“Boys will be boys” reinforces unequal expectations of men and women
I think using phrases like “boys will be boys” and “he’s a man, what did you expect?” to excuse harmful behaviour reinforces a double standard. Boys and men receive more room to avoid responsibility, while girls and women are expected to anticipate, tolerate, or manage the consequences.
My argument is about how these phrases are used to excuse behaviour that affects other people. Describing children being energetic or playful is different from dismissing disrespect, harassment, or refusal to take responsibility.
I’m a law student, not a psychologist. This is also something I’ve caught myself doing. Saying “what do you expect from men?” can feel like criticism, but it can still reinforce the idea that men cannot reasonably be expected to behave differently.
I think that has consequences in three connected ways.
First, it shifts responsibility towards the person affected. If a boy repeatedly bothers a girl and adults say “he just likes you,” she may be expected to tolerate something that makes her uncomfortable. He misses an opportunity to learn that liking someone does not justify ignoring their boundaries.
The same reasoning appears in adult relationships. “Men are just like that” becomes an explanation for leaving household responsibilities to a partner, refusing to communicate, or dismissing someone’s feelings. The behaviour becomes something the other person must accommodate rather than something he should address.
Sexual assault is a particularly serious example. Saying “men have urges” or asking why a woman trusted someone shifts attention away from the person responsible. Sexual desire does not remove someone’s ability or obligation to respect consent.
Second, these excuses can lower expectations so much that basic consideration seems exceptional. I think we should appreciate kindness and encourage thoughtful behaviour. But there is a difference between appreciating a father’s parenting and treating him as unusually generous for looking after his own children.
The concern is the standard being used. “At least I don’t hit you” or “other men would have done worse” compares someone’s behaviour with a worse alternative instead of addressing whether their own actions were acceptable. Being better than another person does not make someone beyond criticism.
This applies to men who consider themselves feminists too. Supporting equality does not mean someone will never behave unfairly, and being praised for previous good behaviour should not prevent accountability now.
Third, we can reinforce this difference from childhood through what we call maturity. Girls may be expected to help with younger children, manage other people’s feelings, or “know better,” while boys receive more tolerance for being careless. We then describe the resulting difference in behaviour as evidence that girls are naturally more mature.
I don’t think emotional maturity can be reduced to a simple claim about whose brain develops first. Development varies, and expectations and opportunities to practise responsibility matter too. A daughter repeatedly expected to clear the table while her brother keeps sitting is learning a different lesson about responsibility.
Young adults also continue developing, but that does not mean accountability has to wait. A twenty-one-year-old can still be learning while being expected to respect boundaries, apologise, and change harmful behaviour.
This is where I see the connection to patriarchy. Men can be treated as naturally suited to authority while being treated as less capable of managing their behaviour when responsibility becomes inconvenient. Meanwhile, women are expected to manage both their own actions and men’s reactions.
I recognise that these phrases do not automatically produce the same outcome in every person. Their meaning depends on context, and one comment does not determine a child’s character. My position is that repeatedly using them to excuse harm helps normalise unequal expectations.
Holding boys to fair, age-appropriate standards also shows that we believe they are capable of empathy, consideration, and growth. Girls should have room to be children without being assigned responsibility for everyone else.
I’d like to hear opposing perspectives. Do you think these phrases actively reinforce unequal expectations, or mostly reflect attitudes that already exist? Is there a distinction or counterexample I’m overlooking?
I’m questioning a social pattern that people of any gender can reinforce, including me. My view is that we should appreciate kindness while consistently expecting respect and accountability, rather than treating those qualities as surprising in men or dismissing horrible behavouir on the basis of gender.
EDIT: Okay, reading the replies, I’m realising I assumed we were all familiar with the same use of this phrase, and clearly we aren’t. The number of people saying they’ve only heard it about harmless childhood behaviour has honestly caught me off guard. That isn’t how I’ve always heard it used, but I should’ve explained the context more clearly.
I’m wondering whether our different experiences come down to culture, generation, or social circles. I don’t have an answer to that yet. Something being familiar around me doesn’t establish how common it is everywhere, and I appreciate people making me think about that.
I also put so much emphasis on “boys will be boys” that the discussion became about those exact words. What I wanted to explore was the wider attitude behind comments like “he’s a man, what did you expect?” when someone has behaved badly. Would my point have been clearer if I’d started there? Probably.
A few replies have also asked whether this is actually criticism of men rather than an excuse for them. I think that’s a fair distinction to raise. Someone might intend to express frustration with men, yet still suggest that women should expect poor treatment and adjust their expectations accordingly. That’s the effect I’m questioning, including when I’ve said it myself.
I don’t want to reinforce the idea that being a man means having bad character. I want us to question that connection. We can recognise patterns in how people are raised and treated while still holding an individual responsible for their choices.
So I’m taking the feedback on board without pretending I suddenly haven’t heard what I’ve heard. I should’ve been more careful about presenting my experience as a shared one. I’m still interested in the broader question: what happens when we repeatedly explain someone’s harmful behaviour through their gender, and expect the people affected to simply know better?