The harmful and inequitable implications of men’s actions have always been a central focus of the United Nation’s Women, Peace and Security agenda. Despite this, until recently, there have been few programmes in the agenda which attempt to directly work with men. The past five years have seen a rapid growth of programming that explicitly targets men and even calls for a ‘Men, Peace and Security’ agenda. This article analyses how these programmes understand their work. Drawing on expert interviews and documentary analysis it argues that current programming reflects two fundamentally different approaches, enga- ging or changing men. While these two perspectives are not mutually exclusive, they reflect different understandings of what and ‘Men, Peace and Security’ agenda should prioritise. In exploring the tension between these two approaches the article concludes that without greater coherence and clarity the MPS agenda risks being ineffective or even producing harmful outcomes.