Beyond Men vs Women: Gendered Burdens, Social Expectations, and the Politics of Suffering in India.

Abstract

In India, gender discussions often devolve into a contest of who suffers more. On one hand, the narrative of men’s greater suffering centers on their financial burdens, family responsibilities, emotional stoicism, job stress, and societal pressure to appear strong. On the other hand, feminist and women’s rights discourse highlights women’s experience of domestic violence, unpaid care work, discrimination, limited mobility, and patriarchal dominance. This paper argues that the very question of “who suffers more?” is flawed. Instead,₹₹ we need to acknowledge the differing yet interconnected forms of gendered suffering experienced by men and women. Women’s suffering often stems from structural inequality, violence, unpaid domestic labor, and lack of autonomy, while men’s suffering is frequently linked to provider pressure, neglect of mental health, emotional repression, and social expendability. Drawing on Indian evidence from the Time Use Survey, Periodic Labour Force Survey, National Family Health Survey, and NCRB suicide data, this paper demonstrates that gendered suffering is neither homogenous nor isolated. The paper rejects both patriarchal masculinity and gender-hostile politics, advocating for a human-centered approach to gender justice that recognizes women’s structural disadvantage without disregarding men’s emotional and social burdens.

Keywords: gender, India, patriarchy, masculinity, feminism, unpaid labor, male mental health, women’s oppression, gender justice

1. Introduction

Gender discourse in India has, for a long time, been characterized by its emotionally charged, defensive, and polarized nature. On the one side, men assert that they are the true victims, burdened by the expectations of earning a living, protecting their families, remaining emotionally resilient, and bearing the primary financial responsibility. On the other, feminists and women’s rights activists argue that women bear deeper suffering due to domestic violence, sexual harassment, unpaid care labor, restricted freedom of movement, unequal opportunities, and patriarchal control. These positions are often presented as antithetical, as if validation of one implies rejection of the other.

This paper contends that this debate is myopic and that the core issue is not a competition to determine who suffers more. Rather, the critical inquiry lies in understanding how society manufactures differential forms of suffering for men and women. Men and women do not suffer identically, yet they both contend with socially imposed burdens that shape their lived experiences. In India, the archetypal man is expected to be financially successful, emotionally reticent, physically robust, and perpetually responsible for his family’s well-being. Similarly, the ideal woman is envisioned as nurturing, obedient, demure, sacrificial, and readily available for domestic chores. These idealized constructs create distinct, yet confining, prisons.

The central argument of this paper is that gendered suffering should not be framed as a zero-sum game. The legitimate struggles and oppressions of women should not be invalidated on the grounds of men’s hardships, nor should men’s suffering be ignored in defense of women’s rights. A mature approach demands acknowledging both the structural inequalities that afflict women and the emotional and social burdens carried by men.

It must be emphasized, however, that this paper does not claim that men and women face equal levels of disadvantage across all areas. The evidence consistently indicates that women in India continue to experience severe structural disadvantages in areas such as unpaid labor, domestic violence, personal safety, labor force participation, and personal autonomy. For instance, the Time Use Survey 2019 starkly illustrates the disproportionate amount of time women dedicate to unpaid domestic work, highlighting it as one of India’s most invisible labor forms. ([MoSPI][1]) Furthermore, NFHS-5 confirms that intimate partner violence remains a persistent issue for Indian women. ([Press Information Bureau][2]) Concurrently, men also bear significant burdens, particularly in relation to provider pressure, mental health, suicide rates, and social isolation. Notably, NCRB suicide data reveals a significantly higher share of suicide deaths attributable to men in India, an issue that warrants serious consideration rather than silence. ([National Crime Records Bureau][3])

Given this context, the paper shifts the focus from “Who has it worse?” to a more nuanced inquiry: “What are the unique forms of suffering that men and women are compelled to endure, and what steps can society take to alleviate these burdens?”

2. The Fallacy of the ‘Men vs Women’ Dichotomy:

The common narrative in gender discourse often follows a simplified pattern. Men will exclaim, “We are expected to earn, protect, provide, and never shed tears,” while women will counter, “We are expected to cook, care, obey, stay safe, and sacrifice.” While both statements contain a kernel of truth, they become detrimental when used as cudgels to negate each other’s struggles.

When men articulate their challenges, their concerns often revolve around job insecurity, unemployment, the pressures of marriage, potential legal repercussions, family obligations, and profound emotional loneliness. In many Indian households, a man’s worth is intricately tied to his ability to generate income. An unemployed man may be viewed as incomplete, inadequate, or even irresponsible. While he may be loved, this love is often conditional upon his proving himself useful. This creates a significant psychological strain.

In contrast, women describe their burdens in terms of societal control, sexual harassment, unpaid household labor, violence, the coercive pressure of marriage, restricted mobility, and the imperative to conform. Women are not only judged by their accomplishments but by their perceived obedience, modesty, and family-centeredness. Even highly educated women are frequently expected to balance career demands with the full spectrum of domestic responsibilities.

The error lies in juxtaposing these struggles as mutually exclusive. The fact that men commit suicide at higher rates does not diminish the reality of domestic violence faced by women, and conversely, the pervasive unpaid labor performed by women does not negate the immense economic pressure experienced by men. Both patriarchal masculinity and women’s oppression can exist concurrently, each impacting society in different yet interconnected ways.

To move forward, a robust gender analysis must transcend superficial emotional comparisons. The critical question is not “Who is the primary victim?” but rather “How are differing burdens of suffering created and distributed by society between men and women?”

3. The Dual Burden of Women: Unpaid Labor, Violence, and Social Control:

The prevalence of unpaid domestic work stands as one of the most significant examples of women’s gendered burden in India. Cooking, cleaning, washing, caring for children and the elderly, managing food supplies, maintaining relationships, and providing emotional support are all essential forms of labor. However, because this work is unpaid and primarily occurs within the private sphere, it is often rendered invisible.

The Time Use Survey 2019 is an invaluable resource that quantifies both paid and unpaid activities and highlights the divergence in how men and women spend their time. The survey was specifically designed to measure the time spent on paid employment, unpaid domestic services, unpaid care work, learning, leisure, and self-care, thereby revealing that the absence of wages does not signify an absence of labor. ([MoSPI][1])

Women in Indian households typically face a “double burden.” Even if they are employed outside the home, their role in domestic duties is often unquestioned. This dual responsibility translates into a workload that is both physically and emotionally taxing. A man who is a breadwinner is praised for his economic contributions, whereas a working woman is simultaneously expected to prove her worth as a diligent daughter, wife, daughter-in-law, and mother.

Violence against women is another pervasive aspect of their gendered burden. NFHS-5 data clearly indicates that spousal and intimate partner violence continue to be a serious concern in India. Government reports based on NFHS-5 information detail that a significant proportion of ever-married women aged 18–49 have endured spousal physical and/or sexual violence. ([Press Information Bureau][2]) This statistic underscores the grim reality that for many women, their homes are not necessarily safe havens.

Women also encounter a broad spectrum of social control. Their choices regarding clothing, friendships, mobile phone usage, freedom of movement, sexual behavior, career aspirations, and marriage decisions are frequently subjected to scrutiny and intervention. While a young man’s independence is often taken for granted, a young woman’s autonomy is frequently perceived as potentially problematic and necessitating close supervision.A woman’s safety is sometimes used as an excuse to limit her freedoms, rather than change the unsafe conditions which limit her. In this way, the oppression of women is not merely about the individual behaviour of bad men. It is structural. It is incorporated into the family expectations, the public safety, the marital norms, the work pattern and the notion of honor. Women are often oppressed in the name of security, tradition, propriety and family honor. 4. Men’s burden:

Provider pressure, emotional silence and mental health While it is true that women face a significant structural inequality, it is also true that men suffer and that male suffering is often overlooked. Indian society generally socializes men to be strong, successful, and emotionally composed. Boys are generally told that they must not cry, not show any vulnerability, not rely on anyone. This produces a society where male suffering is invisible. The problem of provider pressure is one such burden. Men are generally expected not only to earn money for themselves, but also to provide for their parents, wives, children, siblings, and often extended family. A man’s position in society is very closely linked to his earning potential and a man’s marriage, status, family dignity and other factors often hinge on a man’s financial success. The Periodic Labour Force Survey Annual Report 2025 points out a sharp contrast between male and female labor participation rates. Labor force participation rate of person 15 years and above is 79.1 percent for males and 40.0 percent for females. While this figure directly highlights inequality, it also represents that the entire population of males is tied to employment expectations and men are not merely privileged to be part of the work force but may face significant sanctions if they do not. Men’s mental health, on the other hand, is a very serious concern. NCRB data on suicides, almost consistently, show a very large male proportion among suicide deaths. While this is not to suggest that men have a higher burden in all aspects of life than women, this finding clearly demonstrates that male distress remains inadequately addressed. Financial distress, unemployment, social pressure, addictions, loss of relationships, loneliness and the inability to express one’s grief and pain can become life-threatening when the community remains silent to male anguish.

The crux of the problem is that men are seen as valuable for their utilitarian purpose rather than vulnerability. A woman facing emotional hardship is at least sometimes expected to cry, ask for support and feel fear. A man facing emotional hardship is instead often told that “man up”. This denial of expressing emotional hardship is not an act of strength, it is a symptom of a disease society is suffering from. In no way does this imply that women do not suffer but rather suggests that patriarchy not only makes women suffer, but men also suffer from the patriarchy. It is arguing that patriarchy is not simply to be understood as one gender dominating the other. It is essentially an aspect of masculinity which harms men by making them believe they should never cry, they should always remain silent and they are a strong sex. This provides some men with a sense of power over women but traps the majority of the men in a society that expects too much out of them. 5. Patriarchy not just a male dominated setup: It is often argued that patriarchy represents a situation where the power has solely gone to men and all women are uniformly suffering, however, it is far more complicated than that. A better definition of patriarchy is that it is a social system where men in positions of authority and public power largely have control and there are distinct rules prescribed for males and females in the society. While women face immediate harm through physical/sexual violence and exploitation of their labor and bodies; men also suffer in their own way as they are compelled to live in strict gender roles. It is men, in this society that are being indoctrinated with the values that they are to look after, sacrifice and be providers of comfort and pleasure. It has to be reiterated that although there exists a clear power differential between the sexes inpatriarchy, the same cannot be extrapolated into an explanation of everyone experiencing patriarchy in similar ways and to the same extent. Poor and working class men, for example, do not solely experience the advantages that patriarchy grants them but may be severely oppressed by their class and caste position and also patriarchal expectations. The same can be extended to men who are disabled, aged, or of low-caste and it is possible that their gender experience is shaped by their particular context. The essential aspect ofpatriarchy is not necessarily that ‘all men are oppressive’, it is that “gender roles shape society as a whole and that there is a systematic imbalance in power whereby males primarily dominate and have their positions of power maintained and women are largely subordinated or at least marginalized”.Women usually bear the direct violence and limitations, while men often experience the pressure and strain of patriarchally assigned roles. The statement made in the previous section that there is male suffering is indeed true but it can never negate women’s suffering. But when making an argument, one has to acknowledge the fact that it is not that women are suffering while men have fun. Patriarchy puts a huge pressure and responsibility on men too and if men fail to conform to these expectations, they will face sanctions. A Balanced argument would be that Patriarchy does not mean every man lives an easy life. It simply means that a structure where the power remains largely within men, which controls women, and the sex roles are well-defined with very strict definitions and limits for what constitutes acceptable feminine and masculine behavior. 6. Feminism, Masculinity and delicate language: Misuse of the term “feminism” has lead to women’s aspirations for dignity, respect and equality being wrongly labeled as woman-power and misandry while “masculinity” can sometimes mean more than just responsibility, courage and protection-it may refer to dominance and aggression as well. This paper does not condone gender hatred nor a generalization that all men are oppressors and all women are victims nor it supports patriarchal masculinity where women need to subordinate themselves for men. We are talking of healthy feminism which aims at dignity, equality and respect for women and unhealthy politics which focuses on blaming an entire gender and refusing to look beyond prescribed roles. Healthy masculinity implies responsibility, bravery, kindness and respect while toxic masculinity implies a need for power and superiority over others. So, it is advised not to say, “I am against feminism” as this would make you sound biased. The statement ‘this paper aims at Gender dignity and equality while also being critical of any ideology-be it feminist, masculinist, or patriarchal-that would seek to turn the fight for gender justice into an issue of gender hatred’ would do this much better. 7. Caste, class, gender and Indian context: Gender roles alone are not enough to provide explanations for women’s oppression in India, as caste, religion, class, regionalism, education, rural/urban background and individual characteristics also play a very significant role. For example, a wealthy urban woman and poor rural woman cannot live the same life. The impact of patriarchy for an upper-class urban woman can be different from a poor woman living in a rural setting. A woman belonging to the Scheduled Caste may face caste discrimination, gender violence, economic exploitation, and social ostracism simultaneously. Similarly, not all men have similar advantages either, and the impact of patriarchy on a wealthy upper-class male will differ from the experience of a poor unemployed male or lower caste male, not to mention their interaction with the Indian social hierarchy. An unemployed poor male faces pressures of provider roles when he may not have access to paid employment and may be looked down upon for his lack of financial success. Thus, gender suffering is intersectional, not isolated or unitary. Therefore, gender needs to be treated as a category which intersects with other categories of social difference such as class, caste, etc. To provide holistic explanations of inequality and oppression. Gender experiences of individuals would depend on the interaction of their gender roles with other social markers such as class, caste, ethnicity, age, education, etc. The better argument here would be: while all members of a given society are shaped by gender roles in varying degrees, the consequences of those roles are neither experienced, nor imposed, uniformly. The burden of gender is intensified by factors of caste, class, education and location in particular social contexts.

8. Why Arguing Who Suffers More Is Risky: Asking “who suffers more?” is simple and attractive, but deadly. It reduces justice to a contest. Men’s pain spoken only to suppress women’s issues is reactionary. Women’s oppression mentioned only to belittle men’s problems is incomplete. Comparison breeds resentment: men may believe women’s rights movements neglect male pain, while women may see men raising their issues only when women discuss violence or discrimination. Consequently, each sex digs in. A sophisticated society accepts both facts: Women experience systematic gender inequality. Men are subject to serious gendered pressures. These two truths are not opposites; rather they stem from the same system. The system that teaches women submission teaches men invincibility. The same family that burdens women with domesticity tasks it with responsibility for finance. The same family structure that controls women oppresses men to provide for it. The answer is not a war of the sexes, but the transformation of sex roles.

9. Toward a Human-Centered Framework for Gender Justice: A human-centered model of gender justice is based on a recognition of both equality and empathy. This framework acknowledges the oppression of women without mocking male pain. Key components of such a model would be: 1. The recognition of unpaid domestic work as labor: Women’s contribution within the home is “nothing.” The Time Use Survey has brought to light this invisible world of domestic labor in Indian homes. 2. Safety for women needs to be a public and private concern: Domestic violence must not be dismissed as private behavior. The evidence from NFHS-5 demonstrates continued domestic and intimate partner violence. 3. Men’s mental health needs public scrutiny: Male suicide rates and the emotional isolation to which men are often subjected should be discussed without shame. Statistics from the NCRB clearly show the seriousness of male distress for public health. 4. Provider pressure should be eased by economic sharing:Men should not be ATMs, nor women prohibited from work. Data from the PLFS shows both women’s labor participation levels as well as the adherence of men to paid labor. 5. Raising children requires the abandonment of gender roles:Boys and girls must be taught to both express sadness and ask for help, as well as to both cook and care, and share in emotional labor. They must be permitted to both study and go out, achieve and choose. 6. Legal and social reforms must be gender-aware, not gender-biased:Women must be protected from violence and oppression, while men also require protections from mental health neglect, damaging social expectations, and lack of emotional support. Justice cannot be revenge.

10. Conclusion. Debating whether men or women suffers more, in essence, misdiagnoses India’s gender question. Both men and women suffers; they do so differently. Women are often suppressed by the burden of unpaid domestic labor, the threat of violence, control over their bodies, and constant moral judgment. Men, by contrast, face the crushing burden of the breadwinner role, the need to appear strong even in the face of mental illness, neglect of emotional issues, and societal pressure to be macho. While no field suffers more than another in absolute terms, the issues faced are interrelated. A mature society asks not who deserves more sympathy but why anyone, male or female, is driven into roles that destroy them. Women should not need to demonstrate suffering to merit equal rights. Men should not have to demonstrate emotional strength to prove their worth. This paper advocates for a move beyond blame and against gender war; it makes a case for a feminist agenda that accounts for structural patriarchy and men’s individual suffering, the intersection of caste, class, and caste within India, and the impact of family norms. Adversity does not make a people weak; it speaks to their endurance, not their valor. Survival cannot be romanticized. Just society should not be men or women silently carrying unequal burdens; it must acknowledge the problems, address them fairly, and gradually reduce them.

Bibliography

Government of India, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. Time Use in India 2019. National Statistical Office. This report is useful for understanding paid work, unpaid domestic services, unpaid caregiving, and gendered time use in India.

Government of India, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. Periodic Labour Force Survey Annual Report 2025. This source provides updated labour force participation data, including male and female LFPR and WPR for persons aged 15 years and above.

Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child Development. Mission Shakti and NFHS-5 Based Data on Violence Against Women. This source is useful for discussing domestic violence, spousal violence, and women’s access to grievance redressal mechanisms.

International Institute for Population Sciences and ICF. National Family Health Survey, India 2019–21: NFHS-5. This is one of the most important sources for data on women’s health, marriage, domestic violence, reproductive health, and household conditions in India.

National Crime Records Bureau. Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India. This source is important for analysing suicide trends, gender distribution of suicide deaths, and mental health-related social concerns in India.

International Labour Organization. Unpaid Care Work Prevents 708 Million Women from Participating in the Labour Market. This source helps connect India’s unpaid care work debate to a broader global pattern.

Manna, S. Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence among Indian Women. This academic article is useful as a secondary research source for understanding intimate partner violence and its connection with empowerment, household conditions, and gender relations.