gender equality DE JURE vs. DE FACTO

Description of the tool

1. yes/no question (10’):
a. Point out the two signs at either end of the wall, and explain that you are going to read out a statement, with which they may agree to a greater or lesser extent.
b. Select one statement from the list below and read it out to the group.
c. Tell people to position themselves along the wall between the two signs according to “how much” they agree or disagree: if they agree or disagree totally they should stand at one of the ends; otherwise they should stand somewhere between the two points.
d. Explain to participants that no discussion is foreseen: it’s a quick game based on sudden reaction and not on reflection
e. Ask the following questions:
• Men have more power than women
• Women are stronger than men
• All religions are equal in terms of rights for women and men
• We must respect all laws
• Women are better to take care of children
3. dividing the participants into 3 groups
4. giving each group a study case, set in 3 different countries of EM (Spain, Belgium, Jordan)
5. giving each group a draft summary of the country norms related to gender equality (civil and penal code of Spain, in Spanish, and Belgium, in French; 2000 CEDAW report on Jordan)
6. each group has to discuss about the congruity and inadequacy of actual facts to the formal norms (25’) answering to the following questions:
a. how would you have behaved in the position of the victim?
b. Which are the article of the National law which have not been respected?
c. Which activities can you undertake on a local level as activist?
d. Write a shadow report to CEDAW.
7. participants have to come back with a panel explaining their discussion and outcomes and with a guess about the country considered (5’ each)
8. a plenary discussion follows (25’)