The Human Rights Implications of Female Genitalia Mutilation

On July 29 UNA-NCA hosted a panel discussion on the human rights implications of female
genitalia mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). The well-attended discussion was hosted at Chemonics
International in Washington DC. Human rights Committee co-chair Sultana Ali introduced the
program and the panelists who offered an insightful discussion on the practice. The panel was
moderated by Sarah Craven, Chief of the Washington Liaison Office of the United Nations
Population Fund and UNA-NCA Advisory Council member. Panelists included Susan Gibbs
Consultant on Womens Empowerment, Human Rights and Population at the Wallace Global
Fund; Maria Jurua, Fellow at Leadership and Advocacy for Women in Africa and Coordinator of
Law and Advocacy for Women in Uganda (LAW-U); and Varina Winder, Fellow at the U.S
Department of State.
Susan Gibbs began the discussion with an overview of the FMG/C practice. FGM/C is the full or
partial removal of female external genital parts for non-medical reasons. The practice often
results in infections such as HIV and death due to bleeding. Over 125 million girls and women
have endured the practice. It is estimated that 8,000 women and girls undergo the practice each
day and 7 women and girls undergo the practice per minute. There are several reasons why this
practice is performed to women including marriageability, cleanliness, social convention and
culture. Patriarchal societies also perpetuate this practice in order to have sexual control over the
women in their societies. FGM/C is also prevalent in developed countries due to global
migration;where some adhere to the practice in order to preserve their culture.
FGM/C is declining but not quickly enough, the percentage of women and girls undergoing
FGM/C is a third lower than it was a decade ago. However the world population has been
growing since then, as a result the number is still high. On a positive note, Susan Gibbs noted
that a majority of women and men in societies where FGM/C is practiced believe it should end.
Girls education and education on the health effects of FGM/C are critical in order to reduce the
prevalence of the practice. She also highlighted that it is important to be aware of the
implications of westerners intruding. Activists in countries where FGM/C is practiced can be
more effective and she sees her role as being an ally to those activists.
As she rounded up she discussed the politics behind the term Female Genital
Mutilation/Cutting.The term mutilation carries with it a malicious connotation which is not the
intention of those who perform the practice. Often times those who are carrying out the practice
believe they are doing it out of love for their daughters. As a result cutting, which carries a less
severe connotation is used in conjunction with mutilation. Victims of FGM/C however believe
that the practice is extremely cruel and it must be described with a term that carries a
harshconnotation.
Panelist Maria Jurua helped pass a law in Uganda that outlawed FGM/C. FGM/C was
prevalent in the northeast region of Uganda. The region, which consists of two tribes faces
insecurity and is also hard to reach. In the 1980s after learning that such practice was going on,
women from the Western and Central parts of Uganda visited the northeast in an effort to end the
practice. The women received backlash and were thrown out by the tribes. The day after their
visit, the leader of the village came up with a law that made FGM/C compulsory. This required a
change in the way women in the Western and Central parts of Uganda addressed the issue. The
women changed their language and their approach to the issue. In addressing the issue they
focused on the harmful health effects of FGM/C, this way their approach was less
confrontational. They found that with the new approach the tribe members began listening and
started to change their ways.
Men are also rallying behind the efforts to end FGM/C, Maria applauded the efforts of the men
in the Ugandan parliament who were behind the 2010 law that prohibited FGM/C. Laws
however are not the only way to stop the practice, she mentioned. Changing culture is critical;
this is why it is important to engage in conversation with grandmothers and mothers.
Grandmothers and mothers have the power to teach the younger generations that FGM/C is no
longer necessary. She also mentioned exchanged visits, in which people from other villages that
do not practice FGM/C visit practicing villages. As an alternative to cutting some villages kill a
cow instead, this is a preferable way to maintain the spirituality of the practice.
Virena Winder discussed United States response to the practice. The United States views
FGM/C as a health, social and economic issue. She mentioned that Americas response has been
regional, bilateral and multilateral. The United States has been funding programs and
organizations abroad that are working to end FGM/C. The U.S has made strides against FGM/C
domestically including a law in 1996 that made FGM/C illegal. In 2013 the U.S made it illegal to
take family abroad have FGM/C performed. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention will
also conduct a new study on FGM/C as the last study in the U.S on the issue was done in 1997.
Theprogram ended with a question and answer session which posed critical questions and
considerations on the issue. More work still needs to be done to address the issue and it is
necessary to keep the conversation on FGM/C going.