Tatiana Moura- Center for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
This article proposes the notion of feminist masculinities as a transformative solution to the global re-emergence of antifeminist politics, especially those based on right-wing populism and regressive gender ideologies. While previous research has primarily focused on the ideological content and mobilization strategies of antifeminism, less attention has been given to men who actively oppose such narratives and engage in feminist-aligned practices. Drawing on the scholarship of bell hooks, Connell and Messerschmidt, and feminist care ethicists, the article theorizes feminist masculinities as ethical, relational, and politically committed alternatives to hegemonic forms of masculinity, characterized by dominance, control, and emotional suppression. Framed as both identity practices and collective political endeavors, feminist masculinities promote care, vulnerability, and accountability, and seek to dismantle patriarchal formations through relational and intersectional praxis. In an empirical analysis, the article explores four projects—MenCare, MenEngage, Bróders, and KINDER—that apply caring masculinities in both international and grassroots contexts. Through their pedagogical, advocacy, and community-based strategies, these initiatives demonstrate the potential of feminist masculinities to transform cultural norms, shape policy-making, and foster connections between movements for gender, racial, and social justice. The findings demonstrate that feminist masculinities are most effective when grounded in broader feminist and intersectional agendas that integrate structural reforms with cultural change. The article concludes by contending that feminist masculinities present a robust counter-narrative to antifeminism and constitute a pragmatic basis for reimaging masculinity in directions that sustain equity, empathy, and democratic care. Policy interventions proposed include infusing gender-transformative curricula in education, institutionalizing support for care work, funding youth-led initiatives, and establishing feminist accountability mechanisms. In doing so, feminist masculinities are positioned not simply as reactive identities, but as proactive, systemic interventions essential to promoting more just and sustainable futures.
1 Introduction
In recent years, antifeminism has resurfaced as an ideological force with real power, fueled by the resurgence of right-wing populism and reactionary politics worldwide (Mackay et al., 2021; Phipps, 2020). Such movements routinely frame feminist advances as dangers to the established social order, invoking essentialist and binary understandings of gender for the purpose of reasserting patriarchal dominance.
Whereas a growing corpus of academic literature has critiqued the ideological constructions and mobilization strategies accompanying antifeminism, relatively little consideration has been given to men who operate against these narratives and engage in feminist-directed activism, solidarity campaigns, and transformative practices (Kováts, 2018). This indicates a significant lacuna in the literature, especially at a time when backlash politics are ever more influential in framing public discussions of gender. This article seeks to fill that void by exploring the potential of feminist masculinities1 as a counter-hegemonic opposition to antifeminist political movements. Originally envisioned by hooks (2004), feminist masculinities contradict prevalent norms of masculinity centered on dominance, emotional suppression, and institutionalized power dynamics (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005; Messner, 2016). Instead, they valorize emotional openness, caregiving, fairness, and relational responsibility (Elliott, 2016). These masculinities are not only individual identity formations, but more importantly, they are a political and cultural project that seeks to dismantle patriarchal gender orders and promote feminist interpretations of justice.
The central aim of this article is a twofold one. Firstly, it attempts to theorize caring and feminist masculinities as transformational solutions to the ideological re-emergence of antifeminism. Secondly, the evaluation targets the concrete realization of these masculinities by investigating case studies of particular international and grassroots programs—MenCare, MenEngage, Bróders, and Kinder—that engage men and boys as allies toward gender justice. By performing an in-depth analysis of the frameworks, methodologies, and reported impacts of such initiatives, the paper demonstrates the way in which feminist masculinities are promoted in educational, policy, and community settings. The activities are an illustration of how accountability and care-based masculinities can disrupt the cycle of patriarchal norms, especially in the younger generations (Flood, 2019).
By way of conclusion, this paper also builds feminist theoretical paradigms and applied gender justice praxis by foregrounding the political and cultural significance of feminist masculinities. It contends that such masculinities are important not only to undermine antifeminist agendas but to forge more equal and compassionate societies as well. The article is divided into three distinct parts. Part one theorizes the feminist and caring masculinities on which the work of bell hooks, Connell, and other prominent scholars is drawn. Part two presents case studies of the four programs, examining their goals, interventions, and sociopolitical effects. Part three provides a critical discussion of the programs’ implications, considering what they mean for future policy development, activist practice, and research.
2 Feminist and caring masculinities
Antifeminism is not merely a response to feminist campaigns and achievements but a cultural and political phenomenon that has intensified over the past decade (Gottfried, 2012; Mackay et al., 2021). It emerges from deeply entrenched social hierarchies threatened by feminist progress (Connell, 2005), and manifests in dominant narratives that frame emotional strength, care, and empathy as signs of weakness in men (Messner, 2016).
Antifeminist leaders often rely on assertive and domineering gender performances (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005), masking insecurity behind simplistic, patriarchal solutions. Feminist masculinities, as conceptualized by hooks (2004), counter this by advocating relational, caring, and equitable forms of masculinity. These masculinities reject control and dominance, and instead embrace values such as empathy, fairness, and emotional literacy (Elliott, 2016; Flood, 2019).
Feminist masculinities are not merely alternative identities but a cultural and political project embedded within feminist ethics and transformative justice. They call for dismantling patriarchal structures and reimagining masculinity as collaborative and relational. Men who practice feminist masculinities become not passive supporters but active participants in feminist movements, reshaping societal norms and challenging systemic injustice.
This article builds on foundational gender theories, particularly the work of Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) on hegemonic masculinity, and extends them using feminist ethics and care theories by scholars such as Tronto (1993) and Held (2006). The contribution lies in redefining feminist masculinities not just as supportive to feminism but as fundamentally integral to feminist theory and praxis.
Research by scholars like Michael Kimmel, as well as initiatives like HeForShe and MenEngage, frame men as allies in promoting gender equality. My approach further develops this by showing how feminist masculinities are capable of structural transformation, not just individual change, and how they intersect with broader social justice goals, including LGBTQIA+ rights, racial equity, and climate justice.
2.1 The role of caring masculinities
Caring masculinities disrupt dominant notions of masculinity rooted in power and detachment. By centering emotional engagement and care work, these masculinities become key tools for dismantling antifeminist ideologies. Campaigns like MenCare challenge traditional gender roles by valuing paternal involvement in caregiving. Such programs serve as public models that promote feminist values in family and institutional settings.
Educational programs also play a critical role. For instance, the Equi-Champions initiative in Portugal, Brazil, Spain, and Croatia and Spain’s Charlas de Vestuário program use sport to engage boys in discussions around respect, consent, and emotional development. By embedding feminist pedagogy in everyday spaces, these interventions challenge hegemonic norms at formative stages.
2.2 Caring and feminist masculinities
Antifeminism is not simply a reactive response to feminist success; rather, it is a deeply ingrained cultural and political phenomenon that has intensified alongside the rise of international right-wing populism and reactionary rhetoric (Gottfried, 2012; Mackay et al., 2021). Antifeminism is, in essence, the articulation of vested power formations confronted with social change.
These processes draw upon established social hierarchies, framing advancements in feminism as a danger to values and social order. They bolster restrictive gender norms by constructing empathy, vulnerability, and care as risks to men, thereby underpinning hegemonic masculinity’s stress on dominance, control, and emotional suppression (Connell, 2005; Messner, 2016). As a response, feminist masculinities—first formulated by hooks (2004) in The Will to Change—emerge as an interventionary critique and transformation paradigm. Feminist masculinities challenge the patriarchal standards by promoting alternative masculinities founded on emotional openness, ethical accountability, and equalitarian relationships.
These forms of masculinity are not only oppositional identities but are part of a wider cultural, political, and moral project that seeks to reorganize the gender hierarchy via care ethics, relational practice, and social justice commitments (Elliott, 2016; Flood, 2019).
The concept of feminist masculinities is also explored through the meeting point of gender theory and feminist care ethics, based on initial research by Connell and Messerschmidt (2005), alongside subsequent research by Joan Tronto (1993) and Virginia Held (2006). The meeting point between care ethics and feminist masculinity provides a robust critique of neoliberal individualism and a foundation for reframing masculinity as an interdependent and social process. Feminist masculinities are not passive supporters but rather active agents of change. They do not merely “support” feminist movements; they embrace feminist ideals and enact these principles in their interpersonal relationships, public life, and cultural production. This rethinking of masculinity emphasizes the necessity of emotional intelligence, personal responsibility, and anti-patriarchal collaboration as key components of masculinity.
In addition, it places these masculinities in the context of large-scale justice movements, including LGBTQIA+ rights, climate justice, and racial justice, thereby expanding the scale and reach of feminist praxis.
3 Projects and findings: operationalizing feminist masculinities
3.1 MenCare as a model for care-based masculinity
The MenCare campaign, active in over 50 nations, reframes fatherhood and care as fundamental pillars of a reconfigured masculine identity. Its pillars—equitable parenting, sexual and reproductive health responsibility, and empathy-based violence prevention—are grounded in education, the media, and policy mobilization. By reaching men at various levels of society, MenCare assists in shaping shifting normative structures on fatherhood and male responsibility.
Impact evaluations from partner countries report greater levels of men’s involvement in domestic work, more supportive attitudes toward gender equality, and greater social acceptance of caring men. In several regions, MenCare has institutionalized paternity leave and integrated gender-equitable parent models into national public health policy.
3.2 MenEngage as a joint exploration of patriarchal patterns
The MenEngage Global Alliance, which comprises more than 1,000 organizations in over 70 countries, presents itself as activist coalition and analytical framework. It is an international observatory that tracks the ways hegemonic masculinities are formed, articulated, and challenged in various settings. MenEngage fosters self-reflexivity, ethical accountability, and transnational discussion among scholars, activists, and practitioners.
One of the strongest points of MenEngage is its capacity to forge intersections among various movements for justice, connecting gender equality with climate action, racial justice, and advocating for LGBTQIA+ rights. Its focus on local actions and grassroots organizing means that feminist masculinities are removed from academic or elite spaces and become part of the quotidian. By providing shared protocols, training materials, and assessment tools, MenEngage has played a significant role in developing culture-specific, replicable interventions that serve as exemplars of feminist-aligned masculinity.
3.3 Bróders: a virtual community facilitating youth participation
Bróders is an online platform that is prevalent in Spain and Sweden, targeted at young men and teenage boys. It is an open yet safe environment in which users can explore themes of identity, relationships, and mental well-being. The platform’s interactive features include moderated message boards, anonymous messaging systems, information resources, and contact lists of services—each aimed at encouraging discussion and facilitating critical examination.
Significantly, Bróders works both online and in schools, augmenting curriculum change and teacher training. Working on the cusp between online culture and formal education, Bróders is an example of how digital technologies can be used to disseminate feminist masculinities and provide support networks for young men as they navigate a changing gender landscape.
3.4 KINDER: institutionalizing gender-responsive education
KINDER (Addressing Gender Stereotypes in Education and Early Childhood) is a pan-European project coordinated by the Centre for Social Studies at Coimbra. It seeks to reveal, challenge, and rebuild gender stereotypes in early education systems. Through teacher training, curriculum development, and policy influence, KINDER seeks to implement feminist values in formal education.
Program components include gender-sensitive, age-specific curricula (“Program K”), interactivity workshops for teachers, computer-based curriculum-planning modules, and family- and community-based participatory activities. Through targeting national and EU-level policymakers, KINDER has begun to influence education standards, teacher certification programs, and school-inspection processes.
4 Caring masculinities and care as praxis: a pathway to counter antifeminism
As noted above, the revival of antifeminist politics across the world has coincided with the consolidation of hegemonic masculinity, a framework that reproduces traditional gender roles and reinforces systemic inequalities (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005; Geva, 2024). In this context, the theory of caring masculinities—based on care ethics and feminist theories—presents a different model of masculinity founded on relationality, empathy, and egalitarian values (Elliott, 2016; Hanlon, 2012). My proposal in this article is also to examine how caring masculinities, alongside care as a social and political practice, can counter antifeminist forces (Aboim and Vasquez del Aguila, 2024). By analyzing the transformative potential of care at various levels—individual, community, and system—we can consider that care ethics and practices can disrupt the dichotomies that facilitate antifeminism and forge solidarities that undermine its ideological underpinnings (Tronto, 2013; Kay, 2024).
Antifeminism has been a hallmark of contemporary political movements, couched in the language of crisis discourses, most frequently for masculinity, familial formations, and national identity. One of its key elements is the reestablishment of traditional gender roles, generally cast in terms of defending against the purported disruption wrought by the forward momentum of feminist and LGBTQIA+ agendas. Caring masculinities, as a notion underscoring care as a paramount ethical and pragmatic imperative, offer a strong counter-narrative in this regard. Contextualizing care in a feminist framework, it contends that care ethics and practices can challenge the underlying dominative logics of antifeminism and provide spaces for solidarity and transformation.
4.1 Antifeminism and the crisis of masculinity
Antifeminist backlashes frequently capitalize on anxieties surrounding masculinity, portraying feminist advancements as threats to male identity and societal cohesion (Kimmel, 2017; Messner, 2016). Central to this reactionary rhetoric is the notion of a “crisis of masculinity,” which manifests in multiple ways: the reassertion of traditional patriarchal ideals emphasizing strength, dominance, and emotional stoicism (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005); the mobilization of political agendas aimed at reversing perceived feminist “overreach” by invoking a nostalgic vision of a “golden age” of gender relations (Gottfried, 2012; Geva, 2024); and the marginalization of feminist and LGBTQIA+ movements by framing them as existential threats to cultural and familial stability (Bacchetta and Power, 2022).
These dynamics create fertile ground for the spread of antifeminist ideologies, reinforcing systemic injustices and exacerbating cultural divisions. Nevertheless, embedded in these discourses is a profound vulnerability: the unsustainability of hegemonic masculinity in a globalized, care-dependent world where relational and emotional competencies are increasingly vital (Elliott, 2016; Hanlon, 2012).
Caring masculinities and care ethics present promising alternatives to dominant gender norms by emphasizing empathy, relationality, and mutual responsibility (Tronto, 2013; Flood, 2019). However, these approaches encounter challenging barriers. Cultural resistance is significant—hegemonic norms are deeply entrenched, particularly in socio-political contexts where antifeminism is intertwined with nationalist or religious identity (Mackay et al., 2021). Moreover, care risks instrumentalization; without structural transformation, care work may be reduced to an individualistic or commodified practice, thus reinforcing rather than challenging systemic inequalities (Fraser, 2016). Finally, intersectional blind spots persist: the advancement of caring masculinities must address intersecting oppressions—racial, class-based, and sexual—in order to avoid replicating hierarchies within care practices themselves (Crenshaw, 1991; Aboim and Vasquez del Aguila, 2024).
4.2 Pathways forward: building a care-centered politics
To effectively counter antifeminism, caring masculinities must be embedded within a broader, care-centered political platform that is inclusive and intersectional in scope. This entails prioritizing the lived experiences of marginalized communities and ensuring caregiving practices responsive to intersecting oppressions rooted in patriarchy, racism, and capitalism (Crenshaw, 1991; Fraser, 2016; Tronto, 2013). Such an approach acknowledges that care cannot be depoliticized or abstracted from power structures, but must actively confront the socio-political systems that reproduce inequality.
Moreover, caring masculinities must facilitate the building of global solidarities by forming alliances among feminist, LGBTQIA+2, and anti-racist movements. These solidarities are a collective front against antifeminist politics, challenging the backlash through coordinated resistance and shared visions of justice (Aboim and Vasquez del Aguila, 2024; Bacchetta and Power, 2022). In this way, care becomes an ethical practice and a tool for political coalition-building and intersectional mobilization.
Finally, it is essential to redefine dominant narratives of power and success. The prevailing neoliberal and patriarchal measures—centered on competition, accumulation, and control—must be replaced by values such as care, cooperation, and collective well-being (Elliott, 2016; Hanlon, 2012; hooks, 2000). By placing relationality and interdependence at the center of public life, caring masculinities and care praxis offer a transformative framework for resisting the resurgence of antifeminism.
Care opens pathways toward more inclusive, just, and sustainable futures by disrupting dominance-based ideologies and cultivating relational solidarities. However, realizing this potential requires a sustained and conscious commitment to structural, intersectional, and global frameworks that view care not only as a moral value but also as a political strategy and project for transformative change (Tronto, 2013; Mackay et al., 2021).
4.3 Backlash or the new future?
The global backdrop for gender equality and feminism is one of excellent resistance and possibilities for transformation. Whether we see this as a backlash or a harbinger of things to come depends on our ability to understand the dynamics driving antifeminist mobilization and the staying power of feminist activism.
The emergence of antifeminist movements, often associated with far-right populist ideologies, represents a backlash against feminism’s achievements. This backlash is expressed across many areas, such as the rollback of policies, the limitation of reproductive rights, resistance to gender studies, and the undermining of gender equity policies in several states. It is also prevalent in cultural discourses that represent feminism as endangering traditional family values, national identity, or men’s rights.
Additionally, it is manifested on numerous platforms, namely digital spaces, which are incubators of antifeminist ideologies, thus amplifying misogynistic and anti-LGBTQIA+ discourse via globalized networks.
The adverse effects are typically multiplied by socio-economic crises that asymmetrically target women’s labor market participation and caretaker roles. The crises create a fertile ground for reactionary ideologies that thrive by scapegoating feminism for the ills of society.
Despite these challenges, the signs are that feminism is adapting and evolving, and a revolutionary future may be on the horizon: feminist movements are increasingly adopting intersectional and decolonial approaches, confronting the interconnected oppressions of race, class, sexuality, and gender. Expanding feminist politics in this way increases its relevance and global reach, and solidarity is built between movements.
Younger generations are stepping up to redefine feminism in the internet era. Social media have enabled global feminist movements like #MeToo, Ni Una Menos, and climate justice movements to gain unprecedented visibility and traction.
As antifeminist actors set out to dismantle achievements, feminist campaigners celebrate significant milestones in legal gender recognition, gender parity in politics, and corporate diversity initiatives.
Overall, the fact that we have both backlash and advances means that we have more polarization around gender issues. This is not uncommon in processes of social change—backlash follows significant feminist victories. The current climate is therefore not just a resurgence of old wars but also a sign of feminism’s growing strength and the resistance it provokes.
The value of this time in creating a new future lies in our ability to work through its complexities and adopt a transformational vision. It is necessary to ask how feminist movements can successfully challenge the affective appeal of antifeminist discourses while maintaining principles of justice and inclusivity. Furthermore, what role can care ethics, solidarity, and intersectionality play in bridging differences and advancing sustainable transformation? How do we balance local and global feminist actions in a globalized but fragmented world?
Overall, we are dealing with a backlash of significant proportion; it does not have to be an unstoppable downturn. Instead, it may be a pivot point. Whether and to what degree this backlash becomes the mainstream story or is a spur for feminist advances will depend on how movements, institutions, and individuals respond to the challenges offered by this moment.
5 Conclusion: toward a collaborative future
The transnational revival of antifeminist ideologies—frequently tied to populist far-right movements, nationalist identity politics, and cultural conservatism—has reignited patriarchal discourses on an alleged “crisis of masculinity” (Kimmel, 2017; Ging, 2019). As a result of these circumstances, feminist movements are obliged to craft multi-layered responses that counter backlash and reconceptualize the gendered grounds that facilitate the proliferation of such ideologies. One of these transformative possibilities lies in constructing feminist masculinities—a reformulation of male identity that rejects hegemonic norms and embraces care, relationality, and emotional vulnerability (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005; Elliott, 2016).
Feminist masculinities contest the patriarchal model associating masculinity with power, emotional repression, and control. Instead, they draw on principles of care ethics and intersectional feminist theory, prioritizing an ethic of responsibility, interdependence, and solidarity (Tronto, 1993; Lynch et al., 2009). These masculinities do not aim to supplant feminist leadership but rather to operate with it, creating new possibilities for men to contribute critically and constructively to pursuing gender justice. Their advent is not simply symbolic; it can disrupt current power dynamics by reframing fatherhood, work, leadership, and intimacy norms.
Programs like the MenCare Global Campaign and the MenEngage Global Alliance provide concrete models for mobilizing caring masculinities at structural levels. These initiatives focus on caregiving as a human responsibility, not one based on gender, and seek to dismantle the economic and cultural structures that feminize and undervalue care. By reframing caregiving as a source of empowerment for men and liberation for women, these projects challenge neoliberal and patriarchal conceptions of success that prioritize individualism, competition, and domination over collective well-being.
Nevertheless, feminist masculinities and the broader politics of care must continually confront their limitations. Without an intersectional framework, even well-intentioned initiatives risk reproducing racialized, classed, ableist, and heteronormative exclusions (Crenshaw, 1991; hooks, 2004). Genuine transformation requires an explicit commitment to anti-racist, decolonial, and queer-inclusive feminist critique—one that embraces the plurality of masculinities and responds to the uneven and context-specific operations of patriarchal power. The aim, then, is not to reform masculinity in the abstract, but to reconstruct it through practices that are ethically anchored, relationally informed, and structurally transformative.
Constructing empathetic masculinities is not merely reactive—it is a proactive reimagining of human relationships and social values. It fosters alternative narratives around fatherhood, friendship, emotional expression, and leadership. It also offers counter-discourses to the narratives promoted by the “manosphere” and other reactionary spaces that commodify alienation and exploit male discontent through appeals to dominance and control (Banet-Weiser et al., 2020).
Feminism, in its deepest aspirations, envisions not only the liberation of women but the emancipation of all people from systems that distort, exploit, and dehumanize. Patriarchy harms men by narrowing their emotional range, prescribing rigid roles, and isolating them from meaningful relationships and communal well-being. As such, engaging men not as adversaries but as partners in critical reflection and collective transformation is not just a strategic imperative—it is a political and ethical necessity.
In an era marked by escalating inequality, climate crisis, and political polarization, care is no longer a private concern but a public necessity. It is both an ethic and a praxis that must be integrated into every level of policy, education, and civic life. The future of feminist activism will, in part, depend on the ability to mobilize men not simply as supporters but as co-architects of a more relational, equitable, and just society.
5.1 Future research and policy recommendations
5.1.1 Research priorities
1. Longitudinal impact studies
Future research must undertake longitudinal, mixed-method evaluations of feminist masculinity programs to measure their effects on behavior, mental health, political participation, and interpersonal relationships. Understanding the long-term impact is essential to ensure scalability and sustainability.
2. Cross-cultural and intersectional analysis
Comparative studies must explore how feminist masculinities are interpreted, practiced, and challenged across different cultural, socio-economic, and religious contexts. This includes engaging with non-Western epistemologies and diasporic masculinities that resist monolithic narratives.
3. Digital ethnography and online masculinities
Given the rise of antifeminist content online, digital ethnography is essential to understanding how young men engage with masculinities in virtual spaces. Research should explore how online platforms both reinforce and challenge gender norms, and how feminist messages can better permeate these ecosystems.
4. Institutional contexts and masculinity transformation
Investigations into how caring masculinities are operationalized in traditionally male-dominated institutions—militaries, law enforcement, politics, and sports—can offer insights into systemic change. Organizational case studies can reveal both barriers and enablers to cultural transformation.
5. Policy translation and implementation studies
Researchers should examine how feminist masculinities are integrated (or resisted) in public policy frameworks. This includes studying the political economy of gender reforms, institutional uptake, and the influence of advocacy networks in shaping gender-responsive governance.
5.1.2 Policy recommendations
1. Integrate gender-responsive curricula in public education
Ministries of education should incorporate intersectional, feminist-informed content into national curricula. Programs must address emotional literacy, consent, caregiving, and gender equality from early childhood to secondary levels. Initiatives like KINDER provide valuable blueprints for such integration.
2. Institutionalize support for men in caregiving roles
States should expand access to paid paternity leave, support flexible work arrangements for caregiving, and publicly promote equitable caregiving norms. Legal and economic frameworks should redefine care as a civic and economic contribution rather than a private, feminized responsibility.
3. Fund and scale youth-centered gender justice initiatives
Public and philanthropic investments should prioritize grassroots and youth-focused programs like Bróders that provide safe, inclusive spaces for boys and young men to explore gender, emotional health, and identity. These programs should include peer education, mentorship, and digital engagement.
4. Establish national action plans on caring masculinities
Governments should adopt cross-sectoral strategies that promote feminist-informed masculinities. These plans should include public education campaigns, community workshops, and partnerships with sports, media, and religious institutions to reshape cultural narratives about masculinity.
5. Develop ethical guidelines and accountability mechanisms
Funding for men’s engagement initiatives should require adherence to feminist principles of intersectionality, inclusion, and social justice. Ethical standards like those established by MenEngage should guide program design, evaluation, and institutional partnerships.
6. In short, feminist masculinities present a visionary radicalism that allows for the reimagination and reconstruction of concepts such as power, care, and justice. These frameworks challenge the prevailing narratives that connect masculinity with domination, repression of emotions, and pyramid-based control, advancing an alternative model founded on vulnerability, accountability, and relational ethics. Feminist masculinities are both a theoretical position and a lived practice, indexing the political and ethical stakes of male allyship—not as a tangential activity, but as an obligatory and active function in feminist movements for liberation. Feminist masculinities call on men to do more than ally with feminist objectives from the outside; instead, they call on them to turn inward on their own social locations, to acknowledge structural privilege, and to actively dismantle patriarchal systems.
7. But the formulation and institutionalized recognition of feminist masculinities cannot occur in a void. Their formulation demands rigorous, cross-disciplinary research that incessantly examines power and identity at the intersections of race, class, sexuality, disability, and geopolitics. It demands strong policy structures that place investments in gender-transformative educational programs, equitable caregiving systems, and community-based initiatives that prioritize relational dynamics and emotional intelligence. It is important to struggle for long-term solidarities among several movements, including feminist, queer, anti-racist, decolonial, and climate justice movements, because the transformation of masculinity is inextricably bound up with the broader transformation of society.
In putting care and global emancipation first, feminist masculinities are more than just opposed to harmful gender norms; they offer a progressive template for rethinking the ethical aspects of living in harmony with others in an interconnected world. Such masculinities allow more empathetic forms of masculinity to encourage equitable relationships, promote democratic societies, and construct resilience in the midst of global uncertainty. Feminist masculinities are thus not only reactions to crises but also affirmative directions toward the realization of more just social futures.
Author contributions
TM: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Conceptualization, Funding acquisition.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This research was funded by FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology, https://doi.org/10.54499/2023.08292.CEECIND/CP2885/CT0001 MenCare and Caring Masculinities Fund.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author declares that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. In the preparation of Feminist Masculinities – A Transformative Approach, AI tools were used strictly as writing aids to enhance clarity, organization, and language refinement. All intellectual content, arguments, analysis, and theoretical frameworks reflect the author’s original thought and scholarly interpretation. No generative AI was used to produce data, fabricate sources, or replace critical thinking. The use of AI adhered to ethical standards of academic integrity, with transparency about its supportive role in the writing process.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Footnotes
1. ^https://doi.org/10.54499/2023.08292.CEECIND/CP2885/CT0001
2. ^The anti-LGBTQIA+ movement is presented as a possible reaction to feminism and its advances, but we should consider the reaction within some factions of the feminist movement itself, namely to trans identities with trans exclusionary feminism. While we agree that some feminisms are becoming more intersectional, it is also clear that TERF feminism, although not a new phenomenon, is (re)acquiring strength and voice, from the political and governmental arenas to the media. So, while there is indeed a part of the feminist movement that celebrates legal gender recognition, there is also another part that puts obstacles in its way and fights against it.
References
Aboim, S., and Vasquez del Aguila, E. (2024). Masculinities and care in contemporary societies. London: Routledge.
Bacchetta, P., and Power, M. (2022). Right-wing populism and the politics of antifeminism. Fem. Theory 23, 345–361. doi: 10.1177/14647001221093921
Banet-Weiser, S., Gill, R., and Rottenberg, C. (2020). Postfeminism, popular feminism and neoliberal feminism? Fem. Theory 21, 3–24. doi: 10.1177/1464700119842555
Connell, R. W., and Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: rethinking the concept. Gender Soc. 19, 829–859. doi: 10.1177/0891243205278639
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev. 43, 1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039
Elliott, K. (2016). Caring masculinities: theorizing an emerging concept. Men Masc. 19, 240–259. doi: 10.1177/1097184X15576203
Fraser, N. (2016). Fortunes of feminism: from state-managed capitalism to neoliberal crisis. London: Verso Books.
Geva, D. (2024). Right-wing populism and patriarchal backlash: gender, nation, and the global far right. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ging, D. (2019). Alphas, betas, and incels: theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men Masculin. 22, 638–657. doi: 10.1177/1097184X17706401
Hanlon, N. (2012). Masculinities, care and equality: identity and nurture in men’s lives. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: personal, political, and global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
hooks, b. (2004). The will to change: men, masculinity, and love. New York: Washington Square Press.
Kay, K. (2024). Caring futures: gender, care, and the ethics of social reproduction. London: Policy Press.
Kimmel, M. (2017). Angry white men: American masculinity at the end of an era. New York: Nation Books.
Kováts, E. (2018). Questioning the notion of “anti-gender ideology.”. Gend. Dev. 26, 49–63. doi: 10.1080/13552074.2018.1429096
Lynch, K., Baker, J., and Lyons, M. (2009). Affective equality: Love, care and injustice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mackay, F., Kenny, M., and Chappell, L. (2021). Feminist institutionalism and gendered backlash: resistance to gender equality change. Polit. Gender 17, 433–460. doi: 10.1017/S1743923X20000353
Messner, M. A. (2016). “Masculinities and athletic careers” in Power at play: Sports and the problem of masculinity. ed. M. A. Michael (Boston: Beacon Press), 13–34.
Phipps, A. (2020). Me, not you: the trouble with mainstream feminism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: a political argument for an ethic of care. London: Routledge.
Keywords: masculinities, care, feminism, anti-feminist movements, MenCare, MenEngage
Citation: Moura T (2025) Feminist masculinities: a transformative approach. Front. Polit. Sci. 7:1622137. doi: 10.3389/fpos.2025.1622137
Edited by:
Sílvia Roque, University of Evora, PortugalReviewed by:
Sergio Alejandro D'Antonio Maceiras, Polytechnic University of Madrid, SpainSandra Saleiro, University Institute of Lisbon (ISCTE), Portugal
Copyright © 2025 Moura. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Tatiana Moura, dGF0aWFuYUBjZXMudWMucHQ=