The consent trial

What challenge inspired this recipe?

This method helps to tackle gender based discrimination in IVS activities; the tool can be used as a preventive method in the beginning of a project start to set boundaries and reflect on the topics “consent”, “personal and others’ limits” and “safe space”.

✍️Grenzenlos

Ingredients :

Paper, seats, benches,, tables,  music speaker, maybe post-its

Step by step guide

In this method participants take on the roles of lawyers and judges, where they must discuss certain scenes and decide whether in the act, which is played by 2 people, there was consent or not. 

This method shall help to playfully sensibilize the participants about the topic of consent and personal space. Through having active observations, discussions, and exchange of arguments, they shall point out situations, acts and behaviors, which might be controversial and result in the lack of consent. 

Prework:  

1. The Facilitators need to research on the meaning and definition of the words “Consent” and “Personal Space”. Both words must be clear to the Trainers and clearly explained to all participants before the start of the practical activity.  

2. Write down some questions that might be a bit controversial and invade the personal space of someone. (e.g. “In my culture, we kiss to greet each other. Can I give you a kiss?”; “I’m very sleepy. Do you mind if I put my head on your shoulder?”; “Would you like to come to my room for a chat? It’s more comfy.”; “Do you mind if I change my clothes in front of you?”…). Use one paper per question. 

3. Write down answers that are not clear and might be misread. (e.g. “Okay… (you look down)”; “Mm-hmm (you nod your head)”; “I don’t really know..”; “you shrug your shoulders”…) 

4. Prepare sticks with “Yes” and  “No” signs for the judges. (You can also simplify it and use different colored papers instead of the sticks.) 

5. Prepare some suitable music, that can be used between the scenes. 

Directions:

1. Prepare 3 tables. 2 Tables are facing each other which represent the groups “Yes” and “No”. The 3rd table is located on top of the other tables, where the judges will take a seat. For the public, please place some seats/benches in front of the judge’s table.
   

2. Divide the group in 3 different subgroups: Defenders/Lawyers of “Yes”, defenders/Lawyer of “No” and Judges. There needs to be 3 or 4 people for each defender teams (YES&NO). 5 people take their spot on the jury’s table.  

Also pick 2 peoples to play the scene by reading out the question and the answers that are written on papers and posed on the floor or on the judges’ table. (Make sure to put the question on one pile, and the answers on another pile, the text should be facing downwards.) 

• Make sure to visually distinguish between the different parties. For this post-its with different signs could be used. 

3. On the judges table there place the 5 signs with the words “YES”, and “No” on it, which will be used to show whether the judges are agreeing with the defenders of the “Yes, it was consent”, or the “No, it was not consent” – Group.
   

4. Let one pre-defined person, or a person from the public choose one question and another person choose one answer. Give the time to read the question silently first and then perform it in front of the lawyers and the judges. (Remember to give some time to the actors to prepare.)
   

5. The defenders of Yes ALWAYS have to defend the statement « YES IT WAS CONSENT »  and the defenders of no ALWAYS have to defend « NO IT WASN´T CONSENT » they can`t choose to debate with their personal ideas to the subject but have to defend YES or NO depending on their table.
   

6. TIMING : give each group (yes&no) 2 minutes to prepare their arguments and then another 2 minutes to open the argument and express their arguments. Bith groups present their first arguments to the opposite table.
   After the first round of argumentation both groups get each 1 more minute to wrap up their arguments and answer to what the opposite table might have said as an argument. The groups cannot interrupt each others’ speech and if this happens judges should give minus points to the interrupting group.
   

7. The judges in the meantime have time to take notes and write pro’s and con’s of the arguments.  

8. During the trial Judges are not allowed to speak. They need to listen carefully to both tables (YES&NO) and take notes. Only after the end of the given time to the groups they will have 2 minutes to discuss amongst each other and afterwards declare their decision whether it was consent or not. During the process of decision making by the judges, make sure to play some loud music. (Some classic music or fun and sensual music can be used to amuse the audience.)
   Their decision can be made upon their personal ideas. The judges don’t need to agree and have the same answer. 

9. During the debate of the judges, facilitators can prepare two 2 actors, as well as the Yes-and-No-Lawyers with other participants.
   

10. When the time is up, the judges raise their answers, and will get some time to explain why they chose the “Yes” side or the “no” side. 

The amount of “Yes” and “No”-signs that are being raised up by the judges at the end will decide which table wins the trial.  Include the opinion of the viewers sitting on the benches as well t keep them engaged in case the answer is not clear.

11. You can repeat the whole method with a new “case” (question and answer)
    
    

12. At the end, disseminate carefully how the participants felt during the process and what they have learned about consent and safe space. 

Before you start cooking, keep in mind…

The topic of consent and how people from different backgrounds understand it can be a very sensitive topic. It is important to elaborate that some behavior might be exaggerated within this play and that it might not always feel comfortable defending an opinion that one does not usually have. It might be triggering and therefore needs to be discussed beforehand and afterwards. Dissemination is key to this game, otherwise it might risks strengthening stereotypical behavior.