The masculine art of cooking

When celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay’s chain of eateries were snubbed from the world’s best restaurants list, I revelled in the joy of knowing that the British vanguard of hyper-macho  professional cooking will need a little humbling-up to do. Though the reign of men in the great kitchens of the world is far from over: somewhere in the top 10 proudly sits Heston Blumenthal’s The Fat Duck, known for his ‘Don’t try this at home’ cooking programmes.

Sometimes I think about why the big celebrity chefs in the UK tend to be male and how less oriented their cooking shows are towards domesticity. Y’know, very little in the way of feeding the kids and entertaining guests at dinner parties a la Nigella, and how they’re light years more glamorous than ‘How to boil an egg’ Delia. Serious cooking being the preserve of men means that for women, cooking is unremarkable and boring. Think The Great British Menu – all men. Think trendy and cool, and you have Jamie Oliver.

Gordon Ramsay
Gordon Ramsay

Traditionally, the sexual division of labour had relegated women to the domestic domain of the household, running the daily chores and preparing food for the family. Men, on the other hand, tend to busy themselves with more ‘rewarding’ activities, like paid work outside the home. Men who cook are grandly valued and thus rewarded handsomely. In several instances of the past, men were generally employed as cooks in the royal courts of pharoahs, sultans and kings. As a conscious tactic to ensure that what the royals ate were far superior as possible from the (perceived) banality of the common peasantry where women were the traditional cooks, royal dining became elevated to a kind of art form, and so was the status of the preparers.

Not much has changed since; men’s cooking is still valued more than women’s, though the rules now are little different. Haute cuisine is less about extravagance and more about educated and sophisticated flavours. Less is more. It’s steadily become a kind of sport where the players are aggressive and competitive. So it’s no surprise then that male-headed restaurants are often the bastions of macho and misogynist language and behaviour. Cue The F-Word, Gordon Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares, and Marco Pierre White’s Hell’s Kitchen (Note the dark and foreboding titles).

Today in The Guardian I came face to face with a new term created for men who know their bouillon from their brisket: the gastrosexual. It’s a term with the potential to the turn the stomachs (mind the pun) of loutish male chauvinists and feminists alike. Like the metrosexual, gastrosexuals are men who are, I bite my tongue as I say this, in touch with their feminine side. Oh, did I say that like metrosexuals, gastrosexuals can only be men?

[…] men, who have always dominated professional kitchens, are now cooking at home more than ever before. Freed at last from gender expectations, we are realising that tenderly preparing a meal does not pose a threat to our masculinity. In fact, what other activity actually encourages you to swear every second word? In 1961, men spent an average of five minutes a day cooking and washing up; today that figure has increased to 27 minutes. The “gastrosexual” – the sexed-up marketing tag for my kind – now prepares one-fifth of all in-home evening meals. [source]

About 80 percent of the meal labour is still a heavy load for women in this feminism-is-not-necessary-anymore age of ours. For the majority of men, cooking is something done for special occasions, something one chooses to do rather than something one has to do. And then there are these aforementioned TV chefs that fuel the curious and adventurous imaginations of their largely male audience:

“Perhaps the most important difference between men and women when they cook are the different role models they have in their head,” says comedian Ben Miller, who is still, occasionally literally, dining off having beaten Gordon Ramsay on The F Word’s Celebrity Challenge with his Victoria sponge. “I’ve got Ramsay, the Galloping Gourmet, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and the god of all gods, Jamie Oliver. When I’m baking I think of myself as Heston Blumenthal, with the safety specs on and a blowtorch. When a woman is cooking she is thinking of herself being her mother. And that can be a problem for her or a good thing.” [source]

Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Jamie Oliver
Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Jamie Oliver

When I cook no one is in my head, not even my mother. Although I have to admit Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall has my heart. His back to nature, back to basics, and even back to the inglorious British past of offal cooking approach are all truly inspiring. But guess what? He’s a little domestic and rather maternal, too. If teaching difficult vegetarians and fish-phobes to embrace unusual cuts of meat and sea-dwelling creatures other than fish, respectively, is not as motherly as teaching a toddler to read I don’t know what is.

With Fearnley-Whittingstall of River Cottage, I round off my thoughts on the sexual politics of cooking. But what does my approach to food and cooking say about my feminism? Well, not much really. I happily embody the domestic stereotype who loves baking cupcakes and hosting dinner parties, and I certainly am guilty of non-human oppression due to my love of meat and seafood. Yes, I’m not ashamed of them. But really, not everything in life has to be feminist.

By Angry Malay Woman

I like plants.


  1. None of the guys I know can cook particularly well. None of the grrls can either. I’m special because I can in my social circle. But I’ve seen this mum cooking dad lazing on the couch thing through many families in my time.

  2. When I cook, I have my dad on my head.

    Because he did pretty much 75% of all the fucking cooking, especially when we stopped having full-time housemaids. I say 75% only because the rest of the time, he handed it to me and my brother to cook.

    And it wasn’t even fine-dining cooking, this was everyday, dinner and lunch leftovers cooking which is generally unpaid labour. Dad would come home early some days just to cook for us.

    As long as my dad remains an outlier among fathers in this way, feminism is still necessary in my eyes.

    Gastrosexual. WTF.

  3. Aileen Wuornos,

    Yeah, there a lot of women (in their twenties) today who don’t really do cooking. I sometimes wonder whether the legacies of second wave feminism in the west meant that young women are not expected to learn to cook well, but rather expected to just do it, if I’m making any sense here. Home economics class just for girls may seem outdated today, but the retrogressive expectations still persist.


    My step-mother plays the doting wife/slave to my dad. They both have pretty high-profile jobs but when they’re at home, she assumes the traditional role big time; from making tea everytime he comes home from work to making pretty elaborate meals every evening made from ingredients only my dad loves. On some Sunday mornings my dad suddenly becomes all domestic and cooks a huge breakfast. Because it’s such a special occasion, I *must* get up early and eat with him to show my appreciation.

    Feminism definitely is still needed. It’s just that people toss around the word ‘post-feminism’ whilst mindlessly assuming that it’s as relevant as stone-age flint. I said “feminism-is-not-necessary-anymore age” in a sarcastic way. If you knew that already, sorry ;p

  4. “Aileen Wuornos,

    Yeah, there a lot of women (in their twenties) today who don’t really do cooking. I sometimes wonder whether the legacies of second wave feminism in the west meant that young women are not expected to learn to cook well, but rather expected to just do it, if I’m making any sense here. Home economics class just for girls may seem outdated today, but the retrogressive expectations still persist.”

    I think it would have been originally “not expected to do it” but that’s gravitated towards “let’s not learn at all” probably due to modern consumer ease, for example it’s easier to get a frozen meal than it is to actually make that meal from scratch, even though that doesn’t really make sense cos one is considerably more expensive, and it’s not from scratch.
    Well, as I went to high school at a Private All Girls School we were taught all that kind of shit as well. It might have been the Anglican side of it wanting us to be “Good Christian Girls” but I did home economics just so I could learn to make awesome munchie foods 😉

    I know what you mean about the expectation still existing though – my female friends have no expectations of my to cook and are quite happy to help me out when I ask for it when I do cook, but my male friends kind of just expect it be dished out to them. It’s always funny to see their looks of disappointment when I come out of the kitchen with only one plate – mine!

  5. Cycads: I recognized your snark, no worries! I do that sometimes too. ;D

    When I did Home Economics, the boys also did Home Economics! We got into the same kitchen and had to make sandwiches and stuff. Great fun! We girls also learned woodworking too! Oddly enough, the boys and girls still had separate teachers and classes, for reasons I’ve never comprehended since we essentially learnt the same things (except for sewing).

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: