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.