By Ellen Ince

I joined Equality Now and women’s rights activists, survivors, and human rights practitioners for a discussion on the importance and roles of both law and multi-sectoral approach (MSA) in the elimination of Female Genital Mutiliation/Cutting (FGM/C). This event took place on February 16th, 2022 and was moderated by Asenath Mwithigah. Interpretation was provided in English, French and Arabic.

How can not only protect, but advance the rights of women around the world?

FGM/C is a form of discrimination that has life long affects. It directly impacts a woman’s right to dignity, right to life, freedom from torture and inhuman treatment, freedom from discrimination based on gender, and right to the highest attainable health among other rights.  Ending FGM/C can be done through advocacy and law, with the two going hand in hand. 

While many think that FGM/C is only practiced in Africa, a recent study by Equality Now (in collaboration with the US End FGM/C Network and The European FGM Network) found that FGM/C is carried out in 92 countries. This makes it a global issue that requires a co-ordinated multi-sectoral approach. Of these 92 coutnries where it is practised, only 51 have specifically addressed issues of FGM/C in law. 

Are laws alone enough? 

Worldwide 68 million women and girls will be at risk of FGM/C by the year 2030 if the current levels of intervention as they are remain in place. As trends are globally changing, so too is the issue itself. As a social norm that does not respect geographic boundaries, FGM/C has filtered into Europe and spread to non-practising countries through migration. This has resulted in FGM affecting every continent.

Speakers underlined that interventions need to be holistic and integrate a multi-sectoral approach to be able to address these emerging issues. 

Law sets the standard of what is morally acceptable behaviour. The absence of anti-FGM/C law therefore poses a threat to our efforts to combat the issue. FGM/C challenges the core foundations of human rights and breaches the universal standard of what is morally correct.  Laws prohibiting FGM/C have a powerful impact in eliminating the practise. 

Time to change challenges into opportunities.

Caroline Lagat stated that although FGM/C is a national priority in many countries, only a handful allocate a budget towards the realisation of their anti-FGM/C strategies or in fact the implementation of programmes targeting to end FGM/C. This point made me realise that the presence of law alone is not enough. Financial resources are essential in the proper implementation of these laws. Caroline stressed that the commitment to end FGM/C also needs to come in the form of financial investment. 

The event featured panellist Mariya Taher, who since 2015 has collaborated with the Women’s Bar Association of Massachusetts to pass legislation to protect girls from FGC. Mariya has been an instrumental advocate and expert in ending FGC. She spoke about the need to cover vacation cutting under state law and gave a brief history of FGM/C federal law. In 1996 the US passed a federal law making FGM/C illegal. This law was amended in 2013 to include a travel provision. Mariya explained the success of this law as it closes the loophole that previously existed that allowed for girls to be taken out of the country to have FGM/C performed on them. Mariya agreed that law can be used as a tool to discourage the practice and that this justifies the need for funding. 

FGM/C is a crime. It is important how we frame it. 

Lou Granier, a French international consultant in development specialising in gender, has specifically dedicated to work towards the eradication of FGM/C and has been working with the world bank and numerous NGO’S.  Lou made it clear that every country in the world has a law on FGM/C. The law may not specifically target FGM/C but every jurisdiction provides protection against harm and torture. She explains that France for example does not have a specific FGM/C law. FGM/C, however remains illegal in France. Lou pointed out that using general laws to protect women from FGM is good strategy to consider. 

She did state that specific FGM/C laws are important because they specifically define and criminalises it, leaving no room for vagueness and further protecting women from legal discrimination. 

The work against FGM goes further than borders. 

Madame Bernadette Loloju, a passionate girls rights crusader committed to ending the practice of FGM/C in Kenya also spoke about cross border FGM/C as a challenge. She accurately framed this challenge as ‘people running away from the law’. This demonstrates that law can only stretch so far and that people are going behind the law. Even with law in place we need other strategies in place to end FGM/C. A multi sectoral approach may provide the answer whilst saving on resources such as time. This approach also allows for more collaboration and teamwork. 

FGM - a tradition wrapped in extreme secrecy. 

Human rights defender, Habiba Al-Hinai, discussed the power of individuals and activists. This is especially prevalent in citations where the government is silent or inactive. The government can provide a law but law has a limited impact. It is the people that can create change by acting as advocates and adding pressure. Ballo Bréhima, a program manager of an NGO in Mali states that law teaches communities that FGM/C is harmful and not good for the health of young girls and women. Education surrounding FGM/C is crucial as someone who is aware of the inequalities of this practice will not cut their daughters. It is also important to change the minds of those who underwent FGM/C themselves. Mariya highlighted that survivors can also be the voices for their own daughters. An important point I took away from this webinar is that with FGM/C, the problem is not that the law does not condone it, but that the culture  in which it occurs reinforces it. 

The panel discussion followed by a question and answer session led by Paleki Ayang. I particularly enjoyed the interactive event aspect of this event as questions and comments in the chatbox were addressed by the esteemed panellists. 

You can watch the recording of this event here. 

By Hunter Kessous

Female genital cutting (FGC), which is the practice of removing or harming the female genitalia for non-medical reasons, is a human rights violation recognized by the UN. Right now, legislators in Texas and Idaho are looking to use pre-existing bans on FGC to block transgender youth from receiving life-saving, medically necessary gender-affirming treatments. This is a discriminatory action that has no basis in the crucial work to end FGC.

Gender-affirming care can include social interventions, pubertal suppression, hormone therapy, and gender-affirming surgeries. Social interventions are typically the first step; use of a new name and pronouns, wearing different clothing, and engaging in new activities are often a part of this process. Pubertal suppression is a method of delaying puberty, and hormonal therapy causes secondary sex characteristic development that aligns with one’s gender. Both are reversible and associated with better mental health outcomes for transgender youth. Gender-affirming surgeries, such as mastectomies and vaginoplasty, are irreversible treatments performed on older adolescents who have shown a consistent gender identity and have stable mental health and parental support. Research has shown that these treatments lead to decreased rates of depression, improvement in psychosocial functioning, and minimal long-term side effects.

Transgender and nonbinary adolescents experience anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation at higher rates than cisgender people. According to a report from The National Center for Transgender Equality, 40% of transgender people in the U.S. had attempted suicide at some point in their lives, which is nearly nine times the nationwide suicide rate. Gender-affirming care can significantly improve this mental health crisis. Governor Greg Abbott of Texas was most definitely mistaken when he said “any type of genital mutilation is child abuse” regarding gender-affirming surgery; it is not mutilation, and denial of this care could be more accurately called a form of child abuse by failing to treat serious mental health needs. Texas has attempted to pass several laws that ban transgender youth from access to puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery. Just last year, two of these bills died in session. These failed attempts have led legislatures to turn to FGC laws as a way of making gender-affirming surgery illegal for transgender kids. 

Idaho is taking discriminatory actions similar to Texas. Earlier this month, a bill that would amend the state’s existing law on FGC to ban hormone therapy, puberty blockers, and sex reassignment surgeries cleared a House committee. The amendment would also make it a felony for doctors to provide these services, placing physicians in the tragic position of needing to risk their medical license if they want to provide life-saving care to transgender adolescents. The senate opposes this bill, so, fortunately, it is unlikely to pass. Disappointingly, their reasons for opposing the bill are neither because they see the necessity of gender-affirming care nor because they disagree with conflating this care with FGC. Rather, they do not see the bill as necessary, as many Idaho physicians are unwilling to provide gender-affirming care anyway, and fear the bill undermines the parents’ authority to make decisions for their children. 

Texas’s and Idaho’s legislators justify their actions with claims that these medical interventions are similar to FGC in that they are both unnecessary. Yet, gender-affirming care has medical benefits (e.g. improving mental health), while FGC does not. In fact, FGC often leads to harmful psychological outcomes, including PTSD, anxiety, and depression.

Another faulty comparison drawn between FGC and gender-affirming care is that they are both irreversible. It is true that FGC has irreversible physical and psychological harms, but this is not the case for all treatments for transgender youth. Again, health professionals consider pubertal suppression and hormone therapy to be reversible. Gender surgery is permanent, but research has shown that regrets about having this procedure are very rare. The benefits of gender-affirming care (improved psychosocial functioning and autonomy over one’s gender identity) paired with the high risk of withholding treatment (worsened mental health outcomes, suicidal ideation and use of non-prescription hormones) support the importance of providing this care. 

Lastly, medical care for transgender people is their choice as part of their right to bodily autonomy, whereas FGC violates a girl’s right to bodily autonomy. Minors are often forced to undergo FGC and are too young to fully understand what is occurring and give their consent. Furthermore, consent cannot be given when there is coercion. FGC often exists as a result of societal pressure placed on girls who are told FGC is necessary for them to be a woman, to be a member of their own culture and society, and to be married. Consent can not be freely given to undergo FGC, because coercion will always be a dangerous factor. It is harmful and incorrect to conflate FGC with gender-affirming care. 

I want to make clear that FGC survivors and transgender and non-binary people are not mutually exclusive communities. People who have undergone FGC and do not identify as a cisgender woman in particular would be harmed by legislation that defines gender-affirming treatments as FGC. To learn more about the nuanced experiences of non-cisgender survivors of FGC, I recommend Dena Igusti’s article on being a non-binary survivor and Dear Massi’s advice column for a transgender man who underwent FGC as a child. 

By Meg Sinnott

In honor of International Women’s Day on March 8th, Sahiyo launched our campaign “Each One, Reach Bhaiyo.” During this campaign, Sahiyo encouraged community members to reach out to and educate at least one male-identifying person in their life about female genital cutting (FGC). Through this campaign we involved men in the important work of protecting women and girls. We know that just one conversation can spark a global change towards preventing the human rights violation that is FGC amongst future generations. Learn more here.

Why did you want to reach out to a man in your life to discuss FGM/C? 

I decided to reach out to a man in my life because I believe that advocacy for FGM/C and other gender-based violence must include men. In order to change cultural and traditional practices, the whole community has to be involved. Additionally, the systems that have supported FGM/C are patriarchal and stem from the control of women's bodies and sexuality. If men uphold those systems and beliefs they are complicit in allowing the practice to continue. I spoke to my dad specifically because while he is a highly educated and intelligent man, he has been somewhat blind to women's struggles when I have brought them up with him in the past. 

What was his reaction? 

He was very supportive of Sahiyo’s mission upon learning more about the scope of modern-day FGM/C in the Bohra community. As a white atheist, he had some trouble understanding at first why mothers would continue to subject their daughters to FGM/C if they themselves disagreed with it because he has never followed a religious practice. However, after a discussion on the impact of social norms on the actions of individuals, he came to see that FGM/C is a multifaceted issue. 

Was he aware of FGM/C? 

While he was aware of FGM/C he did not know the different types, nor did he know that it was commonly practiced in communities outside of Africa. Additionally, he was not aware of the reasons that FGM/C was being practiced, nor that it was most commonly done by older women and not medical professionals. 

What advice would you give to others trying to reach out to the men in their lives? 

I would tell others reaching out to men in their lives that they should not be worried about a negative reaction. Any conversation is important to spreading awareness and bringing an end to FGM/C!

By Nesha Abiraj 

In honor of International Women’s Day on March 8th, Sahiyo launched our campaign “Each One, Reach Bhaiyo.” During this campaign, Sahiyo encouraged community members to reach out to and educate at least one male-identifying person in their life about female genital cutting (FGC). Through this campaign we involved men in the important work of protecting women and girls. We know that just one conversation can spark a global change towards preventing the human rights violation that is FGC amongst future generations. Learn more here.

Why did you want to reach out to a man in your life to discuss FGM/C?

I decided to reach out to my two older brothers and talk about FGM/C, in order to bring more men into the space of advocating to end harmful practices against women and girls. 

I chose my brothers because, in addition to knowing they could not say “no” to me as the only girl and the youngest of us three, I knew this would appeal to their sense of compassion, empathy, and humanity. I also know they both have platforms which they could use to ignite conversations around the harmful consequences of FGM/C; my eldest brother works in foreign affairs and my elder brother is a doctor who specializes in infectious diseases and internal medicine. 

What was his reaction?

Both were shocked to learn that the practice of FGM/C existed. They also expressed sentiments of outrage and disappointment upon learning just how many women and girls around the world have had to endure this practice and the fact that millions more continue to be at risk. 

My eldest brother shared with me the next day a recollection that a female co-worker had confided in him several years ago about being subjected to such a practice when she was just a child.  At the time he had not connected the dots and recognized it as being FGM/C or had the terminology to call it such, and only made the connection after I had spoken to him about it.

Since our initial conversation, I have had many conversations with my elder brother around FGM/C and the intersectionality with infectious diseases, as well as the harmful consequences of medicalized FGM/C. 

What advice would you give to others trying to reach out to the men in their lives?

Admittedly I do share a close bond with my brothers and they are a central part of my life, so it was easy for me to speak to them and I know that may not necessarily be the case in all instances. What I can say to others, and what I know to be true from my own experience, is conversations like this might be difficult or uncomfortable or daunting or even flat out scary or all of the above, but it is worth it, for the sake of the millions of women and girls who continue to be at risk. Never underestimate the power of one single voice to make a difference in the life of someone else. Up until I spoke to my eldest brother, I had no knowledge or evidence that FGM/C was even an existent practice in the Eastern Caribbean, and all it took was one conversation to change that.

By Anonymous

In honor of International Women’s Day on March 8th, Sahiyo launched our campaign “Each One, Reach Bhaiyo.” During this campaign, Sahiyo encouraged community members to reach out to and educate at least one male-identifying person in their life about female genital cutting (FGC). Through this campaign we involved men in the important work of protecting women and girls. We know that just one conversation can spark a global change towards preventing the human rights violation that is FGC amongst future generations. Learn more here.

Why did you want to reach out to another man in your life to discuss female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C)?

I felt it's important to speak to other men in the community because FGM/C is an issue that not only impacts women’s lives directly, but also the larger community and its attitude towards women and girls. It is necessary to engage with men to build awareness and take steps towards change. Women and also men need to participate together to speak out against FGM/C.

My usual interactions with community members are mostly with my own family, close relatives, and men who I have come across through the matchmaking process for marriage. I have a keen interest in discussing community life, rituals, beliefs, etc. with a critical lens to understand their meaning, relevance, and history. This has been part of my upbringing and an interest during my years of formal education, particularly from the perspective of gender in society. And so often my interactions with men while meeting them in arranged marriage or dating meetings are based on these topics.

What was his reaction? Was he aware of FGM/C?

I happened to meet a man called Z in his early 30s who was just finishing up his residency term in medicine and was to finally start his independent practice. We had similar observations and views about community practices and were able to have open conversations on many topics. I decided to ask him if he knew about the practice of Khatna. Z had grown up and was still living in a very orthodox community environment and that was his immediate world. However, education and studying medicine had given him an opportunity to be open minded, meet people from different backgrounds, and explore beyond community life. This was something he said he valued.

Z told me that he came to know about the practice of Khatna while he was in college through some posts on Facebook and was shocked to find that this was never spoken about in his family or community life. He studied about it in detail and came to the conclusion that Khatna has no medical benefits as is often told. He started being active about his views against FGM/C online and his family came to know about his stance. It created a lot of agitation in his family and he was told to suspend all his interest in speaking out against the issue. He felt that he has a lot to lose if he is publicly vocal against Khatna and decided to stop his involvement.

During our discussion, I told him that because of my father’s ability to question Khatna as unscientific and unnecessary, my sister and I did not go through it while we were young. My mother and grandmothers, who had all gone through Khatna themselves, were initially hesitant to not follow the tradition. I saw my father’s position as a crucial intervention. I shared with him Sahiyo’s work and approach to engage with community members. Z was not interested in being part of any group or discussions questioning FGM/C anymore. He continues to believe in private that the practice of Khatna should be stopped but cannot afford to risk his community life.

What advice would you give to others trying to reach out to the men in their lives?

In my experience with speaking to men, I came to know that a few of them are aware about FGM/C due to a lot of discussions and campaigns that are now visible on social media and easily accessible. However some are also completely unaware or don’t want to broach the subject. I have noticed that men have the ability to empathise to an extent due to their own experiences of going through male circumcision. Khatna is not about preserving a tradition but a practice of violence that has a prolonged impact on many women who go through it. This does not align with the values of modern education that the Dawoodi Bohra community strives for. I would urge others to speak with men about FGM/C, and open up conversations to share experiences, facts, and outcome of research studies to help them understand better. Even if men can’t come forward openly to their own families, I believe a conversation can certainly open up possibilities for the future.

By Ellen Ince

The Global Platform for Action to End FGM/C’s virtual parallel event at the Commission on the Status of Women showcased the importance of engaging boys and men in ending female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). This event united esteemed speakers and participants from various organisations around the globe who share a common goal to end FGM/C. The panel gathered advocates and experts including Fatima Sy, Dame Indiaye, Mariya Taher, Mireille Tushiminina, Rodrigue Nkwayaya and Catherine Cox. This event was moderated by Carol Jenkins. 

‘Imagine if every man said they would not marry your daughter if she underwent FGM’ ~ Mireille Tushimina

Mireille Tushimina’s powerful preface set the mood for the event. Mireille highlighted that men need to have active roles in ending FGM/C. They can do this by voicing their opposition to the practice and by working with traditional and religious leaders, who often play a crucial role in the development of social norms. 

‘We have everything we need to reach zero tolerance for violence against women. There are no more excuses’. ~ Dr Morris, as quoted by Mireille. 

The event recognised that we are in a decade of action. However, our progress needs to be 10x faster than it is now to end FGM/C by 2030. Therefore we need men and boys on board as activists, researchers, policymakers and in academia.

Sahiyo Co-Founder Mariya Taher and Programs Coordinator Cate Cox showcased Sahiyo’s Bhaiyo program, which launched in 2021. They discussed how FGM/C, a deep-rooted social norm, is not a practice that will change overnight. This is why it is crucial to spark discussion. This video demonstrated male support for ending FGM/C, and how men can act as ambassadors. Sahiyo’s Bhaiyo program includes male voices in this discussion, ensuring that men are aware of and feel the capacity to fulfil their duty to ensure the protection of women’s rights. 

A short clip from Giselle Portenier’s award-winning documentary ‘In the name of your daughter’ was shown. This clip featured men in a Tanzanian market talking about why they feel the need for girls to be subjected to FGM/C. The clip dispelled prevailing social norms surrounding FGM/C and the misconceptions around why girls are cut. The myths mentioned in the clip made me realise that this issue is not going to decrease on its own - these myths and the silence surrounding them are the very reason FGM/C persists. 

‘Men as influencers’ ~ Rodrigue Nkwayaya

End FGM EU Ambassador and Champion of Change, Rodrigue Nkwayaya, took a firm stance that men have influence over their communities. Alfred’s video exhibited how male allies can exert this influence. Some men choose to cut their daughters as this behaviour is in line with social expectations. For some communities, ending FGM/C is viewed as destroying culture and doing away with identity.

‘This is a community issue’ ~ Mariya Taher

Fatima Sy, executive secretary of the Senegalese Association for the Future of Women and Children (ASAFE) and recently elected deputy mayor of the city of Guédiawaye, discussed the stigmatisation women face if they do not undergo FGM/C. She remarked that women are alienated if they are not cut and that they are obligated to accept the practice because it forms part of a cultural tradition. 

Rodrigue built on this discussion by stating that this is why the position of men is important. Men can say no, and they can help women say no. It is important to understand that this practice is a violation of human rights and that women should not be subordinated in this way. The main point I took away from the event was the need to transform gender relations in systems that maintain FGM/C. For FGM/C to end we need to dismantle patriarchal systems and shift cultural paradigms. FGM/C is about power and control and as Rodrigue Nkwayaya put it, ‘someone who controls you in private can control you in public’. Dame Ndiaye pointed out that this is no easy task and bringing men together in a forum does pose some challenges, but progress is possible and activism efforts are striving towards making that change. 

What do we need to do to make that 2030 deadline? 

Dame Ndiaye, co-founder of the National Youth Alliance for Reproductive Health and Family Planning in Senegal, stressed the need for a multi-sectoral approach in ending FGM/C and that this approach should include everyone, at all levels. 

I consider this event to be a very important contribution to the conversation on FGM/C that filled attendees with hope that change is coming. It was clear to me that this change calls for the participation and investment of all genders. Men must challenge this form of discrimination as the practice of FGM/C affects them too.We all must speak up, educate ourselves and have conversations with one another. 

The exchange concluded with a moving and powerful global snapshot video of quotes from around the world. I found this video very useful as a recap of the event discussion as it highlighted the crucial role men play in ending FGM/C. 

A recording of this event can be found here.