Session Theme Feedback: Inclusion / Exclusion: Who is out if men are in?

Facilitator’s impressions and major learnings emerging through the discussions
Overview
We started the session by hearing some of the ideas, insights, revelations and contentions aired at the initial OA dialogue on Working with Men, in July. I had lifted about 20 direct quotes from that first session, transcribed them onto cards and distributed these cards around the room, so that different people’s voices read them out. As if that first dialogue was echoing from the walls. My intention was for this second dialogue to build on what had already been expressed rather than cover the same ground again. It worked even better than hoped.

Two people who had been present in July (Sthe and Sue) spoke briefly about what they had taken away from that first gathering.

We spent the rest of the session in dialogue. Unsurprisingly, this was a more robust, sometimes more divergent, dialogue than before. There was less time for the niceties – and it was appropriate to get some of the disagreements expressed. Frustration was written all over the faces of feminist and LGBTI activists when one participant talked about their gender awareness work with men which has resulted in husbands being more understanding of why their wives loved shoes so much. And these activists got their airtime, expressing themselves eloquently on the subject.

There were many men in the room. Perhaps more men than women, I didn’t count. It was particularly good to have Zimbabwean colleagues from Padare Men’s Forum present.

Reflections
The “Panel” had not been well briefed by OA and there was some confusion as to KRCC’s role. Both KRCC (Mxolisi) and Padare (Leo) had brought powerpoint presentations, expecting to have time to present them. This was the first time I was aware of this expectation. Given the flexible nature of dialogue, it proved easy to create 15 minutes at the end for their presentations.