Implementing Research Design Into Practice

 

Prior to entering the field I conducted Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Indonesian women who are studying in Palmerston North. Some of them are pursuing their Master degree and some are PhD students. I also interviewed Palmerston North Mayor and one of Policy analysts in Palmerston North City Council. Although information from these FGD and interviews cannot be used to represent the view of Indonesian women but I found it very important in trying out my topic guide while exploring some crucial issues that I may have neglected.  For example, during FGD with Indonesian women, household relation, which I never thought as important to my research, emerged as the most discussed topic. In the field, I find discussion on household relation provide entry point and insights to more complex discussion on local governance since most participants can actively involved in this discussion which is of their interest and daily experience. Interestingly, despite differences of level of education between Indonesian women in Palmerston North and women at the grassroots in Indonesia, it is obvious that relationship at the household and husband’s support significantly influence women’s participation in local governance. Notwithstanding  diversity of  these participants, discussing local governance is not an easy task. Level of local government that   women are familiar to discuss is the neighbourhood or wards.             

 

            Selecting Participants:

I change my sampling from purposive sampling to snowballing. Snowballing is well suited less invisible participants (Miller 1998; Standing 1998) by:

a.       Providing access to part of population who may not be included in researcher definition of sample.

b.      Breaking down power relations between researcher and the researched by allowing trust to develop because researcher know somebody who know the researcher (Standing 1998:188-189).

 

Since women are stigmatised groups in local governance, snowballing enables me to allocate these groups as well as to capture the diversity of stakeholders involved in local governance in Indonesia. From an interview with local government official, I was informed and suggested to interview one of women as Lurah in Medan. Later on I decided that this location may represent women as housewives and that are not accompanied by NGO. The Lurah also introduced me to ‘kepala lingkungan’ (head of a ward) who then introduced me to women in his location. In a visit to his house, I also had the opportunity to interview one of the only two women as ‘kepala lingkungan’ in Medan.

 

Seminars and conferences on women also provide strategic entry to allocate participants.   

Through discussion with my colleagues (from PSW/Women Study Centre and other involved in NGOs) I found locations where there are active women community based groups that are accompanied by NGOs. For example, I know the leader of HAPSARI (women NGO) from my colleague as one of the active NGO in empowering women. After discussion with her, she introduced me to the members of SPI (Serikat Perempuan Independen/ Independent Women Association) Bingkat and PIKP (Pusat Informasi dan Kajian Perempuan/ Centre for Information and Woman Study) that are funded and accompanied by HAPSARI. Since SPI consist of women CBOs from diverse regions such as Bingkat, Labuhan Batu, Simalungun by participating in their activities such as conference and discussion, I extended my relationship with other members of SPI from other villages. They also introduced me to other NGOs that have networking with them such as Joipara, Perbuni, Seruni, Nelayan. This extended relationship enable me to gain men insights from these NGOs and to gain information of experiences and voices of participants that enhance the diversity of research participants. I also have the opportunity to have discussion with women NGOs from outside North Sumatera such as OWA (South Sumatera) and Aceh women NGOs who I met in conferences or other activities related to women empowerment conducted by HAPSARI and other women NGOs.

 

Because of the difficulty in locating the locus of interaction between women and local government, I use every opportunity to attend seminar or congress related to women. In one occasion I even attended BKOW (Badan Koordinasi Organisasi Wanita/ Women Organisation Coordinating Body) in which I did not invited since I thought in this occasion I can meet many women organization. In this congress I met with the secretary of WKRI (Indonesian Catholic Women) who then invited me to observe their congress, which was attended by members of WKRI from other regions in North Sumatera. After the congress, I had the time to discuss informally with some women as members of WKRI. From that discussion, I found that I have to go to Pangururan (Toba Samosir) as the location where WKRI has its activities in empowering women through economic programs.  

 

One FGD that I found important is the FGD on the position of the Women Empowerment position after the recent local autonomy law, which was carried out by UGM (University of Gajah Mada,Yogya) since it was attended by PSW (Women Study Centre), women NGOs, CBOs, and Women Caucus.

 

Thus, snowballing enables me to continuously refine the selection of participants that enhance the diversity of participants until sampling reach theoretical saturation.

 

 

             Techniques used in the field:

Choice of techniques used in the field is based on the philosophy of my research. I used interactive approach as Freire (quoted in Stein 1997:237) defines “Listening, dialogue, discussion, self-reflection, critical thought, action and back to listening in empowering research. I find FGDs, in depth interviews and participant observant are complementary to each other as appropriate to do empowering research (triangulation).   

 

Focus Group Discussions (FGDs):

Participants can be empowered by providing a forum in which they may freely express their experience and expectation and learn from each other. For women with limited time because of their traditional domestic responsibilities, FGD provide a room and opportunity where they can express their ‘uneg-uneg’ (unclaimed feeling). FGDs not only useful to gain data relevant to research topic but also to create forum of dialogue between participants who act as extended arm of local government and women, which previously never exist. For example, the participants use this discussion to express the problems they face and questioning government development programmes that of their interest such as social safety net and assistance for their children education. 

 

As one technique of data collecting, the strength of FGD lies on group dynamics that emerge in participants in their interaction in their encouraging one another and in finding solution to problems they face, in criticising and challenging one another ideas or opinions.

For example, a mother from Simalungun proudly tell about her reaction to people who question whether the words ‘fraternity/sisterhood among women’ on SPI blouse she wore mean that there is no fraternity between man and women.  She answered that no need to have solidarity to man since man are cruel. Another women suggest that that woman should not answer that way, because then their organization (SPI) will be considered as husband’s slayers. Their discussion was continued by a woman told her experience of being caught and rudely treated by the military because of her stealing palm kernel (‘ninja sawit’) and reasoned that she did this because of the monetary crises and that her husband did not have any work, other women respond that whatever the reason that is still stealing. This discussion latter on develop into corruption by local government officials and other local government actions that have suppressed women and influence women’s political orientation. Group dynamics in FGDs also reveal diversity within women experiences and power.

 

However FGDs as with other techniques of data collection also inhibits some weaknesses.

Power relation, even within participants from the same group is difficult to avoid. Leaders and active members of the groups tend to dominate the discussions. Directing questions to silent participants is not effective since with the existing power relation, the participants who are silent when questioned about their opinion usually said that they their opinion is similar to those who speak (their leaders). Therefore, listening to women’s murmur and chatting with them after FGDs are more appropriate in capturing the perception of these silent participants.

 

It is also difficult to directly start discussion of local government since local government seem to be so far and isolated from women. By letting conversations familiar to women  such as household relation, health and children’s education flow, discussions develop into interesting and sometimes unexpected issues crucial to local governance such as corruption, cheating in election, their political orientation which are not in my topic guide.

 

There are also other problems of time and location to gather women to have discussions. To invite women to attend discussions without considering their limited time because of their traditional gender responsibilities and restricted place to go outside the house, will increase their burden. Therefore, I negotiate the time and place of discussions with participants and we come to agreement that we will use the time they usually gather to do the discussions. For example, I found difficulty to have FGD with participants in Toba Samosir because of dispersed location of their members. After negotiating the time to meet, we decided that we would use the time before the meeting in Camat’s office since as teachers they have to attend this meeting. Since there was no place available for the discussion at the Camat’s office, we just sat down on a public bench at the shore of Lake Toba. Although it is a public space, the participants discuss openly and they even decide that they will not attend the meeting but continue our discussion.

 

Venn Diagram:

Venn diagram is very difficult to do in my field research. Only in FGD wirid in Labuhan Deli and Padang Bulan it is done, although with much difficulties. No woman willingly holds the pen. It is only after they discussed, then, they come to an agreement. The woman with higher education is the one who draws and other discuss and comment. 

 

In other, it fails. The intention to do Venn diagram immediately raise tension and increase power relation between researcher and participants. Even among women who frequently involved in organization. The most significant factor is women’s uneasiness with writing. With low level of education, holding a pen is not appropriate for participants since most women cannot write nor read. “ Women will be threatened when a guess come with pen and paper”. Even when they saw their leader bring pen and paper  “I can’t write and read. It’s better for me to go home”. Then they went home quietly through backdoor.  

 

But I notice that their fear of holding the pen is not only because of their low education but also because the possible consequences of threatening reaction from government and that by having written document they will be easily recognized. This fear to government was obvious from such question as  “This will not have some negative impact on us, will it?”.

 

The weakness of Venn Diagram is that it increases power tension between researcher and participants in the way that at least researcher will have to describe what to be done. Although I tried to explain in the simplest words I could, that they can write or draw anything they want to describe the institutions closer to them, they still confused of the term institution or organization or gatherings. In one occasion the only organization they draw was their organization. Because for them, the word ‘institution/organisation’ equates the name of their organization. With participants’ inability to read and write, they rely on their memories. Therefore, they prefer discussion than drawing diagrams. The participants reaction differ greatly, when I just chat with them and from that I can gain extensive information of what institutions related and closest to their needs. 

 

Journal:

Journal is very important in which I describe my feeling and provide basis for reflection. In journal I also write the groups dynamic. In the field, journal is important instrument to avoid exploitative relation with participants. I ask my research assistant to notes group dynamics. Prior to the FGD, I explain the objective of my research and the essentials of noticing how participants interact with one another, the situation and condition of the surrounding. After FGD we discuss her notes on group dynamics and compare it to mine.  I find it very useful to gain comprehensive insights and reducing the possibility of my bias to group dynamic.

 

Participant Observant:

Researcher’s active engagement in process of empowerment is important technique in participatory research. It enables researcher to gain insights to participant in their own environment by experiencing what they experienced. In my research proposal I intend to limit myself to participant observant to those of TPP2W by participating in TPP2W in planning process. But in the field I found that, as admitted by members of TPP2W, that this is just ‘on paper women empowerment program instructed by central government’ with activities mostly on reporting. Therefore, I could not find interaction between local government and women by participating in this institution. This is the weakness of secondary data in which researcher rely on government’s documents.

 

By participating in the grassroots women activities such as in their gatherings, discussions, conferences and seminars, I find the focus of my research. Spend nights with SPI members in their preparation for declaration of the formation of women federation, I was surprised to find how interested they are in politics. Before going to bed and immediately after wake up, they continue discussing and analysing problems in the community. Jokes shared while cooking or cleaning also reveal that women do have some power over their choice. ‘Husbands can be politicised without them knowing it, but we cannot politicise the ingredients of food since everybody will know it and complaint’. Solidarity among members also revealed in the forms in which members take turn to clean and cook. Each member contributes something they have, such as rice, dried anchovy, chilly, vegetables and share it together.   

 

Participant observation also reveals power relation and the danger of tyranny of participatory approaches. In one activity, two of the members expressed their intention to go home because it was already late and that they were afraid that their husband would not allow them to participate in the organization anymore. But immediately other members against them and warned them that they should be committed to the organizations and the consequences. Therefore, these women should stay until the activity finished. Although these women do stay until the activities finished, they complaint to me that it is easy for the   women who object of their going home earlier because they already have grown up children or have somebody to take care of their children. But these two women still have young children who cannot take care of themselves.

 

Participant observant contribute to rapport building with participants since they perceive me as part of them, someone they trust. In one occasion, the women have to stay overnight to conduct general repetition for their performance. Being a woman, I cannot imagine how severe it will be for these women, some of them brought their young children, to stay overnight in the place with no walls and no toilets. While the leaders told me that it was the women’s agreement to stay overnight, the women told me that they never know before t the condition of the place. Whilst not complaining to the leaders or organizers, they said to me “We feel like orphans with no place to sleep”. I bought them some ginger drinks and food which I hope may warmth them a little. I also proposed that they might use my NGO office to sleep. Other NGO, then also proposed their place and since this NGO location is closer to the location of the event, these women finally stayed in this NGO office.

 

Participating in various activities of participants, including conducting radio interview on decentralisation and speaking about gender in various discussions of participants enables researcher to experience challenges women face and the dynamic of process of women empowerment. 

 

                                              

In-depth interview:

The privacy in in-depth interview enables participants to speak freely since no other person involved in the interview. For example, a male NGO activist expressed and explained his disagreement with one of women speakers in seminar about inheritance. When researcher asked why he did not directly brought this up in seminar, he said that he did not want to place himself in conflict/confrontation with the speaker. He also expressed his concern of the tendency in women empowerment activities to perceive men as enemy to women. I will not have this insight if I did this in FGD.    

 

Interview with local government officials provides me opportunity to inform local government officials about women’s position and problems. Almost in all in-depth interviews with local government officials, they will ask about what gender is, gender sensitivity and experiences from other countries regarding women’s empowerment.

 

Being a woman, sometimes I find difficulty to control emotion when local government officials blame women for their invisibility in local governance. Especially when discussing about ‘kodrat’ or when women are said to be naturally have limited or lower capability than men because of their ‘kodrat’. Taking the stance not to be neutral but advocating for gender equity, at least in the form of informing participants about women’s struggle, while creates problems/conflicts also lessen psychological conflict within researcher

 

 

Rapport Building:

Gaining trust from participants is extremely important especially when participants consider that discussion of the topic will endanger them. Whilst the term local government is not familiar to them, it is also equated as politics, which is a threatening term for Indonesian women at the grassroots. Fear of being caught and sent to prison because of discussing politics haunts most women and contribute to their reluctant to discuss this topic. Although I am also an Indonesian woman, do not mean that participants will automatically trust me. They are still curios of whom I represent and that they will not be able to answer my questions because of their low level of education. At this point, a gatekeeper plays a crucial role in building trust between the women and the researcher.   

 

In one occasion the women are reluctant when I asked their permission to take their photos and that they will ask their husband’s permission first. It is only after the gatekeeper explained the purpose of the photo is only for research, then the participants willingly have their photos taken. At this point, finding gatekeepers who are familiar to and be trusted by the participants is crucial in gaining the trust from the participants. Gatekeepers in my research come from diverse background such as academician, NGOs, and CBOs. In areas where I cannot find a gatekeeper that I know, I contact the head of the villages and ask her/his permission. The permission from head of village is important in the way that the women will not feel threatened since this FGD was approved by government. For the next meeting, together with the ‘kepala lingkungan’, I invited the participants by visiting them at their homes. This gave the opportunity to meet with their spouse and observe household relation.

 

One of my colleagues at the University of North Sumatera, who also leads a ‘wirid’ group ( a women’s group studying Quran) in Medan willingly act as a gatekeeper. Although prior to the FGD, she has informed and discussed the time for the meeting with participants, together with her I directly visit and invite these women at their homes. This gives me the opportunity to observe participants condition and chat with them so that they may know me better. In most cases participants will firstly ask whether the discussion have negative side effect that will harm them. Gatekeeper plays an important role in introducing researcher as her friend and encouraging women to speak. Being a friend to person they trust, enable participants to speak freely about their feelings, experiences and expectations.   

By considering me as their friend, the women protect the confidentiality of other participants ‘If somebody ask what we do in this place, just say that we are asking for sembako (basic needs)’.

           

Building rapport through friendship is another effective strategy to gain women’s trust as to reduce power relation between researcher and participants. In feminist research, equalising power relation becomes very important. Local government approach which put women as object rather than subject of development, contributes to women passivity in discussion. In their perception, I will instruct or teach them something and that they have to listen as in cases of government invitation. They were very surprised when I told them that I come to learn from them and that by sharing of experiences and information we can learn and help each other.

 

After I determine a site for my study, I did not immediately invite women to participate in the research. I visited them for several times and the gatekeeper informally introduced me as a friend and a researcher. I get to know them in person and participated in their activities. I gave them my address and telephone number so that they can contact me whenever they need to. Some of them even visited me at my home and I introduced them to members of my family. Being a friend and not a teacher to them allowing women to express their feeling which sometimes impossible to capture in FGD and to reduce power relation between researcher and participants. “Although you are a teacher, you are a friend to us because you do not intend to teach us, but instead you want to learn from us. Therefore, we want you to learn together with us” (SPI Bingkat).

 

 

Reflexivity:

Reflexivity is “a position of a certain kind of praxis where there is a continuous checking on the accomplishment of understanding” (Wasserfall 1997:151). Reflexivity is important since researcher is the tool in this research. Reflexivity is an instrument to control the production of knowledge so that researcher may represent participants’ views at its utmost. Through reflexivity I can recognize biases I bring to the field and in determining whose voices will be represented writing.

 

My indigenous status gave me some advantages. Being able to speak Indonesia and understand some of ethnic languages (Java and Batak language) used by participants, enable me to communicate easily with participants compare to if I were a foreigner which means I have to have somebody as interpreter and that I might loose some insight during the translation. Participants were more relax and able to express their feelings in their mother’s tongue language. I am also familiar, to a certain degree, with the custom and tradition of the participants which is crucial to my research that aim to understand women involvement in local governance based on their understanding and experiences as to make women’s voice heard.  Being an Indonesian in woman, in short time I can enter locations and chat with the participants without attracting other people’s attention that may make participants felt uncomfortable of being noticed with curiosity by other people. 

 

Being an academician and involved in NGO, make access to location and networking easier. I can get research permit without much difficulties and in short time. Some of the local government officials are either my former student or friends while at the university. They do their best to have my permit ready and provide me with documents that I need even when it is not published yet. They provide invaluable information of the performance of local government and internal dynamics of local government by sharing with me their expectations and disappointment with the condition of local government, which I may not get if I interview local government officials whom I do not know. The political climate during the period of transition (post authoritarian regime) in Indonesia also provide opportunity for me to interview local government officials as well as to do secondary research since lecturers recently have been more appreciated and respected by local government. Information on recent issues on gender and the movement of women in Sumatera, which I may have missed during my study in New Zealand, I get from my NGOs friends. Some of them willingly become my gatekeepers as well as partners in discussing issues related to research topic. Having them as gatekeeper is helpful since both researcher and participants know them so that trust and friendship between researcher and participants are easier to establish. Through them I can establish networking and access to locations and participants.

 

I have the opportunity to attend and participate as member of a team to formulate results of a seminar on regional reports of general election in Indonesia. I find gender inequity and how women become invisible. From this seminar I met with the head of women’s caucus. She complaint to me that she cannot choose the topic of interest since the seminar committee has included her in groups with topic that she does not interest and familiar to and therefore she did not have anything to say during that seminar. They ask me to voice their complaints and aspirations which I cannot fulfil since my role is limited to summarize the seminar result. Gender issues did not emerge in the discussion. At the national meeting, I am the only women delegation from regions in Indonesia in reporting the result of general election monitoring in regions.

 

However, being an indigenous Indonesia woman also poses dilemmas and disadvantages to researcher. Frequently, the male participants consider me as an example to prove that the community and government have treated women and men equally. They argue that if I, as an Indonesian woman, can have high education, why cannot other women? So, the community and government have provided opportunity for women to be equal to men, it is now depend on women capability and will to use it. Also, they sometimes consider me as representative of women and that they have to defend themselves against me as a woman.

 

Familiarity, although in one side is significantly provides insight to women’s condition, to a certain degree lead me to neglect crucial issues that participants consider as important. For example, I take it for granted that getting husband’s permission to go out is just a custom for women in Indonesia, while for women at the grassroots it is a heavy struggle and an achievement. I was raised in a family with a democratic parent that treat their sons and daughters equally. My husband has been very supportive and that every responsibilities and decision regarding our family is shared and discussed. Other members of my extended family support and encourage me to enhance my career. As an educated woman, I come with some pre-conceptions that have some bias in approaching participants. I perceived that group consist of women intellectuals will have greater participation and influence to local government rather than women at the grassroots while in the field I find that the latter are active participants in local governance based on their own context. Since I came to the field with conception of local governance in terms of  ‘formal politics’, I lost direction and confused since I could not see formal interaction between women and local government. Even though in my pilot FGDs with Indonesian women in New Zealand, issue of household has emerged, I tend to neglect it. It is only after chatting and discuss with participants I found the focus of my research need to be based on ‘daily politics for survival of women’ in order to find the locus of interaction between local government and women. Interaction with participants diverted my conception of politics not just to formal politics but includes every site/sphere that women consider as appropriate site of struggle.  

 

Another dilemma that I found was the negotiation of my position as an insider and outsider in interaction with participants in research process. Although I am an Indonesian woman, my background and experiences has to a certain degree made me as an outsider to certain participants. I cannot help myself to be closer (as insider) to one group/participant than the other. While to participants from the ‘wirid’ groups I tend to be an outsider, to the members of SPI (community based group) I feel as an insider. I frequently feel in tensed when conducting FGDs with the wirid groups since as a Christian I try hard not to offend them in the way I speak and dressed and the topic of discussion. However, I think it is more than a difference in religion since I can discuss openly with the SPI members who are also Moslems. It is that with the members of SPI I find that we share common vision to empowering women. The philosophy of sisterhood in their groups and their willingness to learn together with me contribute to my position as an insider in that group.   

 

Research as Empowerment:

The basic philosophy of my research is that the process of research should be empowering both to participants and researcher. I am obviously empowered by participants through their invaluable experiences and strategies in dealing with so many obstacles to equalise gender relation. 

 

The custom of some NGOs to give money inviting the people caused some participants to think that they will receive some money from researcher. At first researcher feel guilty of not giving money to participants. But researcher realised that development is not only about money but more important it is about the enhancement of people’s capability to determine, control and benefit from process to achieve people’s welfare. In diverse ways of sharing of information the research can empowered participants.

 

At the grassroots level, researcher shared information on local government institutions that related to their interest. For example, in wirid participants discuss much about corruption at their localities and that they are powerless, researcher inform them that they can directly report corruption to the Mayor through telephone which was recently established to receive complaints from the community. Researcher described the performance of women community based organizations in North Sumatera and women organization in other countries that do have impact over the community, and that these women also live in poverty (low economic income). The ‘wirid’ member expressed their wish that it will be very good for them if they may also have this kind of group in their area.  

 

By disseminating information on the rights of people based on Indonesian constitutions, UU 22/1999 (Law on Regional Autonomy), and the roles and responsibilities of local government institutions, the research raise their consciousness, self confident and motivate participants to participate in local governance. “..that’s why when mbak Yanty chat with us about government at the village level, we are very excited. We need to know what village is, the function of village, how and where people can have responsibility. People are yet to know that” (SPI). Women at the grassroots become eager and motivated to be elected as member of BPD since researcher informed them that based on Law No.22/1999 everybody regardless of their education can be elected as member of BPD as long as the people elect them. Local government official socialised that those who are elected to BPD (legislative body at the community level) are only those with high education while most women do not have high education.

 

Researcher informed participants that based on Inmendagri (Instruction of Interior Minister), wive of head of head of villages no longer will automatically become the head of  PKK. Even among local government official, member of parliaments, and NGOs this has yet to be socialised. From the research, I found that sometimes local government seem to neglect women because they do not have information and understanding to what gender and gender empowerment is. Therefore, informing and introducing gender issues to local government officials  are crucial.

 

In process of empowering I find it difficult to avoid conflict and to be neutral. Empowerment in terms of transforming inequity in gender relation into gender relation equity challenges the deeply rooted patriarchy, thus ignite reaction even conflict with those who have benefited from unequal gender relation. The case below is one of the examples of how I cannot avoid conflict by advocating women. It began when members of SPI expressed their intention to declare the formation of their federation in university. They explained to me that before knowing me as their friend they never even imagined that will ever to ‘put their foot’ on the university. Having no or low education, to conduct  activity in university is a pride for them. Also strategically, by declaring the formation of woman federation in the university, the public will know them. I extended their wish to my faculty, the Faculty of Social and Political Science, with the hope that my colleagues in this faculty will be enthusiast since providing community service is one of the function of university. In fact, I was very surprised and upset with their reaction. None of them seem to be interested. This discussion involved 3 male colleagues and I brought one of my female colleagues (who then went out in the midst of the argument because she told me she was very angry because of the reaction from our male colleagues). I forward this plan to the laboratory of politics. Avoiding to offend me as his fiend, the head of politics politely asked me to proposed this to the laboratory of sociology. The other male colleague added that these women have frequently do demonstration and that it is dangerous for the university to become an NGO since it will invite negative reaction from the government. He also added that these women would come to the university bare foot and on trucks. I tried to remind them of the function of university and explained that this women do not asked any fund, all they ask for is cooperation and recognition. I also argued that when laboratory politics are willing to provide fund to train members of parliament, why do they reluctant to cooperate with the women as members of community based group. I was really upset when one of the male colleagues derogated these women by saying that these women are either former communist party members (Gerwani) or prostitutes. That was for the first time I felt offended for my being a woman. I, then, invited and accompanied the member of SPI to directly book the venue to the university (rectorate). I did not want to book it by myself because I want them to be independent, so that next time they know how to have access to the university. The declaration of the formation of this women federation (Federasi HAPSARI) was successfully held in the University of North Sumatera. This event opened my eyes of the great challenges women at the grassroots experienced in their effort to organize themselves since even in the university with educated people (the colleagues I mentioned above all have pursued their Masters degree) women organizing themselves are perceived derogatorily.

 

Advocacy also takes form in informing and making known male participants about the heavy burden women have. Informing men as participants why women seems unattractive and invisible in governance because of their traditional domestic responsibilities. In general, male participants are not informed or unaware of women’s contribution to the family, community and state. Women invisibility is considered as women’s choice and that women lack of interest and capability to involved in local governance. In some occasions, by doing these men become more challenging in defending themselves but more frequently, they become surprised that women do greatly contribute and that their participation cannot be neglected. Sharing jokes and explaining women’s contribution I found as the most effective way to reduce the tense and to prevent male participant to stop discussion.  

 

Empowerment to both men and women is very important since it will create more problems on women if the process excludes men. In empowering research it is important to find ways to transform men to be ally in equalising gender relation by sharing of information rather than considering them as enemies reduce confrontation to women. Raising women’s consciousness while not sensitising men will put women in difficult position of severe conflict with men.