本文透過全球性別治理的論述，呈現國際思潮與國家內部統治二者對於性別暴力之全球治理的滲透與衝突並存，也突顯出女性受害者的同質化意象，而形成全球性別暴力治理的國家內部影響及其合法性的不穩定。關於臺灣婚姻暴力的在地回應，本文透過對於臺灣在性別治理的建制及性別議題的倡議歷程整理，顯示全球性別治理觀念穿越國家疆界而影響到臺灣時，臺灣的在地回應並非全盤接受。導致因為運動倡議者與政策制定執行者之間對於性別治理了解與認同的明顯差異。婚姻暴力加害男性在暴力防制倡議與父權機制的交錯下，形成特定被規訓的論述。防治體系有其工作目標，父權機制也得以維持既有婚姻關係的不平等結構。家庭暴力防治法立法期程過短，在地社會並未對移植自外國制度有共識與準備。在婚姻暴力防制合法化的過程中，缺乏結合廣大女性經驗。在合法化的基礎上，社會認同差異大而造成合法性不足。整體而言，全球性別暴力治理透過國際組織運作共識與條約的簽署，在各國催化性別暴力合法性。但缺乏在地性的對話與融入，而呈現專家治理的疏離與不足。

In the late 20th century, global governance swept worldwide in accompany with international organizations and enterprises. The influence of the global governance might be rather dominant as with the legitimization of nation-states’ responses to the international agreement. However, skew and incoherent values can be raised as local community responses to the global governance. Global governance of gender violence is rooted in the concern of the violation of women’s right. However, gender violence is frequently intersected gender with class, ethnic, religion, culture, etc. Equality of right might compromise equity while only gender is under consideration, instead of the context and the history. Marital violence intervention in Taiwan began from the advocacy of elites and lawmakers under the influence of the global governance. Due to lack of social consensus, the law and associated policies were obviously not bottom-up. Marital violence intervention was successfully legitimized in Taiwan, but with impaired legitimacy.