Rethinking the Anti-FGM Zero-Tolerance Policy: from Intellectual Concerns to Empirical Challenges

Abstract

Purpose of Review Based on the discussions of a symposium co-organized by the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) and the University of Lausanne (UNIL) in Brussels in 2019, this paper critically reflects upon the zero-tolerance strategy on “Female Genital Mutilation” (FGM) and its socio-political, legal and moral repercussions. We ask whether the strategy is effective given the empirical challenges highlighted during the symposium, and also whether it is credible. Recent Findings The anti-FGM zero-tolerance policy, first launched in 2003, aims to eliminate all types of “female genital mutilation” worldwide. The FGM definition of the World Health Organization condemns all forms of genital cutting (FGC) on the basis that they are harmful and degrading to women and infringe upon their rights to physical integrity. Yet, the zero-tolerance policy only applies to traditional and customary forms of genital cutting and not to cosmetic alterations of the female genitalia. Recent publications have shown that various popular forms of cosmetic genital surgery remove the same tissue as some forms of “FGM”. In response to the zero-tolerance policy, national laws banning traditional forms of FGC are enforced and increasingly scrutinize the performance of FGC as well as non-invasive rituals that are culturally meaningful to migrants. At the same time, cosmetic procedures such as labiaplasty have become more popular than ever before and are increasingly performed on adolescents. Summary This review shows that the socio-legal and ethical inconsistencies between “FGM” and cosmetic genital modification pose concrete dilemmas for professionals in the field that need to be addressed and researched.

Genital Cutting as Gender Oppression: Time to Revisit the WHO Paradigm

“…Taking a similar view, Nahid Toubia, the pioneering Sudanese surgeon, women's health advocate, and longtime campaigner against FGC, has stated that in many cases, "female circumcision actually results in less functional impairment and fewer physical complications than male circumcision" (Toubia, 1999) (p. 4). This appears to be the case, for example, in many Muslim communities throughout South and Southeast Asia, where religiously-inspired circumcision (i.e., cutting of the genital prepuce; see Box 2) is a gender-inclusive rite, where both forms have been largely medicalized, and where the female form is often less physically substantial than the male form (Rashid et al, 2010;Rogers, 2016;Bhalla, 2017;DBWRF, 2017;Bootwala, 2019;Rashid and Iguchi, 2019;Wahlberg et al, 2019;Dawson et al, 2020;O'Neill et al, 2020;Shweder, 2022aShweder, ,b, 2023. 9 In short, the harms of genital cutting vary widely, both within and between cultures, and they do so in a way that is not reliably predicted by the sex of the affected child (Androus, 2013).…”

The Future of Female Genital Cutting: An Evolution of its Medicalization

“…The UN calls for a zero-tolerance approach and condemns all forms of genital cutting as harmful and degrading to women; it infringes on their rights to health and physical integrity (UNFPA 2014). However, the zero-tolerance approach only applies to traditional and customary forms of genital cutting, not to cosmetic alterations of the female external genitalia (O'Neill et al 2020). Considering the amount of genital tissue removed in both FGC and FGCS, the two procedures are essentially the same.…”

Against legalising female ‘circumcision’ of minors: a reply to ‘The prosecution of Dawoodi Bohra women’ by Richard Shweder

“…In this respect, therefore, the Dawoodi Bohra should not be seen as an unusual or isolated case. Nevertheless, following migration to -and largely successful integration within -such countries as the US, UK and Australia, the Dawoodi Bohra have been thrust into the spotlight in recent years, primarily due to high-profile 'female genital mutilation' (FGM) 1 court cases and often-sensationalist media coverage thereof (Rogers, 2016;O'Neill et al, 2020;Earp, 2020b). Although research suggests that most, chiefly African, communities that practise female and male genital cutting together have been willing to suspend the female 'half ' of their initiation rites following migration to Western countries (Johnsdotter and Essén, 2016;Creighton et al, 2019;Johnsdotter, 2019;Karlsen et al, 2019), in the case of the Dawoodi Bohra, there has evidently been a desire among some devout members to continue genital cutting on a gender-inclusive basis.…”

“…In many jurisdictions, FC has additionally been defined as an instance of the crime of genital 'mutilation', even if performed by clinically trained personnel with pain control in a sterile environment, and even if there are no long-term physical complications, functional difficulties or visibly altered anatomy (Rogers, 2016;Earp, 2020c;O'Neill et al, 2020).…”