In addition, I observed one third of the men (10/30)
while they cooked a meal at home. If partners were home
when I visited, I invited them to participate in the interview
as well, or to chime in if they had something to add. Three
partners participated fully and two interjected occasionally. I
also invited all partners to complete a questionnaire on
cooking in their households. Partner questionnaires, meal
diaries and cooking observations provided a more detailed
picture of the types of cooking participants did, their feelings
about the practice, and the division of foodwork in their
households.
Participants were all residents of the Greater Toronto Area, a
metropolitan area of 5.5 million residents. Several had grown
up elsewhere in Canada, and three had immigrated from
another country. Ages ranged from 26 to 58. Half of the
participants (15/30) were white of European ancestry, and the
other half were of Asian, Afro-Caribbean, Hispanic or mixed
background. Household incomes ranged from less than $25,000
CAD to more than $150,000, but the most common range was
$50,000$100,000 (11/30). Six participants were single and
living alone or with roommates with whom they did not share
meals, and two were single and living with family members
(brother, mother) with whom they shared meals. The other
two-thirds of the sample were either married (12/30) or
co-habiting with a long-term partner (9/30). Nine of the thirty
men had children with whom they were living. Four partici-
pants self-defined as gay2. In terms of employment, the
majority of men were working full-time (24/30), four were
between jobs and looking for full-time work, one was recently
retired, and one was a stay-at-home dad who did occasional
paid work. Many of the participants were middle class, with
jobs such as accountant, marketing manager, and teacher. Four
were underclass or working class: two were living on social
assistance, one was a welder, and one was a machinist. A few
were difficult to classify. One was a stay-at-home dad whose
wife was a tax analyst, and another did office work on behalf of
construction workers.
In terms of recruitment, I began with the goal of inter-
viewing men in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Since there is
very little research on men's cooking in Canada, I chose the GTA
because this was most feasible for me as a resident of this area
and as a graduate student on a limited budget. I aimed to
recruit men with significant cooking responsibilities in their
homes (men who cooked at least half of the weekly homemade
meals) and men who cooked a good deal from scratch (men
who consciously limited their use of pre-prepared ingredients).
In terms of demographic characteristics, as much of the
literature on men's cooking has been conducted with white
heterosexual married men, one of my goals was to understand
the experiences of men from other groups. In particular, I
aimed to recruit men from different ethno-racial backgrounds,
living situations and sexualities. I used a variety of recruitment
strategies. Some of these were internet-based. For example, I
posted notices in the classified or employment sections of
community websites, on faculty and student listservs, and on
the discussion pages of websites related to cooking and food. I
also used the internet to identify individual men who might be
interested in the project such as food bloggers, men who had
won local amateur cooking contests and men who had
volunteered in children's cooking classes, and contacted them
by email. Further, I contacted a number of individuals, such as
instructors of cooking classes in low-income neighbourhoods,
pastors of local churches associated with different ethno-racial
groups, staff members at community organizations and union
representatives who might know of men who fit my criteria. I
used off-line strategies as well. I put up posters at various
community organizations, local libraries and food coops. I also
handed out brochures in front of grocery stores and in
community markets in neighbourhoods with different demo-
graphic characteristics. I was not aiming for a representative
sample. Following in the methodological footsteps of food and
gender sociologists, DeVault (1991) and Julier (2002), I aimed
to add richness and context to existing knowledge of men's
cooking, additions which could help to avoid the false
universalization of the experiences of particular groups of
 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
men. By aiming for in-depth, qualitative data, I also hoped to
shed light on the complexities of men's real life situations,
including how the intersectionalities of race, class and gender
influence cooking practices and experiences (see also Szabo,
2013a; 2013b).
To analyze the data, I used a modified version of grounded
theory (Punch, 2005). I coded interviews, diaries and field
notes using the qualitative data analysis software, AtlasTi. I also
created participant memos for each participant, a document
summarizing their key motivations for cooking and listing
illustrative quotes. I read the memos several times and
compared them to each other, reviewed the codes and their
accompanying quotes, and pulled out recurring themes.
Findings: participant notions about cooking & gender
As mentioned above, the participants in this study had
significant home cooking responsibilities and most of them (19/
30) were their household's primary cook. How did this influence
their masculinity, or their sense of what kind of man they were?
Although I did not ask participants this question directly, the
issue came up in answer to various broader interview questions,
such as: What motivates you to cook? Participants can be divided
into two categories based on how they defined themselves: 1)
those who framed their cooking as a gender-neutral practice or
who did not speak of their cooking as having a significant
influence on their gender identity, and 2) those who framed
their cooking as an indication of their alternative masculinity.
Unsurprisingly, none of the participants framed their cooking as
indicative of a more traditional or hegemonic masculinity.
However, upon close scrutiny, it is possible to see some
participants' talk of their alternative masculinities as having
hegemonic elements. The third section below, 3) the blurring of
hegemonic and alternative masculinities, examines this last
issue. I consider each of these three categories in turn.
It's just to eat: Cooking as gender neutral
Thirteen of the thirty participants (and all four of the gay
men) framed cooking in their interview as more or less gender
neutral. These participants did not frame their cooking as a
significant influence on their gender identities. Some spoke of
cooking as a practical skill that everyone should have to be able
to feed themselves. Alex (French-Canadian/Hungarian, living
with female partner3), who talked about his father being very
dependent on his mother for food, put it this way: [Cooking]
just seems to me like a skill that everyone should have some
mastery of. Because otherwise you're handicapped. For men
who lived in womanless households, this sense of cooking as a
basic life skill was even more evident. When I asked Jack
(Italian/Irish, living with husband) what motivated him to
cook, he answered with a simple: It's just, it's to eat, right?.
Other men in this group talked about cooking not as a practical
skill but as an innate passion. Yet they framed this passion as
something that was unrelated to gender. Wally (Trinidadian-
Chinese, living with wife and two daughters), for example,
talked about being drawn to cooking as a young child: I just
think I was predisposed for this. At three years old my aunt
asked me, it's one of my earliest memories actually, and I said I
wanted to be a chef. Maybe it was just universal intuition.
Some of these men had grown up in households where fathers
231
cooked regularly or had other male relatives who cooked at
home. While there was some acknowledgement among these
men that cooking has traditionally been seen as women's
work, there was also a resistance to that assumption. When I
asked Wally what kinds of reactions he got to his cooking
because it has traditionally been a feminine task, he countered:
Yeah, it depends on what culture you're in too. Some
cultures it's the men hunt and the women cook but there
are other cultures where the men hunt and cook and the
women take care of the family, you know? Or sometimes
it's the men who are taking care of the kids and feeding
them too, right?
When I asked Wally about the division of labour in his
childhood home, he said: In my household both of my
parents cooked. So I would say I probably learned equally
from both genders in my house. Zack (Caucasian, living with
male partner) told a similar story about his childhood home:
I never felt a gendered thing around [cooking] I guess.
Maybe because my dad was always cooking and not
just barbecuing, cooking and baking and stuff. So, I never
thought of that as being something that women did.
For just under half of the participants, cooking was a
practical skill or a passion that didn't necessarily have
implications for gender.
I'm not Joe macho dude: cooking and alternative masculinities
The rest of the participants (17/30) (all heterosexual) spoke
of their cooking as something that differentiated them from
other men, especially macho men. I group these men in this
alternative masculinities category because they framed their
involvement with domestic work as an indication of some
degree of feminine character in themselves, a framing which
potentially challenges traditional hierarchies between mascu-
line and feminine. These men also contrasted their identities
with what they saw as stereotypically masculine or as
common among men in their surroundings. Ben (white, living
with wife and infant son), was one example. He described
doing various domestic things since he was young:
I'm a pretty domesticated guy. Like I clean, I do laundry, I
cook. I guess that's all typical women's work. I think it's
just who I am. I've always done it. I can't remember not
doing it. I guess I'm not like Joe macho dude.
Trevor (Chinese, living with wife) also talked about being
involved in domestic activities as a boy and how this differen-
tiated him from his male relatives. While he drew on some
elements of a more traditional masculinity to describe himself
during the interview (e.g. playing sports), at one point, he joked:
The weird thing is, the reason why my parents had a third
child is because they were hoping for a daughter. And I
turned out the wrong gender so maybe that had something
to do with it me being more domesticated [laughs].
Chris (Chinese-Canadian, living alone), began cooking later
in life, but, like Ben, contrasted a man who cooks with the
macho man. For him, a man cooking is the anti-clich
232 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
showing that he can provide and that he has a gentler more
caring side [that] he's not all about macho whatever. Frank
(German, living with female partner) also spoke of his cooking
in terms of caring, a stereotypically feminine concern around
food (Szabo, 2013a). He talked about one of the greatest
pleasures of cooking being giving pleasure to others and
labelled his own cooking assuming the mother role of
nurturing others through food (my emphasis). In sum, over
half of the participants spoke of their cooking as something that
differentiated them from the masculine stereotype or norm, or
as an indication of their somewhat feminine character. These
men seemed to embrace these feminine or non-macho
elements in themselves, at least in the context of the interview.
I'm a real catch: the blurring of hegemonic and alternative
masculinities
Seen from another angle, framing cooking as a departure
from a more macho or clichd masculinity may paradox-
ically be a way for these straight participants to bolster
subjectivities that draw on hegemonic ideals. In describing
their cooking practices as different than the male norm,
participants might be simultaneously drawing on alternative
and hegemonic masculinities. One reason for this is that most
of the men who saw their cooking as a departure from the
masculine norm talked about their cooking as impressive to
(straight) women. In other words, they were positioning
themselves in terms of romantic or sexual seduction, a trope of
macho masculinity (see e.g. Kilvert, 1974). In fact, when I asked
participants if they had ever tried to impress a romantic
interest through cooking, most gave enthusiastic responses
such as Yeah, absolutely! (Wally [Trinidadian-Chinese, living
with wife and two kids]), Yeah for sure, that's a big thing!
(Matt [Filipino, living alone]), and I'd be a fool to say no
(Owen [mixed background, living with wife]). One participant,
Nick (mixed background, living alone), even told me that
impressing potential partners was one of my main motiva-
tions for developing cooking skills. Moreover, most of
these men pointed to being seen as different as the key to
seduction4. Will (African-Canadian, living with mother and
teenaged son) put it this way:
I have many female friends that say it's a very attractive
quality, seeing your man in the kitchen and he knows what
he's doing. Gets all kind of brownie points. He's gonna
be taken care of that night [in the bedroom]. If [a woman]
can see [a man] in a completely different environment that
society says you really shouldn't be here if he can break
that stereotype yeah man, he's golden.
Hugh (Scottish/French, living with wife and two young
sons) was another participant who saw his cooking as
differentiating him from other men. For Hugh, cooking seemed
to compensate for his inability to pull off a more macho
masculinity. However, as we see in the following quote, he also
emphasizes his success at seduction and his individualism, two
traits arguably associated with hegemonic masculinity. When I
asked him about cooking before he got married, he said:
I bet it was a way of expressing individuality and
uniqueness that I was able to do something that typically
men weren't interested in or good at. So I think it was a
good way for me to seduce. Because I wasn't particularly
good at it [traditional seduction]. I wasn't one of those
outgoing guys that was you know could be in a bar and
could make something happen. I couldn't do that so
that [cooking] was maybe more my way, sort of being that
other guy. I think girls were usually, I think they found it
romantic.
In distancing himself from macho masculinity, which he
frames around assertiveness in courting, Hugh seems to be
paradoxically also associating himself with it, through his
emphasis on charm and individuality (Wetherell & Edley,
1999).
Another reason for seeing what participants framed as
alternative masculinities around cooking as simultaneously
hegemonic has to do with men's expectations about how it
should be received. We know from previous research that
men's domestic work, especially if it is rare in a social circle,
may be seen as a gift deserving gratitude, while women's may
be taken for granted (Hochschild, 1989). The idea is that men
are expected to be breadwinners, not domestic contributors,
and therefore any domestic contribution they make is seen as a
bonus rather than a responsibility. How did the men in this
group see their cooking? A small number of participants
downplayed the praiseworthiness of their cooking. Dan,
(Black/African, living with wife and three kids), the only
full-time homemaker/stay-at-home dad in the group, put it
this way:
I think that it's not an impressive thing at all for a man to
cook. I think it's kind of a pathetic thing for a man not to
know how to take care of himself and feed other people.
You don't need a badge for that or nothing. It's just, of
course you should be doing that (Dan's emphasis).
Dan was not a substantial breadwinner in his household,
and this no doubt coloured his view that domestic contribu-
tions were necessary rather than something for which he
should be rewarded. Most other participants who saw their
cooking as unusual among men, however, framed it as
worthy of praise. When Ben's partner, Marie, told me that it
was important to her that Ben share the domestic tasks
equally (which he did), he responded, See, I'm a real catch!.
As Jonathon (white/Jewish, living alone), told me about a
time he had made a Spanish omelette for a potluck, his pride
was evident:
My Spanish female friends don't expect guys, never mind
Canadian guys to know how to make it. But here I was
making it and it tasted exactly as it should. So [they said]
Ooh, good job. I'm like Yeeaah, that's right!
The talk of some participants in this group with female
partners also hinted at a desire to receive recognition for
their uniqueness. One participant, Ian (British/white, living
with wife and infant daughter), seemed disappointed that his
wife, Mandy, didn't give him more credit for his cooking.
During the interview, Mandy mentioned that she appreciated
Ian's contributions in the kitchen, especially because the
traditional role of the man is to be the breadwinner [and] a
lot of women, even today, find themselves in the position
where the men still approach it that way. This said, she also
 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
admitted that Ian was able to cook more than other men
because he worked from home and had flexible hours. For
Ian, what was more important was that he was the kind of
guy who was willing to do domestic work. He said: I think
even with that [flexible schedules] in mind, I'm still unique
among most men my age in that not only do I do this [cook], I
want to do it, I enjoy doing it and I do it a lot. Another
exchange between them, this time about childcare, went like
this:
Ian: I think in the spectrum of gender roles, we're
considered quite a progressive couple in terms of you
know. I think nothing of jumping out of bed and going in
to tend to [infant daughter].
Mandy: Well, you don't think nothing. You do have to -
Ian: We actually have a system whereby in the middle of
the night it's always me who goes.
Mandy: Now, now it is.
Ian: For a long time we've done that.
Mandy: Yup. Well, not a long time, it's been -
Ian: Well, I don't have boobs.
Mandy: And that is always the man's excuse. But it's true.
Anyway.(emphasis in original)
It seemed that Mandy recognized Ian's domestic contri-
butions as rare, but also saw them as the result of marital
negotiation, or as aided by structural conditions. For Ian,
what was important was that he was unique among most
men [his] age and unusual in the spectrum of gender roles.
The other women that I talked to framed their partner's
cooking as more straightforwardly praiseworthy. In fact, a few
of these women compensated for their male partner's cooking
by taking on other less visible, less pleasant or more onerous
housework like cleaning or childcare (see also Kemmer, 1999;
Van Hooff, 2011). For example, Trish, the wife of Kevin (British,
living with wife), told me she was spoiled rotten because
Kevin did most of the cooking. She did almost all of the cleaning
and laundry in return. A few other partners I spoke to also
mentioned being told they were lucky to live with a man who
cooks, again emphasizing the idea of the male home cook as a
good catch. This idea was echoed over and over while I was
recruiting for the study. Upon learning about my project on
men who cook often, several women made comments, both
online and in person, such as: Can I have your [participant] list
when you're done?, Are you sure this is for research?, I'm
not interested in participating, but I am interested in meeting
someone who does! and Can I force my husband to fit the
mould of your study? While my research focused on men's
experiences, and the female views I note here are at the level of
anecdotal, it is worth noting that some women contribute
alongside men to the discourse of men's cooking as
praiseworthy.
To summarize, I used qualitative data from thirty men with
significant cooking responsibilities living in Toronto, Canada, to
illuminate how these men understand their cooking in relation
to masculinities. Just under half of the participants framed their
home cooking as gender neutral. They saw their cooking as
having little influence on their gender identities and tended to
frame their cooking as normal. Just over half of the participants
(all straight), spoke of their cooking in relation to alternative
masculinities. These men saw themselves as unique among men
and as eschewing masculine stereotypes. Nevertheless, in
233
contrasting themselves with macho men or with other men
in their social environment, these men might be simultaneously
drawing on hegemonic principles (Connell & Messerschmidt,
2005; Howson, 2008; Messerschmidt, 2012). By describing
themselves as different, some of these men drew on the
masculine tropes of individuality or sexual prowess (Parasecoli,
2005; Wetherell & Edley, 1999). Others saw themselves as
deserving praise or recognition for bucking macho stereotypes, a
feeling reinforced in some cases by women in their lives or social
surroundings.
Discussion: cooking, masculinities and gender relations
The food studies literature tells us that there is a dynamic
and mutually-reinforcing relationship between praise and
cooking involvement (Bove & Sobal, 2006; Lupton, 2000).
Some men might be initially motivated to cook to impress
others, but the very act of cooking may improve their culinary
skills, confidence and enjoyment (Bove & Sobal, 2006). Having
gained cooking experience and opportunities for pleasure in
the kitchen, these men may become an important contributors
to household foodwork. Further, by embracing domestic
practices as part of what they see as alternative masculinities,
these men are valuing the traditionally feminine and
potentially widening the scope of what is considered mascu-
line in their social contexts (cf. Sellaeg & Chapman, 2008). On
the other hand, if men expect extra recognition for their
domestic work, they may help to construct an imbalance in the
economy of gratitude between themselves and female
partners or relatives (Deutsch & Saxon, 1998; Hochschild,
1989). This is a concern in light of the literature on fairness in
the division of labour which suggests that, if expectations
regarding men's participation are low, an unequal division of
domestic labour is seen as fair by both men and women
(Coltrane, 2000). While feminist scholars such as Deutsch and
Saxon (1998) and Hochschild (1989) made similar observa-
tions in earlier research, the data presented here suggests that
this is still an issue over a decade later. It is also important to
note, as Mandy did, that structural conditions influence gender
relations. If women continue to have more limited access to
lucrative and fulfilling paid work than men, and men more
limited access to family accommodations (e.g. parental leave)
than women, a gendered division of labour will no doubt
continue, regardless of attitudes.
The above findings also have implications for masculinity
theory. In a review of the literature on hegemonic masculinity
over the last decade, Messerschmidt (2012) asserts that to
conceptualize fully hegemonic masculinities scholars must
unravel nonhegemonic masculinities from hegemonic mas-
culinities and identify equality masculinities: those that
legitimate an egalitarian relationship between men and
women, between masculinity and femininity, and among
men (p.73). The data presented here suggest that untangling
hegemonic from nonhegemonic masculinities may prove a
complex endeavour. I am not the first to note this. For example,
in their study of heroic, ordinary and rebellious mas-
culinities, Wetherell and Edley (1999) propose that paradox-
ically, one could say that sometimes one of the most effective
ways of being hegemonic, or being a man, may be to
demonstrate one's distance from hegemonic masculinity
(p.351). For participants in their rebellious group, being a
234 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
man often meant evincing individuality and autonomy,
including from the demand to be masculine (p.351). The
present research adds empirical weight to the idea that
self-presentations can be simultaneously hegemonic and
nonhegemonic. I hope also to contribute to this idea by
demonstrating that masculinities which appear to be
nonhegemonic and are therefore alluring to women can also
be hegemonic for the same reason. In our quest for equality
masculinities (Messerschmidt, 2012), we might find that none
will be universally or fully nonhegemonic. This is the strength
of hegemonic systems of power that what is disadvanta-
geous to oppressed groups can also appear advantageous so
that consent is obtained (Gramsci, 1971).
One question for future research is the degree to which a
gender-neutral attitude toward cooking or other domestic
work (also found in Aarseth, 2009 and Aarseth & Olsen,
2008) helps to challenge the gendered division of domestic
labour. The men in this study who conceptualized their
cooking as gender neutral were less likely to see it as a
potential source of praise. However, it is unclear whether this
was a cause or effect of their existing dedication to cooking.
There is some evidence that bringing boys up to understand
domestic chores as gender neutral, or even manly, may
promote the domestic involvement of these boys later in life
(e.g. Penha-Lopes, 2006). More research in this vein will help
to clarify these issues. Further research on women's interpre-
tations of men's cooking would also elucidate the extent to
which women themselves, through praise and appreciation,
contribute to the maintenance of gender hierarchies.
Acknowledgements
This research was completed with funding support from
the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada. I would like to thank Josh James for his keen editing
eye and the anonymous reviewers of this paper for their
helpful suggestions.
Endnotes
1
Initially, recruitment criteria were that the men cook half or more of
the weekly meals in their households. I loosened the criteria late in the
recruitment process to encourage ethno-cultural diversity in the sample.
Nonetheless, the sample is still mainly of men who do half or more of the
household cooking. Only three of the thirty men did less than half of the
cooking in their households.
2
I include gay and single straight men in this study to not only get a
more complete picture of the lived experience of men's cooking, but to
understand the gendered division of labour both within and outside of the
nuclear family. I understand domestic cooking as one element of social
reproduction (Laslett & Brenner, 1989). I see it not as an act isolated in the
home, but as part of a complex organization of foodwork that depends on
the gendered, classed and racialized labour of unpaid household cooks in
nuclear and extended families, restaurant and fast food workers, conve-
nience food producers, and paid domestic workers, among others (Szabo,
2011). As such, men's domestic cooking affects not only women in their
immediate households, but myriad other women such as mothers or aunts
who may cook for them on weekends or holidays, and food industry
workers, whose food they may order, take out or microwave.
3
I list participants' living situations and self-described ethnicities/
ethno-racial backgrounds to give context to interview quotes.
4
Three of the four gay participants also admitted to trying to impress a
romantic or sexual interest with their cooking. However, unlike the straight
participants, the gay men did not seem to see the seduction of cooking as
stemming from their rare or unconventional abilities in the kitchen. Rather,
they spoke of food as an expression of human connection or a sensual
experience which could lead to romance and sex. The sample is too small to
draw robust comparisons, but it is worth noting that gay and straight men
may see cooking as attractive for different reasons.
References
Aarseth, Helene (2009). From modernized masculinity to degendered lifestyle
projects: Changes in men's narratives on domestic participation 1990
2005. Men and Masculinities, 11(4), 424440.
Aarseth, Helene, & Olsen, Bente Marianne (2008). Food and masculinity in
dual-career couples. Journal of Gender Studies, 17(4), 277287.
Australian bureau of statistics (2009). Trends in Household Work. Australian
Social Trends, March 2009. Retrieved July 15, 2013 from http://www.abs.gov.
au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features40March%202009
Beagan, Brenda, Chapman, Gwen E., D'Sylva, Andrea, & Bassett, B. Raewyn
(2008). It's just easier for me to do it: Rationalizing the family division
of food work. Sociology, 42(4), 653671.
Beasley, Christine (2008). Rethinking hegemonic masculinity in a globalizing
world. Men and Masculinities, 11(1), 86103.
Bove, Caron F., & Sobal, Jeffery (2006). Foodwork in newly married couples.
Food, Culture & Society, 9(1), 7089.
Cairns, Kate, Johnston, Jose, & Baumann, Shyon (2010). Caring about
food: Doing gender in the foodie kitchen. Gender and Society, 24(5),
591615.
Carrington, Christopher (1999). No place like home: Relationships and
family life among lesbians and gay men. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Coltrane, Scott (1989). Household labor and the routine production of
gender. Social Problems, 36(5), 473490.
Coltrane, Scott (2000). Research on Household Labor: Modeling and
Measuring the Social Embeddedness of Routine Family Work. Journal
of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 12081233.
Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Place: University of California Press.
Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, James W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity:
Rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19(6), 829859.
De Solier, Isabelle (2005). TV Dinners: Culinary television, education and
distinction. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 19(4), 465481.
Deutsch, John (2005). Please pass the chicken tits: Rethinking men and
cooking at an urban firehouse. Food and Foodways, 13(1), 91114.
Deutsch, Francine M., & Saxon, Susan E. (1998). The double standard of
praise and criticism for mothers and fathers. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 22(4), 665683.
DeVault, Marjorie (1991). Feeding the family: The social organization of caring
as gendered work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gramsci, Antonio (1971). Prison notebooks. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Hochschild, Arlie (1989). The second shift. New York: Penguin Books.
Hollows, Joanne (2003). Oliver's twist: Leisure, labour and domestic
masculinity in The Naked Chef. International Journal of Cultural Studies,
6(2), 229248.
Howson, Richard (2008). Hegemonic masculinity in the theory of hegemony: A
brief response to Christine Beasley's Rethinking Hegemonic Masculinity in
a Globalizing World. Men and Masculinities, 11(1), 109113.
Julier, Alice P. (2002). Feeding friends and others: Boundaries of intimacy and
distance in sociable meals. Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School
of Sociology of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, May 2002.
Julier, Alice, & Lindenfeld, Laura (2005). Introduction. Mapping men onto the
menu. Food and Foodways, 13, 116.
Kemmer, Debbie (1999). Food preparation and the domestic division of labour
among newly married and cohabiting couples. British Food Journal, 101(8),
570579.
Kemmer, Debbie (2000). Tradition and change in domestic roles and food
preparation. Sociology, 34(2), 323333.
Kilvert, Cory (1974). The male chauvinist's cookbook. New York: Louis J.
Martin & Associates.
Laslett, Barbara, & Brenner, Johanna (1989). Gender and social reproduction:
Historical perspectives. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 381404.
Lupton, Deborah (2000). Where's me dinner?: Food preparation arrange-
ments in rural Australian families. Journal of Sociology, 36(2), 172186.
Mechling, Jay (2005). Boy scouts and the manly art of cooking. Food and
Foodways, 13(1), 6789.
Messerschmidt, James W. (2008). And now, the rest of the story A
commentary on Christine Beasley's Rethinking Hegemonic Masculinity
in a Globalizing World. Men and Masculinities, 11(1), 104108.
Messerschmidt, James W. (2012). Engendering gendered knowledge: Assessing
the academic appropriation of hegemonic masculinity. Men and Masculinities,
15(1), 5676.
Messner, M. (1997). Politics of masculinities. London: Sage.
 M.K. Szabo / Women's Studies International Forum 44 (2014) 228235
Meuser, Michael (2003). Modernized masculinities? Continuities, challenges
and changes in men's lives. In S. Erv, & T. Johannson (Eds.), Among men:
Moulding masculinities (pp. 127148). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Murcott, Anne (1983). Cooking and the cooked: A note on the domestic
preparation of meals. In A. Murcott (Ed.), The sociology of food and eating
(pp. 178185). Croft: Gower Publishing.
Owen, Jenny, Metcalfe, Alan, Dryden, Caroline, & Shipton, Geraldine (2010).
If they dont eat it, its not a proper meal: Images of risk and choice in
fathers accounts of family food practices. Health, Risk and Society, 12(4),
395406.
Parasecoli, Fabio (2005). Feeding hard bodies: Food and masculinities in
men's fitness magazines. Food and Foodways, 13(1), 1737.
Parasecoli, Fabio (2008). Bite me: Food in popular culture. London: Berg.
Penha-Lopes, Vania (2006). To cook, to sew, to be a man: The socialization
for competence and black men's involvement in housework. Sex Roles,
54(3/4), 261274.
Punch, Keith (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and
qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Risman, Barbara (2004). Gender as social structure. Gender and Society,
18(4), 429450.
Sellaeg, Kari, & Chapman, Gwen E. (2008). Masculinity and food ideals of
men who live alone. Appetite, 51, 120128.
Sobal, Jeffery (2005). Men, meat and marriage: Models of masculinity. Food
& Foodways, 13(1), 135158.
Statistics Canada (1998). Average time spent on activities, by sex. Retrieved
Oct./12 from http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil36a-eng.htm
Statistics Canada (2006). Overview of the time use of Canadians. Ottawa:
Minister of Industry.
235
Swenson, Rebecca (2009). Domestic divo? Televised treatments of masculinity,
femininity and food. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 26(1), 3653.
Szabo, Michelle K. (2011). The Challenges of Re-engaging with Food: Connecting
employment, household patterns and gender relations to convenience food
consumption in North America. Food, Culture & Society, 14(4), 547566.
Szabo, Michelle K. (2013a). Men Nurturing Through Food: challenging
gender dichotomies around domestic cooking. Journal of Gender Studies,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2012.711945.
Szabo, Michelle K. (2013b). Foodwork or Foodplay? Mens domestic cooking,
privilege and leisure. Sociology, 47(4), 623638.
Talbot, Kirsten, & Quayle, Michael (2010). The perils of being a nice guy:
Contextual variation in five young women's constructions of acceptable
hegemonic and alternative masculinities. Men and Masculinities, 13(2),
255278.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011). American time use survey, 2007. Retrieved
October 31, 2012 from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf
Van Hooff, Jenny (2011). Rationalising inequality: Heterosexual couples'
explanations and justifications for the division of housework along
traditionally gendered lines. Journal of Gender Studies, 20(1), 1930.
Wallop, Harry (Aug. 17). Men spending more time in the kitchen. The Telegraph
online. Retrieved October 31, 2012 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/6030731/Men-spending-more-time-in-
the-kitchen.html
West, Candice, & Zimmerman, Don H. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender and
society, 1(2), 125151.
Wetherell, Margaret, & Edley, Nigel (1999). Negotiating hegemonic mascu-
linity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Feminism
and Psychology, 9(3), 335356.