Academic pedagogy in the 21st Century has welcomed new forms of discourse, one of them being the form that a ‘conference’ takes. Spread over a few days, this form of autodidactic learning mechanism results in the perpetuation of certain ideas in a very condensed format and with a lack of diverse inputs and viewpoints (Serrat 2017). This relatively young form of academic pedagogy, particularly while handling a nuanced topic like gender studies, and when uncoupled with long term reforms in the education system, perhaps remains a step too late and too little in the right direction. Feminist and gender fluid pedagogy in India in recent times should strive to address the question of caste, class, and marginalised perspectives, essentially overcoming the androcentrisism embedded within our society (Rege 1995). However, ‘women’ centric design conferences in the recent past, in our experience, have ended up creating ‘cis’ gendered, privileged perspectives, thereby further emphasizing the differences it aimed to abolish. The presentation therefore analyses the forms of discourse that is undertaken in architecture and design conferences of the past two decades (2000-2020) in order to understand their position within the spectrum of intersectional gender studies. To further focus the lens of this presentation, certain parameters have been defined for addressing its critical framework: gender representation, caste and class representation, economic viability, conference timelines, theoretical and academic questions addressed in the conference, and future imaginations for the articulation of this knowledge in practice and academia. The data set for this analysis would attempt to cover not just ‘women’ centric conferences, but all major conferences undertaken in the metropolitan cities of India in the recent past by conducting interviews and documenting conference presenters, organisers, and participants through the lens of gender. The presentation aims to capture the expressions that engage with bridging the gap between realities and imaginations that a conference projects. The presentation therefore makes the argument to ask whether such conferences can be intersectional and inclusive, and further, whether we need to have such conferences at all. What are the alternatives to the practice and pedagogy of a conference, and does it play a part in agitating for reforms in the ecology of larger gender focussed discourse in academia?