Is Australia’s school system ‘anti-boy’?

Nationals leader Matt Canavan says boys are “sick and tired of the feminisation” of Australia’s curriculum. He argues consent and respectful relationships education promotes an “anti-boy ideology” that attracts male students to the manosphere. Canavan also suggests more male teachers will address this problem. Meanwhile, Canavan’s Liberal counterpart, Angus Taylor, has criticised teachers as using classrooms to pursue “political agendas”. He has described the curriculum as unbalanced. What’s in the curriculum? And what does the research say about the role of gender in schools? Who designs the curriculum? The Australian curriculum is a national framework that guides what students should learn in school. It is designed by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (which also runs the NAPLAN testing). When the curriculum was developed, it involved expert and public consultation with approval from education ministers in each state. The most recent version was ticked off under the Morrison government in 2022. What’s in the curriculum? The curriculum is organised around eight foundation subjects (including science, humanities and the arts). There are also general capabilities that go across the curriculum (including literacy, numeracy and personal and social capability). Consent education is taught under health and physical education. There is also a national framework for respectful relationships education in schools. This includes helping all students build healthy self-esteem and sustain respectful relationships in all aspects of their life, including supporting boys and young men to explore concepts of masculinity in healthy ways. Consent is not taught as an isolated topic. It is included within broader age-appropriate learning about emotions, personal strengths, positive coping, problem solving, help seeking, gender norms and stereotypes, and positive gender relations. Why is consent taught in schools? The focus on gender and consent is underpinned by broader aims to prevent gender-based violence. We know this violence is gendered because it is overwhelmingly perpetrated by boys and men against girls and women – especially intimate partner violence. Research tells us this violence is driven, at least in part, by social norms that condone violence against women and promote rigid gender stereotypes. Examining these issues as part of the curriculum does not mean it is “anti-boy”. It means understanding and challenging the gendered nature of this violence. This could include asking students to examine how expectations about masculinity might normalise sexism. For instance, how pressure to fit in with male peers can make it difficult for boys to challenge sexist jokes or comments. Do we need more male teachers? Teaching is often seen as feminised because women comprise around 70% of Australian teachers. It has been hard to attract men into the profession in recent decades. Teaching is often disrespected by the broader community. Australian research tells us men are less likely than women to be attracted to teaching because they view other occupations as better paid. Concerns boys need more male role models in schools are decades old. They are raised in the misguided belief male teachers will improve boys’ experiences of school. But this assumes men are better role models and teachers for boys than women. It also ignores how some male teachers can reinforce harmful gender norms. For example, by ignoring sexual harassment by male students of female peers. In terms of raising boys’ educational achievement – as with all students – the focus should be on quality teaching and supportive teacher–student relationships rather than the teacher’s gender. There is very little empirical evidence supporting the claim that boys benefit from being taught by male teachers. Read more: Men make up less than 18% of Australian primary school teachers. Is this a problem? Schools are not anti-boy but … Research tells us boys and young men are attracted to the manosphere for a number of complex reasons. These include uncertainty about masculinity, sex and relationships as well as searching for validation, belonging and recognition. There is evidence to suggest some young men who feel rejected, lonely and insecure may be particularly attracted to the simple messaging of the manosphere – that the world is “anti-boy” and women, feminism and gender equity are to blame. There is no evidence to suggest boys’ attraction to the manosphere is related to consent and respectful relationships education. Some boys are disengaging Some boys are indeed struggling in schools. In Australia, boys record lower literacy scores in NAPLAN than girls. National data also show boys are more likely to leave school before the end of Year 12. But educational achievement and engagement are powerfully shaped by many factors other than gender. These include class, disability, location and the structural conditions affecting First Nations students. So, boys might be disengaging and under-achieving, but it is not because schools are overly feminised. A different story My 2025 co-authored research explored the online lives of 117 young men aged between 16-21 years. It offers a more nuanced and hopeful picture. The young men we spoke to welcomed opportunities to talk seriously and critically about gender and consent. Many were critical of misogyny and sexism, “manfluencer” Andrew Tate and the manosphere, and the objectification of women in pornography. Many expressed vulnerability, sensitivity and a desire to engage with others ethically. So we should not assume boys are alienated by conversations about gender justice. Instead we can focus on how schools can best create the conditions through which boys’ curiosity and desire for ethical connection can flourish.