The programmatic focus of SRHR limits the capacity to produce data and evidence needed to inform gender transformational change, and combining hegemonic masculinities and Reproductive Justice frameworks offers an analytic framework to innovate approaches to research on men and SRHR.
Key Findings
Background
Global SRHR policies since the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development have emphasized that universal SRHR is unattainable without meaningful engagement and inclusion of men, yet the field continues to struggle with how and in what ways men should be included.
The authors identify the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) as a key milestone establishing the necessity of male engagement in SRHR
Despite decades of policy emphasis, the field has not resolved the question of men's meaningful inclusion in research, programs, and policies
The authors describe this as an ongoing and unresolved challenge in SRHR
Discussion
The programmatic focus of SRHR limits the capacity to produce data and evidence needed to inform gender transformational change.
The authors argue that current SRHR programming is insufficiently equipped to capture manifestations and outcomes of gender and power
A new analytic lens is identified as necessary for men to be meaningfully engaged with by SRHR
The limitation is framed as structural to the field's programmatic orientation rather than incidental
Discussion
The theoretical frameworks of hegemonic masculinities and Reproductive Justice have conceptual complementarities that, when combined, offer an analytic framework for research on men and SRHR.
The authors argue these two frameworks are conceptually complementary despite originating from different traditions
Hegemonic masculinities is identified as useful for analyzing gender and power as they relate to men
Reproductive Justice is identified as a framework emphasizing rights and justice in sexual and reproductive health
The combined framework is proposed to enable 'greater interrogation of gender and power'
Conclusions
Bringing together hegemonic masculinities and Reproductive Justice frameworks would enable production of data and evidence necessary to address ongoing injustices that curtail people's sexual and reproductive freedoms.
The authors contend the combined framework would allow researchers to 'iterate and innovate approaches to research'
The goal is described as grappling with 'ongoing injustices that curtail people's sexual and reproductive freedoms'
The framework is positioned as applicable beyond men alone, affecting all people's sexual and reproductive freedoms
This is presented as a normative argument for conceptual and methodological change in the SRHR field
What This Means
This commentary examines a longstanding problem in global health: despite 30 years of international commitments to include men in sexual and reproductive health programs and research, the field has not figured out how to do this effectively or meaningfully. The authors argue that the way SRHR work is currently structured—focused on programs and interventions—makes it hard to collect the kinds of data needed to actually change the underlying power dynamics between genders that drive poor sexual and reproductive health outcomes.
To address this, the authors propose combining two existing theoretical frameworks: 'hegemonic masculinities' (a body of theory about how dominant forms of manhood shape men's behaviors and relationships) and 'Reproductive Justice' (a framework developed primarily by women of color that centers rights, justice, and social conditions in reproductive health). The authors argue these two frameworks complement each other and together could provide researchers with better tools to study how gender and power operate in people's sexual and reproductive lives.
This research suggests that progress on sexual and reproductive health for everyone—not just women—requires rethinking the conceptual tools researchers and policymakers use when studying men's roles. By adopting a combined analytical framework, the field could generate more useful evidence about how to achieve genuine gender transformation, rather than superficial inclusion of men in programs designed without adequate theoretical grounding.
Strong J, Coast E, Chiweshe M. (2025). Locating Men in Sexual and Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice: Past, Present, Futures.. Studies in family planning. https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.70003