“I am often discriminated against when I walk on the streets in my hometown,” voiced Ria, an Indonesian girl who had been shy until now, “…because of my hijab, my religion, I am a minority.” She shared feelings of total powerlessness when her religious identity was pitted against her neighbor’s judgements. With people voicing respect and support for religious identity, she became determined to speak up for her people, no longer insecure about her beliefs.
This happened during the Cambodia-based peace conference, Initiative for Peace (IFP), intending to provoke deeper thoughts about one’s personal and social identity via game-based activities and guided seminars. Five days of intense cross-cultural discussions helped many of us articulate problems tabooed in local communities and express viewpoints suppressed by traditions.
Her story was but one of many that has been voiced out during IFP. Our goal was to provoke deeper thoughts about one’s personal and social identity within a safe environment by employing ostensibly silly, game-based activities to share experiences. Initially, I was skeptical about the actual impact we’d have on participating students. Could people facing real adversities derive some transformative sense of self-identity in five days? Would the discussions really influence how the Burmese treat their compatriots from Rohingya area? However, when Ria’s experience prompted others to share theirs, and when participants began to take over the debate, my skepticism was challenged.
This conference imbued in me the ability to discuss cross-cultural topics in-depth and sensitive issues with empathy. What truly fascinated me about this experience, however, was the fact that even just five days of intense cross-cultural discussions about identity, service, and empowerment could equip Ria, and many others, with the confidence to acknowledge and the willingness to address sensitive cultural conflicts.
Upon reflection, I realized that these activities have gone beyond simply sharing experiences and opinions, but to equipping participants with lexicons for circumstances initially deemed indescribable to them. In completion, they gained the language and awareness to define the nebulous lines between sexual harassment and acceptable displays of affection, or playful comments and religious prejudice, and many other ambiguous scenarios. Having seen how other participants have initiated IFP in Myanmar, Vietnam, and Indonesia after the conference, I realized that meaningful conversations can successfully equip people to address social injustices.
