 It's actually my mom, but it's okay, it's fine. So I think that we can go directly to a short round of introductions. I will ask you to please give your name, your organization, where you are at this moment, or where do you live normally, and one word, free association word that you associate feminized feminization of politics, too. So for example, I would go and then I would give the floor to, to the rest. My name is Vera. I am project manager in Rosa Luxemburg, Stifton, in Madrid. And for me, feminization of politics means real democracy. So I will go now to Senya. Okay. I didn't have time to think about the word. Did you say? You can pass off it if you want. Okay. So hi, everyone. My name is Xenia. I live in Belgrade and work in Rosa Luxemburg, Stifton game, Belgrade office. But we are office is actually working in the whole region. And yeah, the first word that came up to my mind, it's solidarity, like radical solidarity. So should I give a word to someone else? We go like this or? No, I will. Thank you, Xenia. Alex. Hi, I'm Alex. I'm Alex. I'm working for the foundation in the program Global Feminism. And I'm currently in the south of Germany, but normally I'm in Buenos Aires. And the word is like horizontality, I think. That's the word. Thanks, Irene. Hi, I'm Irene. I'm one of the authors of the report of feminist politics now. And actually, I'm in Madrid. And if I have to choose a word, I will say, I will say friends, because this all this experience of working with a lot of amazing women from everywhere around the world in this municipalism and feminism project has brought me friends beyond activism. So that's the word I will choose. Yeah. Thank you, Irene. Doritun Johanna. Hello, I'm Johanna and I'm the head of the European unit. And I live and work in Berlin if I'm not visiting one of the 10 offices, which was hard in the last month. But usually I do a lot and I don't have a word. I have a sentence and feminization of politics mean to me that I might get rid of a lot of things which drive me crazy all day long. Good. Thanks. Hello, everybody. I'm Dorit and we are currently in the office here in Berlin on Transmeringplatz, where the head quarter of the foundation is. I'm living in Tristan and I'm a project manager in Rosa Luxemburg Foundation. And I would choose the word non-competition. Cool. Thanks, Frau Ada Röhrlmann. Hi, I'm Ada from RLS in Brussels and I'm currently in the office. I escaped my home where I was in home office to be undisturbed by my family. But actually the word that comes to mind are the words and it's a bit of a cheat because it's two words is bringing care into democracy. Thank you, Ada. Gris. Hi, everyone. I'm Cristiane. I'm Cristiane Gomes from the office of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Brazil. I live in Brazil in Sao Paulo and I'm one of the worst countries to be right now is Brazil. And and the word actually two words and transformation and impeccionality. And Serena is here, too. Mama, yeah. Mama, it's so beautiful to be with my friend. It's so beautiful to be with my friend. How beautiful is this friend? Is this Serena? Serena. Say hi. Mama, yeah. Thank you, Gris. Barbara, Peter. Hi, I'm Barbara. I work in the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation Berlin office in the Institute for Social Analysis. And there are so many things that have been said, so I'm saying. Equal access. Thank you very much. Williana, please. Hello, everyone. My name is Billy, and I'm here in front of the Belgrade. Don't like Belgrade now from Belgrade working from home today. My word would usually be democracy, participatory democracy. But I'll just say equality because it's also an element of the essential equality. Thank you very much. Can you now, please? Hi, I'm Kajom Tetzler from the Linke Party in Berlin. I'm at the very moment in my garden, as you can see in my background. And where you just said equality, that was also what came to my mind. And I thought about finding ways of encountering male dominated behavior, maybe also. Perfect. Katarina. Hi, I'm Katarina Pühl. I work as well as in the Institute for Social Research in Berlin. I'm a colleague of Barbara and in I live and work in Berlin. So and I have three words to share. Decolonization and Black Lives Matter and queer feminist materialism. Thank you. I'm happy to join and to see you all. Thank you, Katarina. Kerstin, please. Hello, everyone. I'm Kerstin. I'm from the left party also in Germany. And I work there for the chairwoman, Katja Kipping. And I live in Berlin. I'm also at home office right now. And I like all your words, and I will just say change. Thank you for that. Angela. Hi, I'm Angela Roelich. I hope you can hear me because I have really problems with internet connection right now and I have problems to share with you all. Yeah, I wrote that, but I don't know what's happening. It's one Angela and one Angela. So it's great that we're not just talking. Go ahead, please. OK, sorry. So I have really big problems now with the internet, but I hope I will be able to to participate in this. Anyway, I'm from an organization and I'm from Belgrade, from Belgrade. And I live and work in Belgrade as well as Vienna. So I would choose the word empathy. Great, thanks. Now the other Angela. Hello, I'm Angela from the RLS office in Berlin and I'm program coordinator in the Latin American department. And my word is powerful transformation. Mm hmm. Perfect. Now we go to Ali. Hi, I'm really happy to be here. I live in Madrid. I'm one of the authors of the of the report and I'm at my home. And for me, feminization of politics is collective intelligence. Great. We go to Laura. Hello, I'm Laura Roth. I'm also one of the co-authors. I live in the Basque country in a small town called Aya. And to me, feminization of politics is connected to interdependence. Great. And I would love to listen to Floor. I don't know if it's possible. I don't think so, no? Yes, yes, it is. I hear very well. I'm sorry, but I don't know why, but my camera doesn't work. I can't see you all and I'm very happy to see you. I would like you to see me too, but I don't know how to do it. And well, you just said, well, I work in Buenos Aires office as a project manager and I live here also. I'm in my home now because that's the way things are now. And I usually said all the words I would like to say and to talk about here, but I think that it has to do with the desire to change everything that we had as feminists and also politics has to do with that. The feminization of politics, it's everything that we want. OK, last but not least, I would like to introduce Alex and Maria. Maria is taking some notes and maybe doing some kind of communicative work for us. She's in the Basque country as well. And she will be writing a small note for the website and sharing it with you afterwards. So she's here like a server, but she knows a lot about this matter. So please feel free to jump in whenever you feel like Maria, please. And Alex in Brussels, she's the PR manager and she's in charge not only of the technical stuff behind the scenes right now, but also behind the publication itself, the layout and the editing. And she's, of course, being one of the protagonists of the whole thing. So I will directly turn the floor to Laura, Ale and Irene. Thank you. OK, so it's my turn. First of all, we would like to make a super brief introduction on the political framework and the background of this project, of this report. So let me share. This is that uncomfortable moment in every video conference when you share the screen and it doesn't work, but let's hope it does. So let me share. OK, is it working? Yes, OK, perfect. So as I said, I would like to to tell you a bit more about the framework in which all this project was born and at the stage we are now. So which is the starting point, as you can see in this map? We were a group of six different municipalities, organizations from different places in Europe who joined forces in 2018. And thanks to a grant that we received by Fundaction, a participatory fund, we were able to establish a series of meetings and workshops to develop a methodology on feminization of politics. I'm not going to tell you what do we mean by feminization of politics because I will give that word to Laura, who is the real expert on this field. But the interesting point of this is the way we started working together is that despite all the huge difference among these organizations, because you have, for example, I don't know, difference not only in the size, but in the way they reach political approaches. The way, the agreements that led to the building of these platforms, we were able to reach common grounds on political actions. And as you can see in this map, you have, I don't know, for example, La Silo Masa Critica in Napoli, which is a social center, which is working on politics by empowering the city through culture and arts. And then you have, for example, Barcelona and Común in Barcelona, who is currently the ruling party in the city town, in the town hall. So you have a very different background from interconnection, but we were able to find common grounds and to work together. So during from 2009 until now, until now this because we are still alive, this feminization of politics project has been working. And this report was one step more on the, on the, on the president, thanks to Rosa Luxemburg Foundation and Vera. We were able to, to, let's say, to broaden, to broaden the focus and to bring all the things that have been learning and working together in this, within these six sister organizations and to invite 10 organizations more. We interviewed people from all around the world, trying to understand why, what do we, what do they understood as a feminization of politics within the, the Uniti Palace framework? Of course, not everybody is here in this, in this report because we wanted to reflect the diversity of organizations, but of course the willingness of the organizations, the times were not just so we, we were able to, to have some people participate in some other, not for example, we are missing the Kurdish, the Kurds, the Kurdistan people in this, in this project and we said so in the report, for example, but at the same time we were able to, to interview and to meet people from a very small projects, municipal projects who hadn't had the floor to, to speak before. So it wasn't, let me, let me just interrupt you for a second. If you could speak slower. Yes, sure, that, that's, that's one of my problems in other fields in my life to be honest. So yeah, okay. So I don't know if all, if all of you have read this, this report is very, is very long and as Vera said it's not very academic, it's much more focused on practice and focused on the, how we, we, we were able to, to find these common problems and to be able to identify them as, as problems themselves and which solutions we will find the feasible to, to, to implement. Some of them have been already successful tools implemented in many cities and in many organizations. Some others have been just suggestions and some others have been failures because we also learn from failures. So I, I, we wrote here one of the quotes that one of the participants in the debate say we, because we want not only affect the, what we do but also how we engage in activism. And that was maybe one of the, of the main, of the main, let's say goals we had in mind when working in all of these together. So basically why municipalism and why feminization? Okay. We understood municipalism as a tool for radical democracy and transformation. Why? Because new municipalism and I think in this time I would like to thank the contributions from many authors and experts on this field for example we have Laura, Laura wrote here who for me was one of the persons who from whom I learned more about this, this field but we have Bertie Russell, we have Susan Reing, right? We have a lot of people who has provided a lot of information for this report but being very brief and just bringing some brief points on the topic we understood new municipalism as a way to, for radical democracy and for transformation in this context of the economical crisis of austerity of the rise of extreme, extreme right to these courses because it builds power from the bottom up as we said is reflects the diversity of the local political landscape and is able to be open and participatory decision making processes and be able to reflect that diversity. It also reflects the diverse, as I say the diverse sensitivity of the immediate social and political ecosystem and this sense of subsidiarity let's say is a tool for transformation because municipalism is not just the lowest step of a state administration and sometimes understood as it but it's an open space for self-government. At the same time, instead of understanding let's say the frame of the state nation which is in fact a very masculine way of understanding politics as the only frame possible to build leftist projects within municipalism we are able to find that power of diversity and escape from many masculine ways of understanding how power is exercised as Alejandra and Laura will also explain you later. And at the same time municipalism is the perfect arena to practice feminism. Why? Because this way of working through the relational the everyday works, the everyday challenges faced together are a way of understanding how we build relationships with each other in another level. And as I said before one of the limits of national political projects is that phobia to disagreement and that very main sense of exercise in power. And through intersectionality and diversity in the municipalist level we empower that diversity and we empower that project. And of course, because sometimes it's in this local realm where many of the feminist critiques that have been done to liberal democracy can be landed, can be reflected, can be touched and felt and with this COVID-19 crisis we have been very conscious on that and how the local, which is close to us is also easy and how it works and how liberal politics are exercised there can be somehow challenged by these feminist ways of doing. Another point of this feminist approach to municipalization is that we are learning by doing. That is if you work on public policies towards gender and equality as I do you know that many of the things that we have theorized and that we have discussed haven't even been yet implemented. But this way of learning by doing step by step making mistakes, learning from those mistakes, going back and then starting again is a very interesting way of building these narratives on what is common for us and working on different ways of empowering people through the local structures and challenging ourselves and this is like the artificial division between what is personal and what is political. So as I said before, if we six different organizations from six different countries with many different, with backgrounds completely different and situations completely different we're able to face these common challenges together. Here you can see that at the end in this report we chose to focus on these eight, seven, so recent seven like let's say key issues or key challenges because it was a very hard work to take everything that was discussed and trying to concentrate it in these specific points. At the end what we wrote up with this report was the way of how to feminize, as Laura will explain now, how to feminize this munitipalist potential and this political shift on the way we understand how progressive and left politics can be done and also at the same time, I think it was very interesting to think of building tools together, tools that can be adapted to very diverse and very different contexts. So as I said before, feminism is included in the munitipalist agenda but the meaning of feminization of politics is still to be discussed and it's still to be thought and it's a collective reflection and I would like to give floor to Laura because she's the one that she's going to explain you the way we have been also discussing this core point of the report. So Laura. Thank you. Laura starts, sorry, Laura, to interrupt you. If you have any questions, any suggestions, any feedback, anything, please go to the chat and post them there because we will be looking at it and then facilitate the Q&A moment. Thank you. Good. Yeah, thank you for reminding us of that. So, yeah, so now that the idea is to discuss a little bit about what feminization of politics means. So I don't know if you can change to the next slide. I would like to start by saying what it is not. Some of these things are, of course, in the report and if you read it, if you read it, if you probably know it, but so as we see it, it's not simply a struggle for mere gender equality. It goes far beyond that, although it includes a struggle for more gender equality and gender balance in every aspect, not only in positions of responsibility, but also in every kind of responsibility and so on. So it's not an attempt to promote feminine traits as such. That's something that you probably agree with. It's quite obvious, but some people, when we say the word feminization of politics, they tend to associate it with that. So it's not, we're not talking about that. We're not talking about women acting like men either and about this liberal feminist idea of having a seat at the table. That's also not what we mean with feminization of politics. It's not simply about having more women, having the resources and the power that the men have. So next slide, isn't it? Sorry, I cannot intervene. So why then insist on the term feminization and not talking about, why aren't we talking about feminization or deep patriarchalization? One of the things that we say in the report, it's very important. At least as we cannot pronounce those words, so that's a very important reason. I cannot say deep patriarchalization and in a conversation. But then also there are reasons why it makes sense to keep that idea in mind. So the first one is that, as you know, social role theory has taught us, there are differences in the way our societies understand our roles, although those roles are socially constructed, there are benefits and penalizations that are distributed in society according to those roles. So that's important. And also neuroscience tells us a lot about how our brains work, although recent studies show that we are like mosaic instead of like female or male, but it's still, those differences are still relevant and how we distribute privileges in society according to our traits and our roles is still relevant. And so to some extent we think that although we cannot simply redistribute it, separate it into men and women in the world and identify privileges according to that, it still makes sense to claim that men should adapt to ways of doing that are more common among women. And why we say that? Because those ways of doing are in the first place, things that we want to defend, they are valuable, they cooperation and care and other things, even if they are a product of socialization and also because it's fair, so to find a better balance between how we distribute responsibilities and so on. And this is a clarification, this doesn't, as I was saying before, this doesn't require a binary conception of gender and it doesn't require idealizing feminine traits either, but this is a longer conversation. So, Irene, next slide. Okay. Yeah, so basically what we discussed in the report and in the conversation we are interested in is that we want to change the forms of politics and not only the outcomes of politics. And yeah, next one. And so the basis of the approach are care and relations. We think that it's important to pay attention to care, not only to care work, but also to approach this from a conception of the ethics of care and how we cannot hide the relationships that we depend on for living and we cannot hide the importance of taking care of relationships in the same way as we cannot hide the relevance of care workforce, the sustainability of production, for instance. So one of the aims of this conception of politics is to nurture and to cultivate those relationships and also simply the outcomes and the projects that we do together. Next one. And then a few things about what feminization of politics is for us. It's a struggle against privilege. It's not, as I was saying, not a struggle between men and women, of course, but it's a struggle against any kind of privilege. It's a shift in priorities in politics from, for instance, focusing on the aims of politics and the substantive part of politics, public policies and achieving what we want to achieve and also the forms of politics and how we get there and paying attention to times, to priorities and so on. Then it's a cross-cutting issue or it should be a cross-cutting issue. This doesn't mean that it should be diluted and any other topic, but it should affect every dimension of politics. And then finally, it's, and where we are going to talk about later is, it is a change in structures, relationships, language and times of politics among many other things. So it means going to all the aspects of what we do together and how we do things together. And I will leave it here. So, yeah, just one second. Yeah, I don't know if there's any questions or we can't hear you. This was just one question by Alex saying why did you or we choose the three topics that we are going to speak about? I mean, we can take this, again, Laura, to speak about why care is for us meaning something else. I think this is a great question actually to actually continue to frame what do you think a feminization of politics is at the end of the day? Yeah, so I would say, please add in if you think there's anything missing. So the idea, we discussed about how to approach this. Of course, time was a limitation and we needed to do something. So where did we want to start? We connected that to which of the topics were probably the ones least discussed in the feminist political discussions. I don't know, things like care, as care work, for instance, is something very common or a thing that's in participation, although they're not always implemented. There are also common intersectionality is also usually an issue, although it's not fully implemented and so on. So we wanted to address the issues that were more clearly going to the core of the problem, let's say to the power and leadership are the key, seem to be the key challenges in feminizing politics. So we wanted to start there, although of course all the issues are connected and so on. And why care? Because on the one hand, we wanted to shift from the view of care as simply care work connected to taking care of dependent beings and so on. And we wanted to introduce care, also care in relations and care of relations as the thing that allows us to sustain political projects and to do politics differently. And also care of people as something that is necessary for a happy life. So we thought it made sense to approach difficult issues such as power and leadership from a point of view that is very different from the one that is usually mainstream. So yeah, I would say that. I don't know if I'm missing something. No, I would add that the importance of care as an intersectional issue. When we started in 2018, and we started discussing this in different workshops, we realized that we were all the time speaking about care and the need of care when touching all the different realms, always care was in the core. But at the same time, we always put it forward, put it back like, well, we will discuss this later. We will discuss this later and we never discuss it. So we decided, okay, let's make care like the intersectional, the focus that we'll be always next to us, like inspiring the rest of the actions we are developing. And I think that somehow we made a right approach because now we see that care is now starting to be a word that we are listening more and more on the institution and on the political agendas. We are now listening and reading about a care deal in the EU. We are now listening to experts and sociologists who never ever spoke about care, now vindicating the role of care and putting care in the EU. And so I think it's important that feminism vindicates that care and a broad concept of care is one of the main pillars of feminist politics. Okay, I would ask someone else if they have any questions, comments or else we can go directly and speak about the three topics that we were proposing to actually dig a little deeper in. The proposal is to actually have a presentation on them split into smaller groups and then go back to the plenary and share what we spoke about and, you know, discuss, challenge, interpolate or however we can say to those concepts and the way that the authors presented them and the proposals that they do. So I'm trying to make some time if you have, can you please stop sharing the screen because I cannot see everybody. Oh, great, sorry, because I had the... Thank you. Makes, it's great to see actually faces, thank you. So a couple of minutes for you all to, I don't know, any reactions, any bad, this is the same. Well, I've heard this so many times. This is not new, but this is necessary. But I don't know, whatever you can comment on is more than welcome. Alex? Hi, I don't know if it's the right moment for this question, but like we are part of this or we were invited today because like Chris and also Floor and Angela, we are organizing for a conference should have been in September now, will be hopefully next year on institutions and like feminist perspectives on institutions and we are working with many people that are organized mostly in parties because then they go into the institutions. And you were like focusing on the connection of the feminist potential in the municipalism groups. And also it says in the end of the publication, it says like, yeah, it will be so far more difficult when we talk about parties or other like more traditional forms of organization. And I was just like, it would be very interesting from our perspective to see where do you see the problems and where do you think that's possible to like for some conclusions out of it or something like that. Like where is it more close to each other and where is it not possible to make that transfer? I'm not sure if I was clear. Yeah, no, it's totally clear. It's probably requires a very long debate, right? And to see what is different and what is similar. I think many things are similar. Many of these political platforms work as political parties but they are different in many senses as well. They are smaller, they all live in the same city, people can meet each other. There's some differences that I think are crucial to in terms of the potential to do things differently and proximity, so, yeah, proximity here is key. Of course, technology gives you lots of possibilities but the fact that people can meet and can do things together by sharing spaces and sharing their lives and then working as networks with other organizations, I think it changes some things and that's why we think that it's easier for a feminist project like this to enter politics through the local level and through municipalist platforms, although there's many other things that can be implemented in other kinds of organizations and not only political parties, also like any kinds of social movements and any kinds of collectives. There's many things that we tackle in the report that can be applied to any kind of organization actually. I've been talking about this to artists in Eastern Europe, for instance, and they talk about their collectives and it seems many things resonate as well in their work. I don't know, there's many examples and probably there's some things that cannot be implemented but in any case, I don't know. So the whole point of having these conversations is to find those possibilities and the potential for feminist politics to enter politics because otherwise you could say, no, these are totally different and then maybe one of the conclusions should be when then feminism is doomed or something like that or at least in this kind of project for feminism, like to have a deeper integration into politics. And I don't think that's the, I hope that's not the answer. So yeah, but it certainly requires a very long conversation and very impractices of trial and error. So I don't know, I'm optimistic. I don't know about you, but. Okay, maybe you can leave the pessimism or the optimism for the plenary session after the breakout sessions. I would really love the authors to actually present the proposals that they have in terms of power leadership and nonviolence. I would urge you to be short in this because we will have time to actually discuss further in the breakout sessions. So if you can take three minutes each, it would be actually great. We cannot listen to you, Irene. Sorry, may I share the screen again because we have three slides with each topic. So it would be super fast, promise. Okay, so sorry, share. Okay, so let's start with power. Thank you. It's my turn. Okay, so one of the exits we worked during the report was power and power relations. There is a theoretical background about power and power relations, but we have been focused on practices, but we have this quote of Hannah Arendt that is power is the human ability to not just to act but to act in concept. It means to act with others now. So what we saw is that feminist perspectives criticize the idea of power as a power over, as a domination concept. And we want to shift in this conception of power to a conception of a power to achieve something and power to do or a power to with others. So this traditional notion of power, as I said, is based on domination and this patriarchal conception of this exclusive leadership and the accumulation of power and some kind of loyalty and critical fidelity. As we see in the next slide, there is like three notions of power, like the power over, which is individualist based on domination and is the potestas, but also we have the power to do with others. It means that the social relationship appears here to empower oneself and empower others. We also have the power with, which is a more Italian theoretical concept based in the affidamento, which is the social relationship between women, the trust that we have in others and how we entrust ourselves. So powers is not a resource. It's not something that someone has and someone gains. It's a relational character. So feminist power is about to use this relational character to change the social power structure collectively. But between power over and power to or with someone, power has power as ability, not replace the concept of power as domination. It must coexist together. So we have to think how are we going to work with that? In the way of the directions of feminist theory, we find three, like the inclusion. It's there is a frame already made. So we enter in this frame. There is a reversal way, which is to propose the opposite frame. And the other one is to displace the previous frame, building a new dialectical proposal or a new dialectical. So what we found with the feminist conception of power, this power to empower with is that some elements are, next slide please. It's a cooperation and mutual support, the empowerment, not only individual, but also as a community and to have agency in the context of oppression. So which are the challenges we found in our report is that we need to find ways to foster this cooperation inside within our organizations. So what happens with this cooperation when it acts in context of confrontation, sorry. That means that if we stick to feminist methods, we are going to be a site of decision making. This is going to affect to the way the organization works, the people in the organization works, is it also affects the way that we communicate if we have tools to conflict resolution or not. And also how do we alliance, how we have allies outside our organization. Another challenge is the time to address. When we want to make a structural change, we usually have this excuse like, we have no time to afford it now. So we need to develop these mechanisms to warranty and monitor the way we work on cooperation to reverse power relations. And it can be from political discourses, not in a confrontative way to make, for example, diplomacy group and not have the... Not to leave the diplomacy task for one person only. And also, of course, the political communication. Of course, we find also when a cooperative way of do politics confront with a competitive way, we have the question of, it will have the right to have it. If the women have different behavioral standards that men are unwilling to apply to themselves. So should we be more cooperative, more nice or more feminist than our male partners? And that's a little bit the power. Thank you, Ale. I'm going to talk a little bit about how we think leadership fits into the discussion of feminism in politics. So I will go again to social role theory. Traditionally, leadership has been associated to masculinity and seen as a male trait that is associated to agency, security, infallibility, strength, capacity to deal with stress, for instance, and speed. And this is, we think, intrinsically negative and not simply because it's something that is connected to, that is more common among men. And it is intrinsically negative because it's unstable. It depends on just one person. Usually if something happens to that person, that's a problem for the whole project. It's more vulnerable to attacks, so from the outside. It's more prone to making mistakes because it doesn't rely on collective intelligence. It is intrinsically undemocratic because it doesn't share the power to decide with others. And it's bad for the leader itself, himself or herself, because it takes, it means a lot of responsibility, a lot of visibility. They have to take a lot of shit, usually like publicly and so on. So it's a problem. So we wanted to share this quote from Karen Tep. She's one of the interviewees in the report. We'll see, so you can read it. Well, I will give you time to read it, it's probably faster. So there's many elements arising here about how an alternative vision of leadership would look like. And I will talk about those elements in a second. I just wanted to also add that it is necessary to think about a feminist way of leading because adapting to that traditional way of understanding leadership also has a backlash effect on non-privileged people. And we also, we're also subjected to the imposter syndrome, of course, no. So there's a need to find an alternative view of leadership that is connected to some of the traits that Karen is mentioning here. So if you want to move to the next slide. So we think leadership should be a feminist way of understanding leadership is connected to care and to interdependence and care of relations and a leader is someone who takes care of their relationships that are built around her person and facilitates those relationships to flourish. It's a person that can make mistakes and needs to trust others in order to lead. And it also leads based on horizontal relationships or at least as horizontal as possible and it's not in a position of vertical relationship to the other people. And I wanted to share this little thing here about how leadership also depends on the diagnosis we make of problems. And masculine or traditional leadership usually understands problems as technical problems. And there are some technical problems in our lives. Like, I don't know, I need someone to fix my oven. But usually political problems are not like this. There's not one right answer. So in technical problems, the diagnosis and solution are offered by the leader who is the expert and obedience is the result because there's one right answer and this is the person that knows best. So if we think that problems are like this, then traditional leadership is okay. But if we are facing adaptive problems, this is a way of understanding a vocabulary that is used in some discussions about leadership then like Ronald Haifetz, for instance, is a person who has been working around this. Then where there's no right answer and there's disagreement, then the diagnosis needs to be done by those who are affected by the problem themselves. There's disagreement about the solution and the key is to have a leader that can mobilize people to find a solution together. And there's many examples of people who have led like that in history and we think of feminists, your leadership is more connected to that. So keeping in mind how we understand problems and challenges is also key to think about how we want to lead as a consequence. And yeah, and then in the group later, we will discuss some more practical things like for instance, I don't know, rotation or mapping of experts, teamwork, transfer of knowledge, communication. There's many ideas that we have to implement that, but I would like to, I don't know, to stay with that idea of how we understand problems and what do we need to do to deal with them. Okay, and last but not least, there I go with violence. Well, we also added this quote from Bad Hooks. And of course, I wouldn't say that violence is an issue that is somehow hidden or less discussed as power or leadership as Alejandra and Laura have explained. I think that violence and especially patriarchal violence is nowadays in the core of feminist indications around the world. So I think it's an issue that it's obvious and that it's in all the feminist agendas. However, we had a lot of different, realms and issues to tackle within, when speaking about non-violence because the establishment of anti-violence movements and questioning the existing forms of conflict resolution and the management of interpersonal relations are key issues in the feminist politics. But we didn't want to focus on, at least now in this session, we don't want to focus on, let's say, the external, the extra problems that feminists are facing when working towards violence against women and broadening the focus on patriarchal violence. But we wanted to focus on how these feminist organizations that we have been researching are addressing the problem of violence within the organizations. And first of all, we discussed and we thought that it was important to call it by its name and to recognize that violence exists within our organizations and that our organizations are not violence free spaces. So it is important to have a common ground, to have a clear definition of what do we all understand as violence and which kinds of violence do we understand that we have to work on? Why? Because, and we had a very interesting debate that we will develop later in the other session, but we have a very interesting debate on how, once we have defined that violence and what it is, how do we want to transform it? Does these forms of violence have a potential to be work and transform or can't be tolerated and thus they have to be erased from these movements? And how do we do that? And one of the ways that feminization of politics proposed to tackle, to address this conflict is working on prevention from the focus on privation by identifying, as I said, what is violence? Which violence can be tolerated, let's say so, in a way of transforming and using it as a learning tool and which ones not? And how can we build procedures and protocols together to do so? And I know it's a very difficult debate and it implies and you have to have in mind the experiences of survivors to do so. And especially in this local level where with the role of our closest communities when trying to survive violence. And a third point is how to act when we generate these protocols, can feminization of politics propose a different way of approaching the ways of eradicating violence without a punitive, with not just a punitive approach but with different approach, both for victims and for perpetrators. So that's basically the three points that we think that are interesting to work with a feminist point of view. Great, thanks. So I think that, wow, a lot of info here and this is taking some flesh. I think that it's a moment to go to the breakout sessions and make pieces out of this and pull together and have the chance to chat with each of the authors that they will facilitate each of the sessions. Now, Alexandra, if you could please send us to the sessions those who didn't choose anything in the chest, you were randomly assigned to one of them. So I hope that you enjoy whatever you will be there. You know that these automatically closes, so in 30 minutes, 30 minutes, Angela. We will 25, 30 minutes, but yeah, 30 minutes, I think you will have a pop-up window saying, yeah, this will close. So we will be back in 30 minutes. Remember please to choose someone to actually, yeah, Senya. Yes, everybody go whatever you want. We will wait for you in the breakout sessions, okay? See you later. See you.