Attempt to overturn the Gambia’s ban on FGM heard by supreme court

[IwantToRetire]

A group of religious leaders and an MP in the Gambia have launched efforts to overturn a ban on female genital mutilation at the country’s supreme court.

The court case, due to resume this month, comes after two babies bled to death after undergoing FGM in the Gambia last year. Almameh Gibba, an MP and one of the plaintiffs, tabled a bill to decriminalise FGM that was rejected by the country’s parliament in 2024.

Activists and lawyers see this as the latest move in a backlash against women’s rights that is eroding gender protections across the world.

Fatou Baldeh, founder of the Gambian rights organisation Women in Liberation & Leadership, said: “FGM is a strong manifestation of violence against women that harms their physical and psychological health.

“If this issue is still being [debated at a national level], it shows us that women’s rights are really regressing. This is not an isolated issue – it’s part of a global regression on women’s rights.”

The Gambia has one of the highest rates of FGM in the world. Almost three-quarters of women between 15 and 49 have undergone the practice and nearly two-thirds of them were cut before the age of five.

Article continues at https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/jan/09/the-gambia-female-genital-mutilation-fgm-supreme-court-case-overturn-ban

And yet that BMA article suggested FGM bans were a culturally insensitive colonial imposition...

Do we know anything about the Gambian supreme court's views, and which way they might lean?

I have no idea, and hopefully as court they will look at the facts.

But also from a quick google, the ban is part of a law passed in 2015 on Women's Rights.

So the court case is, I assume, about whether what is said to be part of the country's culture is more important that women's rights.

Here is a summary from AI:

Female genital mutilation (FGM) is a widespread practice in The Gambia, where approximately 73% of women and girls aged 15-49 have undergone the procedure, often before the age of six. FGM has been illegal in The Gambia since 2015, and a recent attempt to repeal the ban was rejected by the National Assembly in July 2024, a major victory for women's rights activists.

Key Aspects of FGM in The Gambia

• Prevalence: The Gambia has one of the highest FGM rates globally. The practice is deeply rooted in culture and tradition across most ethnic groups and is practiced by both Muslims and Christians, though not supported by core religious texts.
• Legality: The Women's (Amendment) Act 2015 criminalized FGM, with penalties of up to three years in prison and/or fines, and life imprisonment if a girl dies as a result.
• Enforcement Challenges: Despite the ban, enforcement has been limited, with only two prosecutions and one conviction reported up until 2023. The first conviction of three women in 2023 for cutting eight infants sparked a national debate.
• Political and Social Debate: A strong lobby group, including an influential Imam who paid the fines for the convicted women, campaigned to decriminalize FGM, arguing it is a religious and cultural right. In March 2024, a bill to repeal the ban advanced in parliament, causing international outrage and a strong counter-campaign by human rights organizations and the UN. The bill was ultimately rejected in July 2024.
• Health Consequences: FGM has no health benefits and causes severe immediate and long-term physical and psychological harm, including chronic pain, infections, difficult childbirth, and an increased risk of newborn death.
• Activism: Local and international civil society organizations, such as the Gambia Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children (GAMCOTRAP) and Safe Hands for Girls, are at the forefront of the fight to end the practice through awareness campaigns and advocacy.

The legal status of FGM remains secure for now, but the battle continues with a lawsuit challenging the ban currently at the Supreme Court. Activists stress the need for stronger law enforcement and continued community education to change ingrained social norms.

Just read this article, apparently women are having to be mutilated as if we have a sexual appetite it's problematic for the man. I really have no words.

FGM is so horrific. Not just for the physical reasons, which are indescribably awful, but for the mysogynistic reasons.

Why does is happen so much in African countries? Does it happen anywhere else?

I suspect you would have to go back many centuries into when FGM first started to be inflicted on women, and then how in some areas it continued but in some it didn't.

Not sure if this is an up to date map, but it shows it is a few countries in different continents.

https://www.forwarduk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Forward-FGM-Prevalence-Map-2019-WEB-1.pdf

In Ancient Egypt some female slaves were subject to FGM. Mainly those doing manual work, I think.

There is also FMG in the Middle East and Indonesia, and some small tribes (IIRC) in the Americas.

I think the largest numbers are Muslim countries but it isn't limited to that. It also occurs in some Christian communities, traditional tribal religions, and even occasionally in Jewish communities. It seems to be very connected to a strong view of female sexuality as socially dangerous.

I've never seen anything that really digs into why it develops in some cultures but not others, I think that would be a very worthwhile thing for some academic to look at. It does seem to be geographically somewhat concentrated so for example where you see Christians doing it there are also close by Muslim communities, so I would ask if it's something that long predated current major religious groups in those places (Islam, Christianity and Judaism in particular) and maybe relates to whatever beliefs preceded those religions. And those subsequent religions could have exported the practice, particularly Islam which has spread so widely since it's appearance.

That's a guess though.

That's a guess though.

But also undoubtedly where patriarchal systems and values have continued to be the benchmark.

I dont even want to think why men would want to have physical sex with a woman who has been mutilated, but as said in a PP there is in some cultures the thought that women should not be able to be sexually aroused.

I think only a male brain would be able to put forward a justification.

Why would they want to have physical sex with a woman who has been so mutilated?

It's to assert ownership isn't it? If she finds sex not arousing, uncomfortable and unpleasant, she won't want to be off doing it with somebody else, and in the societies where it happens a lot she may have a harder time supporting herself without the help of a man.

"I think only a male brain would be able to put forward a justification."

And yet an entire episode of sitc had a plotline about a character being repulsed by the idea of having sex with a man who wasn't mutilated .

Male circumcision is not in anyway comparable to FGM. And circumcision has some health benefits (and there is some evidence that women whose husbands/partners are circumcised are less prone to cervical cancer). Male circumcision is also used to alleviate urinary problems. FGM has no upsides whatsoever and causes manifold disabling problems, it is entirely about male power and ownership - though why one would want to have sex with a woman who cannot be aroused and enjoy being with you, Heaven alone knows - what peculiar men!

"Male circumcision is not in anyway comparable to FGM."

Well they are comparable in some ways

both are forms of mutilation in many cases performed on infants.

The foreskin is the male equivalent of the clitoral hood which is removed in fgm type 1A. One is illegal worldwide and the other is not.

Both have risks of complications or death.

The pp pointed out she could not comprehend how "only men" could countenance sex with mutilated women.

It's not like cosmopolitan similar magazines /TV shows refuse to discuss female preferences for "cut" Vs intact men.

Male circumcision does not remove their ability to orgasm, FGM does - that’s a pretty enormous difference?

"Male circumcision does not remove their ability to orgasm, FGM does - that’s a pretty enormous difference?"

That would depend on which type of fgm. Type 1a leaves the clitoris intact but is still abhorrent

Circumcision removes nerves in the foreskin and and reduces sensations/ sensitivity in the glans. This is acceptable in men apparently. " Female brains" publish articles about this increasing stamina in bed for cut men and recommend lube for handjobs.....

If anyone wants to discuss male circumcision they could have a thread about it.

Cant women who have been mutilated by FGM have the right to have the harm done to them without a what about the men highjack.

People who support Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) justify it based on deeply rooted social, cultural, and traditional beliefs, not medical reasons or the mandates of major religions. There is intense social pressure to conform to community norms, as families may face ostracism if their daughters are not cut.

Common justifications include:

• Social Acceptance and Integration FGM is often seen as a necessary rite of passage into womanhood and a prerequisite for social acceptance within the community.
• Marriageability and Honor It is widely believed that FGM makes a girl "marriageable" by ensuring her premarital virginity and marital fidelity. The practice is sometimes used to control female sexuality and uphold family honor.
• Aesthetics and Hygiene In some communities, the external female genitalia are considered unclean, ugly, or "male" and are removed to promote hygiene and aesthetic appeal.
• Tradition and Custom The practice has been part of cultural identity for generations, leading many to view it as an intrinsic custom that must be preserved.
• Perceived Religious Requirement While no major religious texts (including the Bible or the Quran) mandate FGM, some practitioners mistakenly believe it has religious support. Religious leaders in fact have often spoken out against the practice.
• Belief in Health Benefits Some may mistakenly believe that FGM makes childbirth safer for the infant, or that having it performed by medical professionals (medicalization) reduces health risks, though these beliefs have no basis in fact and FGM causes severe health complications.

Despite these justifications, FGM is a form of child abuse and a violation of human rights with severe, lifelong physical and psychological consequences.

"I dont even want to think why men would want to have physical sex with a woman who has been mutilated"

"I think only a male brain would be able to put forward a justification"

Yes because women would never have sex with mutilated man. In a female brain this is ok as long as the man can cum apparently.

the "patriachy" has made fgm illegal worldwide, - and continues to do so

Let's not forget in the thread you posted it was women convicted for performing fgm.

Oh dear. As this is a feminist forum I wouldn't have thought I have to spell it out that as women as a sex class are oppressed by the male sex class of men, it is only to obvious that women in their servile position would be prerssured into performing on behalf of men.

The comment is like saying women who end up as prostitutes or in strip shows, where very often are recruited by women, are making a free choice.

Its not that long ago, and probably still happens, that it was assumed that mothers and grandmothers would ensure that daughters and grand daughters were indoctirnated to accept their second class status. Whilst at the same time telling boys and grandsons they could do what the want.

I don't think I've named an FWR instance of Rule Eleven yet: "Whatever women suffer from, it is worse when it happens to men."

Rules Three and Five are clear.

Three: Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish. How dare we only want to speak about women?
Five: Women and Feminism must be useful to men or they are worthless. The man turns up on the board expecting us to discuss male circumcision.

Male circumcision is carried out by men, at men's behest. It is a religious requirement for Judaism and Islam, both of which have traditionally had an all-male priesthood. It is men who have the power to end male circumcision, not women. There's no point asking women to stop it and it's unfair to do so.

In the British Isles where most Mumsnet posters are based, male circumcision outwith those two religious communities is very rare and usually carried out on medical grounds. Expecting British and Irish women to explain why a fictional character in an American sitcom prefers circumcised men is unreasonable because most of us will never have had sex with one in order to develop such a preference.

I’ve reported Mr Whataboutthemenzzzzz and suggest others do too.
I am appalled that on the topic of FGM, the most horiffic topic of all, anyone can justify whataboutery.
But also for those who want a western example of this happening, take a read of the history of William Kellogg of breakfast cereal fame. He literally adopted girls and did this to them. Despicable. I also read a completely sickening account of a French doctor in the 19th C who believed this was a way to ‘cure’ young girls of issues (their issues were likely stemming from CSA).

Hi all,

Just a quick message to remind posters that derailing does break our talk guidelines and it is always better to start a new thread to discuss the topic of interest rather than derailing a pre-existing one. We appreciate that the fluidity and dynamic nature of threads can mean that conversations can sometimes segue into other topics, however the OP has now re-echoed the scope of the thread discussion so we ask that posters keep this in mind when posting.

The only chink of light I can see in this OP is that a court case brings buried arguments to light. It’s useful if there are people genuinely arguing that mutilating female babies and children is a cultural right that this should be said in the open and I hope, challenged and defeated (again). But yes it feels dangerous because what if by some horrible fluke it goes through? More girls suffering and dying from this specific form of patriarchal violence.

Didn't see this at the time, but thanks.

oh pack it in
it is not the same, if you want to talk about male circumcision start a conversation about it
this conversation is about the severe mutilation of women and girls. we do not always have to have someone bleating "but what about da poor menz" every time we talk about women's issues.

But yeah, sure, they will pick you. Well done

For info

Event: Zero Tolerance to FGM: Investing in the health & dignity of women & girls
13 February 2026 - London
https://www.forwarduk.org.uk/news-events/event-zero-tolerance-to-fgm-investing-in-the-health-dignity-of-women-girls/