Where we started from
Talking about the media representation of gender-based violence, we can all bring up horrifying examples. And though we might claim that the situation has improved enormously in the past decades, some memorable cases from the recent past show that we often automatically exhibit the worst possible attitudes towards this problem. And the way we react to violence is strongly influenced by the image the media shows about it.
When a woman becomes victim of violence, the media reacts in some way – as long as there is something newsworthy about it. On the website of the Hungarian police, we can read about numerous cases of gender-based violence, but only some of them make it into the news – typically the extremely brutal ones, or those that have some other element (e.g., the victim, the perpetrator or both are celebrities) which make them suitable for tabloids. All the other women disappear in the racket of the media as faceless, nameless victims, even if their cases come to light (unlike most cases of abuse). On the march of the Silent Witnesses, organized every year as the opening event of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, we also commemorate women victims about whom we have no information whatsoever, nor are there any publicly available statistics which would tell us how many such cases happen in Hungary.
Let us start with a historical overview of media reactions to violence against women from the past 15 years, cases that still influence our attitudes to gender-based violence.
“Not exactly a nun” – the rape of Zsanett
This case took place in 2007, at a very tense political moment; just a few months before, the police reacted with undue violence to anti-government protests. On May 4th, 2007, Zsanett E. reported that at dawn five police officers stopped her to check her documents, then two of them raped her, while the other three looked on. Given general suspicion towards the police at the time, public opinion and the media was initially on Zsanett’s side, reinforcing the stereotype of the brutal policeman. However, a couple of months later media representation took a U-turn. First the media started doubting the expert opinions that supported Zsanett’s story, articles claimed that the marks on her genitals may also have resulted from a fierce consensual act. The famous lawyer of one of the police officers (who, incidentally, is still active in oppositional politics) said on a radio show that Zsanett’s lifestyle “was not exactly that of a nun”. He later said he meant this as a witty statement, but from that point, tabloid media presented Zsanett as a woman with loose morals, who just wanted to get into the limelight and would do anything for that. At the same time, the policemen involved were presented as impeccable; the tabloid Blikk published a series of articles, emphasizing that three of them were engaged and planned to organize a joint wedding; the fiancées denied the charges, suggesting that a man whose sex life was “all right” would never rape a woman. These statements were published without any reflection. The abovementioned lawyer also claimed that in many cases, suspected rape turns out to have been consensual.
The Zsanett-case was a serious setback in discourses related to gender-based violence. It reinforced the image of the lecherous, immoral woman, whose revealing clothes force men – even impeccable police officers – to rape her. Victims were discredited, which deterred them from turning to the police. As journalist Szilvia Varga wrote: “After Zsanett E.’s case was closed, no Hungarian woman in her right mind would report a rape to the police.”
“Where did this new love go wrong?” – the Athina Papadimitriu interview
In 2010, journalist Péter Hajdú made an interview with actress and singer Athina Papadimitriu for the tabloid TV program Frizbi, exhibiting all the typical elements of victim-blaming. As Andrea Kocsis wrote in her study of the case: this is a prime example of how little Hungarian journalists are prepared to talk to victims of gender-based violence. Unfortunately, even today, there is no discourse about the professional principles for conducting interviews with abused women, and about how journalists should prepare the victim for such an interview. Athina Papadimitriu claims to have agreed to the interview in order to raise awareness to gender-based violence. However, the journalist asked her questions like: “Where did this new love go wrong?”, “Why didn’t you leave him when he beat you up in the ninth month of pregnancy?” “Did you give him a reason?”. These retraumatized the victim, so what the viewers saw was a humiliated abused woman falling apart in front of their eyes and forced to defend her actions, in a conversation with an uncomprehending, victim-blaming male journalist, who was ready to find excuses for the perpetrator.
“A passionate person” – the rape case of Roland Damu
Another celebrity case the effects of which are still felt today: actor Roland Damu Roland was arrested on November 18th, 2010 for suspected rape. His girlfriend, Tímea Palácsik, reported him to the police, saying he had thrown cigarette butts in her face, kicked her and hit her behind closed doors so she could not escape. Damu had been convicted for intimate partner violence against his previous girlfriend in 2001, and in 2007 for hitting a female colleague who jumped the taxi queue. In spite of this, the media consistently presented Damu as the broken star actor who has been persecuted for feeling ‘passionate love’ for his girlfriend, and they relativized violence by saying he had also been abused as a child. At the same time, Palácsik was doubted, said to have dated Damu because of his fame, and even suspected of trying to revenge him because he had earlier reported her for forgery. The articles showed smiling faces of Palácsik from the time of their relationship (suggesting she cannot have been abused) and tortured faces of Damu (suggesting he has been innocently accused and broken). Péter Hajdú blamed the victim as usual, asking in his interview with her questions like “Why didn’t you leave him when he first hit you?”
Palácsik later married film producer Andy Vajna, but she has never washed herself clean of the suspicion of being a gold-digger. To this day, any tabloid news about her get comments about her being manipulative and a liar or suggesting she would have deserved an even harsher beating. Nobody remembers that she used the media coverage of her case to call attention to the situation of abused women.
Rape is so funny, isn’t it?
On August 30th, 2014 a young woman was raped in the freshmen’s camp of ELTE Budapest University. The next morning a funny radio program, Morning Show on the radio station Class FM, spoke about the topic, making jokes of it, trivializing violence and blaming the victim. They spoke of rape as a “harmful event” and suggested that licentious sexual behavior is quite common at freshmen’s camps: “The evening program is dinner, campfire, dancing, rape”.
The program caused public outrage and received huge media attention. The show’s presenters claimed that they had not made fun of rape, they had been misunderstood. The National Media and Infocommunications Authority, in response to citizen complaints, started a procedure against the media provider for breaching provisions on the protections of minors and the respect for human dignity. They concluded that the show had offended human dignity by presenting violence in a humorous way, fined the media provider 500,000 Forints and made them publish a statement on having breached the law. This case calls attention to the importance of conscious media consumption and to speaking up in case we hear or see something offensive; though arguably a few hundred thousand Forints’ fine may not be enough sanction, at least the case was investigated thoroughly. But in case we think things are improving, let me cite some recent cases.
When Fanni Novozánszki, a former participant in a popular reality show, disappeared and later was found dead, tabloids were full of her “dubious” previous life. Star psychiatrist Imre Csernus made victim-blaming comments in an interview, and when the (female) journalist pointed out how problematic these were, he put her on the defensive too. Female celebrity Soma Mamagésa slapped one of her (also female) competitors in the face in a cooking program, later dubbing this as a “motherly act.” In another cooking show, star chef Jenő Rácz “teased” his girlfriend in a way that would qualify as verbal abuse – and won the show, nevertheless. All these stories caused no more than five minutes’ public outrage, if at all.
What it is like when gender-based violence is taken seriously
There are exceptions, though. Recently in a reality show on RTL Klub the female participants were supposed to perform a strip dance to the men (let’s not talk about the image of women such elements convey). One participant stopped dancing and told the other women that this was traumatizing for her as she had been abused. The other women first discussed among themselves how they did not believe the story, then confronted the victim herself with this, which made her break down. The TV channel, before putting this episode on air, called attention to gender-based violence, and afterwards the presenter emphasized that victim-blaming is unacceptable, and victims of abuse should not be hesitant to ask for help (simultaneously showing the number of NANE hotline for battered women). However, this is more a positive exception than the rule.
So, we might calm ourselves that we are gradually advancing toward a media space where violence against women gets responsible and empathetic reactions, but the truth is, our stimulation threshold is being raised continuously, so now we only notice such cases if they are arguably a breach of ethics. We might see fewer such cases than before, e.g., because the problematic statements are cut out from the program (like when Péter Kabát former footballer bragged about gang raping a woman with his teammates) but eventually they make their way into public discourse, because they create outrage, which means they sell well. And as long as this approach exists (and let’s not be naïve, it will for a while) it is hard to fight against coded sexism and consolidated stereotypes.
One example is the problematic term “crime of passion”, which recently appeared in a news item by the MTI news agency, and then most of the mainstream media reproduced it uncritically – even papers which at other times publish responsible and conscious articles on gender-based violence. Also, in spite of several international recommendations, Hungarian newspapers continue to illustrate gender-based violence with frightening images of women with black-eyes, crying in the corner or being strangled, which further traumatizes victims.
It is only as an aside that we mention how male Members of Parliament refuse to ratify the Istanbul Convention, but make sexist remarks at their female peers, and if a woman politician speaks up against the government, her microphone is simply muted (this has happened several times). It is no more than a few minutes’ news value that hirado.hu claims: Biden has included so many women in his government because they like talking.
Toxic masculinity is still cool. The sexist behaviors we have mentioned in this article were exhibited by star lawyers, star actors, star psychiatrists, star journalists, star chefs. Men who have power and thus can institutionalize various forms of gender-based violence without causing general public outrage. Plus, the media compete for the attention of the audience, which results in publishing content with as little energy invested as possible – and this is not too reassuring either.
In conclusion, all we can do is remember these deterrents, call attention to present anomalies, and repeat as many times as necessary: gender-based violence is unacceptable, the protection of victims should be a priority, and no excuses should be found for perpetrators. And the media does have a responsibility to help break down prejudices that are coded in society.
