Critical studies of men and masculinities have developed significantly over the last 20-30 years. Connell (2007) refers to the rapid growth of the­oretically informed empirical studies of men's lives in the 1980s as 'the ethnographic moment' in 1nasculinity studies. Notwithstanding the growth of this scholarship, we have been struck by the relative lack of interroga­tion of the epistemologies and methodologies involved in the study of men and masculinities. It is clear from a review of the empirical literature in mas­culinity studies that masculinity scholars have generally not problematized the methodologies they have chosen to research men's lives. There is no debate that is comparable to the discussions within feminist scholarship about appropriate methodologies for researching women's lives. Research on men and masculinities has thus failed to consider power differences in research interviews, cross-gender research, the status of n1en in fieldwork, the influence of interviewer gender on the interpretation of data or the appropri­ateness of using feminist methodologies in studying men (Popoviciu et al. 2006; Whorley and Addis 2006; Delamont and Atkinson 2008; Holmgren 2009; Hopkins and Noble 2009; Curato 2010; Robinson 2010). While there are exceptions to this generalization, which we review here, we believe that this lack of attention to methodological issues in undertaking feminist­-informed empirical research with men is problematic on a range of counts. Two interconnected concerns occur to us in terms of why methodology matters in relation to the study of men and masculinities.