Mojatu Berkshire Magazine Issue B011

16
Faith & Spirituality
mojatu.com
But despite the external reality that FGM is
extremely damaging to young women’s future
prospects, some community members will
continue to believe that FGM and, probably, early
/ forced ‘marriage’ is essential for their daughters.
This belief must be challenged.
It is a fundamental duty of democratic nations,
both generally and also specifically in regard to
FGM, to ensure that girls and boys alike receive
an education. In developed nations the issue of
school drop-out when girls reach the puberty are
not an obstacle, and it is vital to ensure also that
girls don’t disappear for other reasons either. Plus,
we must make it clear to all children that whilst
marriage is never a necessary condition for adult
status, education is.
Of course people in different traditions will see
status and honour in different ways, but these are
in the end private matters which individuals must
resolve for themselves. No-one has a right to say
how mature individuals should live their lives; but
our society overall has an absolute obligation to
ensure that every child reaches adulthood healthy,
unharmed and well-equipped to cope as their own
person with the obligations and opportunities
which becoming grown up brings.
So, in summary, education and enforcement
go hand-in-hand in the eradication of FGM and,
indeed, of all HTPs.
Politicians may like standing shoulder-toshoulder
with brave survivors of FGM, but they
are in my UK experience less enthusiastic,
even when they provide some funding, about
actually delivering on properly thought-out
(inter)national provision to deliver eradication.
Q: What are the barriers in preventing FGM
from happening in wealthy countries like the
UK or US?
Ms. Burrage: Political will is the main barrier,
with the corollary that this can only be driven or
supported by corresponding public concern.
Politicians may like standing shoulder-toshoulder
with brave survivors of FGM, but they
are in my UK experience less enthusiastic, even
when they provide some funding, about actually
delivering on properly thought-out (inter-)national
provision to deliver eradication. Yes, the British
Government has promised creditable sums to
international programmes; plus in the UK we
have had reasonably good legislation for some
decades, and multi-agency guidance also for a
while now. But UK funding to stop FGM has not
been generous and the impact here remains far
from impressive – not as yet even one successful
prosecution, for instance.
Some European countries such as France (with
about 100 convictions since the 1980s) have gone
for criminal investigations on the basis of already
enacted general legislation such as the prohibition
of bodily harm, whilst others, including the UK,
have taken forward specific legislation which as
of very recently even includes specific protection
orders. This appears to be having some small
measure of positive, increased traction.
But we don’t as yet know in any detail how much
impact various methodologies have. Either way –
general (no need for new legislation) or specific
(legally better, but takes time to bring to statute)
– could be reasonably effective as long as there is
full attention also both to context: what, we must
ask, does the community need to know in order
to make sense of the legal action and to provide
proper public resourcing.
At the moment however, as various narrators say
in my second book, Female Mutilation: The truth
behind the horrifying global practice of female
genital mutilation (which reports on activity in five
continents, including North America, Australia
and Europe) much of the on-going effort is by
members of local communities who receive little
substantive resourcing or genuine support from the
professionals who are also involved. No wonder
these activists are cynical about the sincerity and
determination of their political leaders.
Q: What needs to happen for FGM to be
eradicated?
Ms. Burrage:
1. In the end, money speaks louder than words.
We can talk forever about the absolute necessity to
end FGM and other cruel patriarchal practices, but
whilst the economic rewards of undertaking these
practices outweigh the impacts of investment by
our leaders in eradication, they will continue.
2. Likewise, use the right words.
In my view the euphemisms must go, now: no
more glossing over cruelty in formal public and
professional discourse. We must tell it as it is: as
the Inter-African Committee and many others
insist, in formal discourse FGM is indeed female
genital mutilation. It’s also essential to move from
talking about ‘cultural practices’ to discussing