A Laundromat Lesson In Gender Dynamics
Every Sunday, like clockwork, I transform into a budget economist with one mission: secure eight one-dollar coins for my apartment complex’s washer and dryer. And every Sunday, I find myself playing emotional roulette at the checkout. If I get a female cashier, she hands over the coins like I’ve asked for a plastic bag. ⋆✿ No drama ✿⋆. If it’s a male cashier? Suddenly, I’m hearing my own Dry July response echoed back at me: “I’ll try… but I can’t promise anything”.
We’re talking coins, not concert tickets, yet somehow, this weekly ritual has become a quiet study in the gendered performance of helpfulness. It’s shown me, time and again, that women are more likely to feel it's their duty to appease. To smile, accommodate or smooth things over. While men often don’t carry that same burden as they’ve been socially cast not to please, but to survive, protect, build, lead. Saying “yes” just isn’t in the script.
While I admit it’s a fairly mundane observation, and one that probably suggests I should get more hobbies, it’s a good example of how small, insignificant rituals (like getting change for laundry) can quietly expose bigger social dynamics. And I don’t think I’m imagining things; research in psychology and sociology has highlighted gendered differences in service behaviour, especially in roles involving emotional labor. Women are often socialised (and sometimes expected) to be more accommodating, nurturing and customer-pleasing (considering they are literal MOTHERS, this checks out). This can play out in ways both subtle and structural ways… or in my case, female cashiers feeling more pressured (conscious or not) to go the extra step to satisfy their customer, even if it’s slightly inconvenient (like breaking down change!).
Men, on the other hand, may not feel the same pressure to appease or “perform”, or they may feel more comfortable setting boundaries or saying no (even if the “no” is arbitrary or based on weak reasoning like not having enough coins, etc). It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re being rude. It’s more that they’re less likely to take on the appeasing role in low-stakes, everyday exchanges. Something I, a gay male with crippling people-pleasing tendencies, cannot for the life of me understand… but am deeply envious of.
Or maybe it’s an assertion of power, masculinity, dominance, etc. Maybe somtimes, men, subconsciously (and biologically) assert a bit more control over the situation by introducing friction.
Sure, personality, policy, or timing could play a role, but the consistency I’ve witnessed suggests something more patterned. And let’s not forget that gender roles don’t switch off in customer service settings (or any setting for that matter).
Honestly, it’s kind of crazy how even the act of getting dollar coins for weekly laundry can reflect broader social scripts. Truthfully, I might’ve just coined (sorry) a new theory of micro-gender performance at my local Woolies.
Final thought: is it sexist if I now instinctively scan for a female cashier, just to increase my odds of walking away with eight one-dollar coins? I’m simply a person trying to do their laundry with minimal resistance. Sorry, not sorry.
Until next Dispatch,
LGM