YOUTH IN ACTION
Equality building REPORT OF THE PROJECT
Objectives of the project p. 3 Partners and phases
Social research report on Equality
Organizations in Bulgaria, Italy, Romania and Spain. p. 6 Equality Building seminar p. 15 Po l i t i c i a n s a n d Yo u n g s t e r s Meeting
OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT Why is this project so important? Inside the NGOs and the Institutions there is the seed of the activism, of the actions that could really make a difference, help people or change society. But what happen if the promoters of equality doesn’t know how to implement it in their own work environment? What if we have beautiful assemblies and awesome votation but the way we really make decisions is in the late hours of afternoon with a beer and with no all the people involved invited? What if we are so focused in changing the world that we don’t care about how we are doing it? What if we don’t feel like participating because we feel like stupid or like we don’t have anything interesting to add? What if we achieve the leadership but we are too proud to admit that we don’t know what our “competence” is? Well, you can add your own “what if”, and I find that’s why you are here. Yes, the process of changing is important, and yes, there is still a long way until the gender issues doesn’t condition the way to the power positions, to make our opinions and to respect our voice.
Aim of the project This is a Youth Democracy Project in the frame of the progame Youth in Action. With this project we aim to contribute in creating spaces and tools for the inclusion of the women in decision making democratic processes as the ones inside the institutions and NGOs and throughout them to promote the entrepreneurship spirit of youth in decision making and building a common future. The objective of this project is to develop spaces, tools and strategies in order to make more democratic and plural the decision making process inside the democratic practices, NGOs and other entities, including persons that have difficulties in giving voice to their opinions because of gender or other reasons and empower the youngsters to active participate in democracy. Moreover, we also aim to share good practices with those organizations where gender equality is already a fact. As we always have team-building activities during the seminars, training courses and other happenings, we also want to create equality-building in order to raise awareness on the importance of gender equality and of the fact that the decision making processes inside a democracy must be as plural and inclusive as possible.
PARTNERS AND PHASES Partners of the project • Spain: Cazalla Intercultural, Ayuntamiento de Lorca • Italy: Lo Sapazio delle idee, Associazione Cultural Eufemia • Bulgaria: Regional Inspectorate of Education, European Multicultural Association • Romania: Support for Youth Development, Centrul Regional de Voluntariat
APV (4 days in April) • Set up the bases of the collaboration: common understanding of the topic, strategy of communication between partners, visibility and sustainability of the project. • Develop the questionnaire with the social research expert • Agree in the main objectives, activities and results of the project. • Find out how each of us can contribute in the project
Social Research (from April to September) • Spread the questionnaire among organizations • Collect data and conclusions • Find the participants for the seminar • Prepare participants for the seminar by giving them information, making some activities, discussions and debates.
Seminar (7 days in September) • Find out how gender condition the access to power positions and above all, the active and equal participation in decission making process. • Face our prejudices in gender roles terms. Develop empathy through the experience of the others. • Share good practices in this topic at political and grassroots level.
• Develop tools to make the decission making process more equal an fair. • Empower women to take responsibility in the decission making process and also men to give them space to express their selves. • Create a product: Tipbook that will help youngsters how important is the equality in the decission making process and give them some tips to make this equality happen. • Discuss the results of the research
Follow-up (october, november 2013) • Evaluate the project, find out the solutions good practices and that we will improve • Ensure mid-term and long-term sustainability of the project
SOCIAL RESEARCH REPORT ON EQUALITY BUILDING IN ORGANIZATIONS IN BULGARIA, ITALY, ROMANIA AND SPAIN. INTRODUCTION AND RANGE OF THE RESEARCH Research on Equality Building in Organizations is part of the project "Equality Building" funded by the program Youth in Action. Partners of the project are organizations from 4 countries: Bulgaria, Italy, Romania and Spain (Cazalla International Association). Organizations from these 4 countries were involved in preparation of survey and realization of social research each one in its country. Finally we collected 110 fillet forms. Aim of this project is to contribute in creating spaces and to find tools for the inclusion of the women in decision making democratic processes as the ones inside the institutions and NGOs and through out them to promote the entrepreneurship spirit of youth in decision making and building a common future.
OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH The objectives of "Equality building" is to develop spaces, tools and strategies in order to make more democratic and plural the decision making process inside the democratic practices, NGOs and other entities, including persons that have difficulties in giving voice to their opinions because of gender or other reasons and empower the youngsters to active participate in democracy. Moreover, we also aim to share good practices with those organizations where gender equality is already a fact.
METHODOLOGY To obtain our objectives we used techniques based on: I. Online survey with guideline from Kick Off Meeting, during which the participants prepared their own questions and definitions, that we used in the formulary.
We collected nearly 30
responds of NGO’s and cultural institutions from all countries involved in the project. Mostly it’s representation of NGO’s working with youth, so responders are also young people, 90 % are not even 35 years old. Our aim was to have 40 fillet forms from each partner country, but because of a lack of answers of responders we collected 18 from Italy, 25 from Romania, 27 from Spain and 40 from Bulgaria. In total 110 filled questionnaires. II. Focus group. It took place in Lorca also during Kick Off Meeting with representatives of NGO’s and institutions involved in “Equality Building” project. This focus group allowed us to definite important objectives, common understandings and concepts of the topic and relatives with it social problems. Methodology of the research we used based on rules of sociology. We found some problems with realization of the research, specifically lack of answers of respondents in all the countries. We set up to carry out 40 surveys in each country. Finally, no organization has achieved the objective. According to its capabilities in each organization conducted a total of 120 questionnaires. Results of the presented report are based on them. Researchers were choosing first at all the organization, then making contact of representative and sending survey on-line. First version of the form was in English, but then represents of the NGO’s changed for languages of their countries, so Bulgarian, Italian, Romanian and Spanish. In the end all the answers were once again translated into English for easily sociological processing. In order to obtain statistical data we used the Program PSPP. This is a program for statistical analysis of sampled data. It is a free replacement for the proprietary program SPSSThe final drafting of the report dealt with sociologist Kamila Lenczewska, from the beginning committed to focusing on sociological research in this project.
THE CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS Basic terms that we found and describe during first meeting of representants of NGO’s are “gender equality” and “decision making process”. We decide to not to use sociological forms but these ones that reflect our approach to these phenomena. Then our definition of “gender equality” is: to have the same rights and opportunities by being aware and respecting values, socio-cultural background, sexual identity of yourself and the others. “Decision making” is the process, affected by competences, stakeholders and resources that happen within a group of people following the same goals(and facing particular challenges) to identity and choose possible solutions.
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT ORGANIZATIONS In Romania 99 % of organizations are NGO-s located in cities with big number of citizens, half of them from 200 to 500 thousands people. In contrast to Romania, in Spain were investigated in 87% government organizations in towns of less than 50,000 residents, including 30 percent of the villages. Italy has similar situation like Romania, where were investigated mainly NGO’s in big cities. Bulgaria presents more balanced situation, where the research covers non-governmental organizations and the government in towns of all sizes, from rural to large city. Most of the institutions, because 78 % of investigated organizations are non-governmental organizations dealing with issues including youth, often benefiting from the fund of the "Youth in Action". Two-thirds of organizations are small groups of less than 20 employees or volunteers. Even if organizations have a large range of persons belonging to them, they work in groups of no more than 20 people. They know their co-workers “face-to-face”
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT EMPLOYEES/VOLUNTEERS IN THE ORGANISATIONS In 79 % workers or activists of investigated organizations are people with higher education(full of part), also students. The leaders of the organizations are both men and women, but about 10 percent more managers, directors or presidents are men. The situation is somehow different for the lowerlevel positions in the boards of organizations, where 67 percent prevalence affects women. Only in Spain the indicator is lower and more men occupy also these positions. On the third place in the board often we can find women then a men. About another workers and volunteers of the organizations, the number of people of different gender is not equal also. More women then men works in the field of youth organizations. But type of job(that’s mean full time, or part time job) and salaries don’t depend of gender, what is a positive result of research, because the first research hypothesis, we assumed that mainly women will belong to the group of part time or volunteering job. In opinions of responders also gender doesn’t depend from level of education. Both men and women have mostly higher education incomplete or complete. The same situation we can find in the area of having children. Off course more women then men have children, but it depends from larger number of women in organizations.
For the question “Does your organization or office has formalized rules and procedures for recruitment, such as open calls and contests?” 91 % of respondents said “yes”. They were even more agree with answer for the question: “Does it happen that in the announcement on the recruitment of staff is information about the desired gender of the candidate”, where 5 % said “yes, sometimes”. For the question: “Does it happen that in the announcement on the recruitment of staff is information about the family status of the candidate?” 99% disagreed. From these answers we can read that official recruitment rules are open and transparent, no depend from gender or family status of candidates.
ACCESS TO EDUCATION AND UPGRADINGS and SALARIES Access to education depends more from type of organization then from country or gender. This means that non-governmental organizations involved in training more women (in Romania until 24 women for 25 people take usually part in trainings). In governmental types of organizations access to education is the same for men and women. Probably because of the obligatory sending employees to training, without splitting on gender. But in the case of voluntary participation women take part often then men. Respondents from different countries and types of organizations are agree with the sentence, that female or male employees had the same position in the process of advancing during last year. The same situation applies to amount of salary in institutions. Answers present situation without much variation regarding salaries by gender workers / activists.
DECISION MAKING PROCESS Decision making process depends from a lot of various factors. In our research first of all we asked: “Who mainly makes important decisions in your organization/office?” and answers indicated no difference in the final decision-making by gender. The implication has just a gender of leader of an institution. Thus, if the boss is a man, then he makes the final decision / the same applies to women. The same conclusion bring question: “Who is mainly involved in the decision-making process in your organization / office?”. Where more then 50% answers are: ”both of a gender” and another put men and women in the same positions by giving the same number of indication.
Important role for taking decision has also place and time of this process. Our responders gave us answers that mostly(74%)decisions in their organizations take place in the offices, no in the not formal places, like bars or homes. Even more, because 85 % said that decisions take time during official working hours. The feeling participation in decision-making is very high among our respondents. Highest in Romania and Italy, where the majority of organizations are NGOs (only one Romanian and one of Italy said that has no feeling of participation in decision-making). In Bulgaria, the result was also high, but slightly lower (92%). Therefore Spain, where most of the organizations are government institutions the result is the lowest, and so 86% of the respondents answered. Overall, the results from all countries are very high, indicating a high degree of participation in decision-making respondents in organizations. They think also that their own opinions reflect decisions in their work groups. About changing behavior and use it like attitude do in order to make voice be heard during dmp, most of the responders(almost 85%) said that they donâ€™t change anything. Mostly responders think that in dmp are involved all the workers and volunteers, specially in NGOâ€™s. In 27 % also beneficiares and in 8% partners of the organizations. Communication and feeling competitive have also important roles in dmp. Reponders of our research indicated a very different approach to the issue. Unable to highlight if it is better to communicate with women or with men. Comfort work also remains without tilting and sets the superiority of either gender.
GENDER AND WORK IN AN ORGANIZATION â€“ DISCRIMINATION AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION The survey conducted among NGOs, government institutions and organizations indicates a very good level of established gender equality among the members of the organizations. The responses show a lack of distinction and prejudices regarding gender and harmony in the allocation of duties and responsibilities between men and women. There was no giving preference to one gender or another in the process, as well as in decision-making and responsibility. The surveyed organizations did not show and did not give evidence of violence or harassment based on gender of their members, as well as complaints in this regard. Among the respondents were recorded answers on still existing mainly physical difference between the gender. This is resulting in some minor differences in the ability to deal with various problems arising from the nature of the work. With this in mind, members of organizations accept and account these differences as a positive feature of the collective work, not as an obstacle or disadvantage.
The inquiry is positive and establishes a relatively high level of gender equality among the organizations. In all the countries. There ere just few of examples of discrimination and they relate on nationality(unfortunately without explanation – just 1), women discrimination also without explanation. Mostly reponders describe that they feel comfortable in tehir organisations, specially in NGO’s.
“Normally for important decision we try to reach as much we can a general consensus and avoid to take it a majority. Honestly we try to avoid also to speak in term of
“In our organization mostly are women but everyone as the right to take part in making decision process and express their opinions.”
gender because we think be a social construction and we are oriented to hold up LGBT rights”
“There is not this kind of problem in our 'NGO. The President is a men because of
. “in every project or activity we try to have equal number of men and women, of youngsters coming from urban and rural areas, youngsters
his skills and length of service. Being few people everyone has a specific role that's why there is no competition.“
with great opportunities and with fewer opportunities. By involving them in common activities, we teach them to accept each-other, to work together, to understand eachother's mentality and to act together, as a team, in order to reach a common goal.”
“In our organization we work with foreigner youth, mostly man and Muslim. We noted that youth respect more women authority, while with men educators the try to be in competition. While Muslim guy ad a “traditional” conception of
“…we don't speak properly about
woman we always try to open
gender, we prefer to have a more
discussion about that, put in
assertive attitude toward other kind
ourselves, as example. “
of sexualities.” “Usually on starting point of our meeting we do exercises against
“Meeting about topic, participation
discrimination and in debriefing we
of subject “at risk” in the
always talk about interpersonal
relations and possible offence coming up during the organization of events and project.”
FINAL RESULTS AND OUTCOMES From research about equality building we can’t specify sociologically correct final results and generalize what the situation in the 4 represented countries is, because of insufficient sample size and unequal number of results. Arise, however, some generalized conclusions:
1. The number of women in leading positions is growing. 2. There are more women in lower / support positions than men in organizations. 3. Gender does not affect the time of the work(full or part time) 4. Official recruitment rules in organizations from surveys are open and transparent, no depend from gender or family status of candidates. 5. Access to education depends more from type of organization then from country or gender. This means that non-governmental organizations involved in training more women. In governmental types of organizations access to education is the same for men and women. 6. Responders of our research fell mostly involved in DMP. What not depends form the gender. 7. Results of research shows low level of feeling discrimination among investigated workers/volunteers in their organization, because of gender. 8. Organizations which took part in research are trying to solve problems of lack participation in DMP. 9. Women in NGO’s participate more in trainings and educational systems, then men. 10. Final decision in organization takes person on highest position, not depend from the gender. 11. Most of the responders said that they don’t change anything in order to make voice be heard during dmp (not depend from gender). 12. Having child doesn’t change work-time situation of both gender.
MATERIALS USED Questionary was made through google drive. You can find it here: http://goo.gl/7zNu0d And the Spanish version: http://goo.gl/wZUDSF
EQUALITY BUILDING SEMINAR Overview During this seminar 31 youngsters from Romania, Bulgary, Italy and Span gather together in Coy, Lorca, to discover more about gender an decision making process issues. They also met the local authorities and polititians to discuss about the topic and exchange ideas. Although some of them werenâ€™t interested in the gender topic at first, they discovered how important it is and how can in condition our live and our carreer. We can say that this seminar opened their minds and now they are very keen on working more in this direction.
Day by Day This seminar lasted for .... days. Each of them had a spetial objective to facilitate their learning and the exchange of experiences. DAY 1 Set up the frame of the seminar. DAY 2 Gender issues DAY 3 Decission making process DAY 4 Rules of equality in decision making process DAY 5 Day off in Aguilas DAY 6 Outcomes and results DAY 7 Meeting with politicians and evaluation
Day 1 morning OBJECTIVE: To set up the frame of the Seminar, its objectives and the expectations of the participants. Start getting to know each other.
METHODOLOGY: Short presentation of the Seminar and answer of the questions: what? why? where? when? and who? about the Seminar. Circle of names and why I'm here. Name-game: We pass white stickers to participants. They have to put one line for each letter in their names. Then they have to look for someone who has the same letter in his or her name and write the letter to each other. Coffe-Break Presentation of the program already put on the wall. Presentation of the objectives We ask participants what are their objectives and we ask to put them on a flying object. Then we put on the wall a plane and three faces: happy, normal and sad one. They had to stick the plane in the wall and change each day the place of the plane in depends of the motivation and how the expectations are fulfilled and the fears overcame.
Presentation of the support person and the rules of the house. Also to set up the timetable to do the reimbursement sheets and collection of boarding passes and so on.
TEMPORALITY: 3h 30m (plus break 30 min) RESOURCES/MATERIALS: stickers, markers, flip-chart, colour papers.
OBSERVATIONS: The name game really works because participants keep their stickers and it's easier to remember games. One thing that was missing was a game to put name and other information on the wall and make even easier to remember names, as far as we could have checked. Was very useful to hear the objectives of participants because we expected people with more experience and/or motivation, so we could adapt the activities to a group with some "experts" but mostly beginners in the topic.
Day 1 afternoon OBJECTIVE: -To create a good atmosphere for work -the group to know each other -to trust each other to collaborate better
METHODOLOGY: Then afternoon session began with an energizer, which was a tribe dance called IPO Y TATA. The group had to repeat the moves and the words of a song in order to enter as member to the Maori tribe (5 min) After that we have continued with a small creativity game, so that they open their mind and think “out of the box”. The facilitator was showing the pax some numbers of some unknown culture with the colored markers and they had to guess what number it was. The trick was that the facilitator was showing the correct number with her fingers, but the participants was not paying attention to the facilitators hand. After the pax guessed what was the rule, we have made a little debriefing on how to be more open minded and be attentive to other things then obvious. The participants also proposed another similar activity to “weak up” our creativity. (20 min) IN the second afternoon session we have revised if everybody already knows the names of the whole group. The tasks was to pass the ball in the circle and whoever had the ball, the group had to shout his/her name. After that, we made a few more group building activities: Triangles: the participants had to make, without speaking, perfect triangles with two other persons that they have chosen from the group. In the end we had a combination of triangles made from the whole group. Perfect circle: the participants closed their eyes, and randomly took the hands of two other persons. Without watching, only speaking, they had to make a perfect circle. Lines: the participants had to position themselves in the line, from the ones who have smallest feet to those who have the biggest feet. Secondly, from the ones who have the lightest color of their eyes to the darkest. Points on the floor: The facilitator says 2 numbers. First means how many people in the group and second how many points on the floor the group can touch.
Trust building in pairs: the participants in pairs, one of the persons had his/her eyes closed, they had to walk around. First slowly and then little by little the were going faster and faster and finally run. After that, the persons with the closed eyes were the ones who had to guide the other person through the same process. Trust building in group: the group formed a tunnel of hands and participants had to run quickly as they could through the tunnel. The hands were raising up in the moment when they saw a person approaching to them
After this set of activities we have made a debriefing on haw was to collaborate with the others, how was it to trust somebody that we donâ€™t know, how were the feelings of the group etc. To finish the day we have revised the learning of the day: each of the participants had to think about one thing that he/she learned during the day and share it with others.
TEMPORALITY: 3,5 hours RESOURCES/MATERIALS: outdoor activities, markers, pens, flipchart
OBSERVATIONS: Even though we had the whole afternoon of just outside activities, it was very good for the group to tae time and know each other better, since the seminar is about gender equality and some sensitive issues might pop out it is important to build a safe and trusty atmosphere. Was very useful to hear the objectives of participants because we expected people with more experience and/or motivation, so we could adapt the activities to a group with some "experts" but mostly beginners in the topic.
Day 2 morning OBJECTIVE: Make the difference between gender and sex Reflect about our prejudices and stereotypes and how them condition our social relationships. Discover what is our image of different social roles and how we perceive gender through
METHODOLOGY: Energizer: Count till 6 and move arms and legs (first 1, then 2, then 3...) Prejudices in balloons: We reflect in plenary about what prejudices and stereotypes mean and also about examples of them that we face in our real life. After that we look for prejudices and stereotypes in gender. Each one takes a balloon for each stereotype or prejudice she or he has, blow them and tie them to the belly. Then they try to hug the others and feel something in between. After that they explode the balloons and hug others, to feel how is getting close to each other without prejudices or stereotypes. Gender and Sex: We make a brainstorming about what concepts we associate with gender and with sex and then we make groups and read some sentences. They have to decide if the sentence is talking about sex or about gender. Gender collage: We make groups and we give them a white paper with a rol, scissors, glue and colors. The selected roles are: The boss, the feminist, the macho, the sexy, the fighter. We ask them to imagine what is the story of them, their lives, interest, gender... After that we make a long debriefing.
TEMPORALITY: 3 hours and a half RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Flipchart, papers with "sex" and "gender" for each team. Statements about gender and sex written in papers. Paper, markers, magazines, newspapers, scissors, glue, music.
OBSERVATIONS: People were asked in infopack to bring magazines from their country, but only one of them did, so we didn't have much variety of images. It was really difficult for them to think about their prejudices and stereotypes, but when they made the collage there appear a lot of them. The collages and the explanation of them were really surprising because we thought parcipants would have wider perspective about gender and about social construction, but we discovered that most of them weren't aware about gender issues at all. About "sexy" some of them said that being sexy was an internal and personal (non social) election, about "fighter" they thought about fighters from USA films, with weapons and without family (in the other hand, when we asked them to think about fighters in real life they thought about their parents or their grand-parents) and about the "macho" they didn't think about a person who thinks that women shouldn't be allowed to be equal than men, but about men or women with strong personality. It was a really good activity that allows us to assess the level of the group and its needs and also a good starting point for a debate. For some of them was the first step to start thinking about gender equality and it made them open their mind.
Stereotypes Luca-Italians come to late for the meetings. Alexandra- Romanians are gypsies. Men do the job better than women. Men get jobs easier than women just because they are men. Fio- Women do not drive very well. Where stereotypes do come from? -An idea about something or someone that is not proven. -Stereotypes come from culture, history. - For example, boys play with cars, girls with dolls. It is because they have been taught so. It is because of the education they had.
Prejudices What is it? Idea, conclusion about somebody without knowing that the person. Things that stop us to see who the person is actually. They are barriers t recognize the others. Sometimes prejudices are also protection, kind of self-protection. They come from outside, because of the lack of information. Giulia- It is cultural frame, separation between them and us. Guillermo- It is judging because of person`s appearance. Religion is also a prejudice or it creates prejudices. We have them because of nationality, gender, color of skin. Prejudices are because of our culture, how we grow up.
Day 2 afternoon OBJECTIVE: Discover more about gender issues Be aware about how gender condition our role and opportunities in society Develop arguments and debates Open mind for other new ideas and opinions. Find out if different public/private places are occupied more likely by men or by women and to trace what can be the cause of this and how we perceive these spaces.
METHODOLOGY: Dilema game: we put a rope in the floor and we say some statements. Then participants, in small groups, have to decide if they agree with the statement and they can decide how close to the rope position themselves. The statements are: -Men and women are different -Women are potential victims because of her gender -Gender based violence can be also perpetuated against men. -Housewives should be paid for her job. -Prostitution should be a legal work. -Women cannot reach the most powerful position. After they take position, they have to explain why and we start a fruitful debate and debriefing. The group was divided into small teams of 4. The groups were given cards stating different public or private places. They had to decide if in their opinion these places are more often occupied by men or women. After all the groups were ready the results were shared. From the result we could see if the group believes that one place is more occupied by men or women. (Task: Set an average percentage of what is the proportion of men and women inhabiting these places. Also please concentrate if applicable if there are decisions made in these places, and if yes, who is making it? Discuss between yourself why do you think that this or that place is occupied mostly by men or women?)
Places were selected according to the following theme: Places: In the house: living room â€“ TV, computer, kitchen, garage, garden, bedroom, laundry room, etc In the city (public places, like playground, parks, benches, seaside, etc) Places of culture â€“ museum, theatre, cinema, etc In the office, at the workplace: public transport, doctors, lawyers, etc. Places in connection with children: kindergarten, school, high-school, etc. TEMPORALITY: 3h 30m break prison 30 min) Something strange and (plus provoking: RESOURCES/MATERIALS: stickers, markers, flip-chart, colour papers.hall; Bar; Stadium; Finally selected places: Shopping Mall; Gym; Hospital; University Garage; Prison; Kitchen; Church; Playground; Kindergarten; Park; Office; Living room; Car; Parliament; Results: Spaces mostly occupied by men are: Bar; Stadium; Garage; Prison; Living room; Car; Parliament; Spaces mostly occupied by women: Kitchen; Church; Playground; Kindergarten; Shopping Mall Neutral: Gym; Hospital; University hall; Park; Office After having a short discussion about what participants think about the different places there was a discussion led by the following questions: Group discussion: Can you find any connection between the places? The result can be due to cultural, historical background? Has anything to do with our biological origins? Do you think these proportions have changed in the recent time? Do you think that in the case of some places the proportion will change in the future, if yes why?
TEMPORALITY: 3h 30m (plus break 30 min) RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Rope, flipchart with statements. paper, printed pictures of the different spaces, markers
OBSERVATIONS: It was really interesting exercise, and we had positive feedback from the reflection groups about it. Although sometimes their explanation where not very deep, they learned from each other and it helped them a lot to open their minds to new opinions and arguments. I recommend using it talking about gender. The toughest statement was about prostitution. Two persons had to quit their group because they couldn't reach an agreement. The exercise about space we had positive feedback too from the reflection groups. Although sometimes their explanation where not very deep, they learned from each other and it helped them a lot to open their minds to new opinions and arguments. I recommend using it talking about gender. The toughest statement was about prostitution. Two persons had to quit their group because they couldn't reach an agreement.
Dilema debate Men can also be victims of gender based violence! YES-> - Different types of violence. Men can be a victim of different kind of violence (Woman in the disco and man have to pay and women do not to enter). Violence against gays. They accept lesbians not gays. YES-> - Not sure about types of violence. Only few cases when men can suffer from physical violence. -The boys suffer more from the public pressure. YES-> Men are stronger, but women suffer more. ->Young boys are discriminated from the society. ->Men who do not confront with their gender role, they suffer more.
Prostitution should be legalized! Yes-> if legalized we can have more control (disease, human trafficking, lower the level of violence) We can control by legalizing, but in deep it is going to be the same. Prostitution is a choice when a woman is in a very bad economic situation. In rich counties prostitutes are imported because the women who live in those counties have social and economic support. It is very unhealthy phenomenon. It is decision made by woman who is in a very bad situation. It is also a very dangerous job. YES-> We are not totally agree, but it should be legalized. If it would be legal then more women will choose it as they will be protected. Does not matter if it is legal or not it will exist. Al least with by legalizing we will have control. Health is very important for everyone. Legalization is different for each object of the contract. So they are many delicate questions regarding this issue. YES-> We thought about the health protection, so in this case legalization is important. But as a job it is not the best, but it happens, it exists.
It is important to have some regulations to control the age, to protect the kids to be involved in prostitution. Maybe a legal situation can help to solve it.
Women cannot reach the most powerful positions! YES->There are countries where women are the presidents. But also it is about a fake discrimination when gender equality is promoted in political level. YES-> Most of the positions ate taken by men in reality. We think we are in the process to change this. Women started to get education (go to school, university). Education is very important to change the situation we are now. YES-> Much job should be done to overcome the prejudices and stereotypes regarding women. YES-> Women can reach high positions. The question is that not many women want it. But now many women have education and they can achieve what they want.
Conclusions Different thinking, opinions Our thinking and opinions are the mirror of our cultures The hardest topic to discuss was about the prostitution Gender based violence was not clear because of the lack of information.
Day 2. Intercultural Night OBJECTIVE: Share the music, food and traditions of each country Meet together in an informal environment
METHODOLOGY: We gave them space and time to share their traditions, food and music. First we shared food and drink and then we try different dancing.
TEMPORALITY: 2h RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Food, drink and music
OBSERVATIONS: Bulgarian girls dressed up with traditional clothes and we had also a Ecuatorian dancing. Although we didn't asked nothing for the intercultural night everybody brought a lot of things, showing that this night is very important for them to feel comfortable and to show their countries.
Day 3 morning OBJECTIVE: -To introduce the topic of decision making process -To understand the dynamics of taking decisions but being in another shoes
METHODOLOGY: The morning began with the energizer: The activity began in splitting the group into 5 smaller groups. Each group had the task to make a decision about the situation that they have received(on a small paper) but not as themselves but as somebody who behaves like the following: 1.all the time asking stupid questions 2.Always going away from the topic and speaks about his/her personal life 3.Is imposing his/her opinion and doesn’t listen to other opinions 4.is a good listener, keeps track of time and coordinates the debate 5.Only listen to men and doesn’t care about women’s opinions 6.Whenever somebody makes a proposal, he/she says “YES; BUT..” and always says something against the proposal VERY IMPORTANT: the persons in the group do not know the roles of the other persons, just their own role!!
The situations that they had to decide were the following:
1. You have to choose the president of the world. The choice you have is: -Fernando Alonso -Shrek -Michael Jackson -Virgen Mary -Pocahontas -Lady gaga
2. Brad Pit himself comes to your school in a small town to give a speech about "How to be successful in life". You have to organise his free so that he would want to come back. 3. You are the scriptwriters of a TV serial, and you have to kill a character and you have to decide who. You must decide among this TV serials: Simpsons, How I met your mother, Friends or Big Bang Theory 4. You are scriptwriters and you have to revise the ending of the movie Titanic. How is it going to end? 5.You ended up in Siberia and you will have to spend there six months until the first plane comes to save you. You have found a magic gene in the bottle and he told you that he will give you three material things in order to survive, since you arrived without any luggage. No second wishes allowed.
The groups had 20 minutes to take their decisions. Afterwards, we have gathered together and shared the different cases, the decisions taken and spoke about the process of decision making. What the participants shared about the process was the following: -It was very difficult to not be able to say your opinion --I wanted to debate the proposal, since it was very interesting for me, but then I had to speak about my life and it was really difficult -we were laughing so much, since it was so crazy to decide anything, that’s why we just stopped being in our roles, took the decision and than continue with the acting -for me it was easy, in the real life I always debate
and I am very participative in
discussions…the only thing it was uncomfortable for me was that when I agreed, I had to say yea, but..and had no arguments against the proposal -in the end we have listened to the “stupid” ideas and chose them, since we could not agree -it was very difficult to focus on the discussion since we had so many interruptions from different people saying crazy things, speaking about their grandmothers etc, so I really didn’t understand what was going on.
The participants learned that in a decision making process the active listening, the focus, the motivation is very important in order to be able to take a good decision.
TEMPORALITY: 1h 30m RESOURCES/MATERIALS: -the different printouts of situations -printouts of different roles
A very nice activity to start debating on the process of decision
making, since itâ€™s kind of experiential learning, where the participants have everything but a good environment to be able to decide.
Conclusions of the groups Group 1 Siberia case: It was very fun. We were comfortable with the roles. It was not annoying. The attitude was different and it was fun to feel different. I am searching for the best solution Most of the time. I felt comfortable with the group. We stopped acting our roles because we could not find a decision. So we went out from our roles made a decision and came back.
Group 2 President of the World: Vote went to Pocahontas. It was difficult (going away from the topic). There was some arguments I was agree with, but I had to play stupid and talk about M Jacksons skin color. I (agree with everybody) was agree with everybody, but this time I had to remember about the group. It was not comfortable when the others one were not comfortable with the results of the voting. When you can`t find a solution the last this is to vote. We discussed all the options with pro and contra. From the beginning our choice has not changed. Everyone was behaving according their roles. I was aware of final result to choose the person I vote. As an active listener I was involved. Pocahontas
- she is a fighter. She could handle the role of the president. But there was a
discussion about her gender. It was about her abilities but not about her gender.
Group 3 TV series: Friends We didnâ€™t reach to the decision. Everyone was distrusting everyone. It was difficult because of the attitudes we had to carry. They were acting as different persons. I was acting strangely because I was frustrated. I wanted to say something, but I had to keep my attitude and be part of the group. I was part of the decision but I was not active to change being agreed with everyone.
I want to say what I think and I felt comfortable with my role. I was a barrier with stupid questions. Those questions were killing us and everyone was investing on that. I was not comfortable with my role (to lead the game) keeping the time moderating. I had to be patient and I am not in real life.
Group 4 Titanic ending I was the one to please everybody, so I did not really express my opinion. I did not feel very comfortable (confronting my real personality). It was funny, but I was asking stupid questions. So when the group had to focus I was asking questions, stupid ones. It was hard for me, because I am not like that (personal questions). In the end I got used and started to ask questions. I was facing ironic faces and talks. I had a close position with my real personality (but person). Here I could not discuss a lot. It was barrier to have a â€œbutâ€? person in the group, who was not agree.
Group 5 Brad Pitt Case It was very fun for us. When you have a brainstorming and people have no idea or stupid ones it can be good to share. You need an active listener in the group. It was hard to listen only to men and not women (according to the role). I wanted to listen to women not men. Our team had perfect roles for everyone. I was thinking that I was the only clever person in the team because of the roles and attitudes people had. Conclusions/Role sharing -I have a group of friends and I am not patients with them. But today I decided to be and try my abilities. - It was strange to talk about something else. Usually I am super annoyed with those people and it was very fun. - We missed the imposer character and it was important to have in the group.
Day 3 morning II and afternoon OBJECTIVE: To explore the different types of the group decisión making processes within the groups of Young people To explore the different strategies how young people are involved in the decision making of adults – politicians etc. To analise the different element of the decisión making process in the different life situation
METHODOLOGY: STEP 1 – getting to know the theoretical backgroud of the group decisión making process Structure: 20 min – introduction of trainer and the sesión itself + energizer 10 min – introduction to the activity 45 min – working in the small groups 45 min – presentations 15 min – input on consensus
The method used for this activity was based on the self-learning and learning in the group. All the participants were divided into 3 smaller groups. Each group was provided with the materials from the area of the group decisión making processes and they had the following tasks to do: get familiar with the material, learn and understand it try to find different life-based examples that can represent different situations Find the effective way to present it to the group.
The group had 45 minutes to learnt he material and prepare the presentaiton out of it. During each presentation we were trying all together find the pro´s adn cont´s of the different ways of decisión making processes, analyze and get the conclusions. In the end the short input in the consensus way of the decisión maing proces was done, with the steps to consesus as well as benefits and challanges of it.
STEP 2 - putting knowledge into practice The second part of the activity aimed at practicing the knowledge received. Therefore participants were divided into 5 groups and they role was to design the decisión making process to the different situations given. The situations were design the way that each of participant could relate to this. Base don this exercise in the debriefing we have managed to ge tinto the concusions about the elements that are needed to make the decisión, ways of making the decisions that are most frequently used, and way. The tasks for the participants: • Think, and name what decisión you have to make • What kind of alternatives you have: • Who in this situation should be invovled in the decisión making process (with which role)? • What kind of information you need to make the decission: • What kind of other things you need for the decisión making (some pre-agreement in the group, facilitator, clear rules etc.): • What are the steps of the decisión making process?
The examples of the situations:
1. You are the members of the youth association. The organization for the last 5 years was run by one person (president John) and everyone was very happy by his management style. Unfortunately he has to leave since he got the job in the other country. Somehow no one knows how to proceed now, and how the organization should function right now. There is no clear information written what is the decisión making process in this situation. Members of the organization are getting frustrated, because without the president there is a pure chaos. Something must be done. Please suggest how to proceed in this situation.
2. You are the informal group of young people very much dedicated to the development of your local community. The city hall has propose to you some money to support some of your actions. They believe in you and trust your opiniĂłn about what kind of actions with which objectives you would like to organize. Because it is the end of the year the city hall must officially approve the project in order to grant the money. That means you have just 3 days to agree on the actions you would like to carry on. Please design the plan on how you are going to make those important decissions. 3. One of the activitst organization with the well developed organizational structure is planning their action. To get a lot of the visibility for their case, and to be present in media, promote the case they decided to climbe the high building
and stick the huge
poster on it. They need to decide who will implement this action, and the best person for this Â¨jobÂ¨ with a lot of climbing experience was expelled with his collegues from the organization, due to getting involved in the dangerous activities. The organization now must decide if to bring this person back to implement the action. 4. You are the members of the youth parliament, being selected in behalf of your university. The parliament itself has a lot of power, and the next week you will have voting on the elimination of the scholarships for the best students, and the students in the bad economic situation, but instead eliminating the university enrolment fee. The majority students of your school are very happy with this proposal. You and your college are being convinced by other parliament representatives from the other school to vote against. You and your college as the representatives of your university must decide how to vote. 5. The organization that you are part of is very much against pro abortion. The government is about to pass the law prohibiting the abortion in any case. The organization know that they must do something about it, and are thinking about making a huge demonstration in your city. Unfortunately in the country you are living in the demostration are ilegal. What do you do.
Presentations of the groups Group 1 Youth Involvement -The group presented the ideas from the material was provided to them. They summarized the theory by presenting a poster. -The group thought they are in different levels of involvement (adult initiated, shared decisions with young people and young people consulted and informed) - If adults want to organize a project, it is normal to consult with young people and gather their opinion. - Discussion about the difference between manipulation and decoration.
Group 2 Five Types of Decisions Making Presentation of the material on the types of decision making by combining oral presentation and acting. Everyone from the group was happy with the group discussion, as each person participated and agreed with the decision. We should have consensus in each decision, as each person will have chance and should have chance to participate and agree. People`s need should be taken into consideration while making decisions.
Group 3 Methods of Decision Making Presentation of the methods of decision making by combining oral presentation and acting. Group also makes the other participants to participate in the discussion and share their opinion. In the case of minority one small group can decide what is good for people. At the same time in the case of the play the majority decides wins during voting. Minority decision is any type of delegate decision. The group reached the consensus during the discussion.
Consensus Reaching consensus by augmenting, discussing For example discussing about university choice (where to study, which university is cheaper but gives good education for future) You bring arguments to support you thesis, you are negotiatingâ€Ś Lavinia- Everyone can be frustrated about the decision, because everyone will hear that their opinion is modifies Sebastiana- In many cases people are not satisfied. It can be also annoying to reach, when there are many people involved. Lavinia- Even if it is not the best solution individually, but it can be the best for the group. Factors that are important in consensus- time, information, skills to make a decision, responsibility, level of engagement and participation
Group work on decision making Group 1 (collect the materials used by groups) We were describing the process, talking about the things that could help us about our future actions. We could not see the consensus. We were together as a group in a certain time limit, and the things that will help us during this time. Process was discussion the things were good or bad and go on. Also we discussed the needs of the target group or having facilitator to support us. I think the structure is useful, but it is hard to manage. We could find the way as we had many options.
Group 2 People were contributed, we were brainstorming. Because of the time we needed someone urgently and also because of the functionality we made our choice.
Reaching consensus by augmenting, discussing For example discussing about university choice (where to study, which university is cheaper but gives good education for future) You bring arguments to support you thesis, you are negotiatingâ€Ś Lavinia- Everyone can be frustrated about the decision, because everyone will hear that their opinion is modifies Sebastiana- In many cases people are not satisfied. It can be also annoying to reach, when there are many people involved. Lavinia- Even if it is not the best solution individually, but it can be the best for the group. Factors that are important in consensus- time, information, skills to make a decision, responsibility, level of engagement and participation we made our choice.
Group 3 In terms of the importance of decision making having full information, doing research, having common goal in the group, establishing internal rules and expertzing.
Group 4 Involving all opinions decisions Clear rules and summarizing the conclusions for decision making
Group 5 Activist organization->planning the steps Making clear steps, roles and functions, information needed Group facilitators, clarifying rules and the risks (operational structure of the process) Selecting the best option for the people
Day 4 morning OBJECTIVE: Discover and know more about the legislation in gender issues in different countries. Share good political practices and also find out the discrimination in the laws.
METHODOLOGY: We make a big drawing of Europe with the names in the countries participating in the project: Spain, Romania, Bulgaria an Italy. Then we make national groups and we give them post-its with two colors: grey for the bad practices and pink for the good practices at political level in their countries. We gave them 1 hour to investigate and then they shared their results. Some of the results were quite surprising. For example in Bulgary they don't punish sexual aggression, and in Spain some women lose their job if they get pregnant and the law doesn't protect them. However, there were also good practices in terms of fighting against inequality, for example support for women how have suffered gender based violence.
Presentation of the support person and the rules of the house. Also to set up the timetable to do the reimbursement sheets and collection of boarding passes and so on.
TEMPORALITY: 2h RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Map of Europe, post-it, pens, computers and internet access.
It was a very interesting session that allow us to discover other
realities and what is the agenda in the other countries and which one we share as Europeans. We could find the violence against women a real problem that we have to fight against. It was surprising that one group chose that in their country men can't decide about abortion of women as example of inequality. This started a deep debate about if men have the same rights in the decision, because is alarming this understanding of "equality" among youngsters.
Results of the discussion Country Maps ROMANIA • Constitution is equally for men and women • Contraception in some cases you do not need a prescription from the doctor • Divorce-women get the child (not by law) • Retiring age men 65/women 60 • Same sex marriage- there is no law • Two years for maternity leave- in happens that fathers also take the leave • If there is common things made during the marriage it will be divided equally into 2 parts. • After 2010 you can also sign a contract (if a person wants) to make everything separately or in common during marriage • We think law should be flexible with laws to adapt to our biological differences • There is a law if one as a doctor
give an abortion (men should sign a agreement to for
abortion). This law has many contradictions. • Man can get marry at the age of 18, women get marry even at the age 16 with the approval of parents. You can also get married at the age of 15 if you have a approval of the doctor that a girl can carry a child. • Law in treating both genders in equal way • Law having equal opportunities. • 70% of women should be involved to decision making process in public sphere.
BULGARIA • There is no law against sexual violence. Women are protected. • Boys are accepted with lower grades to the university then girls (arrangement among universities to balance • Women are not supported them in military service. Many difficulties to go to school (no law exists, but the reality). • Constitution is based on equal rights.
• No law for abortion (if you are under 18, one f the parents should sign a document) • Maternity law-mother can stay with a child for 2 years. Father also can take the same leave. It also can be the grandmother. When the kid is born father can take 2 weeks off to stay with a kid. • Contract before marriage. Father also can take the kid after the divorce (by law). • Law against domestic violence • Discrimination law – commission chosen by the parliament dealing with thse issues.
ITALY • Constitution recognizes the principal of the equality. Special bodies to deal with those issues • Equal access to education both for men and women • Free medical control for women (attending gynecologist) • Maternity is for one year- discussion for fraternity • Women and men can vote… • Pink quote• No law against stalking-real problem in Italy nowadays • Discriminative law against men • Fathers last name given to children • Men retire • Abortion law-doctors can decide to do or not. Even if it legal, doctor can decide to do or not • Military service is harder for women to get. • Different age for retiring for men and women.
SPAIN • There is law to protect women against violence • No money for the person who takes care of the person who is dependent in family. • Father has to pay for the kid after divorce. • Children stay with women after divorce.
Day 4 afternoon OBJECTIVE: -To reflect about our own needs in decision making process -To share them with others and find a common list of recommendations in order to make the decision making process comfortable, equal for women and men -To experience a decision making process in the group and be aware of our own behavior and role in the decision making process in the group
METHODOLOGY: The session started with a nice energizer , where each of the participants got stuck on their bodies 4 post-its. They had to get rid of them and stick them to another person. When the game finished we counted who had less post-its on their bodies. Afterwards the facilitator introduced the objectives of the session. The participants had to make first individual reflexions about their needs in decision making process. What do you need in order to express yourself freely in a group while a decision is being made? What helps the group to take the right decision? They had 15 min to reflect and write the needs down. The second step was to join a group of people with whom you feel comfortable and share your needs with them. The group split into 3 groups and they had 15 min for sharing. After that they had to make a list of 10 most important things that they had in common. The last step was to present the list to other groups. And for that we have played the game pantomime. Each group had to tell to one of the participants of the other group one NEED of their list, and that person had to represent with mimic to his/her group. We have made several rounds (some kind of competition) and the group who had guessed more times won. In the end we made a debriefing and spoke about their needs, added some more and made sure that everybody understands them. Conditions young people need in decision making -Respect -Professional advice -Time for reflection (individual and in group) -Time to take de decision -Courage to express yourself -Interactive group -Active participation
-Define the purpose -Common rules for everyone -Useful information -Open mind -Positive decision impact -To include everyone even if they speak different languages -Everyone pays attention -Safe environment
We continued after a short break to put our â€œlistâ€? into practice. The group had the following task:
THE TRIBES You are a tribe living in the territory of the King of Riceland. It was a peaceful place, as until now all goods were available for all the people of Riceland. But in Riceland the only food is rice and winter is coming soon so you desperately need rice in order to survive. The problem is that in Riceland you are not the only tribe. There is another tribe living there. The King is a fair leader but he knows that this winter the amount of rice is scares because of the bad weather during the year. He is very worried and he does not know how to distribute the rice fairly therefore he decides to ask the tribes to fulfil his one and only whish. He wants to have a photo taken of himself and his family. One of the tribes has the lenses and battery of the camera, the other tribe has the body of the camera. In order to take the picture you need the full equipment. But without the photo your tribe will die during the winter of hunger. The King offers 200 kg of rice for the photo. 200 kg is perfectly enough for one tribe to survive comfortable during the winter but also can be enough for both tribes if you share. But if you share remember that rice might not be enough for all of you to survive. Therefore you have to visit the other tribe and negotiate how you will solve this situation. You can only meet three times with the other tribe.
1st meeting: Gather as much of information about the other tribe as possible. 2nd meeting: Negotiate your conditions. 3rd meeting: (present your) Final decision, final solution
First you have to decide within the members what is the structure of the tribe. Examples: You have a chief and followers Democracy Anarchy etc. Decide on a representative colour/colours and a symbol (flag, anthem, etc.) of the tribe and think of how your people look like and dress up/mask yourself if you have the possibility. Tribe B: You are a matriarchal tribe and you live in harmony with the nature. Your people are very peaceful and you are interested in other people's opinion and care about their well-being. In your tribe when you say YES it means NO, and when you say NO it means YES. Only women can negotiate. Whenever you say something you have to give thanks with gestures to mother Earth or the Sun. You have the body of the camera. Tribe A: You are a patriarchal tribe and you are materialistic. For your people development, progress is very important and you would do anything to achieve your goals. Your tribe never looks in the eyes of other people when they are speaking to you or when you speak to them. Only men can negotiate. In your tribe MAYBE means YES. You have the lenses and the batteries of the camera.
So the group split into 2 groups and started preparing their tribes. Meanwhile, the team choose 1 observer per group (the person that we thought could be a good observer) that had the tasks to observe the process of decision making while making the task. These to persons also participated in taking decisions, so that the group would not feel to uncomfortable. The groups had 1 hour and a half to solve the problem. In the end, during the last meeting of the tribes, the decision was taken: the tribes killed each other ): After that we gathered the group and made the debriefing on: -The task itself -The process of taking decisions in the group The participants reflected on why it was so difficult to decide about the negotiation with the orhet tribe, what were the barriers of communication, how was it to be matriarcal and listen only to decisions of women and viceversa, what was the role of the time pressur in the decision making, why they killed each other in the end?, etc On the other hand, the two obervers presented us their observations and the group realized it’s very difficult to include people who don’t speak english well into the process of deciding and reflected on how to be more inclusive towards them.
After the “hot debate” and conclusions drawn, the group went into reflexion groups and made reflexions of the day.
TEMPORALITY: 3 hours RESOURCES/MATERIALS:Flipcharts, paper, markers Printed out descriptions of the tribes Material in order to dress up and prepare the tribe
OBSERVATIONS: Both activities are very motivating and challenging and very good results come out, experiential learning.. Maybe have a bit more time for the second one, at least 2,5 hours. In each of the groups there have to be a supporting person to keep track of the time and help the group.
Day 5 day in Aguilas OBJECTIVE: Discover more about the city of Ă guilas Meet the locals Discover more about the role of women in Spanish families Overcome linguistic barriers.
METHODOLOGY: We split participants in four groups We give one pen to each group The task: they have one hour and a half to do exchanges (starting with the pen) with the locals to get more valuable things. They have also to gather information about what is the role of the women in the family.
TEMPORALITY: 1h 30min RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Map of Europe, post-it, pens, computers and internet access.
OBSERVATIONS: As it was a quite competitive group they were more focused on the results than on the process, so it's important that they understand the aim of the exercise, which is to have fun and to meet the locals. However one of the groups brought very valuable but priceless things, that the smile of a group of children or the love of a couple. That was great! About the language issues is better to have in each group at least one Spanish speaker. In most of the families was the woman who took the decisions or they took the decisions together man and woman.
Day 6 morning OBJECTIVE: -to start working and reflecting on future common activities and actions in our local communities -to prepare recommendations for the politicians about more equal decision making process for women and men -to think about the questions the participants would like to make to the politicians about the gender equality in the decision making process in the world of politics
METHODOLOGY: The day started with the energizer and the introduction of the day activities and objectives. The energizer was run by the Italian group, they have played the mouse and the cat. The facilitators prepared in advance the working place as the â€œworld cafĂŠâ€?, with four different tables, on each table there was a task to do. The participants traveled in little groups from one table to another and reflected about the tasks, that were: 1.Local activities with youth that they would like to make once returned to their homes (on topic of gender equality in decision making process) 2.Good practices, publications, web pages they know in working with youth on gender, gender equality and decision making process 3.Recommendations that they would like to make to the politicians, in order to make the decision making process more equal for women and men 4.The questions they would like to make to the politicians about the gender equality in the decision making process in the politics world The groups had 10 minutes per table. After everybody visited all the tables, the groups made presentations of the results and after each of them had 5 minutes to decide on which topic he/she would like to work furthermore to define and develop it in details.
METHODOLOGY: The day started with the energizer and the introduction of the day activities and objectives. The energizer was run by the Italian group, they have played the mouse and the cat. The facilitators prepared in advance the working place as the “world café”, with four different tables, on each table there was a task to do. The participants traveled in little groups from one table to another and reflected about the tasks, that were: 1.Local activities with youth that they would like to make once returned to their homes (on topic of gender equality in decision making process) 2.Good practices, publications, web pages they know in working with youth on gender, gender equality and decision making process 3.Recommendations that they would like to make to the politicians, in order to make the decision making process more equal for women and men 4.The questions they would like to make to the politicians about the gender equality in the decision making process in the politics world The groups had 10 minutes per table. After everybody visited all the tables, the groups made presentations of the results and after each of them had 5 minutes to decide on which topic he/she would like to work furthermore to define and develop it in details. These were the results of the working groups: 1.ACTIVITIES AND FOLLOW UP PROJECTS: Antidiscrimination Activity
Topic: Gender equality, cultural diversity Target Group: 30 participants (10 teachers and 20 students) Very young students and teachers Adolescents and teachers Educational diversity (private and public, etc) Time: 1 day Human Resources: 2 facilitators Objectives: Teachers and students learn from each other about equality and that they have the same rights and responsibilities to express themselves when they are taking a decision.
Methodology/Structure: Get to know each other Coffee break Energizers Exercise to create trust Lunch break Definitions and explanations about the topic (interactive, activities) Exercise for opinions, point of views, example (workshop) Blog (Lara, Alex, Andrei)
Name: Equality Building Topics: Question of the week related to gender Opinions pro/contra (eg. Phrase and different opiniĂłn) Statistics Case studies about different countries Expert opinion/interviews Discussion on different categories (eg. Gender, ageâ€Ś) Events (events around the world on gender equality)
Team Contacts (social media) Photos Search tool
Bloggers are young people, simple design, advertisement for sustainability
Implementation of a long term project
Title: Say Yes to Prevention Description and Aims: To raise awareness about sexually transmitted diseases for all genders including transgender. This program is also addressed to immigrants. Duration: 12 months Target Group: 15 up to 60 years old Location: Village with 5000-6000 inhabitants Advantages: To present the spreading of HIV and to reduce the number of abortion, to prevent prostate and prevent breast cancer. Budget- EU, government, private sector Results: Health reduce the number of people
ACTIVITIES Sponsor by private sector
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 X
10 11 12
brainstorming with expert Local events
Free week every month for
free medical consultation Meeting with Government,
doctors, experts Check the results Follow up act.
Our suggestions for the politicians of Lorca
• Create a meeting space for the local politicians and delegates of civil society in order to share experiences and to collaborate to promote gender equality. • Initiate, finance and support educational programmes on the topic (for example a training for the local teachers). • Employ a gender advisor and cooperate with him/her during the decision making process. • Create awareness-raising activities for the public on a local level (for example set up a „Gender Equality Day”) • Create a network with other local politicians from other cities and share good practices. • Provide free childcare for families in need. • Consider a gender quota in the city council. As we are working on a project called “Equality Building” we would like you to answer a few questions related to gender in decision making process and how young people are being prepared for making important decisions. Firstly we have a question concerning the Supreme decision making institution Cortes Generales, because laws reflect on every person. There are currently 614 memebers, so • We would like you to tell us why there are more men than women in Cortes Generales and is it different on local level? Then, another thing we would like to know if gender matters to be able to make decision and our question is. • Do you think that gender equality in decision making process is possible in politics? Also, we have questions in another aspect- youngsters. • Taking into consideration the fact that young people are the future of the country, how important is it for you their abilities to make important decisions? • If it is considered as important, what kind of actions do you take related to informing and teaching youngsters (e.g. Non-formal learning) • Last but not least, is there some kind of special funding for organizations that are involved with youth training? For example, the amount of money spent on such activities.
TEMPORALITY: 3h 30min (with a 30 min break) RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Flipcharts, pens, few tables and chairs
This was a very productive time for the participants since they were
responsible of creating something new by themselves after learning so many new things during the training. It was a successful and dynamic process of creation that we recommend with this kind of methodology. Maybe a little bit more time for reflexion would be an added plus.
Day 6 afternoon OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this activity was to prepare the motivational phrases which will be the content of the tip book of the seminar.
METHODOLOGY: First part of this workshop was an “energizer” type of activity. The aim was to trigger the creativity of the participants. They were working in 4 groups and each group should remake a machine from their own body using their creative ideas. Machines were: hairdryer microwave land mover typewriter When finishing the exercise participants were asked to pick 3 cards (Dixit) that they liked. With the help of the cards they had to prepare (individual work) 3 motivational phrases or sentences in connection with equality and decision making. When participants finished they had to write the phrases on a flipchart and finally everybody could read all the ideas that they had. Afterwards they were divided in groups of 3. The groups had to pick 3 phrases that they liked the most and were asked to take photos. The task was to take photos which express the meaning of the phrases which they chose. The tip book of the seminar is going to be made from the motivational phrases and connecting different drawings made from the participants’ ideas.
TEMPORALITY: 1h 30min RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Dixit cards: which triggered the emotional and creative capabilities of participants, paper, markers and flipchart paper. Mobile phones / cameras of participants.
Day 6 night. Changing roles party OBJECTIVE: Break the gender prejudices Experience the good and the bad aspects of being the opposite gender Face the people expectations about gender and break them Discover more about gender issues in each country
METHODOLOGY: We asked people to bring clothes to dress up as the opposite gender. After dinner we dressed up and we paint our faces. We went to a local pub to face the locals disguised as women and men. Then we came back and each country made a performance about gender issues that they face in their lifes.
TEMPORALITY: 2h RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Clothes, hats, high-heels shoes, face paints
OBSERVATIONS: It was a very interesting activity and everybody enjoyed, even though not everybody dressed up. A few guys were scared about dressing like a woman. We discovered how much our look conditions our acts and also the perception of others. It is a very funny and fruitful activity that can be done again. It needs a lot of confidence among the group, so is better do it in the last days.
Day 7 afternoon. Evaluation OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the process of the seminar Evaluate the learning and what is the impact in participants Evaluate the facilities, practical things and the team Help them to not forget the seminar, the learning and the experience Give and receive feedback
METHODOLOGY: First we made an informal evaluation. We asked them to make a circle and we put a bell in the middle. We said some statements and they had to get close to the bell if they agreed with the statement. First we started asking questions about the team, the facilitator, the supporting person, etc., then about facilities and practical staff and finally about learning and impact. We could have a visual picture of how much people had learnt and how much the have got from the seminar. Then we got inside and we give them a paper. The task was to make a draw about some important moment of the seminar or what was the meaning of the seminar for them. We made a visualization to help them to remember what had been done during the seminar and then we put some inspiration music. After they finished the drawings they put their names on it, they pass them around and everybody wrote some feedback on the back until the draw came again to its owner. After that we give them a certificate to warrant their learning and their participation, as in Democracy Projects doesn't exist youthpass. Finally we asked them to fill up the forms we had prepared, to have an official evaluation.
TEMPORALITY: 1h30. Break (30 min). 1h RESOURCES/MATERIALS:Bell, paper and pens, music and speakers
Each Day. Reflexion groups and feedback OBJECTIVE: Give participants space and time for reflection Get feedback from them Modify the schedule depending on the needs od participants
METHODOLOGY: First day we asked them to decide in which language they want to make the reflection in order to let them feel comfortable and free to speak. Then we made groups of 6 people and we gave them a paper with a suggested structure for the refection to help them if they don't know how to do it (please find attached this document). We gave them half an hour to meet in groups and then we asked the groups to come one by one and give us feedback. After that we have a team meeting and discuss how to improve the seminar and to fit the participants needs. The suggested structure for evaluation teams: 1. Choose one of you to report the team. 2. Summarize all the activities done this day. 3. Find the agreement of the group about: -What was the most interesting/useful? -What was the less interesting/useful? -What are the feelings about the day? -What are your suggestions about what to keep and what to change?
TEMPORALITY: 30 min. group reflection 30 min. feedback RESOURCES/MATERIALS: Paper and pens. Suggested structure.
OBSERVATIONS: Participants were very happy to have this opportunity to meet together and give us feedback, and for us was very useful to know their feelings and opinions. After one of the feedbacks we decided to introduce an observer in the activities in order to help them to reflect about the group dynamics and the role of each one in the group. We also changed the working hours after participant agreed of having more time at lunch time and some of the activities we'd designed.
POLITICIANS ANDYOUNGSTERS MEETING Politicians who took part in the meeting VERÓNICA LÓPEZ. President of General Directorate of Youth. AGUSTÍN LLAMAS. Youth councelor. LALI IBARRA. Woman councelor. ANA MARÍA LIDÓN. Participation councelor. ANDREA PERIAGO Federación Mujeres
Suggestions to polititians 1. Create a meeting space for the local politicians and delegates of civil society in order to share experiences and to collaborate to promote gender equality. It could be useful to establish dialogue tables in order to take into account the requests and the expertise coming from civil society, elaborate policies which reflect the real needs of people, evaluate the situation. We consider this action a core element in order to elaborate bottom up policies, implementing the so called participatory democracy and involve the community into the decision making process.
2. Initiate, finance and support educational programmes on the topic (for example a training for the local teachers). Studies show that gender stereotypes and prejudices are also perpetuated in schools, leading to contraselection, low self-esteem and even sexual harrassment amongst students. In order to prevent this, it’s vital to sensibilize teachers to the topic. With an effective strategy, adjusted to the local reality, teachers can create an environment where all students feel safe, competent and free, regardless their gender.
3. Employ a gender advisor and cooperate with him/her during the decision making process. A trained gender expert can help in designing a gender equality strategy. During the decision making process he/she can foresee the decision’s consequencies on men and women, thus preventing discrimination.
4. Create awareness-raising activities for the public on a local level (for example set up a „Gender Equality Day”) Gender inequality affects everyone, and the public authorities have an important role in thematising social issues. Initiating events and programs on the topic shows the local authorities’ commitment to equality and can help inhabitants become aware of their responsibility and possible role in eliminating discrimination.
5. Create a network with other local politicians from other cities and share good practices. Establish formal and informal consultations between local politicians in order to cooperate and coordinate gender equality policies. The aim is to connect local realities spreading a culture of equality, and to implement policies avoiding overlapping and to learn from each other’s experiences.
6. Provide free childcare for families in need. Without available childcare options, mothers can lose their jobs and unemployed parents don’t have the possibility to search for a job. This is especially difficult for single mothers, and increases women’s economic dependency on men. It’s essential to make childcare available for everyone in order to build equality
7. Consider a gender quota in the city council in order to ensure at least a minimum number of women into decision making process. Quotas system could be an efficient method to reach a gender balance in political institutions. We consider that women's experiences are needed in political life and they are just as qualified as men, but women's qualifications are downgraded and minimized in a male-dominated political system. In this sanse a gender quota compensates actual barriers that prevent women from their fair share of the political seats. Quotas can also contribute to a process of democratisation by making the nomination process more transparent and formalised. We are aware that introducing quotas may cause conflicts, but these may be only temprarily.
Intervention after suggestions VERONICA LOPEZ.
She appreciates the suggestions and comments that after the
decentralization of power autonomies took a role in close collaboration with civil society, such as the Federation of Women, whose representative is present or the Youth Council. She also added that democracy in Spain is â€œvery youngâ€?; just 35 years ago a woman could not open a bank account without the permission of her husband. Since then many changes have been achieved for gender equality, but there is still a long way to go. About the quota she doesnâ€™t agree with this as a solution, because she consider that as positive discrimination that can have problems. In her closing remarks she mentioned that we could see three main points in the listed suggestions the suggestions that have weight in policy arising from the General Directorate of Youth ....: Awareness raising, visibility and coordination, which shows that we are walking in the same direction.
Questions and answers
1. We would like to ask you why there are more men than women in the Parliament and if there is still much to do in this field? VERONICA LOPEZ. As I mentioned before, our democracy is very young and although much has already been achieved, still much remains to be done in this field.
2. Do you think that gender equality in the decision-making process is possible in politics? LALI IBARRA. We need to value the potential of women, because we have a lot to say. Policies that are made in the Council are transversal that takes into account the perspective of women. We try to have a closer contact with the female population to implement these policies. They also have a raising awareness and visibility campaign to fight against gender-based violence, which is one of the most urgent social issues nowadays. The Federation for Women and Concejalía are developing a joint project now, because there have been cases of gender based violence among youngsters. They work at schools, so if cases of violence are detected, girls have the opportunity be assisted by specialists. We work with women supporting partnership and participation, so they can be together, encourage participation and collaboration. The City Council allocated a specific budget for this field.
We are also collaborating with the
The Directorate General for Gender-Based Violence Prevention of Murcia. VERÓNICA LÓPEZ. We need much awareness and still a lot to go.
3. Considering the fact that young people are the future of the country, how important is their ability to make decisions for you? AGUSTIN LLAMAS. Young people are not the future of the country, they are the present. They are as important as adults. We have Council of Youth that brings together young people of Lorca. The Department of Youth does 100% of its actions in collaboration with youth organizations such as Cazalla or Council of Youth. We believe that participation can ensure that young people have weight in our decisions .
4. If you consider this important than what kinds of actions are taken to inform and educate young people? (e.g. non-formal learning). VERONICA. We coordinate educational activities in the Region of Murcia. Non-formal education is very important for us. Almost every action taken by the Directorate General is in the field of non-formal education.
We believe that it is as important as formal education for social,
personal and professional development. There are 80 Youth Information Centres in the Region of Murcia. We also give a training course for non-formal education (you can find the information on the website: mundojoven.net). We have a school for developing non-formal learning. Just recently we finished a course at the University of Mar on non-formal education. It was the fifth edition of this course which has brought together about 60 participants.
5. Is there any funding for organizations that are involved with the training of young people? For example, what is the amount of money spent on these activities? VERONICA LOPEZ. There is a budget in the Directorate General for the school of leisure and spare time. On the other hand, each Council has its own budget.
ANDREA PERIAGO. I want to congratulate you for the work you have done. I noticed that the legislation is very different from one country to another. We have made a big progress here, but we have a long way to go. Women have a big problem- we are left very far from the ruling positions. For example, most presidents of European countries are men.
If we work in
collaboration with youth organizations we will be able to break the glass ceiling. I am very happy to see you here. Women have been working with this problem for a long time and now I am very glad to see you because this problem affects you and all of us. I urge you to continue working in this direction and I appreciate the initiative. True equality of tomorrow is in your hands. ANA MARIA LIDĂ“N. I offer the website of citizen participation to publish the results of your project. The problem of gender inequality in decision-making is not only a problem of women, but of all citizens. AUGUSTINE. We are very happy to have you here. Through education of good citizens equality is achieved, and it is achieved through the quality of non-formal education.
Radio interview http://goo.gl/V6DeRu
CAZALLA INTERCULTURAL 2013
Pictures and design of the postcards: Marta Zak Edited by: Sibisse Rodríguez CAZALLA INTERCULTURAL AYUNTAMIENTO DE LORCA January 2013