Gendered Boundaries in Caregiving

Brittney Paul
Jul 13
3 min read

written by Brittney Paul, student psychologist

In a recent workshop, we explored how our bodies respond differently when we say

“yes” compared to when we say “no.” We practised saying both words with the rhythm of the breath – on the inhale, hold at the top, exhale, and hold at the bottom. Later, we were

encouraged to notice the body’s yeses and noes, and to honour them. What surprised me most was how I struggled to say no when someone called my name and invited me to step into the circle. I felt as though I was disappointing them, being mean to them, or rejecting them. Upon reflecting on the difficulty I experienced during this exercise, I wondered how much gendered expectations shape our ability to say no.

"...saying “no” can feel like breaking

the rules..."

Caregiving (whether paid or unpaid) is often framed as women’s work, associated

with qualities such as selflessness, gentleness, empathy, and nurturing. These traits are often described as the “natural” dispositions of women (Husso & Hirovonen, 2012). From an early age, many girls are taught to prioritise others’ needs, to be empathetic, and to avoid conflict. Within this context, saying “no” can feel like breaking the rules of femininity itself. However, these qualities are not inherently feminine – they are fundamentally human.

Patriarchal norms tend to assign these qualities to women while discouraging men from

experiencing vulnerability, tenderness, or emotional attentiveness. This is detrimental to

everyone involved. Women carry a disproportionate burden of emotional and caregiving

labour, while men are denied opportunities to develop relational forms of care and empathy.

"Reframing “no” as a form of empowerment changes this narrative."

My discomfort in the workshop reflected this broader dynamic. Even in a safe, experimental

space, I felt guilty for refusing, as though I were failing in my role as someone who is

expected to be caring and responsive.

Women often deny the influence of gender in care work, only later recognising how

expectations of emotional involvement shape their everyday practices (Husso & Hirvonen, 2012). In contrast, men are often permitted (or even expected) to be assertive, decisive, and to set clear boundaries. Men’s “noes” are therefore more likely to be interpreted as strength or authority, while women’s may be judged as being cold or selfish. Reframing “no” as a form of empowerment changes this narrative. For caregivers, especially, boundaries are not selfish; they are essential for sustaining care. Women’s emotional labour often becomes a source of social suffering, as they compensate for perceived lower status by investing heavily in relational work (Husso & Hirvonen, 2012). Sometimes saying no is an act of sustainability. A nurse who refuses another double shift after already covering for colleagues all week is not being unhelpful; she is protecting her ability to provide quality care. In the same sense, a mother who insists that childcare responsibilities be shared is not withdrawing care; she is challenging the assumption that caregiving should automatically fall to women. These refusals challenge the assumption that women’s value lies in endless availability.