Scholars have noted that there is hesitation to utilise findings from gender studies in engineering education. Issues within gender studies may be part of the matching problem. Debates concerning two concepts for new engineering paradigms are investigated: care and heterogeneity. Their appeals and the respective complications which they tend to be associated with are revisited. Two examples are explored in detail. The tensions revealed lead to the contents of technical work. More social sciences content in engineering education is sometimes suggested, as a way to support more humane approaches. But, if the calculations that decide how many bolts of what dimension are to be put where are ‘masculinist reductionism’, it still remains that someone will have to do those calculations. Is emphasis on social issues really what we want from engineers?