Although Aotearoa (New Zealand) has been a pioneer in the development and expansion of restorative justice in the adult and youth criminal justice systems, it has taken a more cautious approach to using restorative justice in adult cases of gendered violence. This study presents interviews of nineteen Aotearoa Opinion Leaders on the appropriateness of restorative justice for partner, family, and sexual violence, and child sexual abuse. Three groups, rather than two, better describe the range of positions: these are the Supporters, Sceptics, and Contingent Thinkers. All viewed child sexual assault as least suitable, with relatively more support in partner, family, and sexual violence. The participants' views were complex and varied; they were shaped by experiences with restorative justice, their professional positions, racial and ethnic identities, and views of the criminal justice system. The findings challenge any simple dichotomised understanding on the question of appropriateness for gendered violence, and they create an opening for new ways of thinking about debate in this area.