You're listening to a stage talk titled Speaking
of Violence. This week we were joined by psychotherapist
and activist Leila Hussain. In an honest and
emotional talk, we unpacked the impact reporting
can have on survivors of gender -based violence
and discussed ways to create a better environment
for interviews and a more sustainable relationship
with your sources. This talk was hosted by me,
Charla Moore, on Thursday the 14th of August
2025 in the Bellycat Discord server. Okay, welcome
all to this week's stage talk. We're continuing
our mini -series on gender -based violence this
week. You've heard from a lawyer's perspective
with Dr. Alexa Koenig, a journalist's perspective
with Eliza and Yang Wei from The Fuller Project,
and today we're hearing from a survivor's perspective.
Before we go into the talk, I wanted to recognise
that today we'll be discussing issues that may
be triggering for some in the audience, and if
you wish to leave, The talk at any point, please
feel free to. It's also a reminder to ensure
you are respectful with comments and questions
in the chat as we approach this harrowing topic
here on stage. As the UN recognised this year,
there are currently no accurate estimates regarding
the scale of those affected by violence and discrimination
based on sexual orientation and or gender identity
worldwide. Data just isn't collected sufficiently
enough. to see the global impact of this harm.
That is why reporting out stories of survivors
and showcasing data patterns of gender -based
violence is so important. It takes skill to tell
these incredibly difficult experiences and these
stories sensitively. And unfortunately, many
reporters get it wrong, with devastating consequences.
I want to welcome our guest speaker, Leila Hussain.
Layla speaks from a wealth of experience in this
area. She is a survivor herself of female genital
mutilation, FGM, and is a well -regarded activist
here in the UK. As part of that work, she helped
build the project The Girl Generation that focuses
on the importance of the emotional wellbeing
of activists in the field working with survivors
of FGM, and is a global ambassador for the Girl
Generation movement. She also founded the Dahlia
Project, now run by others, the UK's first specialist
therapeutic service for FDM survivors. On top
of all of that, she's also a psychotherapist
specializing in supporting survivors of sexual
abuse and consults with leading NGOs and organizations
like the World Health Organization on development
projects in the wellbeing of activists working
within communities. As we talk, please make sure
to add your questions in the chat box via the
message bubble icon in the top right corner of
your screen. And please note that this is being
audio recorded. So if you do not want me to read
out your username on the podcast, please note
that within your question. Really important,
guys. Okay, over to you, Leila. Tell us all about
yourself. Thank you. Thank you so much, Charlie.
So thank you so much for having me and also for
creating. a space to have this conversation.
And Charlie, thank you so much for reminding
us and acknowledging that we are discussing a
topic that can be deeply triggering. And please
take care of yourself. And as Charlie said, please
step away if at some point you feel you need
to be, this is feeling difficult. I think it's
very important to acknowledge that. But I even
know, obviously, thank you for mentioning all
my accolades. I'm not just here as a professional,
but I'm here as someone who's lived through being
at the subject of a media attention as a survivor.
When I first shared my own story publicly, I
was propelled into the media spotlight, TV, interviews,
documentaries, news articles. Some journalists
truly treated me with care and dignity, but unfortunately
some didn't. I remember one headline reduced
my whole experience to something very shocking.
with no context about who I was beyond the violence.
I've had experiences where my photo was used
without my permission. I've had intimate parts
of my story that I shared, but I didn't consent
for that to be shared simply because it just
made a great headline. I felt the exhaustion
of being asked to repeat my trauma over and over
and over again, sometimes. the audience that
weren't even ready to listen with respect. And
I've also experienced the opposite moments where
journalists truly saw me as a whole person, respected
my boundaries, and ensured my voice was the central
of what was happening. These experiences truly
have shaped how I work in the media today and
why I feel so strongly about the responsibilities
of a journalist have have when reporting on gender
-based violence. Why does this matter? When we
talk about reporting gender -based violence,
we are not dealing with abstract issues. Behind
every headline, image, video clip, there's a
human being, and I think we must always remember
that. I know from personal experience how a story
can be taken out of your hands. It can feel like
your own truth no longer belongs to you, so you
feel hopeless. And I'm exploited with that experience.
I've also seen how careful and respectful reporting
can be, can empower survivors, helping them reclaim
their voice, connect with others, spark root
change. In 2013 I presented a documentary on
Channel 4 which focused on FGM and how FGM is
being tackled in the UK. I remember the care
the director really took, you know, not just
for those in front of the camera, but also behind
the camera. So we actually had, because we were
interviewing survivors of female genital mutilation.
It was really important to have a therapist with
us at all times. And also the survivors who were
interviewed were given the opportunity to watch
what they recorded and then signed. the contract.
So that kind of approach genuinely helped. So
the difference obviously is something to think
about. Does the reporting center around survivor
humanity? Is it trauma enforced? Does it avoid
perpetrating stereotypes or harm? So it takes
years, by the way, for survivors. To rebuild
trust, it takes a single careless headline to
destroy it all. Actually, I've had few of those,
especially when the cruel cut documentary came
out and I got to a point where I would refuse
to talk to any journalists. I really just couldn't
talk to any journalists. I mean, I'm a writer
myself, always now put my voice out there by
myself. And what happened over and over again,
I would say something and then it was It was
turned into something that I really didn't agree
to. So what I also did over the years, I built
great relationships with very good journalists.
So when I want to say something in the media,
so those are the things I usually would go to.
But also, I want to talk about the impact around
race, gender, and location. And how when we report,
how that shapes how journalists now report. So
I'll give an example. As a black African woman
survivor from Europe. I've seen firsthand how
race and gender influences the narrative, right?
So mine is, a white woman's story of violence
may be framed as tragic injustice, deserving
of empathy and urgent action. Perfect, right?
That's how you really want to frame it. But what
you will find with black African women's stories
might be reduced to a cultural issue or an exotic
practice stripped of the recognition that this
is violence and is a human rights violation.
Locations, max of two, where the violence happens
often determines whether the world treats it
as a crisis or just a footnote. When atrocities
happen in the global south, they are too often
framed as a local custom rather than the crime
demanding accountability. So, oh, this is what
these people do. And what I've seen with female
genital mutilation, femicide, child marriage,
I hate, by the way, I hate the term child marriage.
that a child cannot be married. I'm begging you,
all the journalists, researchers who are here,
it's so important you really point out that a
child can never be married off because that really
harms. So when you double down or you hold these
biases around gender and geography, it shapes
survivors as seeing how stories are told. So
ultimately... It basically changes the narrative
for those who are from a certain part of the
world. So I really would urge you to really treat
everybody equally, not based on their race and
gender and location. So let me share some common
mistakes journalists make. Sensationalizing of
a substance from my own story was sometimes reduced
to a shock value with headlines designed to provoke
outrage rather than understanding. Language means
use. For example, at the Girl Generation, we
have a position paper on the power of language
on how FGM has been tackled over the years. Because
what's happened with FGM, they keep referring
to it as cultural traditional practice. No, FGM,
it's violence. And there's actually one word
I've been seeing journalists use a lot. They
call it procedure. Imagine. Procedure is something
you have with a doctor if you have an operation.
So FGM is not a procedure. So it's really important
to keep an eye on language. And thirdly, one
common mistake that happened is consent. Consent
at every stage. When you're talking to a survivor
of violence, make sure when she's talking to
you that she's consented that she's talking to
you. When you are publishing, please, it's important
that they are published and make sure you show
them the picture you could be using because that
could be triggering. There are times where I
have had a great piece, but then next to the
piece, they had a blade. with blood next to it.
So I really couldn't read that article because
the blade is so triggering. It's not useful.
So that just causes more harm. And I've noticed
a lot sometimes, and I notice this with sexual
violence cases, where the focus is on the perpetrator
rather than the survivor. So even more space
to the abuser's background than the survivor's
voice. And finally, This is really important.
Neglecting aftercare. So important when we are
speaking to survivors of violence, especially
when they're telling their story. It's important
there's some sort of aftercare. I'm not saying
you have the budget to go now get her a therapist.
No, I think it's important that you organized
maybe one or two, three calls after that interview
goes out publicly just to check in because the
anxiety is, you'll be off the roof. So it's important
just to say to someone, hey, are you okay? Is
there someone that you can go and talk to? Do
you have some friends? You can probably go out
with the day after, someone can come and see.
So please help when you're talking to survivors
to think about aftercare. So let me share some
best practices. It's important that you really
have some understanding around trauma, to be
trauma informed. So for example, prepare survivors
for the process, give them control over what's
shared and respect their boundaries. Then use
person -centered and accurate language. So for
example, call violence for what it is. Survivors
are more than just their violence, are they injured?
Context matters. The context absolutely matters.
So work with local experts, advocates who understand
the picture or the story you're looking deeper.
Most importantly, it's really critical. I don't
know if any of you, like if you're a part of
an organization or a journalist that works for
themselves, say for employed, please, please
try to have a do no harm approach. And what I
mean by that is Create an approach where every
time you're interviewing someone who's really
at risk, is this the right image? Am I using
the right language? Can I chat with them? So
really make sure there's a do no harm approach
at all times. And just remember behind every
image, every video, an image of a person is not
just a piece of evidence. There's a human behind
this. reporting on when harm is so for example,
how do we report on issues that we consider a
taboo, right? So for example, FGM has been considered
that. So in my work, there are communities that
simply do not think FGM is harmful. They think
it's tradition, culture, even protection. If
I use, I would like to use a recent case in the
Gambia. This is just a few days ago, illustrates
this perfectly. One month old baby girl died
after being subjected to FGM. She was murdered.
But much of the reporting avoided calling it
that. Instead, it was framed around tradition
and cultural practice. Do you see when I say
your location, gender, and race absolutely plays
a role on how this was reported? Imagine if this
was a white girl, how this would have been reported.
I just really want you to reflect on that. Think
about that child's life was taken away, taken
by the very people that were meant to protect
them, yet the headlines prioritize. cultural
framing over the reality of the violence. This
is where reporting choices matter deeply. When
journalists soften the language to avoid offending
cultural norms, they can end up erasing the crime
itself and denying justice from the survivors
and victims. For journalists, this means you
must be very thoughtful. You can't just parachute
in with facts and outrage, okay? You need to
understand that the cultural landscape work with
trusted insiders and find the language and framing
that opens a conversation rather than slamming
the door shut. But equally, you must be brave
enough to name the harm. And if I come back to
the example of child marriage, I have yet to
see an article that says, can we please talk
about the pedophilia that's happening because
that's what it is. Right. It's really important
for journalists to really name it for this. Sometimes
the goal is to convince everyone immediately,
but it's important that we plant a seed for change
while telling the truth. It's critical. So I
really have to, I wouldn't call it a call to
action, but maybe an ask for you to reflect on.
If the survivor, so when every journalist research
a storyteller in the space, she'll ask themselves,
if the survivor reads this tomorrow, would they
feel that their truth has been honored? When
any survivor of violence shares their story,
really, it's a series I cannot express enough.
It's an honor to be sitting there to hear someone's
pain like that and to witness it. So it's really
important they feel honored. Two, does this contribute
what I'm writing and publishing? Does it contribute
to justice and healing or could it cause further
harm? I wish every journalist who interviewed
me had asked me those questions. I'm here because
I believe ethical reporting saves lives. It challenges
impunity, shifts narratives, and creates a space
for survivors to heal and to be heard. But only
if we approach it with care, humility, and respect.
I really want to remind us that this is just
the beginning of this conversation. And please
reflect on just those few questions that are
asked. Thank you so much, and I look forward
to your questions. Thanks, Charlie. I hope I
didn't go over my time. Absolutely not. Thank
you. That was super useful and really great,
laid the groundwork for the discussion we want
to have today. Lots of already supportive comments
as well in the chat. Somebody said, I hear you
about building trust. Clickbait headlines are
so disrespectful to everyone. If that case of
the... A one -year -old baby, a one -month -old
baby died in North America. The reaction would
be a hundred times different. I appreciate you
flagging the need for overcoming the problem
of false balance and instead centering the perspectives
in need of the victims. Okay, we've got some
questions coming in, but I wanted to start the
discussion off just taking you back to that idea
of consent because that's something that you
said at the beginning that it's really important
to ask for consent. So how should you approach
a potential survivor to ask for consent slash
if they'd like to address their experience. What
are some clear don'ts when you're asking for
consent that you wouldn't tolerate yourself as
a survivor? Absolutely. I think first of all,
I think from my experience, it depends how the
journalist really approaches me. I think if you
approach someone with kindness and good intent,
I think someone can already feel that. So how
you speak to them, eye contact. you know, making
things clear. Maybe sometimes they might not
give you consent the first time, but I would
say continue. If this is a very important story,
I think it's important you continue to have a
conversation. I remember doing that, especially
with documentary makers. I never say yes right
away. I need more conversation. So I think consent
is something you have to ask. I think you ask
with kindness. with openness and being honest.
I think you need to be honest with what your
intentions are, otherwise it just goes wrong.
When we were filming the crawl cut, there was
a scene where we created a vagina gallery for
men and boys. Jesus, I would really recommend
you go watch this. Because of what we were filming
and the boys were over 18, we said we will film
it. So I said, can we film it and then let them
watch it, let them sit with this, then they can
give consent because they were still young. Even
though they were over eight, we felt they were
very young and we would do an experiment, an
experiment where we divided the gallery into
like four sections, you know, and each section
had some sort of artwork, you know, around FGM.
So it could have been triggering or upsetting.
Actually, one of them got really upset and cried.
but he gave us consent later on. So there's not
one way. It's really just checking the space
you're in, who you're talking to, and it's building
a relationship. I remember usually documentary
makers don't do that, but for this film, for
this documentary, I said, I really want to make
sure these boys feel safe. And what happened
after the film came out? They were dragged and
attacked on social media for being part of a
scene where I'm teaching them. about the female
Volvo. So that's an example of consent. Wow,
I can't believe that they also were subjected
to hate after that. I actually ended up going
to, yeah, yeah, because we were doing an experiment.
I love documentaries that experiment. But what
came as an experiment? Some of the boys were
you know, they shared some of their misogynistic
views about women. So that was the journey we
took. So they were attacked, probably misogynists,
but they were also attacked for just being part
of it. But one good thing that came out of it,
they were all from the same school. They went
to a secondary school years ago and the headteacher
contacted me and I actually ended up working
with the school for a couple of months because
he said, if they're saying that, that means the
school, some of the students in the school have
this view. So he brought in every women's organisation
you can think of to come and work with the school.
Wow. That's a great story that that impact carried
on afterwards. There's quite a few questions
coming in, but I want to ask the most recent
one actually, because it really relates to what
we're talking about. Primavera Legal asks, can
you really give consent when you're not aware
of the consequences? Even if you're a reporter,
how are you giving informed consent if you actually
don't understand where this would go, just like
you're explaining with the boys' situation there?
I think until someone understands it, you shouldn't
be working with them. I step away. If I know
this person doesn't even understand, then I really
shouldn't be reporting it because then I'm putting
myself at risk and I'm putting them at risk.
So I think, I think consent is, it's critical.
You have to figure out a way that if I have to
get a translator, that's what I would do. If
I have to, yeah, I have to figure out a way to
get them to understand. Otherwise I will, I will
step away situation that that will be my approach.
Absolutely. And I think we'll return to that
conversation in a little bit when I, cause I
want to ask a question about how, you know, modern
social media as well can empower survivors, but
also can kind of give false pretenses that they're
happy, particularly speaking about their experience.
But we'll revisit that in a second. I want to
make sure that we're asking the audience questions
because they're coming in thick and fast. When
considering the victims, how do you handle there
being different requests? For example, requests
for images, requests for content, requests for
wording. Basically, how do you keep everybody
happy in those situations? So, for example, at
the Go Generation, we developed a No Harm Guide,
which when we are speaking to anyone, we have
to send them the images. get their approval.
They have to consent. We cannot go out there
without any consent. It just doesn't. But it's
what we've done over the years. I mean, TG, the
girl generation was established in 2014. So we
have built such a great relationship. I mean,
now some of the women, when we want to tell,
when we quickly want to do a story and put it
out there, they'll say, hey guys, because we
built that trust. It's like, oh, you know, the
communications team, okay, we trust you. You
go ahead and do this. So we built. that relationship,
but I really, I'm very, uh, uh, it's, it's, it's,
it's building that relationship. Otherwise, again,
I would say step back, but having a do no harm
approach. Absolutely. It's, it's, I mean, um,
I don't know if someone can actually go to the
girl generations page and actually share some
of that content. Um, because it's extremely important
because, uh, we've had horrible experience. I
mean, I remember I've had horrible experiences
where There was a few images that I didn't consent
to, and it was used over and over again by different
publishers. The Girl Generation website link
is in the chat now, and I will ensure it's in
the description link of this podcast for those
listening back. Chris asks, do you have any tips
for journos who get sucked into the false balance
trap for better centering survivors? Chris, maybe
you can give a little bit more detail. The question
was, do you have any tips for journos who get
sucked into the false balance trap for better
centering survivors? I presume you mean in regards
to different regions from the beginning conversation,
but maybe Chris, you can specify that. In the
meantime, while Chris is typing, if you could...
talk to us about the perfect setup for a sensitive
interview. That would be super useful. Like what
processes would you expect researchers, journalists
to follow if they were going to go interview
you for a sensitive interview? This setting is
actually really important. 100%, 100%. Maybe
if I give you an example of what journalists
used to do. Ring, ring, a phone call. Hi, I'm
doing a piece. Do you have a survivor? I mean,
that's literally the language. I can be quite
petty when I get fed up. So I said, give me a
minute. I waited for a minute and then I said,
I go, there's none left on the shelf. And he
was just stunned. He was like, what? Well, I
said, I said to him, you know, you asked me,
is there a survivor for this piece? I said, well,
you talked about it as if this was a subject,
like an object. So I said, there is none left
on the shelf and I hanged up. So that question
is extremely important because this is the kind
of environment sometimes I enjoy. Because we
want stories to go out there. So how you set
the setting, one, it's having maybe one or two
conversations before any interview takes place.
Before any interview takes place. By just introducing
yourself, talking about the intent of the article,
and then you talk about consent in that conversation.
So if you're doing this over the phone, because
now we live in a world where we're interviewing
people, other forms of technology. So it's important
to really have one or two, three chats. Just
to build, and I keep coming back to building
the relationship, it's absolutely critical. Because
remember, survivors of violence, they'd be harmed
by people very close to them. Someone they're
very close to. A journalist who you're telling
your most horrific thing. It's a very intimate
experience. So it could be very triggering. It's
like, I can't trust you too much, but you're
too close. So it's important to have one or two
conversations just to build that trust. It's
absolutely critical that you do that. If you
meet in a physical space, always ask, where does
she feel comfortable? Is there anything that
could be triggering? I'll give you another great
example. 2016, I was in New York for CSW and
a famous actor, I forgot his name, but he was
quite known. He was at Sex and the City, one
of those actors. He offered one of the organizations
that we're working with his base. So he has a
nice bar in Manhattan. He's like, yep, come and
do your session here. We'll have a session about
FGM. So three of us survivors, we were walking
together. And because he's a filmmaker, the bias
called the cutting room. Imagine, we were invited
to come to a safe space called the cutting room.
I just remember thinking, is this a joke? So
GC, even though the intent was to go to this
lovely place to have this conversation, because
the cutting room, he meant... A filmmaker, they
have a cutting room where they edit, right? At
least correct me if I'm wrong. So that's where
he named it. But for our nephew, he took him
to a place that was safe and then they called
it the cutting room. So please ask when you're
talking to any survivors of violence, is it best
that she comes to you, to her space? Where does
she feel safe the most? It's very important to,
and every survivor is different. That's where
those conversations are absolutely critical to
create that safe space. So you're co -creating
that safe space. Don't assume what safe space
is. going to an expensive hotel room, it's going
to be a safe space for her because that could
be triggering. So ask the survivor what her safety
actually looks like and please don't forget the
aftercare. The aftercare is extremely important
because that's also part of the safety you're
creating for the person that you're interviewing.
Absolutely. I'd also add that even on top of
the aftercare and the right setting and everything,
it's also important to remind them that they
can also take breaks. And often it's quite difficult
sometimes, particularly if you've gone through
a harmful situation, to tell things in chronological
order as well, which is what journalists and
researchers often are looking for. So kind of
guiding that person through that experience and
allowing them to take breaks and take a second.
I often let people leave the room and then come
back when they're ready to continue the conversation.
I've had situations where I wanted just to be,
I remember I couldn't talk to a male journalist.
That was just where I was at the time. So it
was really important to also keep an eye on that.
That could be also be triggering. So it's important
to also be mindful of that. Yes, taking a break.
And also one thing I want to, some of the journalists
I usually talk to, they always say to me, Leila,
if you don't want to go ahead with this, we can
cancel it. So it's very important to reassure.
So because I know when a piece is going out next
morning, that night I usually I struggled to
sleep. I also know I have the power to say, hey,
please don't publish it. Very important to give
the survivor that power. Remember, her being
violated, her power has been taken away. So we
don't want to repeat that in this process. She
needs to feel that she's also having power in
that space. And for some, it's the first time
they're recounting it as well. So you've also
got to keep that in mind too. It's really, it's
really flattering. That's why I use the word
honor, because you know, it's a really, it's
an honor to hear someone else's pain like that.
It's a really, I feel very privileged to sit
with survivors who tell me what has happened
because listening to their story and acknowledging
is part of their healing. That's why we need
to be careful that we don't re -traumatize. Chris
has now clarified the question. By false balance,
they were talking about the expectation that
donors have to present equally both sides of
every issue. For example, if you're telling a
story of an attack and they've accused a specific
person, sometimes you'd be expected by a newsroom
to go and get a rebuttal, a right of reply, a
comment back from the accused. How do you balance
that shoe when it comes to making sure that you
continue to respect the survivor, I think is
the question. Yeah, I've seen this so many times.
I think fundamentally it's where you start, what
yourself's doing, all of this. I think sometimes
we have to make a decision about saying, no,
I will not do this. And I'll give you an example.
I've had uh, situations where I was interviewed
about FGM, a journalist, when an interviewed
someone who opposes my views, who says FGM is
not a bad thing. And I cannot tell you how triggering
and painful that is. Um, and, and you're told,
but well, you know, we need to check both sides.
And I said, how do you even, uh, give space to
when someone's telling you as a child, she was
pinned to the table and a group of adults touched
her genitalia. I mean, It's really insane to
me. I always say to journalists, that's a decision
you will have to make in terms of your morals.
Like, where do I stand in all of this? Because
it is harmful. And recently, I don't know if
you're following what's happened in the UK, a
lot of the cases around sexual violence. It's
horrific the way the survivors are now being
attacked. It always feels like we're blaming
the actual victim. instead of the perpetrator.
And then the perpetrator somehow is humanized
in this. So I always say to journalists, you
will have to make that decision yourself, because
I know, I guess, for me, you can't never put
a survivor in harm's way. That will be my answer
to that question. This is partly related, but
slightly different. And there's also a practice
in these rooms. Obviously, it's really important
for every good journalist to back up claims that
someone makes, as we've just been speaking about.
But for example, if someone is accused of wrongdoing,
journalists look for data to substantiate those
claims. Sometimes that seeking of the truth can
feel invasive. And going back a little bit to
Chris's point, because Chris was mentioning in
the chat that sometimes legal, for example, ask
you to give this kind of this proof documents.
For example, the survivors of sexual violence,
sometimes newsrooms will ask for medical documents
or proof of therapeutic treatment or police case
numbers. For example, I myself have had to prove
sexual violence this way and it's incredibly
traumatising. How would you suggest researchers
slash journalists approach this subject with
a survivor if they absolutely have to ask for
this kind of level of proof? And have you come
across this yourself when speaking out about
particular cases? I remember being asked to do
an article and then the legal team were copied
into the email and they said, oh, is there proof?
I was horrified by that request. And I remember
writing a long email just really saying about
what they did. They changed the whole process.
So my answer to that is I think collectively,
Collectively, we need to change that. We need
to change that process. It's not okay to ask
a survivor of violence, can you bring me proof?
Imagine survivors of violence already feel like
no one cares, but now they have to, you have
to prove with some sort of paperwork that you
have been violated. So I think that process has
to change, but all of us to really demand for
that change, we have to come up with another
system. That one just doesn't work. It does more
harm. And Charlie, thank you for sharing your
experience. I don't have any other way of making
that better. I feel like when someone says they've
violated, I like to believe that's the truth.
But unfortunately, we live in a world, but with
any system, there'll always be one or two people
who would lie. We know that. Any process. But
in any process, any system. But we cannot be
asking survivors of violence to be subjected
to be asking. I don't think that's ethical, in
my opinion. It re -traumatises the survivor herself.
I think it's absolutely incredibly difficult
on the survivor's point of view. I think sometimes
journalists and researchers feel the need to
make sure that their reporting is completely
valid. issues, for example, in the Me Too movement,
where people had come out and then claims had
fallen away in very little, but some cases. I
think there has been this culture that has arisen
with this need to prove personal accounts. Someone's
just put in the chat, it's an account, not a
trial. Most interviews don't demand proof from
their interviewee anyway. It's a really good
point. When I've had to do it in the past, and
I personally have asked not survivors of sexual
violence, but I have had to ask people who've
suffered from violence in general, proof of police
cases and police case numbers and medical documents.
I've had to kind of really explain why I'm asking
that and saying it's not questioning their validity
of their story. but actually making sure that
if someone writes in to us claiming that what
they said was untrue, we can say that we have
seen physical documents that supports their case.
I think that's the only way that I've ever seen
it framed. is in any way supportive of the survivor.
And I think it's a really difficult position,
not only for the survivor, but also for the researcher
and slash journalist to be put in to. And I agree
with you, the practice should change. But if
you're ever in that position, you have to frame
it in a very sensitive way. If you're ever pressured
by your newsroom into doing that and you have
no other choice. No, and I think this is a this
especially this particular conversation needs
to be widened a bit more, because I think that
system needs to change how we are. Because I
think what I loved about you, it was the way
you asked and how you said, right? You're like,
okay, I need this just to ensure that you are
safe. And this story, it's obviously true, right?
So you wanted to keep what you did it for safety
reasons. So how you approached it was very important.
But I do hope that system changed because I think
I've seen so many times where, I mean, especially
FGM survivors, We have to go to a gynaecologist
to prove our violence because you can't physically,
you can't see me from the outside. So it's really,
it's a very difficult thing to ask survivors
of violence. I really, yeah, we have to change
it. We have to figure out other ways of getting
that data, but we need to create a safe space
to actually talk about what's wrong and then
we can create a better version, a better system.
I'm a great believer in destroying odds. I'm
okay with it. I'm like, let's get rid of it.
It didn't work. Let's create a new one. That
is actually better. Maybe we can start the revolution
today. Hey, I'm going to fall off on that one
with you and say, Hey, I think we will, I guess.
No, it really isn't. It's a, it's a very important
question because you want data. You want to share
data, but then how do you do without harming
that person? So how, so we need to figure out
collectively by actually having some conversations
and maybe creating a better a better system.
If anyone in the audience wants to continue that
conversation, please feel free to add some suggestions
in the chat. Okay. In Eliza's talk, by the way,
you should listen back to, I don't know, Sutter
Knife, if you don't mind popping in the links
to both Eliza's and Alexa Koenig's stage talks,
just for people who may not have listened to
them yet. In Eliza's talk, we had an interesting
question from one of our members on the cases
of children being the subject of harm and the
balance of wanting to raise awareness of the
issue, but also not subject the child to a loss
of anonymity. So you mentioned that horrific
case earlier in the talk. How can we report on
these cases whilst ensuring that further harm
doesn't come to the child either now or in later
life from the reporting? I think a huge fear
for many reporters, particularly when it comes
to open source research, for example, is this
fear of jigsaw information where you might give
too much information in little bits so that someone
could piece that together and recognize that
they themselves had gone through that harm or
that somebody they knew had gone through that
harm, for example. So how do you protect the
identity of a child when talking about such harms?
I think we have to always remember, if I use
the example in Gambia, and so far I haven't seen
the name of the child or the family names. I
think what we need to do when something like
that happens is to focus on the act, what actually
happened. It was very important that we do that
and not sensationalize this child or especially
what I find a lot if that child it's black, African,
they're not white. We end up talking about the
community they come from. So the harm it's now
creating this narrative where now we have to
hate this group of people because that child
died. No, let's focus a child was violated and
that child needs justice. That's how the story
should be framed. not look at these people with
their traditional cultural practice and they
come from that part of the world. So there was
such a focus on location and exotic practices
versus a child was murdered by adults that should
have protected them. Do you see? So that should
have been the focus, not where the child comes
from and its people. And now we're vilifying
just because of the way the article was written.
So the harm is not just from the child, it can
replicate to the whole family. So it's not just
the child, it can impact everybody. And also
for me, I think it's important to remember, anyone
you're speaking to, they're all different individuals.
Everybody's unique. So you can't take the same
approach with everybody. You really have to trust
your instinct and sense. come back to do no harm
approach. It's extremely critical that you always
go back to that. That reminds me, going back
to the consent question about how social media
has changed things. How has social media kind
of changed this story ownership? landscape where
now, even young survivors, I mean, a lot of teenagers
now, for example, use TikTok and talk about their
personal experiences. How does platforms like
TikTok, for example, open up this ability for
survivors to speak about their story online?
But also, how does that balance the responsibility
of the reporter to then make sure that they're
not just taking that story from social media
and presuming that because this person has spoken
out online, that they're happy to speak out in
general. Because that's not always the case,
is it? Oh, that is so scary. I've had my tweets
and Instagram posts referenced in articles and
I was not asked about it. I was actually quite
shocking. Even though obviously, yeah, great.
I mean, social media has given us the space to
be, well, not so free, but kind of free to have
a space and audience we can talk to, right? So
I think when survivors are speaking in these
spaces, it's great. It brings awareness in all
those things. But for me, I worry, actually,
my worry is around the comments they get and
then how that impacts them, the emotional wellbeing.
And then journalists need to be very mindful
that when survivors are usually speaking about
their own experience. They aren't getting attacked,
trolled. So now it's important. I mean, it takes
a quick message to say, hey, I love your content.
I would love to share it. I think it's important.
I think it's so simple. I don't think we should
just take someone's content. I mean, and also
the social media platforms also, they really
need to have their policies around it. I think
people should not just take from people's pages
because that's my page. And you should be asking
me for permission. So it is quite, that deeply
worries me. Journalists just take people's content
from social media and then put it in the article.
It's not, it's not ethical. It's yeah. And you
do in her because you didn't ask. We spoke about
a really difficult situation in Alexa's talk
when, for example, in open source research, often
we come across videos. of horrific attacks and
we might need to use them as part of a data selection.
For example, if we're saying harm has happened
in this particular area, sometimes that harm
is then linked to in a map or with a trigger
warning and often blurring. But it's very, very
difficult for you to track down the person within
that video. particularly as it's usually not
the person who's uploaded it and asked for consent.
We talked about this on Alexa's talk about this
imbalance in showcasing the harm to do good in
terms of proving that this harm happened and
we've been able to geolocate, locate where this
happened so people know that this crime was committed.
but also not having the ability to ask for permission
from this individual who may be blurred and it
may be difficult to depict who they are, but
they could see that and be irreversibly damaged
from seeing themselves in that state. So it's
a really difficult issue. And that's why I say
that every case is different. what you described,
I can see why someone would take that image.
Because, you know, as a journalist, you want
the world to see what the hell is happening,
but you can't get hold of that person. But again,
this is why it's really important. Every organization,
everyone in this, to really think about what
your do -not -harm process looks like. It's really
important to create a space. What does that actually
look like for me, for us, around how we share
images, how we collect stories, how are we survivor
-centered? So to really think about that. Uh,
so I think through those conversations, I think
you come to some sort of understanding on how
you now think about images. Cause it is, it is,
you know, we, you know, as, as an activist, uh,
and, and, and, you know, working, uh, with my
advocacy work, journalists are extremely important.
I mean, a lot of my messages or information I
was sharing at the time publicly, I couldn't
have done it without a journalist. So. I recognize
the power journalists hold. I mean, without them,
we wouldn't know what's going on in the world
right now, even with social media. But I think
it's really important just to think about what
a do -no -harm now looks like. Because everybody's
different. They work in different environments,
different situations. But begin to think about
what do -no -harm looks like for you. And keep
your questions coming. Chris has asked, what
key actions do you think will help build enough
momentum towards a tipping point on FGM? And
how can we help? That's a big question. Oh, well,
how can you help? Please, please. We need more
stories out there about female genital mutilation.
And the key to make a change is the language.
Maybe if you go on our website, look at our position
paper. on the power of language. Actually, what
we are discussing, it's a form of sexual assault,
child abuse, neglect, kidnapping, the list goes
on. So we need journalists to now tell the actual
story. I mean, that's why I use that example
in Gambia. Girl died, girl was murdered by adults.
So I don't know if that baby's gonna get what
it needed, you know, if they're going to get.
the justice that they needed. And again, not
just FGM, child marriage. Again, do you see how
language really plays a role on how we approach
certain situations? If a random stranger, a man,
beat me up in the street, call it domestic violence.
But because it's my partner, somehow this is
the domesticated version. So we really need to
reflect on language and journalists and writers,
researchers, you have no idea the power you have
by really addressing such issues for what they
are, not for what they perceived or packaged.
You know, they're packaged in this lovely oil
or, you know, it's child marriage. So they do
know a white girl was being married off as a
child. There will be an outrage. There'll be
an outrage. So. Why are we, so we need to check
ourselves. What biases am I holding? Why am I
not reporting this for the way it should be reported?
Yeah. It's as simple as changing a few words.
Chris said, I hear you about language. Even child
marriage makes it sound consensual with marriage.
Exactly. A child can never consent to marriage.
They can't. When a child is with an adult man,
this is an assault to this child. That's how
it needs to be seen. A few years ago, I was in
Senegal for a photography project I was leading
on. I was working with a photographer and I was
obviously collecting the stories and I wanted
to show those who are really tackling FGM how
it should be. But sadly, through that journey,
I met little girls who were pregnant. To see
an 11 -year -old carry being pregnant, it's not
something you can forget. But the world child
marriage, it's why we're not, we were, people
were not outraged. And I can never forget that
just to see a child carrying another child. It's,
it's, it's, it's a form of abuse. I really, I
just can't, I don't even know how to name it.
Um, yeah. So, so it's, it's language is absolutely
critical. Absolutely critical. You know, butchering
and mutilating the female child. It's not culture,
it's violence. And it's really, I mean, fundamentally
FGM happens to control the female sex. But then
the question is, where in the world are we not
controlling females? Very, very true. I want
to ask a question about mental health in a second,
because I've seen a few comments in the chat
about wanting to now go hug their cats. And I
feel you. And thank you for saying that, thank
you for saying it because it's mind boggling
when you hear this stuff, you know? And we've
only got seven more minutes left, so absolutely
we will all go and hug our respective animals
in a second. But I wanted to at first ask, before
we go on to protecting yourself, because this
is a subject that's come up quite a few times
in these gender -based violence -themed talks
about telling these stories and wanting to make
an impact on the ground. But if you're telling
stories of sexual violence topics, for example,
that could be taboo in the area that you're trying
to hit the ground running in, how do you currently
advise the activists on the ground to change
perspec - perceptions, getting the word out to
people who might not want to be willing to hear
what you've got to say. So how do you change
perceptions? For a reporter's point of view,
that would be really interesting to know, I think.
I think when we began this, one of the things
I said towards the end, it's important to remember
not everybody's going to accept what you're saying.
So the intent is very important. One, if your
article or your piece that you're doing It's
not harming a survivor, but you're speaking the
truth. Yes, it would trigger people. People will
be upset, but I always say a reaction means something
has to shift, right? Like I think it's important
that we get uncomfortable. If you're too comfortable,
nothing changes. But when you create a conversation
that makes you uncomfortable, it means views
and perception will have to shift. Something
has to move. But our conversation has to begin.
So don't assume people are going to be in your...
As long as you're not harming anyone, it's important
that you publish that story. You're not going
to have everybody on your side at the beginning.
But what will happen, even their anger, whoever
is angry at you, or you've began a conversation
that they have to now reflect on. And I've seen
it over and over again. 22 years now, I've been
doing this work. I remember early on in my career,
I... A lot of people were against me, but I continued
to really say FGM's violence, it's child abuse.
Somehow everybody now, and for me I always say,
it's creating that safe space. The safe space
is make sure you're not harming anybody. These
are my words, these are my views. I will share
it. And actually every, every hour right now,
just to warn you, my words might trigger you.
So I giving you a warning. But I'm not going
to stop sharing my experience or that story that
a journalist wants to share. So people will be
triggered and upset, but something will begin
to shift because that's when our views change.
Trigger warning going to share disturbing news
story. Exactly. In the Discord, yes, SubtleKnife
has just pointed out you can actually use little
hidden marks to hide and let people click if
they want to see. So if you're ever telling a
story within here, you can use the symbols to
hide what you're saying to people who don't want
to see the news. As long as you give, please
give context, a little context so people know
not to click on it and just be like, oh, why
is it covered? Please do that. But in the gender
-based violence channel, for example, which I'll
link in the chat in a second, where we discuss
topics like this regularly, that is common practice
within there. People know, you know, it's a triggering
story and they might not want to click on it.
Plus trigger warning topics mentioned, of course,
as well. Right. I wanted to get to mental health
before the end of the time and we're only three
minutes. There's quite a lot of people in this
audience who will have seen quite triggering
things from torch content to sexual violence
in general. Videos of such for their work, sometimes
depending on research topics daily. So we always
ask about mental health because it's something
that a lot of people have different topics with.
As you listen to other people's survivor experiences
all the time, what do you do to maintain your
own mental health, particularly as much of the
topics must be quite triggering for yourself
as well? Yeah, I mean, a majority of my work
is actually holding space for people who are
survivors of violence. I mean, I work with people
from sexual violence to torture. Currently, I'm
working with a lot of frontline activists who
are in Palestine, Sudan. So you just imagine
holding with that. So how do I take care? I love
that question. I think it's important to have
practices that ensure my well -being. So for
me, I enjoy cooking because cooking means I'm
not typing. I'm not on my laptop. I'm not on
my phone. I have music that luckily I live. in
Kenya, so the weather definitely helps. When
it's very difficult to be doing this kind of
work, okay, freezing cold, so I love the work
that I do from here. But also I am in therapy.
I think it's important to check in and have a
space for me to release. I have a clinical supervisor
who goes through my clinical work. So I have
these spaces to really address all the difficulties
that come up for me. But sometimes it's okay
to also have a not a good day. I do have days
where I just want to curl up in bed and cry and
be upset. And actually I find crying to something
a process where I'm releasing all the anxiety
that I'm carrying in my body. It's a great way.
Um, so that's, that's how I take care of myself.
And I love music by the way. So yeah. So this
weekend, actually I'm going to a festival to
dancing off the bad energy that's happening in
the world. That's my plan. I adore that. I am
also a dancer. I love going to dance. I'm do
one, actually. I need it. Yeah. If you like cooking,
by the way, we have hashtag BellingCook in the
Discord server where we share amazing recipes
from around the world. I have a huge list of
things on YouTube. Cook. I'm terrible at cooking.
I don't really enjoy it, but I do enjoy Belling
Cook because I get loads of inspiration. I just
want to read a little bit of the comments here
just to end. Somebody said, I really appreciate
this talk. I'm not a journalist, but when I first
heard about FGM many years ago, I struggled.
What I was hearing was absolutely repulsive,
but it was also part of a culture I didn't understand
and I wanted to respect. That was what I struggled
with. Then I realized how much of American culture
has also come to be seen as abusive and we would
never want to return to it. It wasn't FGM was
part of the culture. It was that I wasn't giving
other cultures the credit to be able to develop
away from abusive practices the same way I did
my own. Now I have much more clarity in allowing
my proportion to not be felt with disrespect
to another culture. Yet every talk like this
is hopeful and providing more clarification.
A lot of people are sharing that they're also
survivors in the chat as well and have really,
really braved to say that. Thank you so much
for sharing. But yeah, please do follow some
of the mental health tips after this talk. I
will be, definitely. I'm going to go dance in
my kitchen in a second and give my two dogs a
cuddle. Please, please do that yourself and touch
a bit of grass as we like to say at the link
as well. Love that. Perfect. Exactly. All right.
We are over time. So I've got to say thank you
so much, Leila, for joining us today. Thank you
so much for sharing so many really useful tips
for reporters and researchers and for sharing
your own personal anecdotes as well. I really
appreciate the honesty and transparency that
you've shared here today. This podcast recording
will be up. Hopefully tomorrow, if not over the
weekend, and I'll be sharing it in our Monday
announcements in the Discord on Monday. Alright,
thank you so much everybody for your time and
effort here. Thank you. Thank you so much, everyone.
Thank you for listening to the stage talk. If
you'd like to catch a stage talk live where you
can ask the guest questions, join the Bellingcat
Discord server by visiting www .discord .gg slash
Bellingcat. The music you've heard is titled
Dawn by Newer Self and is courtesy of Artlist.