At a rally for independence in Nagaland at a notorious checkpoint, an incident sparked the women to a simple dilemma demonstration when soldiers broke up the march with live gunfire. The women at the march were mostly elders in the community and were indignant. They marched back to their villages and called the other women outside. "It's time," they announced.
The women numbering around one hundred then proceed to the army checkpoint, which was manned by about a dozen soldiers. They announced their intentions and proceeded to take apart the checkpoint, bit by bit. They then ordered that the checkpoint was never going to be put up again, that the mess by the roadside would be left as a reminder of their power. And it’s still a heap of rubble to this day.
The women had created a dilemma demonstration. And their dilemma demonstration was not just an "impromptu" act (though it was inspired!) but came out of a considered sensibility and lots of previous training and preparation. They had considered the possibility of repression (in their case being killed), and made an informed decision to go ahead with it.
Dilemma demonstrations are in this way very different than marching in the streets asking for something. Because if the women marched for an end to that checkpoint and the government just allowed them to march, do they win anything? And if there's no increasing of the pressure, the government can ignore the march and see it merely as personal expression of frustration that will go away.