A/HRC/26/38 Gender Equality, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil from 29 March to 3 April 2009. This Declaration outlines an obligation for States, United Nations agencies and donors to promote the agenda of engaging men and boys, and advocates the allocation of resources to further work in that direction. The Rio Declaration is an NGO declaration and does not have comparable status, in legal terms, with United Nations documents; and it was developed and promoted by the very men’s groups that it provides for and strengthens. The distortion of the rationale and the interpretation of international human rights standards and frameworks, particularly as regards gender equality and engaging or partnering with men to transform gender inequality, is thus reinforced by such arguments. Such conflating of United Nations commitments with an NGO declaration has resulted in the mushrooming of independent men’s groups and organizations, separate from the women’s movement, many of which have redefined engagement with men and boys, in male terms. 72. From a pragmatic point of view, if men constitute the vast majority of perpetrators of violence against women, then engaging them in discussions, educating them to resist and reject the nature and consequences of hypermasculinity and misogyny and to overcome patterns of violence is an obvious step towards the elimination of violence against women. The feminist approach has commonly considered men as allies and targets of education in the quest for gender transformation. In recent years, many men’s groups have moved from being targets of engagement and allies, to being leaders of initiatives on gender equality, especially through the setting up of specialized men’s organizations to engage men and boys. The logic of the shift in focus appears to be self-defeating because it empowers the group to which perpetrators belong — and which overwhelmingly continues to maintain economic, political and societal structures of power, privilege and opportunity — to offer protection from violence and discrimination. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned that the dominant voices on engaging men and boys, whether through reporting, United Nations meetings or connection with the wider public through the press and popular culture, belong to a very small group of men who are linked to the most prominent organizations associated with the men and boys agenda. This raises numerous questions, including in respect of legitimacy and accountability. 73. There are many ideologies about the role of men and boys. Often, the focus is not on women as autonomous beings, disproportionately affected by inequality, discrimination and violence; but rather, violence against women is conflated with the interests of men and boys. The tendency is for men’s groups to argue both that the majority of men are not implicated in abuse and that all men suffer the consequences of being socialized into dominant perceptions of hypermasculinity, and that that accounts, in part, for recourse to violence. Thus, the argument is that since both men and women are subject to gender stereotypes, and that corrupt and corrupting forms of power are as damaging to men as to women, both men and women would benefit from the dismantling of gender stereotypes. 74. One strategy associated with the engagement of men and boys is to appeal to the idea that women deserve respect as mothers, sisters, wives and so on. Emphasizing personal relationships is said to make it easier to understand the consequences of violence against women. This is also seen as an effective strategy in overtly patriarchal societies, in which calls to consider women as rights-bearing individuals, irrespective of their marital status, are considered too radical to attract support, even among women themselves. This implicit suggestion thus distorts the issue of women as autonomous individuals deserving of respect, and renders regard for the rights of women contingent on their status in the private sphere, which further reinforces the public/private dichotomy. 75. A brief analysis of the mandates and principles of organizations associated with engaging men and boys in efforts to counter violence against women reveals a series of internal contradictions which compromise the understanding of the foundational principles linked to women’s human rights. This is reflected in several ways, including reaffirmation 20