I started to ring in a 10-bell tower with an RM who did not have a great deal of complex method knowledge or interest. I very nearly gave up until I realised that I would have to my own research into handling a bell, and in method construction. The 10-bell tower some miles away had much more interesting development functions with multi-spliced to be had. Both of those had male RMs, but also had a number of female members who were, in general, able to ring with the males with no discernible difference in prowess. My view of this is that the general atmosphere in both places was encouraging. I cannot, of course, look at it from the opposite gender point of view.

Later, having left that georgraphical area, I became a member of bands which had - at the 'top' end - male RMs who were, as far as I could see, solely interested in inculcating good, advanced ringing and striking, irrespective of gender or gender disposition. Those bands which I knew well, and which had thriving ab initio teaching elements, often had extremely talented female
RMs. Their results, in teaching and in retaining the interest for the more advanced members,  and therefore the teaching and advancement aspects, were clear for all to see. These RMs, thorugh their thought and skill, drew in other ringers. It is my impression now that there are more female RMs than then, albeit with varying personal skill, but who treat a practice with a structure which is adaptable and have a developed forward sense. Too many male RMs are content to make it up as they go along. This latter trait is one of those which will eventually stifle ringing through stagnation and boredom.