A Safe Space for Intercultural Dialogues
Intercultural communication often involves invisible boundaries shaped by religion, nationality, race, values, and lived experience. Beyond these boundaries lies the risk of feeling misunderstood or misrepresented. Because of this, topics involving culture are often avoided to prevent emotional tension. Many societies adopt a “better not talk about it” attitude, hoping silence will maintain harmony. Yet, silence often reinforces stereotypes rather than dissolving them.
At HSE, the School of Foreign Languages, Intercultural Communication Track, recognizes the necessity and value of these conversations. Here, students are encouraged to voice their perspectives, challenge stereotypes, and deepen their cross-cultural awareness in a safe and moderated environment. This space becomes not only a classroom but a laboratory of empathy, where difficult questions can be explored without fear of judgment.
From Subconscious Stereotypes to Conscious Reflection
Before coming to HSE, many of my assumptions about other cultures remained unchallenged, tucked away in my subconscious. I had never been in spaces where cultural stereotypes could be openly discussed or critically examined with mutual respect. In many contexts, cultural difference is treated as something fragile, something to tiptoe around. As a result, people learn to avoid difficult discussions entirely.
This changed the moment I entered my first course, Introduction to Inter- and Cross-Cultural Communication with Professor Moshnyaga. That class marked the beginning of my journey toward conscious reflection, logical reasoning, and meaningful engagement with people from diverse cultural backgrounds. It was the first time I encountered a space where intercultural competence, ethnorelativism, and cultural self-awareness were treated as essential skills rather than optional concepts.
At HSE, we routinely explore complex topics such as language ideologies, immigration, religious tolerance, race, national identity, and the global South’s position in world politics. These themes, often considered too sensitive in public discourse, are handled with respect and intellectual maturity. We challenge each topic one case at a time, unwrapping it layer by layer, like a present getting unveiled. Understanding root causes whilst offering well-thought-out analysis and potential solutions to various scenarios where necessary.
This slow, reflective process teaches us that intercultural competence is not about being “politically correct,” but about learning to listen deeply, suspend ethnocentric judgments, and approach unfamiliar perspectives with intellectual humility.
Classroom Moments That Reshape Understanding
On December 4th, during a session of Pragmatics of Inter- and Cross-Cultural Communication (II) with Professor Moshnyaga, we examined reasons for divorce across cultures and discussed host-guest dynamics in migration contexts. We explored the roles each individual has to play in a given situation, not only in theory but through vivid examples.
To illustrate this dynamic, imagine leaving your home country for Spain for a three-month vacation. You must live with an Airbnb host, which automatically places you in a guest position. Now imagine that in your home country, you normally wake up at 10 o’clock every morning, but your host insists that everyone must be awake by 7 a.m. This is a surface-level scenario to simply explain host-guest dynamics. Now apply it to modern immigration discussions: the tension becomes far more complex, filled with competing values, cultural norms, and expectations of assimilation.
This topic sparked several compelling reactions and cases. Everyone had varied opinions about the dos and don’ts of such situations, revealing the extent to which cultural upbringing shapes our moral judgment.
Eva, from Bulgaria, shared her experience visiting Tajikistan, where she was given a pamphlet outlining cultural and religious expectations during her stay in the country. Her willingness to follow these norms, and how it influenced her perception of the country became a strong example of cultural adaptation and cultural intelligence in action.
Toba, from Pakistan, recounted how the late Princess Diana respectfully wore a headscarf during her visit to Pakistan. This opened a discussion about cultural compliance and the significance of adapting to a host country’s norms, even when they differ from one’s own.
Both examples highlighted the importance of maintaining a respectful host-guest relationship, where visitors adjust to local customs to demonstrate sensitivity. It all boils down to assimilation, respect, and acceptance but also to the ability of hosts to communicate expectations clearly. These discussions taught us that intercultural encounters are reciprocal, requiring flexibility from both parties.
Challenging Questions Without Easy Answers
Later, the professor introduced two thought-provoking cases, one of which I contributed. I focused on a growing trend in Europe and North America: guests who, due to personal or religious beliefs, refuse to conform to their host culture’s rules. I asked:
“Why do we increasingly see cases where guests expect the host culture to bend to their personal norms rather than adapting to the host’s laws and customs?”
The room filled with thoughtful reactions. Many perspectives emerged, yet no definitive answers. And that was precisely the purpose. The aim was not to declare who is right or wrong, but to create space for intellectual curiosity, empathy, and intercultural reasoning.
This is the essence of intercultural dialogue: the willingness to examine the complexity of cultural encounters without reducing them to simplistic binaries. These questions often reveal more about global power dynamics, migration patterns, and historical relationships than they do about individual behavior.
Why These Dialogues Matter
The value of these discussions does not lie in reaching agreement. Instead, they create a forum where individuals from diverse cultural, religious, and national backgrounds can exchange ideas without judgment. This aligns perfectly with the goals of intercultural sensitivity, decentring, and perspective-taking.
Such conversations illuminate realities we may never have encountered and challenge us to reconsider our assumptions. They push us to ask:
* Why do we abide by certain norms?
* Why do some expectations feel negotiable while others do not?
* How can we engage more ethically and respectfully across cultures?
* What motivates cultural resistance or acceptance during migration?
* How do power, privilege, and history shape host-guest relationships?
This continuous questioning is essential for becoming competent intercultural communicators, individuals capable of navigating increasingly diverse societies with awareness, responsibility, and respect.
A Safe Haven for Dialogue
For me, HSE has become more than an institution; it is a safe haven for intercultural dialogue. It has allowed me to confront personal biases, listen to others without defensiveness, and gain a deeper understanding of global cultural dynamics. Through structured dialogue, respectful debates, and guided reflection, I have learned to appreciate the complexities of cultural identity and the beauty of intercultural encounters.
In a world often marked by division, polarization, and cultural misunderstandings, spaces like these are not just valuable, they are necessary. HSE provides a model for what intercultural engagement should look like - respectful, informed, courageous, and transformative.
Shared by
Okpleya Richard junior
