The Global Platform for Action to End FGM/C is pleased to invite you to our NGO CSW Parallel Event on the topic of ‘Engaging Men to End Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting'.

Event Details:

Date: 14th March 2022

Time: 08:00 AM EST

Registration: https://bit.ly/EngagingMentoEndFGM

About the Event: 

Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) affects over 200,000,000 women and girls globally. The Global Platform for Action to End FGM/C developed a call to action to advocate for greater prioritization, resourcing, and action to end female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). Recognizing that FGM/C is a social and gendered norm, upheld through complex systems of patriarchy and tradition, the call to action includes acknowledging that we cannot bring about its end without engaging everyone, including boys and men. During this event, we will gather advocates and experts who have experience building male engagement programs to discuss ways of incorporating men in programming to end FGM/C. 

About the The Global Platform for Action to End FGM/C 

In June 2019 civil society organisations, champions, survivors and other grassroots representatives came together at the Women Deliver conference to develop a global Call to Action to end female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). The event was co-ordinated through a core group of globally representative organisations that managed logistics: Amref Health Africa, Coalition on Violence Against Women, End FGM Canada Network, End FGM European Network, Equality Now, Orchid Project, Sahiyo, The Girl Generation, The Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices, The US End FGM/C Network, There Is No Limit Foundation and Tostan. The Call to Action was the result of several months of global consultation via an online survey. 

Version française // FRENCH 

Événement à venir le 14 mars avec l’ONG CSW: Mobiliser les hommes pour mettre fin aux mutilations génitales féminines
La Plateforme Mondiale d’Action pour mettre fin aux MGF/E est ravie d’annoncer que nous organiserons un événement avec l’ONG CSW sur le sujet de ‘Mobiliser les hommes pour mettre fin aux mutilations génitales féminines / excision (MGF/E)’.

Renseignements sur l’événement :

Date : 14 mars 2022

Heure : 8h, heure de l’Est 

Inscription : https://bit.ly/EngagingMentoEndFG

La pratique du MGF/E est une norme sociale profondément ancrée dans les sociétés et les communautés dans lesquelles elle se produit. Il s’agit d’une question sexospécifique, soutenue par des systèmes complexes de patriarcat et de tradition. 

La MGF/E touchant plus de 200 millions de femmes et de filles dans le monde, La Plateforme Mondiale d’Action pour mettre fin aux MGF/E plaide pour une plus grande hiérarchisation, ressources et action. Cette coalition d’organisations de la société civile, des champions, des survivants et d’autres organisations communautaires reconnaît que nous ne pouvons pas mettre fin à cette pratique sans impliquer tout le monde, y compris les garçons et les hommes.

L’événement portera donc sur l’importance de l’engagement des hommes. Au cours de cet événement, nous réunirons des défenseurs et des experts qui ont de l’expérience dans l’élaboration de programmes d’engagement des hommes afin de discuter des différentes façons d’intégrer et faire participer les hommes dans les programmes visant à mettre fin aux MGF/E.

Nous croyons que la conversation a le pouvoir de saisir l’expérience, de façonner l’opinion et de créer le changement. Nous vous invitons donc à nous rejoindre dans cette conversation.

On January 20th, Sahiyo hosted the webinar ‘How to Stop The Rising Trend of Medicalising Female Genital Cutting in Asia’. Organised by Sahiyo’s program’s intern Beth Fotheringham and moderated by Sahiyo co-founder, Insia Dariwala, the webinar featured a panel of experts in female sexual and reproductive health: Saza Faradilla, Kalpana Swaminathan, Ibu Atas, and Dr. Nozer Sheriar. The discussion was centred around two main questions: Why does the medicalisation of female genital cutting need to be stopped and how can we stop this rising trend? 

Sahiyo Intern Beth began the event by providing a brief overview of female genital cutting (FGC), citing motivating factors for the practice such as social acceptance, marriageability, community belonging, proof of virginity, curbing promiscuity, hygiene, and religion. Though there are no  health benefits to medicalised FGC, there is often a misguided belief that the procedure is safer when medicalised. The medicalisation of FGC refers to situations in which FGC is practised by a healthcare professional, whether in a public or a private clinic, at home or elsewhere. More than 200 million women and girls have experienced  some form of FGC, with 1 in 3 girls being cut by a health professional. 

The following video shared during the webinar highlights that many young girls undergo this practice against their will.

By courageously sharing her voice and her story, Saza Faradilla gives us an insight into how the practice is carried out without consent. Her story showcases the trauma experienced by survivors who only discover that they have suffered FGC as an adult. This speaks to the aura of silence that surrounds the practice. A lack of questioning falsely leads people to believe that FGC is necessary for socio-cultural or religious reasons. In Singapore 20.5% of doctors carry out FGC, 9.4% of which perform FGC on girls before their first birthday. The preferred age for cutting is between 4-6 months. 

The backlash Saza receives in her community highlights the need for change. By speaking out against what is perceived to be normal in her community, she recognises that her right to health, the right to physical integrity, and the right to equality and non-discrimination have been violated. Saza’s heartfelt  and inspiring activism demonstrates that human rights emerge and evolve through the attempts of ordinary people to challenge injustice. Saza embodies the power of storytelling by sharing stories; hearing a survivor’s experience can definitely shift attitudes and opinions on this issue.

The significant lack of information surrounding FGC and medicalization is driving the practice. This means that individuals, including doctors, conform to the norm of FGC without being aware of its inequalities. Pressure to conform to social expectations is a motive behind why healthcare professionals perform FGC. Carrying out FGC in hospital or health settings creates a false sense that FGC is necessary.  FGC does not take the bodily integrity of the child into consideration and there is a misogynistic link to FGC being medicalised. Portraying that cutting can be done ‘cleanly, neatly and safely’ directly translates into control of female sexuality and results in the subordination of women.  Kalpana expressed how FGC injures much more than the child’s anatomy - any child that suffers unwanted touch will deal with a myriad of mental and psychological effects. However, Kalpana notes that this trauma can also translate into a determination in survivors to fight back and speak out against the wrong-doing they have suffered. 

Kalpana Swaminathan further develops the argument against the medicalisation of FGC, stating that there is no room for the medicalisation of FGC and the practice cannot be condoned. She explains how the power of culture and tradition can make individuals think and act collectively. Therefore, changing the attitudes of parents and doctors is integral in the campaign to eradicate FGC.

How can we stop this rising trend?

FGC is not only happening in Asian communities, it is happening everywhere in the world. Sahiyo co-founder Insia Dariwala raised pressing questions such as how do we hold doctors responsible and who is going to do it? Ibu Atas, long standing activist for FGC in Indonesia explains that a firm stance is needed in the work against this practice. FGC is deeply embedded in culture. By campaigning against this practice, we are challenging community attitudes, social norms and their values. Taking immediate action is the best response to the rising trend of medicalising FGC.

The message I took away from this webinar ties in with Sahiyo’s objective to recognise and emphasise the values of consent, as well as a child and woman’s right over her own body. Our speakers stressed that there are no justifications for FGC, regardless of who carries it out. Kalpana explains that parental attitudes are influenced by social norms and refers to consent as ‘a can of worms.’ This made me realise that understanding how parental attitudes influence the practice of FGC is key to developing appropriate interventions aimed at eradicating this practice. As put by Ibu Atas, the message must be clear: ‘Don’t touch our genitals.’ Every female should have the right to make autonomous decisions about her own body and reproductive functions. This right is at the core of her basic human rights. 

Sahiyo would like to thank our panelists  for bringing their thought-provoking perspectives to this discussion. You can learn more about the esteemed speakers here.

Watch the full event here:

By Hunter Kessous

In my sophomore year of college, I decided to conduct research analyzing the knowledge, attitudes, and training of community health workers who work to end FGC. In the early stages of my research project, I held interviews with many wonderful leaders of organizations working to end female genital cutting (FGC). I also asked for their assistance in sharing a survey with community health workers within and outside their organization. In one interview, a leader asked me very directly “Why should we do all this work?” It was a valid question; I was requesting their incredibly valuable time and resources. Why should they take time to participate in my research specifically when there is so much important work to be done? Last week, I attended a webinar that answered her question better than I ever could have.

The event was hosted by the UNFPA, UNICEF, WHO, and the Population Council, Kenya. These organizations collaborated to launch two exciting new documents: the first-ever Research Agenda To Accelerate the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation and Ethical Considersations in Research on Female Genital Mutilation. An opening statement by Nankali Maksud, UNICEF Senior Advisor, described perfectly why these documents are so needed. Every year, at least four million girls are at risk of undergoing FGC. The COVID-19 pandemic has added an additional two million cases to this figure, which otherwise would have been averted. In order to end FGC by 2030, progress needs to be 10 times faster. To achieve this goal, the work to end FGC must be based on high quality evidence, which requires 1) asking the right questions and 2) ethical guidance, both of which are addressed in these documents. 

To date, research on FGC prevention and elimination has been limited. The research agenda was created by performing a literature review and developing a list of questions to explore the gaps in our current knowledge. The list is very comprehensive, and the authors even ranked the questions by priority so researchers can clearly see what needs to be addressed most urgently. The document calls on researchers to ask important questions, the top priority being: “How can healthcare providers and the health system be effectively utilised in the prevention of FGM and the provision of services to women and girls affected by FGM?” The complete list of 78 research questions is broken down into thematic areas, including Enabling Legal and Policy Frameworks, FGC in Conflict and Crisis Settings, and more. 

The guidelines for ethical considerations when conducting research on FGC includes checklists for each step of the research process to ensure that the rights of participants are prioritized and respected at all times. The document also emphasized the importance of engaging with the community early to ensure that research will make a contribution to the health and well-being of the population. This part is essential. Research is not done simply for the sake of running numbers or getting published—research is only as useful as the extent to which it can guide policies and interventions. We must make sure research is relevant in order to end FGC. 

As an FGC researcher myself, I wish these comprehensive guides existed when I began my project, but this will not stop me from using them going forward. I am excited for the future of research under the guidance of these resources. It’s inspiring and hopeful to see multiple organizations come together to support the importance of evidence-based approaches to end FGC.

On February 3rd, Sahiyo Co-Founder Mariya Taher joined Dr. Karen McDonnell from George Washington for our second training for the Connecticut Trauma and Gender Learning Collaborative (TAG). TAG is a collaboration between the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), the Connecticut Women’s Consortium (CWC), and other healthcare providers in Connecticut. TAG aims to promote best practices in trauma-informed, gender-responsive behavioral health care in Connecticut by providing training, consultation, and information to behavioral health agencies across the state. During this presentation, Sahiyo continued to explore FGM/C in the United States, and discussed various resources available for clinicians and other front-line professionals who may come in contact with women impacted by FGC, and are looking to better understand how to provide trauma-informed care while practicing cultural competence and sensitivity.

By Urvashi Sharma

In an article written by bioethicist and philosopher Brian D. Earp, he comments on the argument presented by Richard Shweder that childhood female genital cutting (FGC) should be legalized in order to balance acceptance of childhood male genital cutting (circumcision) in many communities. In contrast to Shweder’s argument, Earp believes male and female circumcisions that are medically unnecessary, and performed without consent, should be “opposed equally on moral and legal grounds and discouraged by all appropriate means.” The solution to this imbalance? A gender-inclusive opposition to genital cutting. 

Firstly, on the subject of gender imbalance, I believe there will always be one. From the first time that I learned about FGC and what it meant, I always wondered if it was similar for males. I read page after page about how there is so much more sensory tissue in the clitoris; there are so many more health risks, so many more types, and so much more pain. I read about the religious reasons behind male circumcision and the oppressive reasons behind FGC. Yes, there are religious reasons behind the carrying out of FGC as well; it’s just that the oppressive reasons layered behind the doctrine of religion for why FGC is done hold more of my attention. The fact that it is a female-specific reason holds more of my attention. By female-specific I mean that it is an attribute of being female itself- feeling pleasure is sinful, sex is almost like a service to a man in which the female and her needs are secondary etc. 

I often wondered (and still do) about how-and why- these practices are lumped together like they are the same thing. Different anatomy, different reasons, and different agendas cannot be clumped together under a single umbrella, as though they are the one and the same. To me, this is not an apples to apples comparison. 

A phrase that Earp frequently uses in his article is “non-consensual.” That stuck with me because ever since I learned about FGC, I never thought about it like that. I associated FGC with words like “violation” and “autonomy” and “fundamental rights”, but I never outrightly asked that simple question of consent. I believe Earp makes an important point. He skillfully avoids interfering in cultural reasoning behind genital cutting to stick to the issue of consent and minors. 

I agree with Earp’s argument that the solution cannot be regression in the form of legalization of FGC. I believe that one of the major problems of the subject of circumcision is its nature itself. A practice with cultural influences, gender-based influences, race-related influences and socioeconomic influences (to name a few) cannot be tackled easily at all. 

Are either FGC or male circumcision consensual? Can this individual, most often a child, make decisions using their own judgment? And that’s an important place to start, really. Yes, I feel FGC is incomparable to male circumcision in the sense of bodily impact due to the simple fact of different anatomy; however, starting at the root- the root of consent- is vital. 

Both of these practices are non-consensual when they occur to children who are not old enough to give consent. Can you ask your eight-day old baby if he is okay with undergoing circumcision and carrying on your customs and values? Can you ask your five-year old daughter if she is okay with getting her clitoris cut as a cure for her masturbation? 

And is the question really about whether these practices are medically beneficial or not? Following this logic, the justification for carrying out this practice is the fact that it will have some medical benefits: let’s cut a part of your body because in the long run, you will be healthier. I don’t understand that argument. 

Unless it is absolutely necessary (medically) for this part of the body to be removed to be healthier, I see no reason why the question of consent should be ignored in this decision-making process that concerns bodily autonomy. I see no reason why FGC should be legalized for young girls just to bridge the so-called equality gap. 

Make it equal by allowing FGC and reversing the progress that has been made to try to end FGC, Richard Shweder is essentially saying. But we cannot go back, not in any way. Forward, until the end of this harmful practice entirely, is the only way to go. 

On February 1st, CARE Atlanta Global Innovation Hub hosted a webinar on reproductive rights and justice, and invited Sahiyo’s U.S. Executive Director Mariya Taher to speak about female genital cutting in the U.S. Pari Chowdhary (Technical Advisor, CARE) and Rachael Lorenzo (Cofunder, Indigenous Women Rising) also spoke on the panel.

The speakers focused on highlighting how reproductive rights are linked to the social, political, and economic inequalities that affect a woman’s ability to access reproductive health care services. Core components of reproductive justice include equal access to affordable contraceptives and comprehensive sex education, as well as freedom from sexual violence. As the attacks on reproductive rights and justice continue to grow, it’s more important than ever to build and strengthen communities who will fight for unrestricted access to comprehensive reproductive health care.

To learn more about CARE’s Tuesday Talks which were created to build bridges by exploring compelling topics, click here

You can watch the full webinar here, or listen to the event on one of the following podcast streaming services:

Apple Podcasts

Google Podcasts

Spotify Podcasts