Due to their propensity for acting out with antisocial behaviours, angry men are often regarded as having antisocial personality disorder with little hope for treatment success. Whilst not denying the difficulties in working with angry men, this paper looks to challenge some of the received wisdom in this area. Antisocial personality disorder is compared with borderline personality disorder and the many similarities, including the association with childhood trauma, course of illness, symptoms and rates of occurrence, are discussed. Differences between the two groups may be associated with the internalization or externalization of anger. Some issues related to bias in diagnosis are raised, as is the universal hopelessness implied in the literature related to treatment of antisocial personality disorder. Some issues related to engaging traditional men are discussed. In this paper the term 'traditional men' is used to describe men who value stoicism, self-reliance, strength, work, status and aggression highly whilst denying any vulnerability and exhibiting restricted emotionality. There is a need to reframe the diagnosis in order to recognize the associated behaviours as being an adult manifestation of complex childhood trauma. Further, there is a need for treatment directed towards altering ongoing patterns of retraumatization which characterize the lives of these men. A case study is included to demonstrate a number of the issues involved in working with angry men. These include issues of connection, boundaries, safety and utilization of the general practitioner in setting up a containing structure. The case study is used to illustrate that when issues of connection and anger containment are positively addressed, good therapeutic outcomes are possible.