This is the Somalian flag. In that country, 90-98% of women undergo infibulation, or the removal of most parts of the genital, then sewing the labias together to close it up. In their culture, it makes women more desirable to men, because it ensures their virginity before marriage, and prevents promiscuity during the marriage. That’s not some obscure tradition practiced long ago. It’s still happening. Today.

Female genital cutting (FGC) is mainly practiced in African countries, but due to migration, it can also be found in remote parts of the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and America. The country where FGC is most prevalent are Somalia, Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, and Mali. In November 1999, the parliament of Somalia unanimously approved legislation making the practice illegal. There is no evidence, however, that this law is being enforced.

Effects on Health

As a woman, I cannot help but wince while reading about the operations being performed on young girls, usually between 4-8 years old. Operations that have, at times, led to their deaths, either due to shock, infections, excessive bleeding, or an overdose of anesthesia. The four different types of FGC as defined by the World Health Organization are illustrated on the right. Click if you have the stomach for it.

Other serious long term health effects are also common. These include urinary and reproductive tract infections, caused by obstructed flow of urine and menstrual blood, various forms of scarring and infertility. The first sexual intercourse will often be extremely painful, and infibulated women will need the labia majora to be opened, to allow their husband access to the vagina. This second cut, sometimes performed by the husband with a knife, can cause other complications to arise.

A June 2006 study by the WHO has cast doubt on the safety of genital cutting of any kind. All types of FGC were found to pose an increased risk of death to the baby: 15% for Type I, 32% for Type II, and 55% for Type III. Mothers with FGC Type III were also found to be 30% more at risk for cesarean sections and had a 70% increase in postpartum hemorrhage compared to women without FGC. Estimating from these results, an additional 10 to 20 per thousand babies in Africa die during delivery as a result of the mothers having undergone genital cutting.

Efforts to end the practice

Despite laws forbidding the practice, FGC has proven to be an enduring tradition difficult to overcome on the local level with deeply held cultural and sometimes political significance. For instance, prohibition by the British of the procedure among tribes in Kenya significantly strengthened the tribes’ resistance to British colonial rule in the 1950s and increased support for the Mau Mau guerrilla movement. Thus, colonial efforts to stamp out the practice had the contradictory result of making it even more common, as it was seen as a form of resistance towards colonial rule.

A significant difficulty lies in the fact that the practice, as an identifying feature of indigenous culture, is intimately associated with the endogamous potential of young women. Thus for only one or a few families within a given locale to “deprive” their daughters of the operation is to significantly disadvantage them in finding husbands. Parents may also demand a higher bridal price if their daughter undergoes FGC, making it a socio-economic benefit.

Because the practice holds such cultural and marital significance, anti-FGC activists increasingly recognize that to end the practice it is necessary to work closely with local communities. What must happen, some have noted, is that members of a marriage network must all give up the practice simultaneously so no individuals are handicapped, as happened, for example, under similar circumstances with the rapid abandonment of foot binding among the Chinese early in the 20th century.

A lot of progress have been made in Senegal thru education rather than brute force banning. With persistence, I can only hope for the women that other countries follow suit.