The Fiji Women’s Rights Movement has rubbished a research damning national response to gender-based violence as its methods negligently leave out the voices of survivors, ignore strong feminist research already done in Fiji, and risk doing more harm than good.
The study titled “Masculinities and Gender-based Violence (GBV) in Fiji: The Perceptions of iTaukei (indigenous Fijian) Men” found that many iTaukei men feel excluded from Fiji’s national gender-based violence response and view concepts like gender and gender-based violence as foreign and imposed.
It also found that iTaukei marriage customs were seen to reinforce male dominance and normalise violence and despite ongoing efforts, gender-based violence remains high, partly due to the lack of reliable data on perpetrators.
The research highlights that social constructions of iTaukei masculinity—focused on control and authority—are key drivers of violence, with many men misunderstanding or rejecting gender-based policies and viewing violence as a justified response to relationship challenges.
FWRM says one of the biggest problems is that the study only talks to men—specifically, 31 iTaukei men who all live in urban areas, have higher education, and are Christian.
They say this is not a fair or full picture or even a logical representative sample of the majority of Fijian men.
The organisation says it leaves out rural men, men with less education, men of other religions, and most importantly, the women who have survived violence.
They say research on gender-based violence must include survivors, because their experiences show us the real impact of abuse and how to stop it.
The organisation says the study also takes what the men say at face value, without checking if what they say is true or complete as no one checked medical reports, police data, or spoke to the women involved.
FWRM says that is not good research—it is just giving more space to people who cause harm.
They say another concern is that the study does not compare violent men to men who are not violent and without that kind of comparison, it’s impossible to know whether the views shared are common among all men or mostly among those who abuse.
The organisation says good research must make this distinction so that we know what to target in prevention efforts.
FWRM Chair and academic, Akanisi Nabalarua says the study was based on 31 structured interviews, and five conversational anecdotal ones.
She says it was literally a perception survey on the National Action Plan for the Prevention of Violence Against Women and Girls and iTaukei men, confirming what we already know.
Nabalarua says FWRM thanks the researcher, Avelina Rokoduru as the research has some inherent value for that reason, but it brings nothing new to the table.
She says if anything it tapped into the current male mindset which needs to be changed.
The Chair says it is also disappointing that the study ignores years of feminist research done in Fiji and the region, where they have collected survivor stories, trained service providers, and led legal and policy changes that protect women.
She says the study unfairly claims that feminist policies “don’t work,” but offers no real evidence.
Nabalarua says they know that feminist efforts—like telephone helplines, shelters, education programmes, and stronger laws—have made a difference here and around the world.
Nabalarua has also criticised the study for ethical shortcomings, including giving space to men who admitted to violence without offering support, excluding survivors' voices, and including statements that could shame victims.
She says the research centres perpetrators and downplays the root cause of violence—power and control—by framing it as a cultural misunderstanding.
Nabalarua is calling for ethical, survivor-centred, feminist research that aligns with Fiji’s National Action Plan to end violence against women and girls, stressing the need to prioritise victims' experiences and demand accountability.
Stay tuned for the latest news on our radio stations
