 My name is Dr. Manichism and I'm a senior lecturer in the School of Security Studies here at King's College London. Today we are speaking with one of the leading experts on men and masculinities in the context of conflict and peace building. Dr. Henry Martin in Dr. Martin is currently a co-investigator in the masculinities and sexualities research stream of the gender justice and security hub at the London School of Economics women peace and security center. He has worked extensively on gender conflict and peace building for a number of NGOs. He joins us from Yangon to discuss his research. Welcome Henry. Hi. Great to speak to you. Thanks for having me. Lovely that you can make the time to speak with us today. Henry, we've got a series of questions for you so hope you're ready for them. The first one is I just, you've said in your writing that whilst engaging with men and boys in fragile and conflict affected situations is not new. The vast majority of these interventions don't consider the role of masculinities play in influencing and directing male behavior. What do you mean by masculinities in this context? Yeah, so my masculinity is kind of the most basic way of looking at it is just the ways in which men and boys are expected to act as men. But it can also be people who are not biologically men who act in particular ways which are associated with manhood. Let's say for example women in the military might be expected to perform in masculine ways to fit into that organization. And what I mean with that quote that you mentioned there is that when we look at conflict in war, we talk about political leaders, we talk about soldiers, about peacekeepers, which for the most part are men in all of the armed forces of the world and all of the guerrilla movements in terrorist groups and so on. Most of the people wearing weapons are men, but we seldom or relatively seldomly think about how the way in which they have been taught to be men, the way in which they expect to be men, and the way in which others expect them to be men affect their behavior. And we don't look at the ways for example in which peace negotiators who again are mostly men see the world in a certain way because they've been raised to be certain kinds of men. And I think that's something where there's a lot more to be done to unpack some of these ways in which masculinities and expectations on men shape our world. And I think there's been a lot of work, a lot of really interesting work done on women's perspectives and the impacts of conflict on women and the role of femininities, but the corresponding look at men and masculinities, that's still lagging quite a bit behind in terms of research. We hear the term toxic masculinity being talked about a lot and often described as misogynistic, abusive, sexist behavior, although there's no universal accepted definition to what this term looks like or feels like. Do you think using the label does more harm than good. And if so, how do you think we should refer to masculine behaviors that harm gender equality and cause social discord or even violence in different contexts and cultures. And I think sort of the term toxic masculinity in many ways is a really good term and easy term to use, which is also why it's not a good term to use. So what I mean with that is that when we say toxic masculinity, everyone can immediately imagine something. And it's like, okay, I know what we're talking about. But that's kind of the problem as well. So it's a good shorthand, but then by being a good shorthand it also encompasses a lot of different types of masculinities and also papers over a lot of important differences between these masculinity. And I think there is a need to go a bit deeper than just the label. So it's a good entry point, but we do need to dig deeper. So if we, for example, to use a somebody who's been associated with toxic masculinity quite a bit. Donald Trump, for example, is often spoken of in terms of having toxic masculinity, but he also uses notions of toxic masculinity when talking about others. So when he's talking about the bad embrace coming from Central America to the US. He's also referring to particular men and their masculinities and negative issues associated with that. And that's kind of where the difficulty then comes in. So if we're using the term toxic masculinity to cover the masculinity of a Donald Trump, who is a billionaire, white American billionaire in his 70s, and say that his way of being a man is the same as that of a 16 year old lower class working class man from Honduras or El Salvador who's joined the Maras. I think we're pushing too much into one category. And we do need to see what is or unpack those individual masculinities a lot more and see what the historical and economic context are in which those have been produced. But there are, of course, then also overlaps between the two. So for example, Donald Trump and a member of the Maras, both of them might have this buy-in into ways of being a man, which is misogynistic, which is quite macho and puts a lot of value on being seen to be powerful and not taking any slight. So I think there are sort of some uses to the term because it opens up discussions, but it's important to then go further into those discussions and be a bit more nuanced and understand what it is that we're talking about in a particular context. So you said context, histories, all of that becomes important. So ensuring that we don't universalize any of our concepts we use, right, that we always situate them within the broader histories and economies and contexts of which, you know, they're situated and become meaningful. Good. So, you know, I think anyone who studies men and masculinities and who's a feminist comes up with this kind of tension that, you know, there's a risk that focusing on men and their needs and aspirations that we can really prioritize the unmet needs of women and girls in the quest for gender equality or that we further entrench patriarchy or centering of men by making it more palatable. How do you as a scholar of men and masculinities mitigate against this? Yeah, and I think that is very much real risk. A lot of my work is in the policy sector and in and with NGOs and what you can see often is that there's a bit of a sense of like women and girls and women's rights issues that a bit let's look at the new and shiny thing which is engaging with men and that there is really a real risk there of kind of thinking that we've fulfilled all the needs that women might have now to talk about the men and that's definitely not the case. And men do have a tendency, unfortunately, of kind of sucking up the oxygen quite easily in the rooms and in discussions. So I think that is very much a valid sort of thing to be aware of when working on men and masculinities and a really important thing to be aware of. In working on sort of the NGO side and policy side what we do try to do in the work which means my colleagues is to ensure that we are constantly sort of in touch with women's rights organizations as well and also make sure that we acknowledge the hard work that they've done in bringing us to this point where we can have these critical discussions about or about issues like sexual violence against men and boys. We wouldn't be able to talk about that if women hadn't done all of the hard work of opening up discussions on sexual violence against women and girls. So I think kind of like having that was critical allies and being ready to take on that criticism from women's rights organizations or from feminist scholars I think is really important. So some of my work is focused on issues around men and men's identity and how that links with violence and there can often be somewhat difficult to bring in, at least sort of in the local context women's perspectives on issues because these issues might be sort of seen as things as men's issues and women feel that they're not able to talk about these issues and are reluctant to talk about these issues. And I think that that is also something that needs to be respected we don't really shouldn't be pushing anyone to answer questions or take stances on issues that they're uncomfortable with, but there is then also need to even if that happens to make sure that I as a researcher then do engage with women in that space and talk to women's rights organizations, for example, about their views on these issues and not just say oh well the women didn't want to talk about it so I didn't need to talk to them. So that's great I mean it's a gender is always relational right so I'm bringing it bringing in a multitude of stakeholders and people's perspectives is key absolutely. I think you know with the, like you mentioned with a you know the history of women's activism has been at the fore underpins really the women peace and security agenda right and and the broader recognition of women's experiences and and violence against women in conflict is not natural or inevitable and unfortunate right but it's you know a war crime and and we need to think about this and think about women. There's specific needs in war. I guess I'm wondering you know this leads me to think about. And I guess it's well accepted that we need to pay attention to women in war and women's experiences in war but for you what does paying attention to not just men but masculinities in particular when we're seeking to understand war and violence what what does that bring to the table how does that help. How does that help or the broader women peace and security agenda so it's really kind of a lead on from your from your previous statement I just wonder if conceptually if you can if you can walk us through what does this bring to the table. Sure. I think one of the starting points is coming back to sort of the very first question around men and masculinities and conflict is that in spaces of conflict the vast majority of those who are carrying arms are in uniform be on one side or the other, be peacekeepers and the thereby also the majority of perpetrators of violence are men, and there's an expectation on men to be the protectors of community or join armed forces join a guerrilla force and there's there's a lot of men are brought up in societies across the planet to to live up to those warrior protector expectations and that's something that's but just to movies through books the kind of toys boys plays play with and so on. So there is that link ready made between men and armed violence and sort of unpacking that link is something that that is essential to working towards ending that violence, but also to to looking at some of the impacts that that has on society more broadly. So for example if you look at issues like domestic violence, which again is mostly perpetrated by by men. There is a direct link in research that's been done in post conflict societies in the Balkans, for example, or in Ukraine. So if we look at men who have been in combat or experience war either as civilians or as combatants, then also have a high propensity for perpetrating violence in the long run, even decades after the end end of the war. There's a link between masculinity and violence, but also because as men, we're often taught to not engage with our emotions not engage with our trauma. And there isn't that space to work through emotions in any kind of other way than through anger and violence and often sort of catalyzed by substance abuse which again is quite masculine coded. And I think that there's these various kinds of ways in which masculinity is flowed together with violence and perpetration of violence but also victimization by violence if you look at the victims of armed violence in conflict but also in situations like in say Central America, the vast majority of men because there is that expectation of men to be in those spaces or be being seen as potential combatants. And I think men are quite central for better or for worse or mostly for worse to issues of violence. And that is intimately an integral link with notions of masculinity. I think you know why your work is so amazing and brings such rich and important contribution to a broader understanding of gender and war is that it is rooted in empirics it's rooted in sustained field work it's rooted working directly with NGOs and local communities of you know the real challenges around conflict and in post conflict settings of addressing not only structures gender structures of power but performances and ways of being and being a man and feeling valued as a man and whatnot. And I just wonder throughout you know all of this field engagement that you have and the research that you've done, what approaches and interventions have you seen work when it comes to transforming concepts of masculinity and societies that in the way of reducing the damage they can inflict the violence that these sorts of masculinities and ways of being a man have. So I guess yeah thinking about it, you know the transformation of manhood and masculinity is to move away from like you said the the immediate link to violence and abuse in conflict to to being something other what what sort of approaches or interventions have worked. There's there's been a lot of really interesting and really groundbreaking work that's been done by most of my quite small local NGOs in different parts of the world. There's a lot of partners that I've been working with in Lebanon, for example, or in the former Yugoslavia countries, or in Eastern Congo, or in Columbia, they, they, I think one of the keys to their success is being very much rooted in the global context so there isn't one cookie cutter approach that you can take from country X to country Y and it's going to work. And a lot of it is really also builds on long term sustained engagement by very very dedicated people who then put in hours and hours beyond their regular working hours into working with with men of different ages and trying, as you say, sort of break that link between masculinity and violence and the cycles of violence. And so so there isn't really one, one single approach that that will work, but think of some of the commonalities are having that localized approach and speaking kind of the local, which sort of say for example sort of in, in Eastern Congo, when I was sitting in on the work done by some of these groups, a lot of the, the ways in which different ways of being a man of positive masculinity was being explained by using Bible references because these are communities which are deeply Christian. And then looking at some of the work done for example in Lebanon, since in some cases there's a more faith based approach sometimes it's more of a secular approach. So really sort of drawing on what it what is a local cultural way of speaking about these issues and that that's obviously going to be different. I think something else that is really key is making sure that you don't try and skirt away from painful issues or difficult issues so it's one of the groups. And I was also looking at in Serbia, but they also do a similar work going on in Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, really sort of at the outset really goes into tackling homophobia and misogyny and really sort of takes that head on and doesn't try to sort of airbrush these, these negative aspects of masculinity so ways of being an expectations of being a man, a way to really take that head on. And I think it's also really important to take opposition to change and resistance to change seriously. There are in many different ways invested into these ways of being a man which do have negative impacts, and will resist that change and don't necessarily want to change and change is made difficult by the environments that they're in where they are a softer kind of man so to say they will be ridiculed by their peers they will be shunned by family members and so on. And I think it's really important to engage with that resistance, engage with that opposition, and not run away from it. So I think that those would be some of the key elements. And I think also ensuring that there is, if possible, then also a linking of this norms change with with a possibility of reducing some of the other stress factors in men's lives, like economic stress factors. So, and some of the work we did previously in Tajikistan we combined gender norm change with increasing livelihoods opportunities and involving men and women. And I think that there is often an immense expectation on men from others but also from themselves to be the breadwinners to be the ones who sustain themselves and sustain their families and the often impossibility or huge difficulties meeting that those expectations are a key factor in frustrations as well. Frustrations that then can lead to violence because as mentioned men are often conditioned to not talk about those frustrations openly. Yeah, I think you know what I'm getting from that is it's ridiculously complicated. It requires you know sustained local perspectives there's no one size fits all of course, it involves the community so not just the men, but women as well and it's not just a matter of discourse or how we think and feel about things but there's a material implication for this. All around this. Yeah, I guess you know you did touch on homophobia and you did touch on a little bit of the, the, the LGBTQI plus community I'm just wondering if you could maybe expand a bit more on that and what does bringing that community, you know into the analysis but how we also practice policy and practice kind of a broader piece in these spaces. You know so a queer but also the LGBTQI plus community. What does that do for our analysis but also how we practice peace and in post conflict settings. I mean, I'll try to keep my answer short because it is quite a broad topic. I mean, kind of two, maybe two ways in which I would approach that is one is if we're talking about gender and conflict and trying to look at who is, who's the most vulnerable in conflicts or what does bringing gender perspectives into peace and in conflict work. Then then looking at some of these diverse, so to dive into LGBTI perspectives can really help us see some in a resource of heightened fashion how gender plays a role in underpinning violent ideologies but also violence at the micro level. I mean with that it's like if you look at homophobic and transphobic violence in the context of conflicts and who uses that and who mobilizes around homophobia and misogyny for that matter because these often go hand in hand. We see a huge the wide range of groups, secular groups from the hard left to the hard right. We see religious groups from all major world religions mobilizing around homophobia around misogyny around this being a threat to their culture be it in Southeast Asia be it in Islamic society to be in some more Christian societies. So we have a lot of mobilization around this issue and I think that that was sort of raised the question what's what's happening here. What is it about these gender identities that are pushing beyond the traditional limit, what it means to be a man or a woman. And also, again, has, of course, has to be sort of questioned as to how traditional that is, but these notions of what a man should be and what a woman should be. And you have individuals and communities transgressing that that leads to this massive violence and massive counter reaction to that. So I think that is a really interesting opening there to think about, what is it about that transgression that makes that it involves these violences. Why is it that this is seen as something that needs to be countered with sometimes extreme violence. And I think that's something that we can look at at the macro level at the ideological level, like why is it that the Maoist shining path in Peru mobilizes around the same issue as far right neo-Nazi groups in Hungary in a very different context, as does Islamic State in Syria, as does these of the born-again Christian groups in Uganda. So what's what's happening here around these peers around gender and transgressions of gender roles and the readiness to use violence. I think that that does open up perspective to look into that deeper. But it's also something that I think allows us to think about what's happening at the personal level, at the micro level. So why is it that on a pre-COVID lockdown, Sunday, Saturday night in a pub in Newcastle, a group of men feel so threatened in their masculinities by another man who might have an earring or might have longer hair that they beat him to a pulp for being quote unquote gay. So there's something happening there that around these transgressions around these feelings of unsettling gender norms that provokes violence but both at the ideological level and at the individual micro level. That's really interesting to look deeper into. But then there is beyond that kind of more academic side there is also then the ethical side of if we really do want to get some of the most vulnerable groups in society impacted by conflict, impacted by violence, then people like trans transgender population are among some of the most vulnerable in all societies. I mean, so you're really saying, you know, what I get from that is two key points is one that is it when you bring a queer look in and you bring in LGBTQI populations when you raise the question that or highlight the point that people are not born vulnerable, they're made vulnerable, right. And so what does this tell us about the broader In terms of power structures of power, ways of being that makes these people vulnerable right. So that gives us knowledge into power and the operations of power through gender and sexuality logics and then, importantly, you also highlight a very vulnerable people that yet often ignored community right within the broader WPS agenda I mean they're they're emerging now we're starting to recognize but very vulnerable in peace and conflict times right this is the, you know, the stats on on life expectancy and trans communities globally is significantly lower than, you know, other communities, for example to so so it raises a renders visible a very important group of people, and then also tells us something really interesting about power gender power and sexuality and how that's operating on global and local scales. So if I could maybe jump in that something that I forgot to mention, I think sort of what I've really found in looking at the impacts of conflict and displacement on LGBTI individuals and communities is just how pertinent some of the older feminist critiques of how we consider conflict and violence are. So these concepts of how there isn't really for many people a clear dividing line between armed conflict and peace the way we think about that in times of peace. A lot of women but also majority of the LGBTI population is under constant threat of violence and insecurity. And that the kind of the maximum of the personal is political is extremely pertinent in the context of LGBTI persons and communities in peacetime and in wartime and you have this continuum of violence that they face, which which many women face as well and other marginalized parts of society ethnically marginalized communities, for example, and persons of color. Excellent important point to make absolutely the, yeah, the idea of, and that challenges more of the, you know, liberal or realist kind of notions of what peace is right and the dichotomy between war and peace for definitely a critical feminist perspective, queer perspective and post colonial perspective would argue exactly what you're saying there's a continuum right there's, and we need to contextualize how we understand peace right and and and conflict. You know, what I love about a recent paper, you wrote is that you discussed the concept of new forms of masculinity, and whether these actually, you know, stabilize rather than challenge patriarchy right. You know, you include the label of gender champion and gender men, attributing to some of the high profile leaders such as Justin Trudeau who promoted gender equality and feminism, or his version of feminism. But do so from very much a place of power and privilege. And I'm wondering if you can share some of your thinking on this and also at the same time you're so own a self reflections of course we've had multiple conversations about this previously Henry but your own reflections of being a privileged white man working in gender equality spaces. So if you can just offer some of your reflections on that. Yeah, I mean far beat for me to compare myself to Justin Trudeau, but I think there are some, definitely some clear similarities and privileges that both of us must share as white privilege middle aged men. And I think what really struck struck me is that. So it's a lot of these things that I've been for example, in my, my work in my, in my research and highlighting a lot of it builds on generations of work that's come before for me. And that's been done by feminist activist feminist researchers, and it doesn't necessarily for the most part doesn't really say anything new. These are critiques that women have been raising for a long time, but there is the difference that now is someone like me a privileged white man, a class white man who's saying these things and and that gives me. Entrance to places and give us some kind of currency and and capital that a lot of women who have been saying the same thing. Never had they didn't get the same kind of attention that I get because of who I am and what I'm kind of embodying with through my presence. I think that that is problematic in the kind of critiques that that I put forward are taking more seriously because I'm saying them compared to for example a what my my African female colleagues would then be just labeled as and read black women, whereas when I say it, it's, you know, okay, this is rational because it's a white man saying it. And I think that that kind of power disbalance and what power imbalance is something that we need to be aware of I need to be aware of and understand how just how much I am building on the work of others but also just how much I'm being boosted by the by by patriarchal structures and and also the way in which these petrol structures are not necessarily challenged by what I'm doing what I'm saying but might be stabilized by bringing by co-opting the critique that I'm bringing to the table. Okay, I mean that's such an important critique and it's a critique I think myself as a white middle class educated woman also experiences a great amount of privilege and social capital and the things I say and just having a conversation with Julia well and yesterday about that and you know she made a really important comment saying, if you think what you're saying is new, likely a woman of color has said it before. So it's just you know it's I think you know it's it's it's also us as academic citation practices who we bring into the conversation who do we, you know attribute knowledge to it is so key as well. I guess you know it's really great that you know yourself, you know the perpetual self reflection as part of the feminist ethic as well too. When we think about our own relation to power and privilege but just going back to Trudeau like I wonder, you know, is it bad that he's touting feminism right like what's bad about that I guess if you can maybe reflect upon that. Yeah, I think I think it's a bit of sort of a yes but situation. I would sort of say that that applies to me as well I think it's. I don't think it's a bad thing that I'm raising these kinds of issues or that produce raising these kinds of issues, but we need to be held accountable by others and we need to hold ourselves accountable. And I mean, I don't know enough about Canadian politics to give sort of a detailed truth of Trudeau's politics but I mean one thing that does kind of strike me for example so he sees very good at talking the top but does he actually think it's true on issues like disappearances and feminicides of indigenous women. And is there something that goes beyond just having these kind of quite photogenic and a nice sound bites around feminism, or is there actually an attempt to really do undo some of the the historical structural harms that have been committed to women of color. Indigenous First Nations populations. Or is it just for show and is it just kind of a slogan, hashtag that that he mobilizes. And I fear that with him it probably tends to be more of a ladder it's that the actual structural change that he would be to decree in a position to act upon. I guess bringing it back to you from again from the state leader back to us as as privileged academics late. What you know what would be kind of key advice you would give to, you know younger scholars or just scholars you know our colleagues alike who are white, who are white men white cis men doing this sort of research. How to be a good ally like what kind of key advice would you would you give to them so they don't, you know, kind of reinforce these power dynamics or at least trying to disrupt these power dynamics. I think what one would be to listen more. You mentioned some of the consultation practice and broadening the the range of literature that we engage with. And I think that that's really important and kind of going out of your own comfort zone a bit and not deciding the, the sort of the male stream, so to say, literature about going on beyond that. But I think a lot of it, for me at least comes down to really trying to listen and try to understand what it is what you're being told by your interlocutors, be it in a research or by colleagues, or especially some more junior colleagues or in other ways of less privileged colleagues or staff members and taking that seriously and taking critiques on board and not dismissing them. And if it's, it's taking, and I think it's also the learning to take on that criticism and the critique of privilege, which can be quite painful because none of us likes to be seen as as the bad person or as the oppressor and or most of us don't want to be seen as that. And most of us do like to keep up self image of us doing good. And when that comes under fire, especially when you are already trying to go out of your way to do something good can be difficult but it's something that that's coming out of position of privilege we really need to be open to doing and questioning ourselves. And I think also then, especially for men. It's also being to step back and give that space to others and not always push ourselves to the front and always be the ones who have to be during the talk and have to be the first author and whatever. Yeah. Those are some great advice and I think any any sort of confrontation with your own privilege is uncomfortable but productive and necessary right in order for us to move forward and to be better allies. So we do end our discussion with a final question or rather I guess to interrelated questions. And that is, excuse me, what made you fear first curious about masculinity is more. And where did you think he, we need to go as a community of scholars in studying gender and post conflict so you know the first is more of a historical recount of a view and what made you interested in the sort of research in the more of a future of where do we need to go from here. Yeah, I mean, so it doesn't happen very often in my life but in terms of starting to get curious about masculinity and in conflict or post conflict. I can actually pin it down to a specific moment, which was some when I was so I don't come from a social sciences background. I was did my master's in engineering and then I was working for a, an organization that was working on former military sites and sort of gender learning group informal group, and we're reading through some texts about some gender and displacement and remember this one piece that was about IDPs in Georgia, about people who'd fled from the Abbas, George and war. Suddenly, I noticed that this was the first one and the only time that men and masculinities were being mentioned in any of the literature that we were reading. And it was just a sentence about how all of the men in that IDP camp or IDP settlement spent their time drinking gambling and committing acts of violence against other other men or against family members. And I was like, that's just sparked my curiosity. It's like, what, why, why is this the only time that men have been mentioned and sort of coming from a engineering background. I assumed that there was already going to be this whole massive body of literature on men and conflict and masculinities and conflict. And for me as an outsider, I was like, well, that's obvious because 90% of soldiers are men, 90% of people with weapons are men, obviously someone's looked at it. But at least at the time, and this was quite a while back, there was a very little, there was that invisibility of masculinities in conflict situations. And yeah, then I was kind of pushed, shoved a bit into or dropped into the deep end by a colleague was like, well, here's your chance to do something about it. And she volunteered me to write an article about men and and weapons and arms and yeah, I foolishly agreed and just sent me down that rabbit hole. So in terms of where, where to go next. I think that there's a lot that's been already said, and again, ready been said by by feminist scholars of color, especially around, but I think it's been said but hasn't really been acted upon and there's a lot that needs to be done around that, and there's a lot of issues of intersectionality, for example, as it's a, it's a massive buzzword at the moment, but there is actually relatively little research that really does take that intersectional lens. So starting point and looking at gender masculinities at femininity's or other gender identities in a more complex and nuanced way. I think that that's really something that is starting to happen, but I really would like to see a whole lot more of that happening. And also the something that also speaks to the changing nature of conflicts is the the breaking down of that. This is peace, this is war dichotomy and it's something that as I mentioned feminist scholars have been talking about that for decades, but now it's something that's really also entering the conflict studies war studies fear of like what's a hybrid warfare, for example. And I think there's a lot there that can be aware of the feminist perspectives are already a bit ahead of the game and trying to understand how war and peace are not mutually exclusive spaces but it's sort of this gray zone in between for many people. And I think that lastly. And this is something that that kind of came up in some research I was doing in Ukraine last year was the, the way in which gender itself the discourse around gender has become a literal battlefield. So, for, for example, in the case of Ukraine, how other states, Russia, for example, are mobilizing around questions of gender and using that kind of as a key battleground in this hybrid warfare against what Russia sees as its rival, training government. And something that that's I think we need to be also very aware of how we as researchers are working on a topic that itself has literally become weaponized it's something where different actors and in different countries are pouring money into its intelligence agencies are militaries are mobilizing around discourse gender are mobilizing around what people think about Judith Butler mobilizing around what Cynthia and others are doing and trying to turn that as a way to undermine societies and create wreak havoc or great disturbances and shake trust and institutions. So I think that that's something where I think there's unfortunately probably going to be a lot more happening over the next years and decades. So, lots more work to be done in lots of very interesting and often worrying trends trends to be researching and and and looking through and I guess you know even just the Trump era the Brexit era all of this is this remind us of these hard fought one rights and and logics that we would just assume is common sense. Now are you know can easily be rolled back and eroded to write so all of this is still quite reminds us how fragile it is fragile these these winds are and can be and alerts us to the ways in which gender like you said can be weaponized and is being weaponized as as we speak in in different in different parts of the world by different world leaders. Henry I want to thank you so much for taking the time out of your busy day hectic days to share your research your insights and your experiences with us on men and masculinities violence conflict post conflict kind of continuum. Thank you very much. My pleasure.