 that these two issues came together. It's, to me, it's impossible to talk about anything related to horizontality or democracy without taking care of feminist questions. And, of course, you know we live in a patriarchal society where certain men at least have privilege and the point is that this is not only happening in institutional settings or organizations that don't think about these issues, but also in the political left and probably also in your environments, the environments where you were, even in environments that call themselves feminist spaces. And at the same time, feminism seems to be gaining momentum in the last few years with different projects and different projects and public discourse. It seems that the topic is becoming more relevant. So it's a good time to analyze how these two things, so especially the political left and feminism come together. And I'd like to start with a quote by a colleague in Argentina. She's part of the municipalist platform in Rosario, in one of the cities there. And the reflections she shared with me a few months ago is that in the midst of this feminist revolution, we as an organization, her organization, need to make a decision about whether our projects and organizations let themselves be permeated by this revolution or if they try to hold it back and suppress it. And so it's, I think it's happening in many places that there's this reflection about the topic. So I will shortly explain what we mean by feminization of politics and give a general overview of the issue. And then in their handout, you have a really long and boring list of things, reflections and tools. This is the result of a long process of work as a network that we've been doing with many municipalist organizations across Europe. And then we produced a report with some colleagues from Madrid about the topic and doing interviews to women working in municipalist organizations in different parts of the world, also outside Europe. So this is a result of a collective reflection about the topic and it's an ongoing reflection. So it's not meant to be like a closed list of issues or tools or anything but I thought it would be interesting for you to have it if you're interested. Sometimes it's good to have big options and material to engage in further reflection and work. So we don't need to go through all that. We can go through some things if you like maybe some topics are more interesting for you than others. But yeah, I don't know. We thought that maybe the dynamic of the session also could adapt to how you're feeling about the topic and what you find most interesting. So if it's okay, I will start with sharing a few ideas about what is feminism in relation to feminizing politics. And normally when people talk about feminizing politics they tend to think about female politicians and probably feminist policies which are of course very, very important. But when we talk about the feminization of politics we are of course considering that but mainly focusing on changing structures, ways of doing politics, relationships, languages, times, priorities and things like that. So the work that we've been doing with these organizations is mainly a reflection, an internal reflection within those organizations about how they relate with each other, how they decide together, how they perceive their work and things like that. Some of their reflections of course apply to these kinds of organizations which most of them are somehow engaged with local electoral politics and some might apply to other contexts, some might not, but the conclusions might be interesting anyway. So or not, we'll see. So it's important to stress that feminizing politics doesn't mean simply having more women in charge of things and having fewer men which is also important because politics is still very masculineized in that sense. But it's not that. And it's not about feminine ways either. It's not about acting like women or it's not about being nicer about things that we associate with feminine ways in the world. It's not about that either. And it's not a thing for women. It's something that not only should be everyone's concern but it's also something that affects everyone's feeling or ability to feel at home in political projects because it's not doing things in a particular way also puts men with privilege in a difficult position in many occasions. So it's something that is important for everyone. Although of course these topics are usually interesting for women and women are the ones who attend events when we talk about these things and they meet and they organize and things like that. But we still think it's something that should involve everyone. And in addition to that, talking about men and women here is an oversimplification. We do this because of course depending on the context that is perhaps the most urgent concern but the approach towards these topics should be intersectionality actually. The people are crossed by different kinds of oppression and privilege like class, race, the fact that you're migrated, that you are disabled or many other factors and we shouldn't forget but we are talking about privilege in society and not simply about male privilege. It's not about, mainly it's not this liberal feminist view that privileged women should have more access to spaces that all the privileged men can access. So that is also important. But that said, it's still important to stress that the fact that we consider the situation of privileged men is urgent. And to certain extent the things that we've been discussing assume that on many occasions it is men the ones who should adapt to the ways of doing that make women feel more comfortable with. It doesn't mean again adopting feminine ways of being in the world but it means leaving certain really masculine ways of doing. So even if it's not about men and women this dimension is still relevant. Why should everyone adapt to masculine ways of doing and not men reflecting on their privilege and their ways of doing and adapting to other people's ways of doing. So that's also part of the approach. And why this is important because it's fair for privileged people to adapt to other ways of doing but also because there's some ways of doing that are more common amongst women and people who belong to non-privileged groups that are more valuable in themselves. There's lots of studies that show that, I don't know, tendency towards cooperation, care, diversity are more common amongst non-privileged men. So it means taking a stance on these issues because of who is in practice acting in a certain way and not in another. And I'm a bit theoretical now but there's also, it's important also to stress that we don't understand gender in a binary way where there's men and women. This is, of course, we think this is a continuum. There's many possibilities in between and but it's an oversimplification. So I asked you to keep that in mind when I say women. We don't really mean that. And it's also important to say that feminism as such is, I mean it's difficult to say that feminism is one thing. Of course, most of you know that but there's different kinds of feminism that are more useful for different kinds of people. So that's also part of the approach and we are not really taking a position in that regard but still we are rejecting some styles of feminism. In particular, there's liberal feminism that simply wants to have more women in power positions and encourage women to behave like men and to become successful and privileged as well because this forgets that most of the women who don't have that privilege will never be able to do that and it's not really assessing the roots of privilege in our societies which is not the fact that men, certain men have this access to certain positions but the ways that we behave that give values to certain ways of doing and not to others. And the final point I guess would be that we understand and we want in every project feminism to become a cross cutting issue. It's not something that belongs to groups of women who are obsessed with this and trying to resist and I mean of course that is important but it should be something that should cross through all the things which is really complicated because it's hard to keep that on the agenda all the time because in every, probably in every environment there's always bigger priorities but we would like feminism to be something that everyone, I was saying that before but that everyone considers in everything we are doing and not simply something that a group of people is in charge of and they make proposals about these issues which is usually the case in most organizations and groups. And then for you to have an idea of why we are addressing this topic in as I was mentioning before in the municipalist environment. So municipalism is connected to, so very broadly understood, it's connected to building power, political power from where people actually live in cities, towns, neighborhoods and where people actually interact with each other and instead of going for for instance states and bigger levels of government. There's many reasons for that, we could talk at some point about that but I just wanted to make clear that these are the kinds of organizations that we've been working with, local organizations that sometimes run for elections at the local level, sometimes they don't but in every case there's an understanding of how building power from the local level should engage both the local public institutions, social movements and city sense in different kinds of collectives in a way that allows people to build political power that can have many meanings but I think it's enough for this and it also, so we think there's a close relationship and a good fit between feminism and municipalism and this perhaps for many other reasons but mainly because municipalism is looking at how politics is done and in that way feminism is really important, it's not simply about winning local institutions and being the one who is in charge, it's about changing the way we relate with each other, getting rid of the old traditional ways of doing politics in traditional political parties even in the left and especially in the left in our many occasions, like really vertical and big organizations that have a theory of what's going on and what's wrong and try to push that agenda forward in many cases failing in doing so but being right in what needs to be done and so municipalism aims at changing that so that's why feminism is a good ally and on the other hand because feminizing politics is easier to do if you work in smaller, at a small scale where people actually live, where there's more space for experimenting, for trying out new stuff, for doing things differently, it's really hard to build an organization that works in a feminist way if you have a national political party, like a big organization where people don't even have time to share their work together so yeah, that's why we connected these two things. Yeah, so that's the broad context of this work and then there's, as you can see in the sheet, there's what we've been doing is trying to identify dimensions of the feminization of politics and there's probably more, but these are the ones that have come out so far. These are gender balance, it's the first one and it means not only achieving more equality in positions of responsibility, visibility and things like that, but also distributing, internally distributing visibility, responsibility, decision making power, care responsibilities and things like that within groups. So it doesn't simply mean having, I don't know, the same amount of women in physical positions, but also for people who speak in public or representatives or things like that. Well, we can talk about that more in a minute. I'll go through all of those dimensions. So the second one is power. So how can power be built or understood in a feminist way? There's lots of discussions about this, like outside this domain, like what does power mean from a feminist perspective? And we mainly connect, we've been trying to connect the same of building power in a feminist way with cooperation as an alternative to building power through confrontation and in position on others, over others. So that's the second issue. The third one is leadership, like how, of course there's also a lot of work that has been done around feminist ways of leading and we are trying to depart from this traditional idea of leaders being the strong ones, the ones that make decisions over others, it's really closely connected to how we understand power, but there's more about leadership. And yeah, we can say more about that. But yeah, that's another point. Then the fourth point is care. And as Steve was mentioning before, care is not simply about considering the fact that some of us have children or animals that depend on us or other people, like old people that for some reason depend on us or different kinds of care responsibilities, but it's also about how we can make sure that care is part, is a consideration that is part of our relationships with our peers that we take care of each other in everything we do and also that care becomes part of the political agenda. It's not simply about being nicer, as I was saying before, but that the issue itself is part of the aims and practices of any project. And the third dimension of care is self-care. Sometimes there's things that no one can do for us, even if we get support. So I don't know you, but I can imagine that for most of you, even if the context is really different, there is a lot of overburden and stress and burnout sometimes in the things we do. So that's another important dimension connected to care. Then the fifth element is participation and democracy. And by that, we don't, I mean, of course, in political, let's say, organizations, this is more clear, but I think it's really one for any kind of group, any kind of group, where decisions needs to be made, like who decides? And are groups of decisions self-governed or are some people deciding for others? So that's the key point here. Of course, again, it's closely, intimately connected to the other dimensions. And it's never really, it's never easy to separate those dimensions from each other because they reinforce each other, but still it makes sense to separate them. And then the sixth point is diversity and intersectionality. As I said at the beginning, this is part of the general approach, but there are some things that are specific, and we thought it was interesting to address those issues as a separate point. Because it should be, although it should be a cross-cutting issue, like feminism within organizations, sometimes it's important to actually take a step back and see how you're doing in terms of addressing intersectional forms of oppression within your group. So, yeah, so that's it. Sorry, I didn't understand what you said in the beginning. I, well, I said a little bit about this before, but mainly when we, from the point of view of feminism, when we focus on privilege, it's impossible to simply distinguish use gender as a criterion to determine where privileges are. It's not only men, it's certain type of men, and it's certain type of women. Of course, ignoring the fact that women and men are like a problematic distinction. But every person is crossed by different, I mean, is in different situations in terms of class educational background, race, abilities, and I know many, many other factors. Is that not the word for diversity? No, but it's not diversity, yes. In the section, if you're a woman and you're of a particular demographic group, you have a different experience than a low class woman. If you're a woman of a working class and disabled, it's different again. It's that intersection, it's that cross-cutting. Yeah, you're subjected to different layers of oppression and you're lacking different kinds of privileges that other people have. If I'm a white woman with a certain educational background, for instance, of course I can say some men hold privilege in relation to me in some circumstances, but I'm still privileges compared to other people in other dimensions. So if the point is not simply, as I was saying before, to put women into positions of traditional power and we are addressing privileges, it's not enough to simply talk about gender. It's important to take all those considerations into account and also because in practice, the kinds of things we can do to address those privileges are different once we consider the different situations in which people are and the kinds of oppression that they are subjected to. So how to address these topics is you need different answers for different questions. And of course we are aware that this project, this study has been mainly focusing on gender issues, but still these other, and we think it's fine because some of the things that we are addressing are actually able to change structures and ways of doing that will benefit everyone and not only women and not only equalizing the situation between men and women because once you start addressing care or decision making, the distribution of decision making power or leadership, this will start affecting different kinds of groups in different ways. But still, there's some things that you won't achieve if you don't address that topic as a particular topic. So that's more or less. I'm not, I'm not sure I'm being accurate, but. And by the way, I'm happy to please interact with me if anything doesn't make sense or whatever. So thank you for the question. And then the final topic is non-violence and here, well maybe we are addressing different kinds of violence, much violence that happens within most groups because of how we're used to relating with each other. So, and by violence we don't mean like physical violence necessarily, but also verbal violence, psychological violence, environmental violence, things that make certain people feel pushed out of certain spaces or environments. So, yeah, I'm not sure how, so this is like the first description of all these topics. I was thinking maybe it would make sense to try to, because we have one hour, yeah. So in order to make this more interactive and useful, I thought it might be interesting to maybe, well first, if you have any question, we can talk about it. And I feel, and I also feel happy if anyone has an answer for those questions, but then maybe, since one hour is a lot of time, but not that much, maybe we could choose together some of those topics and reflect on those topics more deeply. And I was also thinking maybe we can leave some time for you to talk with the person you have next to you about, so before we choose the topics about a short conversation about what's relevant to you from all these topics and maybe make a proposal together with the person right next to you, would that make sense? Or do you have any other suggestions of what you would like to do? So the proposal would be the questions, then talking to the person next to you and identifying what's interesting for you, and then sharing it and deciding together which maybe two or three topics that we can address together. Would that make sense? Yeah. Well it feels like also if you address one, you address all of them in some way, shape or form. There's a crossing. Yes. There's a crossing when it happens. Yes, yes, there is. So, yeah. Any questions or comments first? Yeah, nice. Question, it's what was the process in which this document or these notions of principles of feminization of politics were arrived at? So first, there was a first, so it's actually a connection of different projects, but the first one was through the, I don't know if you've heard of the Fearless Cities Network, is a network of informal, maybe not even a network of municipal platforms in different places. And we created a group with representatives of different organizations where we started reflecting together about these issues internally and sharing it with the group. And we met a few times. We organized all the topics that came out and we came out with a list of categories within that group. And then after that, some of the people involved in that project started this new phase of interviewing people in different contexts. So the first project was within Europe and then we started interviewing people from those organizations but also outside those organizations. So it was, and the categories changed a few times. Actually at the beginning, we had like more than 10, maybe like 15 categories and we organized them into fewer categories. And as I said at the beginning, it's not fixed. It's just a working division of topics. And Lara, there's a book now in English on Fearless Cities. Yes, it's been translated to English. Which is a fantastic book. Yeah, it's a collection of really short pieces about public policies and also about organizational issues, sharing the experiences of different municipal organizations in many places. Yeah. And Miki. Yeah. I have a question here about the intersectionality. And of course, we know that within the movement recently there have been problematics in those intersections, especially around race. And I think the biggest complaint is being, people of color in particular, is being about how their stories and dialogue is ignored. So I guess my question to you is, you've talked about intersectionality and I was really refreshed to see that this is part of your discourse. But what do you do? I'm just trying to be practical. What are you doing to ensure that that dials? I mean, a lot of these communities feel, they've sort of been let down, they've sort of been ignored. So it should be interesting to know what your pictures are around there. Yeah, it's a really good point. I must say that although this is part of the agenda, for most municipal organizations, before we started talking about it, it wasn't even an issue. Most of them didn't even consider that to be a relevant topic. Because, not to justify, but to explain what the context is, we're working with organizations that work in very different political contexts from South Africa or Brazil, for instance, where this is of course an issue that they have, they've been working a lot, they talk about it, like everyone knows what we're talking about and things like that. But then, in other places, like, for instance, some, I don't want to point at anyone, but in some regions, these topics are not, not, well, no, but they're not part of the agenda. In some places, for instance, gender diversity is an issue and LGTB is one of those dimensions that they consider not only gender understood in a binary way and also class, but then not race. So, yeah, the contexts are really different and it is probably, together with non-violence, I would say it's probably the two issues that we are finding harder to address. Perhaps the fact of non-violence is quite surprising because it's quite obvious, but in practice, most organizations hadn't engaged in any reflection about those issues before. So, yeah, I agree. I mean, I can only say, I agree. I mean, there still needs to be more work on those dimensions. But have you seen any practice that sort of, it's probably uncomfortable. So, have you seen a practice where people are really pushing up, pushing to pass that uncomfortable space so the ones that are looking at it, it's the sort of really examples of good practice that you've gone across. Yeah, the case of, well, perhaps if, well, I don't know. I'm hesitant here because I'm not sure if this is one of the topics that we want to address, but okay, that's great. So, in practice, for instance, the case of Belo Horizonte is, we have a municipal platform there that they have this crazy way of organizing, well, crazy. They have what they call a collective mandate where there's people running for elections. They have representatives, but there's a big group of, it was 40 people. I'm not sure how many there are now. People who come from social movements and different kinds of groups who are actually the real decision makers. It's not the representatives. The ones who are presenting projects or things like that, but it's this collective that is in charge, right? And for them, of course, in the context where they live, there's three main categories that they consider for everything they do. And it's hard to say, well, tools, because for them, it's really natural. The fact that they have discussed this and the fact that they are, I don't know how to put it, that it's part of their, I'm getting into trouble here, because maybe they have already addressed the issue and it's less difficult for them to find ways of addressing it. But they consider gender, race, and sexual diversity as criteria for everything they do. And for the representatives they choose, they simply cannot ignore those different criteria when doing anything. So I guess, so there's some things that you can find in the sheet, but I guess what the strategy for addressing these topics has been, and now I'm also talking about my experience in Barcelona, has been to, especially in situations where there's no work on those issues, to generate, to create a group that will focus on those issues in particular, even though it needs to be a cross-cutting issue, it has proved to be useless if there's no people who have the specific responsibility of taking care of those topics. So in many cases there's been, people have created these groups to focus on this kind of work, and these groups have been engaging with organizations that have more experience with different kinds of groups. And here the key is, of course, to ask people from these different groups what they need and what they expect instead of taking the lead in going, going for them and asking them to participate. And actually what has been the conclusion in many cases is that when you reach out to people and ask them simply to participate, it doesn't work. And for instance, in the case of Barcelona and Comú, the experience was that people who were migrated or, well, especially migrants, I would say, they don't come to any kind of assembly-like activity. They're simply not interested. Our diagnosis is that perhaps the kinds of dynamics that are happening there are hostile for those people, and that's why I do think. So my English is, sometimes. So there's been a trial and error process of asking people what kinds of things they are interested in doing and what kind of engagement they want to have. And for instance, might sound strange, but the best examples of including different kinds of groups have been related to concrete actions like campaigning and, for instance, the door-to-door campaign that we did in the beginning of the year was a kind of activity that everyone was engaged in. Like, it was a really diverse group of people that wanted to do that. But then when there's decision-making and assembly-like spaces, they're just not interested. And perhaps the next step is to reflect on why, when it comes to decision-making, there's certain people who don't want to be part of that, probably because they feel that they have no say or that their views, the way they approach the topics and the dynamics are not appealing for them. So I think, I mean, there's more challenges than answers at this point, I feel, for most organizations, not for the ones that I was mentioning before, like this platform in South Africa and the one in Brazil. Could I just ask you something? Yeah. What do you talk about the one in the horizon? You should talk about Gabines, do you want to? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, they actually call themselves, you need to see, I don't remember now, anti-racist, municipalist, political project. I mean, it's feminist political project. I mean, they put it like in the very title of their project. Yeah, they have one member in the national parliament, one member in the state parliament and two members in the city parliament. Yeah. Yeah. And there's an old woman, there's two black women, there's two black women, there's a lesbian. I mean, it's all of them are women. It's like, for them, it's like normal stuff. And in the other organizations that we are working with, the visible faces are in most cases men and the people who are working on these topics are in the very margins of the organization. So I guess, going back to what you were saying, I guess that both in the case of non-violence and intersectionality, I think it's the poorest part of, I mean, there's little to share at this point and more to learn, I think. Because there's, I mean, I don't know, it's just the conversations are just starting. But. I think it's important to continue them. Because I think when you feel like you're not being part of something, it's not that I don't mean, they're interesting, it's that they think that there's no representation in their voice. Yeah. So, all of you can feel like they're in the room equaling. Totally. But it's that sort of thing. I just think the key thing that I've learned over the years is you just got to keep that dialogue going and then you got to keep it going. So if people drop off, why do they drop off? How do you get them back in? It might be other ways. It might be that they're all going to work it and like, terrible or something. It could be some very simple reasons, but it's just really interesting and how you keep it going, because it comes up all sides. Yeah, and keep the conversation open, allowing those people to take the lead as well. And not thinking that you have the answer. I think it's really hard. I mean, I must say it's one of the dimensions where I feel more powerless in order to think about what to do personally. Because it's not my duty. But yeah, not totally. But do you know that in Barcelona, for example, so migrants groups have been organizing in an horizontal way and don't feel appeal at all by the politics of a woman. You know this encounter in Jaida? You don't know about that. So I think it has been the most successful happening in this area. And I think it will allow around 500 people meeting, trying to organize themselves, because they don't feel appeal by the government. Yeah. And they want power. Yeah, I mean, it's different if we want, if you talk about the local government and organizations, because the political party did have, I mean, it's not interesting for everyone, but did have, like many, it's engaged in a permanent dialogue with different kinds of organizations and groups. But still, it's been really hard to. This meeting has been organized by women. They were appealing all kind of general notifications but related to care and politics. Wonderful. Now, it's an impression. I just want to quickly share intersectional approach in feminist. And I live and work in Russia under very strict conditions of patriarchy. And feminist communities and work is actually displayed in all types of, all points of view. And it's, we have known like the circle of intersectional feminist is very small. And still, we have to work and make changes all together and find that one language. And it's very, very much compliant, even within the feminist discourse in one seat. And, yeah, I think that was my point because I'm too shy to speak publicly. But, yeah, that's, yeah, I'm always thinking how to find that and how to build that, let's say, sisterhood with those who are not agree with, even within the whole discourse, if we take care of them, how to be closer to maybe colleagues from countries where it's more developed or common. I'm talking from Russia, but I can also affect organizations. For instance, there was a gap between those who had a formal position, like city councillors and those who didn't, when it came to having collective debates internally, things like that. But at the same time, the legitimacy of the work these people were doing came from this horizontal media organization. And so I think that's more or less connected to what you were saying, right? So you're not able to permeate those spaces with new practices, but at the same time, they are legitimized by the work that we are doing outside. And it's bad, but it's much better than nothing. So at least there's that. And then there's another issue. No, of course. I mean, yeah, yeah. And this tension, it can become a productive one as well. I mean, at least that's how we are understanding and many organizations are understanding this process of being outside, being inside, and not, I mean, and having productive conflicts. And also with social movements that at some point felt that their friends were in the city council, but they still had demands that were not going to be met by the new city council. And things like that. And so this, of course, it's difficult to talk about these things without considering how these other structures that you work with work themselves. And one of the aims of municipalism was to go into institutions to transform them. But it's really what you can actually do. It's really nothing. Because you need, I mean, it's slow. It's difficult. There's resistance. There's people working there. And it's not that easy. So I don't know. I think that's, I mean, it's difficult. I don't know. But there's productive tensions that can be found in those experiences, I think. But then there's this other issue of scale, right? It's not simply about different kinds of environments, but also scale, like working with places where you can see people and work with people, and then scaling up to achieve greater things. For instance, in the case of many municipalist platforms, they got involved into regional or national politics. In some cases, they even presented candidates for the European parliament and things like that. And the experience was also very frustrating. Once you start scaling up, the few things that you are doing well start to get lost along the way. And I think it's one of the greatest challenges for everything we do, right? I mean, how to stay true but not irrelevant. And it's really difficult. And when you introduced yourself, you mentioned working with a network, for instance. And my view is that one of them might sound a bit obvious, but one of the answers might come from trying other kinds of articulations that are not necessarily mean scaling up, but working as networks. Of course, there's lots of people doing work in how to work as a network and the challenges that implies and things like that. But I think it necessarily needs to be in the feminist agenda. And I feel it hasn't been addressed that much. We don't really know that much about how working as a network is connected to feminism. And if you do know things about experiences or work around this, please let me know. But I feel it's one of the things that would be interesting to defend more, that trying to become relevant and visible not through growing up or scaling up, but through scaling out and interacting with others. And I think this applies to political organizations, but also other kinds of projects. How to support it. Not only because you can support each other, the things like that, but also to gain more visibility, to gain more, I don't know. Like a terrorist network. Yeah. Exactly. Like a terrorist network. I don't know. Too much. Too much. Yeah. I don't really understand. I very much resonate with the dilemma on how you maintain meaning, but still relevant. And how you try to go into these institutions that still have the power. And I get an answer from you that you say that you should rather get the visibility, maybe, and the relevance through mass, through being more in networks. But I wonder then, are we building parallel structures to the existing ones that anyway now take all the resources? And how to deal with that? I still have this dilemma, how you deal with the fact that you still have all these structures. They have so much power, and most of the resources are there. And all this effort that we would make would not, in a reasonable time, come to the results. That would mean that the people that need resources would have access to them. How I see it, the only alternative is to pull again into patriarchal ways of doing. If you want to get power fast and impact, like efficient and impact, where the power really is, and blah, blah. I'm not saying that it will necessarily be successful, but at least this is the reasoning behind some of the experiments happening in different places. Like, OK, we should do things as they have been done, because it works. I think it's a really difficult question. But again, I'm speaking from the municipal perspective, I think part of the municipalist approaches to, at the same time, relating to institutions that have this kind of formal power. Of course, these are not multinationals, and they don't have a real power. But they have some resources and power that civil society doesn't have. But relating to local governments is less dangerous than relating to other kinds of institutions, and then working as a network in order to spread geographically and things like that can be combined, and also local governments can work as networks instead of relying on higher levels of government and things like that. I mean, I'm using this example because it's the one I know, but I feel it might apply to other kinds of relationship with cultural institutions, funders, and many other kinds of environments. But I don't think there's an answer. I have no idea. It's also not a question, but it's an oracle question, of course. Yesterday, we unblocked some of us, but we discussed the Japanese revolution. I think if intersectional feminism, something opposite the revolution, or this is the other way to make the revolution, I don't know. Do you want to explain why? I don't mean the exact revolution independently, but Lauren, she's not here. She focused on feminist influence, I would say, on it, or male participation in it, because it was in the presentation. It was not known here that it's feminist or not. It was about more gender roles. And at the end, I thought it was a great comment that, OK, revolution can be peaceful, but it could lead for the very violent processes of course. And I think that intersectional feminism could be the key for a new society, a new type of society. But as I mentioned, in Russia, it's very small circle. And as I see, intersectional feminism avoids any violence and revolution, and even if it's peaceful, it could lead to violence, of course, because people all together against, for example, government, but it was an act. It's not a question. Yeah, I wonder to what extent that is contextual or is it the case for every intersectional feminist? It's a good question. I don't know. I don't know that much about what the specific context are. I don't know. OK, but it's more connected with the previous plot. It's also rhetoric questions rather next challenge I'm thinking about. I'm thinking about the overproduction as a kind of thing, which is also against feminization, because I'm working mostly in a theater. And with my organization, we try to create the conditions of equal place to work, to make art, and make social projects. But I'm working quite often with institutions, public institutions, mostly theaters and galleries. And for me, the question all the time is how to, because it's my experience as well, how to get rid of this primitive overproduction when, for example, many, many people, so directors, and people who are in charge of the institutions declare the same values as feminization, equality, et cetera. But at the end of the day, when it comes to realization, what is the focus is on the effect. And in this kind of overproduction mode and speed of work, it turns out that there is no place for care, for justice, for these all values we have in declarations. So for me, it's really painful because it's kind of experience of fiction, also in our bubble. And the question is how to deal with it. Of course, there is no simple answer, and probably the way is to create other structures, experimental one, and I believe in that. But at the same time, when we have institutions, which is big and have resources and all the things we are talking about, and also somehow is a good environment to create because of the infrastructure and all things which are prepared to do the things. And at the same time, it's so difficult to, let's say, change these default settings, which are concentrated on overproduction. So I'm thinking also about this aspect of neoliberal capitalistic way of producing in art. It's really kind of hidden, maybe even visible, but so strong that these settings are so strong that it's not easy to deal with it and to make feminization not only in declarations and in this level of philosophy. So it makes me sad, so I'd like to share with you this. If I may just react to that because we also have kind of similar experiences, both of us. And the same but also in different institutions. But I think it's also related not only to the overproduction of course, but I think it's also related to the way how the artwork is being perceived. In many institutions we were working with, our experience was always the result that was really the criteria to evaluate the work of the institution. And what we have been trying to do in one of the institutions are still trying to, in one of the city theaters in Warsaw, is to shift the mindset in a way of the institution of its directors from the result to the way how it is done and from the perception of the art as a tool that produces artworks to the perception of the art as a social practice that you not only produce art, but you first and foremost produce the social relationships. And therefore, but then it's a really complex process because it also then requires a change of the way how the institution is being evaluated and so on and so forth. So it's complex quite. Absolutely, but again, it's extremely frustrating. But on the other hand, I totally get your point. If we don't try, we may fail in that particular institution. But if we don't try this to implement this change, if we don't raise these questions, then they will not be addressed. So if I can add something to that, it's also, I think we're talking about that, that it's also connected with perceiving the role of artists and the role of art in the society, when especially in theater, I think it's not only in Poland, there's kind of the traditional way of perceiving, for example, directors, especially male director, but director is that it's person who has vision and who has the right to execute things. So it's a way of, so I think that this change we need, it's really in each level and it's really, probably it's also, for sure, it's also connected with artistic education in the way we are doing that and the Assas Marta said perceiving art as the laboratory of relations as well, not only a way to producing stuff, things. So, yeah, it's just our challenge. But those conversations are having a direct level, like we have the, we're working towards our next business and we have two columns, everything we're doing, which is what we do and how we do it and we give measurables and deliverables on each of those things. And they may not be quantifiable in terms of like output or numbers, but they have to be quantifiable and then team speaks more equally at a staff meeting would be a milestone, all right? Right. So these are some of those things that's like, it's not maybe the way we wanna work because it's still answering those like big books, but it's like a way of showing our funders who basically really that business plan is fought or in a way that it's like a tangible piece of work that's happening, like that is the work, the process is the work, okay? The very work that is being done, yeah. Certainly one of my thoughts is to wrap up at a certain point. And typically that comes at a vibrant moment. So apologies for that interjection. Is there anything that you would like to push into the space there as a last final work before you move to Pennsylvania? No, you have my email on the sheet. If you feel like, I mean, we didn't do what we suggested, but it's totally fine because we jump from one topic to another, but if you want to, I don't know, not only me, but the group would be in contact with many people who have more resources and tools and could support any of the work that you want to do in this domain. So feel free to contact me and I could, if I can help, I will, and otherwise I will try finding someone who can. Is it possible to email the checklist so we can actually share that more by day, and we're sure if it's all right? Yeah, I have it, I can share. Okay, great. Great, great, fantastic. And also the deeper research that... It will be published soon. I don't know when, probably in the coming month, but yeah, we could also share it. Yes, yes, of course. Is that in English? Yes, yes, yeah. We'll be, we are in the editing process now, but it will come out probably in December. So it's been a great privilege, certainly for me. I thank you very much, Lara, and the rest of the speakers say, express our appreciation. Thank you.