The notion that the international community has a duty or "responsibility to protect" is not new. It has been raised not only in the context of armed conflict but also when addressing economic, social and cultural rights. In both contexts, the concept includes: the duty to respect; the duty to protect and; the duty to fulfil, that is, to work actively to establish political, economic, and social systems as well as infrastructure that provide access to the guaranteed right to all members of the population. While the responsibility to fulfil these obligations fall primarily to states within their own borders where a state fails or lacks capacity, that responsibility increasingly falls to the international community. Member states have, in turn, attempted to respond to the needs of individuals living in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States (FCAS) by developing protection interventions. Yet what is clear from existing academic research and UN reports, determining the most effective and appropriate protection interventions that affirm rights and mitigate physical or psychological harm poses a number of significant challenges for the international community. In focusing on conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV), this proposal will address one such challenge and fill what we argue to be significant gaps in current research on male CRSV survivors. Drawing on the work of Jill Stauffer (2015) and Philipp Schultz (2018), we will apply Stauffer's concept of 'ethical loneliness,' defined as the "isolation one feels when one, as a violated person or as one member of a persecuted group, has been abandoned by humanity, or by those who have power" (1) to male CRSV survivors. We argue that in focusing on this subject group and adopting this conceptual framework, our research will engage four of the designated thematic areas of this call-Impact of Violations, Impact of Absent or Ineffective Protection Programming, Impact of Recognition Protection, Impact of Targeting on groups excluded from targeted protection/response. In his Ugandan study of sexual violence, Schultz argues that providing a better understanding of the "effects of externally imposed and gender-specific silencing" has a "wider utility beyond male sexual violence" allowing us to better understand and address the multiple needs of "survivors of political and wartime gendered violence more broadly." In focusing on male CRSV, the research and methods proposed will address each prong of the 'egg model' and: 1. Provide a comprehensive base for understanding the factors that lead to male CRSV, and its patterns of abuse; 2. Examine the impact of the initial violation and subsequent harm from the invisibility of male CRSV including: lack of access to appropriate, culturally and gender sensitive treatment and support for survivors and their family; impact on societal cohesion of their community and; any further violence that may manifest. 3. Develop key strategies to address the layers of invisibility of male CRSV, and facilitate access to critical support and recovery services, including sexual and reproductive health (SRH), other medical care, Mental Health and Psycho-Social Support (MHPSS), protection, and access to justice/reparations. In each of these tasks, the research questions are designed to interrogate the drivers of invisibility (stigma, taboos, risks, gendered norms, absence or exclusion from policies and programming) which can leave male SV survivors behind. This, in turn, effects cohesion, stability and recovery within the wider community (including families - specifically women and girls, and community recovery post-conflict), and longer term, perhaps inter-generational transmission which has been seen for other atrocity crimes. The research design will also consider risk factors/victimology and typology, seeking to recognise risks and vulnerabilities of men and boys for CRSV in the first place (alert, prevention, protection).