Blog

FGM Myths

By Kayla Sibanda

As we reach almost a decade of activism and support, Nistawi women are deeply committed to standing firmly opposed to Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG). Indeed, this can take on a variety of forms. 

Some of our work includes supporting survivors of Female Genital Mutilation. We offer an array of services, including workshops, community engagement initiatives and more 

Here, we will be exploring some of the common myths and assumptions surrounding FGM. 

Myth #1: FGM is not a UK issue 

It is true that much of the survivors of FGM are usually migrant women. However, this does not absolve the UK and, the rest of society, within supporting survivors of FGM. There have been recorded cases of FGM occurring in the UK. For instance, the first recorded conviction of FGM occurred in 2019. It is important to stress that it is a small population of FGM cases for victims born in the UK (between 40 to 100), however this reveals that FGM is still an occurring issue. 

In 2014, the UK provided a hard stance on ending FGM, which was supported by huge funding (and say more). However in (number) the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) confirmed that it will end its funding for anti-FGM initiatives by October 2026. 

Myth #2: There is only one type of FGM 

Female Genital Mutilation refers to four types of procedures that cause injury to the female genital organs. 

Here are the different types of FGM: 

• Type 1 – Clitoridectomy – this refers to removal of part or all of the clitoris 
• Type 2 – Excision – this refers to removal of part or all of the clitoris and the inner labia, with or without removal of the labia majora 
• Type 3 – Infibulation – this refers to the narrowing of the vaginal opening by creating a seal, formed by cutting and repositioning the labia 
• Other types of procedures to the female genital which can include picking, piercing, cutting, scraping or burning 

Myth #3: The effects of FGM are only physical 

The procedure of FGM is often extremely painful. However, the harmful damage does not stop there. According to a study, women who have experienced FGM are three times more likely to be at risk of depression or anxiety and 4.4 times more likely to experience Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 

It should also be noted that the physical effects of FGM are also long term. For instance, women who have experienced FGM are likely to experience urological complication which can include urinary tract infections and difficulty urinating. 

Myth #4: FGM is a medical practice 

Oftentimes, survivors of FGM are told that the practice is crucial to hygeine and a woman’s health. However, this is not the case. FGM is usually carried out by non-medical professionals and – most of all – is not necessary by any means. Medicalised FGM refers to the practice of FGM where the practice is performed by healthcare workers. The World Health Organisation addresses several reasons why medicalised FGM might be practised including the belief that it may be a safer practice. However, no matter who is performing the practice, FGM is still a violation of the human dignity and autonomy of individuals. 

Myth #5: FGM is completely legal in Africa 

The researcher and feminist activist, Kaiisha Kukendra highlights that there is a deeply problematic ‘framing of FGM as an African problem.’ Furthermore, prejudiced beliefs around Africa as a regressive and (something) content often taint discourse around FGM. It is true that FGM is practised in some African countries, however there are also a number of African countries that stand firmly against the practice. For instance, in 1996, Burkina Faso outlawed the practice of FGM. 

Sources used: 

Home Office (2019). First UK Conviction for FGM – Home Office in the media. [online] homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk. Available at: https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2019/02/01/first-uk-conviction-for-fgm/.

Kukendra, K. (2021). Safety or stigma? FGM Safeguarding Measures in the UK. [online] Institute of Race Relations. Available at: https://irr.org.uk/article/safety-or-stigma-fgm-safeguarding-measures-in-the-uk/.

Pallitto, C., Ruiz-Vallejo, F., Mochache, V., Stein, K., Vogel, J.P. and Petzold, M. (2025). Exploring the health complications of female genital mutilation through a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health, 25(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-21584-z.

Shell-Duncan, B., Wander, K., Hernlund, Y. and Moreau, A. (2013). Legislating Change? Responses to Criminalizing Female Genital Cutting in Senegal. Law & Society Review, 47(4), pp.803–835. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12044.