The INEVAWG position paper Feminist Approaches for Working with Men or Not? presents a strong, unapologetic feminist critique of dominant narratives that promote male engagement as central to achieving gender equality and ending violence against women and girls. Drawing inspiration from Audre Lorde’s assertion that “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house,” the paper argues that the framing of feminist work around men fundamentally misdirects, dilutes, and depoliticizes women’s struggles.
INEVAWG challenges the assumption embedded in the question “How should feminists work with men?” and instead reframes it as a political choice: whether feminists should work with men at all. From the perspective of Black feminists from the Global South, the paper asserts that feminism does not exist to educate men, seek their permission, or depend on their validation. Rather, feminism is a political movement aimed at dismantling patriarchy, power hierarchies, and structural oppression that harm women and girls.
A central argument is that the recurring “what about men?” discourse functions as a deliberate or unconscious diversion tactic. It shifts attention away from women’s lived realities of violence, exclusion, and marginalization, forcing feminists to justify their focus and defend women-only spaces. This rhetorical move, the paper argues, trivializes women’s organizing, recenters male concerns, and reinforces patriarchal entitlement. While acknowledging that men may experience forms of violence, INEVAWG insists that addressing men’s issues should not occur within women’s movements or at the expense of women’s already overstretched resources.
The paper further critiques the growing emphasis on male engagement within donor-driven gender programming. Funding requirements that compel women’s rights organizations to demonstrate how they engage men are described as coercive and politically regressive. According to INEVAWG, this approach divides limited resources, elevates men as “champions” of gender equality, and reproduces the very power imbalances feminism seeks to dismantle. Male engagement, the paper notes, has often become performative—used as a badge of honor without genuine political consciousness or personal transformation—while some men in these spaces continue to perpetuate abuse, entitlement, and toxic masculinity.
INEVAWG also defends the legitimacy and necessity of women-only organizing spaces. Such spaces are framed not as exclusionary but as essential for healing, consciousness-raising, and unlearning internalized oppression. Women’s lives, the paper argues, are shaped by being unheard and unseen within patriarchal systems, making autonomous spaces critical for reclaiming voice, power, and agency. The paper highlights the hypocrisy in questioning women-only spaces when men routinely organize in exclusive spaces without similar scrutiny.
The document emphasizes that contemporary gender equality discourse has been reduced to a depoliticized negotiation that assumes progress depends on men’s approval. This undermines feminist agency and avoids interrogating power relations. INEVAWG calls for a repoliticization of violence against women and girls, insisting that feminism must remain rooted in power analysis, structural critique, and collective resistance rather than accommodation.
In conclusion, INEVAWG affirms that feminists do not hate men but reject the expectation that women must educate, save, or organize men. The paper calls on feminists to resist narrative control, defend women-centered organizing, and remain focused on dismantling patriarchy through intersectional, Global South–led feminist movements grounded in self-care, solidarity, and political clarity.