Men eat more animal products than women and are typically less open to cutting back. To find out why, researchers from Bryant Research, the University of Zurich, and the University of Bath carried out a two-part study on how traditional masculine norms shape men’s diets in the United Kingdom. They combined a nationally representative survey with a series of focus groups to find both patterns and the social factors behind them.

In the first phase, 1,072 men from the U.K. completed an online survey. It measured how strongly they endorsed traditional masculine values like self-reliance, emotional restraint, and avoiding femininity. Participants were also asked to report their meat and dairy consumption, how attached they felt to these foods, and whether they saw meat as “masculine.” The survey ended with questions about perceived threats from vegetarianism and barriers to eating a more plant-based diet.

Men who scored higher on traditional masculinity ate more red meat and poultry and felt a stronger attachment to both meat and dairy. They were also more likely to view meat as masculine and vegetarianism as a cultural threat. The two traits that stood out as the strongest predictors of meat attachment were achievement status (e.g., the belief that men should be family providers) and avoidance of femininity (e.g., the belief that housework is women’s work). In short, men who linked masculinity with success and distance from femininity were least open to reducing animal products.

When asked what made it hard to eat fewer animal products, 70% of respondents said taste matters most, followed by price (42%) and convenience (27%). For many, meat was simply “nice,” familiar, and comforting. Necessity was the weakest justification for keeping it in their diets.

In the second phase, the researchers held five online focus groups with 22 men who were identified through the online survey as being especially attached to meat. In age-matched groups, participants talked about their diets and how gender might influence their food choices. Each session was led by a male moderator to create an open, comfortable atmosphere.

Here, the researchers found a telling contradiction. Most participants claimed that their gender had zero influence on what they ate, yet their stories revealed strongly gendered patterns. Some admitted feeling pressure to order steak in front of “alpha males” or described smoking meat as a “cliched” masculine ritual. Others noted that women in their households often encouraged them to eat more plant-based foods.

Three key themes stood out. First, many men denied that gender influenced their diets, often expressing disbelief when the topic came up. Second, even while rejecting the idea, they described behavior that clearly reflected masculine norms, such as eating large portions and avoiding lighter meals like salads. Finally, a few men acknowledged that women around them were generally more open to eating plant-based meals. Taken together, these findings suggest that the link between masculinity and meat is mostly implicit. Men may not consciously connect gender identity to food, but social cues and expectations still guide what ends up on their plates.

Across both phases of the study, traditional masculinity reinforced men’s attachment to meat and resistance to veg*nism. The authors argue that advocacy campaigns that focus only on ethics and environmental appeals may miss this deeper cultural layer. They offer several suggestions for advocates:

• Frame plant-based eating as compatible with strength and self-reliance
• Emphasize health and performance benefits
• Use relatable male role models
• Avoid language that threatens masculine identity
• Highlight taste and enjoyment
• Leverage social influence to promote plant-based eating
• Support policies that help make plant-based foods comparable in price to animal products

Ultimately, the key insight for advocates is that resistance to plant-based diets isn’t just about food: it’s about identity. Leaning into widely accepted masculine values and framing plant-based eating as empowering rather than emasculating could make outreach to men far more effective.