Segmenting The #EndFGM Message For Greater Impact – Climate Change, Conflict Displacement, Water, Child Stunting; And Powerful Men
The 69th session of the Commission on the Status of Women took place at United Nations Headquarters in New York from 10 to 21 March 2025. Fortunately however some of the events brought together presenters from many parts of the world via Zoom (see below). Such is the panel in which colleagues and I spoke at 16.30 (4.30pm) EST on Thursday 20 March, our locations being France, Germany, Senegal, the UK and the USA. All of us addressed currently critical issues in ending FGM.
My own presentation, on which I offer some notes below, considered the severe economic and human capital losses arising from female genital mutilation (FGM), and the factors – amongst them climate change, socio-economic and conflict displacement, water and the disaster of child stunting – which may interplay in these losses.
You can read this website in the language of your choice via Google Translate.
This is the video link to the entire CSW presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUkio3GD-Ic :
Beyond Beijing, Challenges Continue to Prevent & Eliminate FGM
INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO ENDING FGM: ACADEMIA, POLICY & ADVOCACY
(Thursday 20 March 2025, 16.30 EST / 20.30 GMT)
My personal contribution before discussions – Segmenting The EndFGM Message In An Era Of Budget Cuts And Political Repression – is at 27.40 to 51.10.
I wanted to reiterate why the deeply damaging deficits to whole communities which I identified must always be acknowledged; and I hoped also to suggest some ways in which these tragedies can be brought directly to the attention of leaders and decision-makers for whom FGM is not always a focus. To do this, I argue, we must knowingly and steadfastly segment our messaging – as commercial advertisers and political leaders do routinely, successfully and incessantly. Different aspects of our ‘story’ will have significantly more impact than others on different ‘segments’ of our ‘audience’.
My fundamental position – I, just one insignificant woman amongst millions who seek a fairer, kinder world for women, children and indeed men – is this:
Those of us who seek the total eradication of FGM (theoretically by 2030!?) and other gendered violence are earnest and many. We are not however the people who can in reality alone make this happen. Those with the best chance of achieving eradication are mostly powerful men, the human beings who wield patriarchal power, the patriarchy incarnate which permits FGM to occur.
In this post I try to identify some issues which lie beyond our usual appeal for a greater compassion and care for women, issues which are only infrequently – if ever – considered, but which might be seen as matters of import across national and political divides; matters which would self-evidently if resolved serve the interests of hard-headed and powerful politicians and decision-makers as much as those of us with more intuitively humanitarian dispositions. And my question is, how can we drive these issues to become more pressing in wider discourse?
The answer, I suggest, is that we have to segment our message and demands to address new, super-powerful audiences, the ones who are content to dismiss more hand-on-heart pleas for kindness and compassion. The ones who live by the rules of hard-headed economics and self-interest. Can this objective be achieved? I leave you to decide…
So below is my personal contribution to the CSW69 FGM Panel…
Segmenting The EndFGM Message In An Era Of Budget Cuts And Political Repression
But first to the factors mentioned above, and their negative impact on efforts to eradicate FGM:
.
Climate change
Issues around FGM and climate change were already very much on the agenda three years ago, at CSW66, when we – along with many others – considered The Impacts of Climate Change and Covid on FGM and Child Marriage. Climate change has had enormous and usually damaging impacts on various global locations and communities, often those least responsible for it, and least able to protect themselves or mitigate against the damage. Yet still those wealthy and all-powerful (inter-) national influences best positioned to address this perilous situation far too frequently pass the buck, deny their culpability or even actively combat accusations of responsibility, whether literal and moral.
As I wrote of COP26 (Glasgow 2021),
Everything comes back to our environment and sustainability: These are amongst the many possible ways that progressive politicians can take action on climate change / sustainability and the environment whilst also attending to the imperative of winning seats and power. Whether it’s flooding, air pollution, transport, walking, food waste collection, safety on our streets, clean energy, domestic insulation or something else, there is much to consider.
So as we progress through CSW69 we should note too that COP30 – the thirtieth and usually annual United Nations Conference of the Parties concerned with climate change and related environmental challenges – is also in preparation to meet in Brazil in November 2025. Yet in 2023 only 34% of national delegates, and even fewer world leaders attending (15 of 133), were women. Only 2% of delegations had equal numbers of men and women, while 79% of delegations had more men than women. Given that 34% is the same percentage as ten years ago, how likely is it that COP30 will see dramatically more women there in positions of significant influence – let alone more influencers for whom matters such as FGM are pressing?
To quote Hamira Kobusingye, a youth climate activist from Uganda:
If the people who are most affected by the climate crisis are not able to have a proper voice in the COP negotiations, how can the process be truly ‘inclusive’? We’re proud that the youth movement in many countries is led by young women, but this has not yet translated into change at the level of COP. Climate impacts make existing gender inequalities worse, so a fair representation of women at the negotiation table is the bare minimum – nothing about us should be decided without us.
We know associations have been identified between climate-related events and increased gender-based violence and HIV prevalence, as well as fertility decisions and harmful practices such as female genital mutilations and early and forced marriages. As a previous member of (Ministerial Appointment to) the DEFRA Science Advisory Council I must however concede there is scant evidence these associations have been brought to the table in meaningful discussions about the environmental hazards now confronting humanity.
.
Socio-economic and conflict displacement
These same issues and questions arise when we consider displacement due to conflict, hunger and poverty arising from climate or other changes, etc. Women and children are almost always the most vulnerable in such circumstances.
In fact, economic and environmental disruption and conflict itself can become factors in parental decisions to impose FGM on daughters: mothers may believe, for instance, that infibulation will prevent military rape, or will ‘protect’ girls’ virginity pending arrangements, probably by the father, of hoped-for later satisfactory and financially beneficial marriage.
This passage from Building Bridges to End FGM explains:
In times of economic hardship or natural disaster for example, parents or caregivers may be driven to subject their daughters to FGM in communities where this enhances a girl’s “chance” of being married. Marrying a daughter in times of crisis is a way for families to gain financial relief through the bride price and to ensure that girls are “protected” and provided for in wedlock. FGM may be practiced even by families who are aware of short, medium and long-term harm because of the perceived immediate benefits. Sometimes, FGM takes place to save the family “honor”, particularly if a girl was a victim of rape during armed conflict.
When a community is faced with insecurity, efforts to maintain or restore peace generally take up most of the attention of the authorities in a community and the rule of law will not be as strongly implemented as in times of peace. Consequently, a lack of legal protection puts women and girls at further risk of undergoing FGM, without consequences for the perpetrators.
Finally, traditional cutters may also experience instability and hardships during crisis situations, which can fuel their motivation to continue and even increase the practice to generate income.
[There is a] need to find ways to discuss FGM with communities while at the same time addressing their key priorities in times of crisis….
Continuing this valuable commentary, we are invited to consider what happens to girls when their schools close, when the age at which FGM may occur changes because of anticipated disruption and dispersion, and when girls and women who have had FGM are nonetheless raped (it is especially dangerous for them). This situation is explained briefly in my 2024 submission on aspects of FGM to Reem Alsalem, the United Nations special rapporteur on violence against women and girls:
[There is] even greater risk of undergoing FGM for some women and girls migrating in humanitarian ‘emergency situations’ such as fleeing conflict, persecution or famine. Proof of ‘purity’ for lessening opportunities for (often underage) marriage, avoidance of rape and violence by combatants and other drivers render girls and women even more vulnerable to FGM in such situations. Very little resourcing (perhaps 0.12% for gender-based violence of all humanitarian funding) is however made available to protect these effectively defenceless people. These are matters which only States and large / international bodies can meaningfully address – including via appropriate care and safeguarding in settlement camps and, if ever possible, by identification and punishment of perpetrators.
Important examples are given in the Building Bridges documentation (above) of how these phenomena evolve in locations such as Cameroon, Egypt, Kenya, Mali, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
But how often are such matters brought fully into focus when social turbulence and displacement are considered? How much of a voice do those with direct and personal insights into these grim experiences have?
.
Water
How many of us realise that across the globe, even in ‘stable’ times, 200 million hours of people’s lives every day is spent collecting water (much of it not even of good quality)? And mostly this task is undertaken by women. Whilst climate change is a critical aspect of issues around water, it is also a vital and independent factor in shaping the routine reality of social and family interaction in many parts of the world.
On World Water Day 2024, 22 March, almost exactly a year ago, the theme was, very appropriately, Leveraging Water for Peace. On that date I posted a weblog here (World Water Day – And Why It Matters For #EndFGM) which raised also the question of whether the easy availability of water might – or might not – be a factor in the likelihood that FGM will occur.
This is the issue I considered in that post:
In June 2014 ReliefWeb published an intriguing news report entitled Improved Access to Water May Hold the Solution to Ending FGM in Africa. The new item concerned a discovery made by Gwada Okot Tao, a ‘female genital mutilation (FGM) traditional surgeon’ commissioned by a local consortium, the Citizens’ Coalition for Electoral Democracy in Uganda (CCEDU), that sought to answer governance issues among communities that circumcise and those that don’t…..
Gwada, who conducted research among 20 ethnic groups across Africa, including Kenya, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Uganda, Ghana, and South Africa, says that ethnic communities that practice FGM in Africa can be found in areas where the water supply is problematic.
Gwada found that in Kenya, for example, only three of the East African nation’s 63 ethnic groups did not practice any form of circumcision. And these three communities were found in the Rift Valley region, where there are water bodies like lakes and rivers.[Gwada] believes that FGM has become a prevalent cultural practice as a consequence of a lack of water.
Beyond my modest enquiry however surprisingly little seems to have been asked about any correlations between water and FGM, but the matter is surely of interest? And surely too the additional significant toll anyway of water collection on the health and well-being of women already burdened with the constraints of FGM is, for numerous reasons, worthy of consideration?
Why are we so incurious about such massively important aspects of the lives of women, perhaps subsistence farmers, whose actual human bodies, their literal physical constitutions, may already have been compromised by the assault of FGM??
.
Child stunting
A similar incuriosity might be detected around matters over generations of children’s potential failure to thrive.
I have also considered previously whether children born to generations of ‘cut’ mothers – themselves tragically harmed – may run a higher risk of stunting than those born to uncut mothers. My rationale for such concerns is explored here: Stunted Children: A Global Tragedy. Does FGM Amplify It?
The World Health Organisation offers these key facts:
Globally in 2022, 149 million children under 5 were estimated to be stunted (too short for age) [and] 45 million were estimated to be wasted (too thin for height)…
Nearly half of deaths among children under 5 years of age are linked to undernutrition. These mostly occur in low- and middle-income countries. The developmental, economic, social and medical impacts of the global burden of malnutrition are serious and lasting, for individuals and their families, for communities and for countries.
Perhaps (we can very much hope) generations after generations of women with FGM do not produce children at ever greater risk of stunting. Perhaps full child stunting still occurs only infrequently actually because of FGM. But we, or at least most of us, don’t really seem to know.
Is that unquestioning incuriosity and failure of knowledge not extraordinary?
.
Many questions, few answers?
All fields of enquiry and knowledge change and grow over time; and this truth surely applies as much to issues around patriarchy and violence against women as to any other endeavour. But work to end FGM understandably remains largely focused around actions ‘on the ground’.
So let me reiterate immediately: The courageous community-facing work of FGM survivors and their supporters, local leaders, political spokespersons, NGO teams, activists and others, women and men alike, is and will always be VITAL.
There can be no substitute for people brave enough to speak up – to their families, friends, neighbours, school and work mates and others – against the cruelty and dangers of FGM. We must pay far more attention to the support needs of these brave and caring people. There can be no substitute for the narratives and stories shared and published which demonstrate beyond any possible doubt that FGM and its callous, fundamental denial of human rights must end.
All that said, however, we are not always making the progress we would so much like to see.
It is I suggest time to ask how we can enhance enduring and laudable work ‘in the field’ so that absolute numbers (not ‘just’ proportions) of women and girls with FGM diminish rapidly. The stated aim of various bodies and NGOs is to end FGM by 2030, but does anyone really believe that can be achieved? Even those most strongly in favour of this ambition, such as the UNICEF, declaring in 2023 that (the) world will miss target of ending FGM by 2030 without urgent action – including from men and boys, seem to have reservations, as per also their 2025 declaration:
Recognizing that legal reforms and policies alone are not enough, we need to ensure sustainable, flexible funding for grassroots organizations leading change within communities. We need schools to be safe spaces, where girls are educated about their rights. We need boys and men to be allies, standing and fighting alongside women and girls to promote traditions and cultural practices which empower women and girls and dismantle discriminatory norms.
The progress we have made is undeniable, but so is the urgency. We are just five years away from 2030, the global deadline to end FGM. Every day that passes means more girls are at risk…. for every girl who escapes, millions more still face the blade. We stand firm in our commitment: this harmful practice must end in our lifetime. And it will—if we step up together, now.
UNICEF is of course 100% correct about this. Without serious support from ‘men and boys‘ we have no hope ever of dismantling gendered cruelties.
But is that enough? My question is, support from and by which men? There are many decent and caring men in communities across the world who seek sincerely to end FGM and other patriarchies incarnate. We need these men’s support every hour of every day. They must be equal and co-ordinated partners in the fight, each of us playing the role best suited by our circumstances to eradicating FGM.
In an important but rarely considered aspect of our work, these men in turn require support to ask the questions perhaps men rather than women may more easily ask of other influential men.
We must demand that the agenda is widened, that the questions posited above (or other, better ones) be directly addressed.
We need to know why these difficult issues are brushed aside, and how instead they can be met full-on.
We need to find ways of securing the attention of people, mostly powerful men, who care little about being nice to ladies, but may be more concerned about the economies and functioning of their nations or organisations.
That is why I suggest we try to ‘segment’ our approach, to confront the really powerful tough guys alongside the already-engaged (and much-needed) well-meaning ones. How that strategy – or, again, a yet to be devised better and similarly hard-headed one – can be achieved is of course another question in and of itself.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Your Comments on this topic are welcome.
Please post them in the Reply box which follows these announcements…..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Books by Hilary Burrage on female genital mutilation
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6684-2740
A free internet version of the book Female Mutilation is available here. It is hoped that putting these many global narrations onto the internet will enable people to read them in whatever language they choose.
Hilary has published widely and has contributed two chapters to Routledge International Handbooks:
Female Genital Mutilation and Genital Surgeries: Chapter 33,
in Routledge International Handbook of Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health (2019),
eds Jane M. Ussher, Joan C. Chrisler, Janette Perz
and
FGM Studies: Economics, Public Health, and Societal Well-Being: Chapter 12,
in The Routledge International Handbook on Harmful Cultural Practices (2023),
eds Maria Jaschok, U. H. Ruhina Jesmin, Tobe Levin von Gleichen, Comfort Momoh
~ ~ ~
PLEASE NOTE:
The Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children, which has a primary focus on FGM, is clear that in formal discourse any term other than ‘mutilation’ concedes damagingly to the cultural relativists. ‘FGM’ is therefore the term I use here – though the terms employed may of necessity vary in informal discussion with those who by tradition use alternative vocabulary. See the Feminist Statement on the Naming and Abolition of Female Genital Mutilation, The Bamako Declaration: Female Genital Mutilation Terminology and the debate about Anthr/Apologists on this website.
~ ~ ~
This article concerns approaches to the eradication specifically of FGM. I am also categorically opposed to MGM, but that is not the focus of this particular piece, except if in any specifics as discussed above.
Anyone wishing to offer additional comment on more general considerations around male infant and juvenile genital mutilation is asked please to do so via these relevant dedicated threads.
Discussion of the general issues re M/FGM will not be published unless they are posted on these dedicated pages. Thanks.
Hilary Burrage 