The Framing of Female Genital Mutilation in the Media
Despite the UN recognising female genital mutilation (FGM) as a violation of human rights, there is still little acknowledgement of it in the mainstream media. When it is spoken about it is often framed as a cultural issue for Africa and the Middle East. However, it continues to be a problem in immigrant populations living in Western Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand.
According to the World Health Organisation, female genital mutilation is the partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons and is carried out on young girls between infancy and age 15. Through research, Unicef estimates that at least 200 million girls and women that are alive today have undergone FGM. It can have serious physical and mental health effects, in this BBC article, Bishara Sheikh Hamo, a FGM survivor and campaigner, shares how it left her with irregular periods, bladder problems, recurrent infections and only being able to have a Caesarean section to have children. This is a horrific practice and abuse to women that could be ended within a decade. In Unicef’s research they found the majority of women and girls think it should end, so why is it still prevailing?
Often people claim it started as a way to control girls’ sexuality, to get them ready for marriage, a rite of passage or if the girls don’t have it done it will bring shame to their family. However, one archaeologist, who is a survivor of the procedure, says it began as an act of sacrifice to the divine, and if we wish to eradicate it, we must realise the history of it. It is believed to date back before many religions, but some tied their beliefs to it, leading to the confusion that it is a religious practice, or one must do it for their religion. Now, social acceptance is cited as the most common reason given for the continuation of the practice.
While I will be using the term FGM throughout this blog as this was the most common name for the practice in my research, it is essential to recognise that people from communities that practice it prefer the term female genital cutting. This is because to them it is not abuse as they believe they are doing what is best.
Lack of Reporting
Mass media may be one of the main, if not the way, people that don’t experience it learn about FGM, however coverage is minimal and inconsistent over time. It is possible there are a few reasons for this from it possibly being a difficult or uncomfortable subject to speak about, many women and girls never speak of what happened and their psychological trauma or the fact it is an ongoing issue rather than a stand out singular event. It is imperative for media coverage on the subject not only to raise awareness and educate but to support change. Sharing victims’ stories, educating people on the risks and promoting abandonment could all help. But when we think of how FGM is reported we have to also consider the meaning of where it is reported. If the argument is in news articles or editorials, it is seen as a topic of serious concern, but if it is in the entertainment section or a letter to the editor, it seems journalists don’t believe it to be important.
Also, it is tough to say whether coverage is accurate or sensationalised because a lot of the time it depends on a person’s belief about the practice. When there are stories from a survivor they may be seen as more reliable or emotive but coming from a journalist, how much can we trust they have researched the topic, story and facts? Have they been to where they are speaking about? Have they met people who partake in FGM or survivors? Have they been a part of the culture they may blame?
One issue of the lack of reporting on FGM may be because it is a women’s issue, typically from 30 countries across Africa, Asia and the Middle East or immigrant populations elsewhere, but white middle-class men occupy most positions of power in journalism. This is an issue as it may be harder for them to understand the issue of women’s oppression by the patriarchy and so they may blame the women and culture rather than diving deeper into the issue.
How is Female Genital Mutilation Framed?
Common frames used when journalists talk about FGM are traditional or cultural frames, social justice frames such as women’s oppression, human rights violations and child abuse, and health frames. Tradition frames blame cultures and argue they continue due to social pressure. Women’s oppression raises the issue of the patriarchy and attitudes towards women’s bodies and sexuality. When feminists pressured the UN, they considered the feminist frame to be too risky, opting for the physical harm frame instead but after this failed to reduce people abandoning the practice, they adopted the women’s oppression frame. The human rights frame on the other hand, recognizes FGM as an injury to all humanity, not just a topic for feminists. Child abuse frames show the practice as violence towards children and victimizing them. Finally, health frames focus on the physical and psychological harm it causes.
Cultural framing has been found to be the dominant framing in multiple people’s research. For example, Meghan Sobel found 60% of articles used cultural framing, and Lisa Wade said the majority of coverage framed the issue as one relating to culture. When articles report a cause of FGM, they mostly said it to be a cultural ritual or tradition. By blaming cultures and the local society or calling practitioners ‘uncivilized’ it creates a “them” problem and makes it harder for “us” in the West understand. It also takes away from the fact that it does happen in the West, which a lot of people probably don’t realise as it is seen as an “African” or “Muslim” problem. But 137,000 girls are at risk of FGM in the UK. The news media will often frame FGM in a way that doesn’t lead to people questioning Western culture, but instead pointing fingers elsewhere. However, not all news outlets are this way, some focus on survivors’ stories and informative journalism rather than journalists’ opinions or will report on FGM in the UK (see previously linked BBC article, here and here as examples), but they do still often frame it as an African and Asian problem.
In the BBC Africa clip below, Leyla describes the first time a doctor used the word abuse rather than cultural practice she realised the significance of what she had been through. This shows the importance of the language and framing used towards FGM and how it can impact survivors understanding on what has happened to them, what it actually is and who is at fault. If they see people constantly blaming the women of their culture, they may resent their mothers, aunties and midwives but not the patriarchal system that caused it. Language choice can also impact outsiders understanding of the topic. When journalists use words such as “African countries”, “third world”, “Islamic countries” or “Muslims”, they are painting an unrealistic and incorrect picture. This New York Times article uses the phrases “rite in Africa” and “Africans”, however, it gives no further detail into which African countries have a high or low prevalence. These words cover a huge group of people, creating a mass generalisation that is inaccurate. Not all Muslims and African countries partake in the practice but by saying this it is implying it is part of their culture.
Othering of Female Genital Mutilation
We live in a world where women’s equality becomes a measure of advancement in society. The West is seen to be more equal meaning we are shown to be more advanced and civilized. Rather than looking further into the root of the problem, Stanlie James says, when discussing FGM, journalists tend to be insensitive to the unfamiliar, blaming cultures for the “savage” practice in “exotic” places. This creates the feeling of “us” vs. “them”, heightening the narrative that the West must rescue the poor non-West. Often (not exclusive to journalism) women are pitted against each other, made to feel hatred, comparison and competitiveness. Women in non-Western countries are seen to need rescuing from their lives and should abandon their culture and religion to adopt those of the West. Whereas Western women’s problems are often put in comparison to those of women in other countries who have “real” problems, making Western women’s oppression seem invalid. Therefore, rather than women supporting women, it creates animosity.
When Western women are left out of topics of global female oppression it makes it seem like there are no problems in the West or the ones that are, aren’t as bad as elsewhere. This is what Lisa Wade calls exemplarism, where the West, especially the US, is shown as the pinnacle of civilisation and everywhere should try to be like them. So, by omitting Western women from the topic of oppression, we also ignore the fact that abuse such as FGM is also carried out in Western countries such as the UK and the US.
It is very easy to judge the women who partake in FGM or have it done to their daughters. However, a lot of women will fear the repercussions of being rejected by their community or their daughter being viewed as dirty or un-marriable more, so it is easier for them to go through with it and be socially accepted. These practices allow women to gain respect and income in some societies where it is limited for women. In the previously mentioned BBC Africa interview, Leyla talks about how women are ostracised if they don’t do it, they won’t be the good wives and aunties. She speaks of the patriarchal system controlled by men that they live under, where men are the ones with the money paying for it and often making the decisions to do it, but the women will be the ones to get blamed. Similarly, in the BBC Three clip below, survivors and campaigners talk about how their mothers thought they were doing what was best for their daughters. If we blame the women, we are othering people who are already marginalized in society for being “bad mothers” or “uncivilized” rather than blaming the system that oppresses women.
Leyla’s point fits into the feminist or women’s oppression argument that often comes up as a reason as to why FGM is still practiced. She also says:
“people are not outraged by FGM, the way they should be, it’s because the idea of controlling women’s bodies and their sexuality is the norm globally” — Leyla Hussein
The Western media may portray the West as being more equal and women have nothing to worry about, but as Leyla points out, women’s bodies are controlled globally, not just in the East.
Islamophobia
When FGM is portrayed as a cultural practice of Muslims, it allows for people to blame the religion and see it as violent, despite being a very peaceful religion. While some people who carry out FGM believe it is a religious practice, many have shown it is not. One example of the prejudice towards Muslims is when Ilhan Omar, an American politician, is asked to make a statement about FGM because she is a Muslim, despite having put out statements and signing bills against it previously. Whereas other politicians who are not Muslim would never be asked this question.
“ask us the proper questions that they will probably ask any member of Congress, or any legislator, or any politician, and would not come with an accusation that we might support something that is so abhorrent, so offensive, so evil, so vile.” — Ilhan Omar
By asking Muslims to speak out about topics associated with their religion, despite many being generalisations anyway, it implies that they may agree with the practice, so they have to clarify over and over again.
In a video with The Guardian, survivor and campaigner Jaha Dukureh, goes on a quest to show her father FGM is not a religious practice so he doesn’t continue it. There is clearly a lot of confusion as to why it is practiced and whether it is religious. One thing that stands out is one woman brings up her lack of education as a reason as to why the women don’t question the practice. If women were properly educated on the subject, then myths shrouding FGM may finally be put to rest, showing the importance of education but also the media which is another significant vehicle for spreading information on the topic.
While not all journalists do, when they overwhelmingly use culture as the main discussion point and framing for FGM it creates the misunderstanding that this doesn’t occur in the West but also that it is an “African” and “Muslim” problem. By creating an “us” vs. “them” narrative it makes the West and non-West feel further apart and less connected when we should be working together to put an end to the horrible practice. Therefore, social justice frames may be a more effective way of framing this subject to bring about change and understanding.
