All iLive content is medically reviewed or fact checked to ensure as much factual accuracy as possible.
We have strict sourcing guidelines and only link to reputable media sites, academic research institutions and, whenever possible, medically peer reviewed studies. Note that the numbers in parentheses ([1], [2], etc.) are clickable links to these studies.
If you feel that any of our content is inaccurate, out-of-date, or otherwise questionable, please select it and press Ctrl + Enter.
Men are more likely to consume meat compared to women, especially in developed countries
Last reviewed: 02.07.2025
A recent study published in the journal Scientific Reports examined whether differences in meat consumption between men and women are universal, whether they depend on cultural norms and opportunities for certain behaviors, and how pronounced they are in countries with higher levels of development and less gender inequality.
Men in North America and Europe consume more meat than women, but the reasons for this difference are unknown. Understanding gender differences in meat consumption may provide insight into cultural relationships. Cross-cultural differences in meat consumption may highlight the role of culture in gender differences and enhance understanding of paradoxical gender effects. Biological differences between the sexes and evolutionary social norms that reward skilled hunters may influence the value of meat.
In this study, the researchers analyzed gender differences in average meat consumption across countries. They examined whether gender differences would be similar, smaller in countries with higher levels of gender equality and human development, or more pronounced.
The 2021 study included 20,802 participants from 23 countries on four continents. Those who gave inaccurate answers to validity tests, did not complete the survey, gave absurd answers, and did not indicate their gender identity as female or male were excluded from the analysis. Participants rated the frequency of consumption of various foods on a scale of 1 to 11, and the researchers calculated animal product consumption from the average scores for categories such as beef, pork, and poultry.
The researchers used the Human Development Index (HDI) to rank countries on their progress in health, education, and living standards. The data was collected from the United Nations Development Programme website in January 2023. The Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI), which includes economic opportunity and participation, educational attainment, political empowerment, and health, was used to compare countries’ levels of gender equality. The 2021 data was taken from the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report.
In all countries except India, Indonesia and China, men consumed more meat than women. However, this difference increased significantly in countries with higher levels of gender equality and human development. The significant positive effect sizes d ranged from 0.2 for Malaysia to 0.6 for Germany.
The random intercepts model explained more variation (11%) than the intercepts-only model. The model using random coefficients for age, gender, and quadratic age terms had difficulty converging, indicating that the slopes of the age effects were consistent across countries. However, modeling with gender slopes only explained more variation than modeling with random intercepts.
Models including level 2.0 variables for gender equality, human development, and the cross-interaction between development, gender, and gender equality were able to explain more variation than the nested random coefficients model.
According to parametric estimates, men consume more meat than women, and meat consumption declines with age but is highest among young and middle-aged adults. Cross-sectional interactions showed that gender inequalities in meat consumption are higher in countries with higher levels of development and lower gender inequality, supporting the paradoxical gender effect hypothesis.
The study found that men consume more meat than women in developed countries with greater gender equality, with the paradoxical gender effect being larger in these countries. No gender differences were found in India, Indonesia, and China, suggesting that cultural and environmental factors may be at play.
Economic factors explain the impact of human development, as meat production is more expensive than plant-based food production. Countries with more resources provide more opportunities to purchase and consume meat. The results support similar studies with psychological traits and help rule out reference group effects as a possible cause.
The study highlights the importance of taking into account cultural and economic factors when examining gender differences in meat consumption and their impact on health. These findings have important public health implications and may help develop strategies to reduce gender inequalities in dietary habits and improve overall well-being.