In this thesis it is explored how “intimate partner violence against men” is constructed as a social problem in a contemporary Danish professional context. Furthermore, it is discussed which significance the constructions have for the field of intimate partner violence. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s (1930-2002) theoretical concept of field it is shown how the official Danish conception of “the man” in relations to intimate partner violence has shifted over the last twenty years. In the early 2000’s the Danish government’s action plans only addressed the man as a “perpetrator” of partner violence. From 2010 and onwards the man is addressed as a “victim” with gender specific needs. The thesis main analysis takes form as a claims-making analysis of nine interviews with practitioners. Practitioners who meet and help male victims of intimate partner violence. The analysis answers two questions: Who is the “male victim of intimate partner violence” constructed as? What is constructed as “partner violence”? In the concluding chapter four main findings are presented: I) Male victims of partner violence is constructed by the practitioners as subject to a “taboo” that prevents them from seeking help II) Two types of "partner violence" are constructed by the practitioners, but are not addressed as two different phenomena III) “Psychological violence” is constructed by the practitioners as the most common type of violence against men IV) “The male victim of partner violence” and “partner violence” is constructed by the practitioners in an effort to include the man into the field of intimate partner violence.