Skip to content

American arrogance and the movement to end 'female genital mutilation'

‘Female genital mutilation’ is widely condemned, yet the phrase—as well as the narrative of ‘dark Africa’ that it reflects—undermines efforts to reduce rates of cutting.

Published:
Amnesty-FGM-posters.jpg
Amnesty-FGM-posters.jpg

Anti-FGM posters from Amnesty International. Layalk/Flickr. Creative Commons.

In 1994, a US immigration judge lifted an order to deport a woman named Lydia Oluloro. Deportation would have forced her to either leave her five- and six-year-old children in America with an abusive father or take them with her to Nigeria. There, they would have been at risk of a genital cutting practice called infibulation, in which the labia majora and minora are trimmed and fused, leaving a small opening for urination and menstruation.

Many Americans will agree that the judge made a good decision, as children shouldn’t be separated from their mothers, left with dangerous family members, or subjected to an unnecessary and irreversible operation that they do not understand. I am among these Americans. However, I am also of the view that Americans who oppose unfamiliar genital cutting practices should think long and hard about how they articulate their opposition.