Big boys don’t cry”, “little man”, “boys will be boys” - people use these expressions often. Less often do they consider what such words really mean and what their long-term effects could be.

Why on earth would we want our young males to suppress emotion? Why would we want them to be viewed as mini adults rather than as children? Why should their behaviour be straitjacketed in a rigid stereotype?

With our casual remarks and culturally prescribed perceptions, we do all of this.

The path to a particularly toxic brand of masculinity starts early. It’s no wonder boys - and we - have problems as they grow up.

For as long as we can remember, girls have outperformed boys academically. And for as long as we can remember, we have wrung our hands over it. But little has changed.​

Boys are more likely to go to prison than girls, die by suicide, injure themselves or others. While at school, they are more likely to be excluded.

Go to any pupil-referral unit and you’d be hard-pushed to spot girls. Is this because boys have more problems and their behaviour is so bad? Are boys naturally more boisterous and aggressive? Or do we encourage and excuse that behaviour when they are small by telling them that “boys will be boys”?

What about the toys we give them to play with? Boys get the exciting playthings, ones that whirr and buzz, and they are encouraged to be active with football and other sports.

Girls get the passive toys such as dolls and prams and make-believe domestic playthings such as kitchens and tea sets. They are encouraged to be meek and mild.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that girls find it easier to sit still and focus on lessons more when older. (Not that that doesn’t bring its own problems, of course.)

Are boys punished more as they get older because they are physically more threatening? An out-of-control 5ft girl is a lot easier to deal with than a 6ft boy, especially if the teacher is herself an average-size female.

One thing we can rule out is the feminisation of the teaching workforce, especially at primary level. It is often cited as the cause for the poor academic performance and behaviour of boys, but research has found that the sex of the teacher makes no difference.

Gender perceptions, however, are another matter. The expectations that schools have of boys (and girls) are the problem, say Mark Roberts and Matt Pinkett, who have put a lot of thought, research and effort into this issue for their book Boys Don’t Try? Rethinking Masculinity in Schools. It delivers a tough message to their colleagues. “On behaviour and in attainment, there is a compelling case from the research that our initial hunch is true: the biggest controllable factor in the poor outcomes for boys is us, their teachers”.

But while they cite teachers as a problem here, importantly, they are also seen as​ a solution. And it’s a message that should resonate with all of us.

Boys who shun boisterous activities and prefer to sit quietly are often called “sissies”, those who are shy and fearful, “a big girl’s blouse” and those who show emotion are told off for “crying like a girl”. The people who do it are often the parents, not the children - and teachers are well placed to deal with this.

We would do every child a favour if we treated them as such - just a child, neither a boy nor a girl - and ditched the gendered language and stereotypes. They are all different and like different things; let’s not judge and leave them to decide.

They’re not little men or little ladies; they are children. Boys will be boys only if we encourage stereotyped behaviours. And big boys do cry. But sadly, it’s still often only on the inside.

Tweets by Ann Mroz

This article originally appeared in the 19 April 2019 issue under the headline “Oh boy, do we have work to do on gender stereotypes in schools”