Female Genital Mutilation Religion,

Culture and the Law

1 INTRODUCTION
This aim of this essay is to provide a critical analysis of the legal, cultural, social and religious
aspects of female genital mutilation.
Female genital mutilation sometimes referred to as female circumcision or female genital cutting
is a practice wide spread in many African countries as well the Middle East and some Asian
countries such as Afghanistan.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), FGM comprises all procedures which
involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or injury to the female genital
organs whether for cultural or any other non-therapeutic reasons.
1

The age at which girls undergo FGM varies enormously according to the ethnic group practicing
it. The procedure may be carried out when the girl is a newborn, during childhood, adolescence,
at the time of marriage or during the first labour. In some FGM practicing cultures, women are
re-infibulated (re-stitched) following childbirth as a matter of routine.
2

The World Health Organisation states that FGM is nearly always carried out on minors and is a
violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health, security
and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,
and the right to life when the procedure results in death.
3

The circumcision is carried out by the elder women in the village and is usually performed
without anaesthetic and under unhygienic conditions. Knives, scissors, razor blades or pieces of
broken glass are used as instruments among others
4
.
The NHS website lists many of the risks that could arise from undergoing this type of procedure;
this list is not exhaustive and includes immediate effects such as severe pain, shock, excessive
bleeding and death. Long term consequences are difficulties passing urine and persistent urine
infections, kidney impairment and possible kidney failure, damage to the reproductive system,
including infertility, cysts and the formation of scar tissue.
5


1
World Health Organisation, (1997)
2
WHO (1997)
3
World Health Organisation.(2013).
4
Desert Flower Foundation. (2013).
5
NHS Choices. (2012).
FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing
and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions
of girls' and women's bodies.
6

2 RELIGION AND HISTORY
It is a widely held belief that female genital mutilation predates many of the religions of today
such as Islam, Christianity or Judaism. The practice has been dated to Ancient Egypt and also 4
th

century Ancient Greece where a document was found to contain details of a procedure very
similar to modern day female genital mutilation
7
.
Many people believe that the practice of cutting is limited only to certain regions in Africa and
Asia, however this is incorrect. As recent as the 1950s, clitoridectomy was practiced in Western
Europe and the United States to treat 'ailments' in women as diverse as hysteria, epilepsy, mental
disorders, masturbation, nymphomania, melancholia and lesbianism
8
.
Religion is often cited as one of the main reasons this procedure is performed, although no
religion to date encourages the practice or demands that a girl should be circumcised. It is often
argued that religion is used to scare the young girls or women into having the procedure done
and thus resulting in the control and oppression of female sexuality.
3 CULTURE
There are many arguments against female genital mutilation; however there are very few
arguments for. The most well know and recognized argument to allow the practice to continue
was put forward by Dr. Mutisya who is the author of A symbolic Form of Female Circumcision
Should Be Allowed for Those Who want It (November 1997) Dr Mutisya argues that the people
who are against the practice are uneducated and do not thoroughly understand what the practice
means to the women who participate in it. Dr. Mutisya also argues that type 1 circumcision,
where the prepuce is pricked or cut to allow for a form of bloodletting, should be allowed as it is
analogous to male circumcision.
In Africa, where the practice is most prevalent, female genital mutilation is used as a tool to
ensure that the girls remain in a pure state ready for marriage. Many communities believe
that if the girls clitoris is removed then she will not have sexual urges and will have a calmer
disposition. This claim has recently been disproven by a study conducted in Nigeria of 1836
women, 45% of whom were circumcised. The study found that circumcised women
experience sexual arousal and orgasm as frequently as uncircumcised women. The
researchers also found no difference in the frequency of intercourse or age of first sexual
experience between the two groups of women
9
. This study contradicts findings from a study

6
World Health Organisation. (2013).
7
Global-alliance-fgm.org, (2013)
8
Brown, I.B, (1866)
9
Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity - 24 September 2002 - New Scientist
conducted in London which found that women who had undergone circumcision had a lower
sexual quality of life than women who were uncircumcised
10
.
Dr. Kopelman states in her research paper on female genital mutilation that in the Masai tribes in
Kenya uncircumcised women cannot be called mother when she has a child and uncircumcised
women are excluded from many tribal celebrations and events. Uncircumcised women are
ostracised and many give into peer pressure to be accepted by the tribe and their own families.
A question that must be raised is whether or not it is morally wrong to impose western morals
upon another culture, is this not a case of cultural imperialism? In western societies it is widely
acceptable for women to pierce their genitals for aesthetics or to enhance sexual pleasure.
However, is this not also a form of female genital mutilation, are these women not modifying a
part of their anatomy by piercing it and in some extreme circumstances women also participate
in scarification, which is the action of scarring or branding the genitalia with use of instruments
such as a scalpel. Why does the law determine that one form of body modification or mutilation
is acceptable yet another that has deep cultural routes is not? The main argument for this appears
to be the issue of consent and the manner in which the practice is carried out.
The issue of consent could be used to argue that male circumcision should also be illegal due to
the fact that a male baby or child is unable to consent to the procedure. Male circumcision is
more widely accepted by society as it is a religious requirement and is less harmful than female
circumcision. Many also argue that it is the right of the parents to choose to circumcise their sons
for religious or cultural reasons as they are doing what they believe to be in the best interest of
the child. This argument is very rarely applied to female circumcision instead parents are
criminalised for doing what they believe is in the best interest of their daughters. A closer look at
the two procedures shows many similarities, both involve young children having unnecessary
medical procedures which cause distress and pain to the child at the request of the parents.
It is a wide held belief that girls or women who undergo the procedure are forced against their
will to take part; however this is erroneous as some of these girls/women elect to have the
procedure done as it is a mark of their culture and belief system. Girls are given presents and
money to celebrate their transition to womanhood this could be seen as bribery or merely a
tradition similar to a Brit Milah.
Some women feel so strongly about their cultural identity that after childbirth they are
reinfibulated. Reinfibulation is purported to have significant health benefits as well as moral
value. According to many women who request to be reinfibulated it purifies the womans body
and prepares her to resume sexual intercourse
11
. Some women also find sexual intercourse more
pleasurable once they have been reinfibulated
12
.

10
FGM significantly reduces sexual quality of life, suggests new study - News - BJOG: 2013
11
Denniston, 2010
12
Troper and Weinfeld, 1999
4 LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
In the United Kingdom it is illegal under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 s.1 to
participate in the practice of female genital mutilation.
13
.
The act provides an exception for surgical operations that are necessary for a girls physical or
mental health and operations carried out in connection with childbirth. But the exception applies
only if the operation is carried out: in the UK by a registered medical practitioner or registered
midwife or a person training to be one; or outside the UK by overseas equivalents of such
persons
14
. Interestingly, the act also states that when assessing a girls mental health no
account is taken of any belief that the operation is needed as a matter of custom or ritual
15

however, it could and has been argued, that if the girl does not undergo this procedure she will be
completely outcast from her family and community, leaving her vulnerable and causing her
distress mentally. The act also takes no account of the victims bodily autonomy, the victim
may choose to have the procedure done but the law prevents her from doing so and therefore
prevents her from exercising control over her own body.

It is against the law in the UK to also take a girl out of the country to be circumcised but is it
necessary to criminalise a procedure which does not take place in the UK? What right does the
UK have to specify that it is illegal to be circumcised in a different country especially if there are
laws already in place in that country to protect girls?

Until 2014 there had been no prosecutions brought forward by the CPS under the current English
legislation. However, the question must be asked as to why it has taken many years and many
campaigns for the CPS to bring just one case
16
before the courts when in other countries such as
France there have been over 120 convictions
17
. According to a government report over 20,000
girls and women are at risk each year of undergoing the procedure with another 66,000 already
have thought to have been circumcised
18
. Departments face many difficulties when attempting to
prosecute those involved in female genital mutilation as it is a taboo subject and police are often
reluctant to approach communities and discuss the subject. Other problems arise from poor
communication between governmental departments and many simply do not understand or even
know that the procedure exists. In a recent study conducted by NSPCC it was found that 16% of
teachers interviewed did not know the procedure was illegal in the UK and that they did not
consider it to be child abuse whilst 83% of teachers stated that they had received no child
protection training about girls at risk.
19
This study highlights the need for greater training across
all sectors that deal with girls who are at risk of undergoing circumcision.

Many organisations have stated that FGM is a violation of human rights but yet in many cases
women who have attempted to use this violation to seek asylum have been turned away as they
cannot prove they are at risk. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights
20
prohibits

13
Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 s.1
14
Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 s.1 (2)
15
Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 s.1 (5)
16
BBC News 2014
17
European Institute of Gender Equality
18
GOV.UK. (2013)
19
Nspcc.org.uk, 2013
20
Human Rights Act 1998, sch 1 part I art. 3
inhumane and degrading treatment as well as torture. Women who fear they are at risk of being
cut have attempted to use Article 3 to seek asylum in European countries such as Sweden as was
the case in Collins and Akaziebie v. Sweden (2007)
21
. This case was brought before the
European Court for Human Rights by Emily Collins who fled from Nigerias Delta State to
Sweden, upon arriving in Sweden Mrs Collins filed for asylum claiming that she and her new-
born child were at serious risk of being forced to undergo female circumcision. The Swedish
Migration Board rejected the asylum application, explaining that FGM was not grounds for
asylum, and that FGM was outlawed by Nigerian law so it was unlikely the first applicant would
be submitted to the procedure upon return to Nigeria. Following several more attempts within
Sweden to be granted asylum, the applicants filed a complaint with the ECHR, alleging that if
they were returned to Nigeria, they would face a high likelihood of being submitted to FGM.
They argued this would violate Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms. The ECHR rejected the complaint, ruling that the applicants had
failed to substantiate that they would face a real risk of being subjected to female genital
mutilation upon returning to Nigeria.

In this case the applicant was turned away as she could not prove she was at risk and because the
practice was against the law in her native country. However, female genital mutilation is still
practiced in countries where it is illegal as it is very difficult to detect as it is mainly carried out
by nomadic tribes and the girls are unwilling to testify against their families and communities.
There is also fear that bringing in legislation alone will result in the practice being pushed
underground therefore making it even more difficult to detect and prosecute, it is for this reason
that the work of NGOs is important as they work with the communities to educate and inform
the community about the illegality and the problems that arise from performing female
circumcision.
22


Article 9 HRA 1998
23
may also be utilised by advocates of FGM as they claim that by denying a
woman the right to undergo female genital mutilation it is an interference with their religious
beliefs and freedom of thought. However although article 9 HRA 1998
24
which allows for the
basic freedom of religion is absolute there is also a provision under article 9(2) HRA 1998
25

which allows for interference with that right when the Courts believe that they must protect the
rights and freedoms of the wider society.







21
23944/05
22
IRIN, 2005
23
Human Rights Act 1998, sch 1 part I art. 9
24
Human Rights Act 1998, sch 1 part I art. 9
25
Human Rights Act 1998, sch 1 part I art. 9(2)
5 CONCLUSION
The power to permanently change the traditions of a culture must come from within the group
itself otherwise we risk denying groups the right of self-identification. This practice has
continued for nearly two millennia, and the majority of the backlash against the procedure comes
from the West. When we open borders for the exchange of thought, we risk change to tradition,
but should this risk be borne on both sides of the exchange? While women in Africa are being
told that the Western world wishes to educate them on the rights they have, should not the
West face a similar argument on the continuation of tradition and celebration of culture? To a
Westernized mind, the practice of female genital cutting seems harmful, painful, and
unnecessary, but does a culture where it marks a sign of desirability, maturity, and custom have
the right to continue the tradition without public scrutiny?

Feminists and human rights activists from Europe, America, and all across the African continent
have spoken against female genital cutting, with lasting results seen when local and international
opinion align and the community welcomes the change. This illustrates the lasting ability of
tradition and culture in spite of international pressure from people both within and outside of the
perceived community. Surely, the only way for true change to take place, the group that the
change will affect must seek that change. From this, the Western world should understand the
need to work with the victimized group, as opposed to continuing the imperialistic mindset by
forcing their ideals upon others. In the end, this will be the only way to ensure lasting change in
the fields of human and womens rights.

























6 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bjog.org. 2013. BJOG release: FGM significantly reduces sexual quality of life, suggests new
study - News - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. [online]
Available at:
http://www.bjog.org/details/news/2725781/BJOG_release_FGM_significantly_reduces_sex
ual_quality_of_life_suggests_new_study.html [Accessed: 28 Nov 2013].
Brown, I. 1866. On the curability of certain forms of insanity, epilepsy, catalepsy, and hysteria
in females. London: Robert Hardwicke.
BBC News Online. (2014, March 21). Fgm: Uk's first female genital mutilation prosecutions
announced. BBC News Online. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26681364
Denniston, G. 2010. Bodily integrity and the politics of circumcision. New York: Springer.
Desertflowerfoundation.org. 2013. What is FGM? | Desert Flower Foundation. [online]
Available at: http://www.desertflowerfoundation.org/en/what-is-fgm/. [Accessed: 28 Nov
2013].
European Institute of Gender Equality. Current situation of female genital mutilation in
FRANCE. 2014. [e-book] France: European Institute of Gender Equality. Available through:
http://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Current%20situation%20and%20trends%20of
%20female%20genital%20mutilation%20in%20France_EN.pdf [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].
Global-alliance-fgm.org. 2013. Global Alliance > Portal > About FGM > Historical Note.
[online] Available at: http://www.global-alliance-
fgm.org/Portal/AboutFGM/HistoricalNote.aspx [Accessed: 28 Nov 2013].
Helping to end female genital mutilation for girls and women in Africa - Improving the lives of
girls and women in the world's poorest countries - Policies - GOV.UK. 2014. Helping to
end female genital mutilation for girls and women in Africa - Improving the lives of girls
and women in the world's poorest countries - Policies - GOV.UK. [ONLINE] Available
at:https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/improving-the-lives-of-girls-and-women-in-
the-worlds-poorest-countries/supporting-pages/helping-to-end-female-genital-mutilation-
for-girls-and-women-in-africa. [Accessed 06 January 2014].

IRINnews. 2005. Razor's Edge - The Controversy of Female Genital Mutilation. [online]
Available at: http://www.irinnews.org/in-depth/62462/15/razor-s-edge-the-controversy-of-
female-genital-mutilation [Accessed: 6 Jan 2014].
Newscientist.com. 2013. Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity - 24 September
2002 - New Scientist. [online] Available at: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2837-
female-circumcision-does-not-reduce-sexual-activity.html#.UpeFj8RdWqY [Accessed: 28
Nov 2013].

Nhs.uk. 2013. Female genital mutilation - NHS Choices. [online] Available at:
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/female-genital-mutilation/Pages/Introduction.aspx. [Accessed: 28
Nov 2013].
Nspcc.org.uk. 2013. Teachers not trained to deal with FGM | Press releases | NSPCC. [online]
Available at: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-and-views/media-centre/press-
releases/2013/female-genital-mutilation/NSPCC-warning-teachers-on-
FGM_wdn94822.html [Accessed: 28 Nov 2013].
Ras-Work, B., Kluge, E. and Others. 1995. Female genital mutilation: a joint
WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA policy statement.. INTER-AFRICAN COMMITTEE ON
TRADITIONAL PRACTICES AFFECTING THE HEALTH OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN
NEWSLETTER, 16 (17), p. 11.
The Day I will Never Forget. 2002. [film] Channel 4 Documentary.
Troper, H. and Weinfeld, M. 1999. Ethnicity, politics, and public policy. Toronto, Ont.:
University of Toronto Press.
Who.int. 2013. WHO | Female genital mutilation. [online] Available at:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en [Accessed: 28 Nov 2013].


CASES AND LEGISLATION
Collins and Akaziebie v. Sweden, 23944/05, Council of Europe: European Court of Human
Rights, 8 March 2007, available at:
http://www.refworld.org/docid/46a8763e2.html [accessed 6 January 2014]
Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 s.1, s.1(2), s.1(5)
Article 3 European Convention on Human Rights 1998
Article 9 European Convention on Human Rights 1998
Article 9(2) European Convention on Human Rights 1998