Note for the Facilitator:

This activity evokes personal views on gender relations, equality, ethics, loyalty, commitment to values and dealing with difficult decisions and choices. It is particularly appropriate for sensitizing staff who need to recognise the moralistic nature of their own attitudes. More generally it can serve to draw out ideas, beliefs, and value conflicts which group members may not be readily prepared to share in open discussion. Weaving such conflicts into a story places them at a safe distance for comment without having to be personally compromised.

Purpose:

To examine personal attitudes and values in a group and demonstrate the importance of openness to each other’s values.

Time: 11/2 Hours

Procedure:

Ask the trainees to sit in small groups of five or six. Tell them they are going to be told a story, called the Story of Maya. While listening to the story, they should reflect on how each of the characters in the story behaves and what prompted the behaviour. Next read the story and ask, "What do you think of the behaviour of each of these five -- Maya, Prakash, Rara, Anil, and Krishna? Whose behaviour do you consider to be right or wrong and why?" Allow a few minutes for a brief exchange of view on this question but not necessarily to reach firm conclusions at this point.

Ask the trainees individually to rank the five characters in order of the appropriateness of their behaviour, from the least justifiable to the most acceptable or desirable. They should then discuss the ranking in their small groups to see if they can come to a consensus. After discussing for five minutes ask the small groups to report their rankings, and to tabulate them on the board. Point out that different rankings depend on the trainee’s own values and attitudes. For some, family obligations may be the most important value and for them Anil’s behaviour may be the least desirable. For others, not using power to exploit people, the virginity of a bride, or loyalty to a loving partner, may be more important. The need to arrive at a consensus can create some discomfort in the group since it involves a measure of value judgement as well as a degree of personal exposure to the larger group. It may be useful to some groups, especially if the level of dependency is high, to stress that there is no single ‘right’ or absolute way of ranking individual behaviours removed from their particular social contexts.

Points of Discussion:

Ask the participants to consider the following:

What precautions should Maya have taken before agreeing to have sex with Ram? What do you believe would be his reaction if she were to insist that he wear a condom?

Think back on the dynamics of your group discussions. In trying to reach a consensus did anyone give in to the majority view? Does anyone feel his/her opinion was brushed aside? How much confidence do you each have in your own judgement when there are no given "right" answers?

Given what we now know about HIV/AIDS, how could the story be rewritten to make it more relevant to the epidemic?

Source: "People in development: A Trainers’ Manual for Groups" John Searly, l982. Pub: SEARCH, 256 First Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore -- 560011, Karnataka, India. (slightly adapted)