This article systematically explores key theoretical and political, and epistemological and methodological considerations regarding men undertaking feminist fieldwork and research. This has become increasingly relevant as men working on exploring the gendered analysis of armed conflict and peacebuilding has become relatively routine recently. Yet, there is a dearth of systematic research on this topic. To fill this gap, this article asks two central questions: Can men do feminist fieldwork and research in conflict/post-conflict settings? What are the requirements for this? Drawing from my experience as a heterosexual cis male doing fieldwork on female combatants in a post-conflict setting in Nepal (2017–2018) and building on the long-standing robust scholarly conversation on desirability and possibility of men in feminist research and activism, the article argues that critical self-reflexivity with honesty on limitation and partiality of research, situated knowledge, and positionality and power including ethics of care, moral responsibility, and reciprocity are key considerations for men to engage in feminist fieldwork and research. While gender is a primary concern for men researching on women, there is “multiplex subjectivity” (race, class, caste, ethnicity, nationality, and education) interacting with gender creating complex relational power dynamics before/during/after the fieldwork to influence the research process and outcome.

中文翻译：

---

男性可以进行女权主义实地考察和研究吗？

本文系统地探讨了男性从事女权主义田野调查和研究的关键理论和政治、认识论和方法论考虑。这变得越来越重要，因为男性致力于探索武装冲突和建设和平的性别分析最近变得相对常规。然而，关于这个主题的系统研究还很缺乏。为了填补这一空白，本文提出了两个核心问题：男性能否在冲突/冲突后环境中进行女权主义田野调查和研究？对此有什么要求？借鉴我作为异性恋顺式男性在尼泊尔（2017-2018 年）的冲突后环境中对女性战斗人员进行实地调查的经验，并基于长期以来关于男性在女权主义研究和行动中的可取性和可能性的强有力的学术对话，文章认为，对研究的局限性和偏袒、情境知识、地位和权力（包括关怀伦理、道德责任和互惠）诚实的批判性自我反思是男性从事女权主义田野调查和研究的关键考虑因素。虽然性别是男性研究女性的主要关注点，但“多元主体性”（种族、阶级、种姓、民族、国籍和教育）与性别相互作用，在田野调查之前/期间/之后产生复杂的关系权力动态，以影响研究过程和结果。和互惠是男性从事女权主义实地考察和研究的关键考虑因素。虽然性别是男性研究女性的主要关注点，但“多元主体性”（种族、阶级、种姓、民族、国籍和教育）与性别相互作用，在田野调查之前/期间/之后产生复杂的关系权力动态，以影响研究过程和结果。和互惠是男性从事女权主义实地考察和研究的关键考虑因素。虽然性别是男性研究女性的主要关注点，但“多元主体性”（种族、阶级、种姓、民族、国籍和教育）与性别相互作用，在田野调查之前/期间/之后产生复杂的关系权力动态，以影响研究过程和结果。