Meat Is a Masculine Issue

In her influential book Fat Is a Feminist Issue, Susie Orbach argued that food, body, and gender are intimately intertwined. For women of the 1970s, and arguably still today, being thin wasn't just a body type but a signifier of social status and moral worth.

Fast forward 50 years, and a parallel conversation is emerging around men’s diets. In 2025, the question is no longer whether fat is feminist, but instead we're asking—is meat a masculine issue?

Men Consume More Meat—Everywhere

Cross-cultural research consistently shows that men eat more meat than women, particularly beef and processed varieties. Large-scale surveys from the United States, United Kingdom, Europe, the Middle East, and Australia reveal not only larger portions but also more frequent meat consumption among men. Women, by contrast, tend to eat more plant-based foods and smaller servings of meat, while vegetarianism and veganism remain markedly more prevalent among women than men.

This gap is not trivial. Men’s higher meat intake contributes to a dietary greenhouse gas footprint around 41 percent larger than women’s, a striking statistic at a moment when climate science urges rapid reductions across all sectors. Indeed, if the average man halved his meat intake at dinner alone, total daily food-related emissions would be lowered by 16 percent, while a 75 percent dinner-time reduction would reduce this by a quarter.

Despite the environmental imperative, persuading men to alter their diets is notoriously difficult. Studies show men are more likely to endorse the so-called "4Ns" of meat consumption; meat is Necessary, Natural, Normal, and Nice. Confronting men with vegetarian messaging often provokes reactance, increasing rather than decreasing meat intake, while exhorting men to eat more like women is, according to the research, about the worst thing that you could do to make change happen.

Beyond Protein: Culture, Identity, and Evolution

Physiological need only partially explains men’s higher meat consumption. Men generally require slightly more calories and protein than women, yet current consumption exceeds dietary recommendations by roughly one third. Meat is also not essential for protein: legumes, nuts, eggs, tofu, and seeds provide ample alternatives, often accompanied by beneficial nutrients such as fibre and antioxidants.

Instead, cultural and psychological factors appear to be playing a key role. Meat is strongly associated with masculine identity and linked to ideas of strength, dominance, and status. Some have argued that this is a historical association, tied to the prowess of hunting, while others suggest that men prefer meat because they engaged in more physically risky activities through our evolutionary past, so they selectively value protein for muscular repair. Interestingly, recent data show that gender differences in meat intake are more apparent in economically developed countries with stronger gender equality, potentially due to greater wealth and freedom affording both men and women more opportunity to express their innate dietary preferences.

Challenges to these types of evolutionary arguments also exist, as others point out that gender differences in meat intake are comparatively recent, implying that they are social trends rather than evolutionary facts. Food is an important tool for managing identity, and research shows that men are more likely to select “masculine” foods, like burgers and steaks, when eating out with other men, arguably as a means to signal dominance within a valued group. Gendered food preferences are less apparent when men dine out with female company.

Experimental research also shows that when masculinity is threatened, for example, by giving men a "masculinity test" and feeding back subpar performance, vegan options are subsequently avoided. Asking men to reflect on their masculinity and then introducing a threat to this process also significantly enhances attachment to meat, providing further evidence that diet is an important medium for men to reassert a valued sense of self.

Rethinking Behavioural Interventions

Traditional strategies to encourage meat reduction, such as appeals highlighting animal welfare, sustainability, or health impacts, often fail to reduce male meat consumption and can even lead to resistance. Similarly, reframing plant-based foods as powerful, dominant, or high-status choices has shown limited success, as has the use of masculine branding (e.g., darker colours, bolder fonts) on vegetarian options.

Gender Essential Reads

The Dangers of Erasing Transgender Identities on Passports

The Existential Load: What Dads Carry That No One Sees

More promisingly, emerging research suggests that men may be more open to trying alternative protein sources, such as lab-grown meat or insects, than women, perhaps owing to gender differences in food neophobia. This suggests that innovative, adventurous marketing could potentially perform better at tapping into male receptivity. Companies like Primeval Foods are already targeting this niche, leveraging male influencers such as Joe Rogan and leaning on experimental branding.

Social context also matters. Male-dominated spaces, notably sports arenas, offer potential to shift perceptions of meat-free diets. Evidence suggests professional athletes can model plant-based diets as demonstrations of a different, but highly valued, masculine ideal incorporating discipline and expertise. Moreover, dialogue between male meat-eaters and meat-avoiders can also help to reduce stigma and encourage experimentation, particularly in team settings.

Disentangling Masculinity

It is important to acknowledge that broad terms like "men" do mask considerable variation in identity and attitudes. Food preferences intersect with beliefs about masculinity, risk, status, and self-presentation, and understanding how underlying psychographic segments cluster by gender is crucial for designing interventions that resonate. Men’s higher meat consumption is not inevitable, but addressing it does require attention to the psychological, cultural, and social forces shaping food choices and addressing these in the right way.

Orbach’s solution back in 1978 was to urge women to recognise that pursuing thinness as a source of social power wasn’t actually power. It was a form of submission that left women so preoccupied with their bodies they had no time to challenge the system that had created the unworkable norm in the first place. An analogous lesson can be found here for men—that personal power is not found in protein, and masculinity need not be expressed through meat consumption. Rethinking the link between diet and identity may ultimately allow men to align personal health and environmental motivations and self-identity in ways that go beyond traditional and constraining masculine tropes.

Just as women were encouraged to redefine the meaning of their body image and femininity, men today might reconsider whether being strong, capable, and socially dominant are really traits that can be served on plates.