Europe’s Helping Hand To Female Genital Mutilation


Video on FGM in Islamic communities

Posted on September 18, 2011 by Eeyore/Vlad Tepes

This is good but brace yourselves. I like how black women activists, what we used to call ‘feminists’, meaning they fought for rational rights for women, like the right not to have all your sexual equipment removed for example, are being told that banning this practice is ‘neocolonialist’ and they have to fight the moronic left who pretend to be on the side of the oppressed by not stopping them from being mutilated in the genitals.

Kafka, did you ever think things could go this far?

By: Jamie Glazov /

How European governmental and non-governmental development-policy bolsters a horrific crime against hundreds of thousands of girls.

Update: A 19-year-old girl in Gothenburg has been awarded compensation after having been subjected to genital mutilation in Somalia as an 11-year-old.


Warning: graphic image(s)


FP: Ines Laufer, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to build on our last interview about your efforts to save migrant girls in Europe from FGM (Female Genital Mutilation).

Can you talk a bit about the situation in African, Arabian and Asian countries and how female genital mutilation is affected their by European development policies?

Laufer: European governmental and non-governmental development-policy widely undermines and hinders the efforts to eradicate FGM in African/Arab/Asian countries.

Since the early 1980’s, there have been numerous initiatives, networks and organisations on the African continent that are committed to the eradication of FGM in their countries. The largest network – that is still active today – is the InterAfrican Committé (IAC) which was  founded in 1984. At that time, the majority of development-agencies, as well as the WorldHealthOrganisation, UNICEF and other UN-agencies, refused to put the problem of FGM on their agenda and to support initiatives like the IAC, because they did not want to “interfere into a cultural custom.”

Mali Not Yet Ready to Ban FGM, Female Activists Told…

Dhimmi Watch: Yemeni Parliament votes down bill to outlaw female …

Female Genital Mutilation and Underage Marriage Continue

Female Genital Mutilation: An Islamic Problem

Balkan Muslims Shun Organ Trafficking Investigator…

In the 1990s, organisations like UNICEF realised that FGM is very well suited to be exploited for raising funds. They created projects and called for generous donations within the Western population. It worked. For instance, to UNICEF Germany, the German people donated more than half a million D-Mark alone in 1994, for a FGM-project in Ethiopia – after a TV-broadcast and big article in STERN-magazine witnessed the live-mutilation of an Ethiopian girl-victim.

Today, 15 years later, UNICEF Germany still requires money for this project – that is likely to have yielded a few million Euros over the time (which is only an estimation, because UNICEF refuses to disclose the true amount). Only recently asked for measurable results of this concrete project – within such a long time – UNICEF is not able to give concrete answers. Obviously, because there aren’t lasting results. This would not even be a big surprise – because so-called “education-campaigns” which are destined to teach the mutilating families and mutilators about the devastating effects of FGM, generally widely failed.

And of course, they had to fail – because FGM is not an “exotic custom” that people perpetrate because they “don’t know better” – no – FGM is a very specific and very systematic kind of legitimized violence against a certain group of members (female children) in the concerned societies.

The consequences of the sexual mutilation of little girls are very well known and realised in all mutilating ethnic groups – but they are knowingly accepted while the girl’s individual health and well-being are subordinated to the male’s claim for sexual control.

So, while millions of donations are gathered and partly invested into disputable, unsuccessful projects, UNICEF knowingly accepts that the girls in all projects which are funded by the UN-agency – continue to be mutilated.

UNICEF – as well as all large development-agencies – refuse to integrate the abandonment of FGM in the project-areas into their support-conditions.

FP: Doesn’t all of this violate some kind of law?

Laufer: This policy of tolerance and acceptance towards FGM – and other forms of violence against children – strictly contradicts the UN-convention of Children’s Rights which has been created in 1989 and signed by all countries except Somalia and the USA and which could be a strong instrument to call for the respect of children’s rights within every single project.

By neglecting to consequently demand the girl’s protection from FGM,UNICEF and Co. must be considered complicit for the mutilation of thousands of little girls in the projects.

Furthermore, in ingratiation to the US-development-concern USaid for monetary reasons, UNICEF now consequently trivialises FGM as “Female Genital Cutting”, in German even as “Circumcision” and so paternalistically overrides the call of African activists to maintain the proper terminology “Female Genital Mutilation” – and even threatened to refuse funds to African groups who named the practice “FGM.”

Other non-governmental development-agencies like PLAN International, WorldVision, Kindernothilfe and CCFKinderhilfswerk work with a very lucrative system: They market so-called “sponsored children” to open the wallets of empathetic donors: They promise to use the money for guaranteeing a “better life” to the children. Up to 100 Million Euros, they acquire each year.

But none of these organisations is willing to protect the sponsored girl-children from FGM by including this point into the conditions for the project-partners:

Up to 400,000 sponsored girls in countries where FGM is practised are submitted to FGM – in front of the eyes of those hypocritical organisations, while they carry a yield of hundreds of millions to the organisation’s accounts.

We have documents where – the 100% avoidable – death of sponsored girls after FGM is reported. The donors of course are not told about the girl’s death-cause and that it has easily could have been avoided.

By financially and materially supporting those villages, communities and male decision-makers who are not willing to respect a least standard of children’s rights, who insist that the female children in their communities are mistreated by FGM, the repressive structures which largely hinder any chance of lasting development, are strengthened.

This hinders and undermines the serious work of initiatives like IAC and makes their efforts much more difficult.

The damage that is caused by this policy can not be compensated by the peanut-amounts which are spent by these organisations to a few selected projects who mainly aim to fight FGM.

The same critics against the FGM-tolerating policy of NGOs also needs to be addressed to the governmental development-aid:

Germany is the world’s second largest donator of development-aid. Those governments who propagate, perpetuate and tolerate FGM in their countries, who disrespect the most fundamental human rights – and therefore largely hinder their societies from lasting development – are generously supported. In 2007, more than 700 millions of German taxpayer’s money have been flowing to these governments, mostly to fulfil their economical requests.

Egypt alone, which just comes from re-legalising FGM, received 100 million Euros. And Ethiopia, whose government in 2008 adopted a law that will lead to a major “famishment” of most human rights-organisations in the country,  received not less than 70 million Euros. Alone from Germany.

No conditions, no call for the respect of Human- and children’s rights are linked to such generous support.

This policy again strengthens political leaders and governments who are far away from caring about the violent oppression of their female members in the society. This makes true development impossible.

Just recently, Günter Nooke – commissioner for human rights within the German government – had called to stop payments to countries who do not respect fundamental human rights He has roughly been answered back by the German ministry of development.

As long as in the governmental development-policy obviously is interested in very own objectives which seem to be more linked to economical and political influence than to true development – and as long as the tax-payers do not really care about the doubtful usage of their money, this situation will not change.

FP: Ines Laufer, thank you for bringing awareness to this issue.



In 2000, when the African Women’s organisation in Vienna run the first (and still only) study on FGMamong migrants in Austria, it could be proven for the first time, that there is no link between the knowledge about the harmful consequences of FGM and the will to abandon the practice: It “has been shown that 56,8 of the interrogated migrants know that FGM has “side-effects” to girls and women, and 54,4% can not give any positive effect of the procedure. This knowledge doesn’t seem to have any influence on their attitude towards FGM: only 24,4% of group (60 people) support the complete abolishment of FGM. The majority of almost 76% is against its entire abandonment. See page 26.

Frontpage Interview’s guest is Ines Laufer, founder of the Task Force for Effective Prevention of Female Genital Mutilation, a network of Human-Rights-organisations and activists that is committed to measurable, broad prevention of genital mutilation among migrant girls in the EU. With the Task Force’s prevention-programme, for the first time true protection of minor girls from this violence comes into reach.


African genital cutters face fatwa, jail

Laurent Prieur and Abdoulaye Massalatchi, Reuters

To be taken with a grain of salt. These announcements are frequent, but change is far away:

Efforts to eradicate female genital circumcision in West Africa have taken a step forward with a fatwa against the practice in Mauritania and sanctions in Niger against mothers who subject their daughters to it.

Known also as female genital mutilation (FGM), the tradition involves removing external parts of a girl’s genitals and sometimes narrowing the vaginal opening. Bleeding, disease and problems in urinating and childbirth can result for millions of victims each year in Africa and the Middle East.

In many parts of West Africa, cutting has been presented as a religious obligation for Muslim women, leading many to believe that if they are not circumcised they are unclean and that their prayers will not be heard.

“Are there texts in the Koran that clearly require that thing? They do not exist,” the secretary general of the Forum of Islamic Thought in Mauritania, Cheikh Ould Zein, told Reuters of the fatwa signed by 34 imams and scholars.

“On the contrary, Islam is clearly against any action that has negative effects on health. Now that doctors in Mauritania unanimously say this practice threatens health, it is therefore clear that Islam is against it,” he added.

The fatwa, or religious ruling, was signed on January 12 but became widely known only this week in a country where some 72 percent of women are estimated to have undergone FGM and where practitioners charge an average 25 euros a time.

“The fact that the religious leaders in Mauritania are standing up and doing this is quite amazing,” said Molly Melching, executive director of Tostan, a Senegal-based organisation working in Mauritania on FGM.


The fatwa in itself is not binding, and would not have an impact on those communities practising FGM for centuries-old cultural reasons not linked to the arrival of Islam in Africa.

Yet it follows other tentative indications of a trend away from FGM in West Africa.

A Save the Children-backed campaign has seen 40 villages in Mali abandon the practice in a country where over 80 percent of the women have undergone FGM. In Senegal, the practice has been widely stopped since a law against it was passed in 1999.

In a sign that authorities in Niger are implementing a 2003 ban, 45 mothers in the southwestern town of Kollo received fines and suspended jail sentences of eight months this week for complicity in allowing their daughters to be cut.

Welfare specialist Moussa Hassane told Reuters that aside from the usual forms of excision, practioners in Niger used the technique to facilitate sexual relations with child brides.

Niger has one of the highest rates of early marriage in the world, with nearly 60 percent of women married between 15-19.

UN agency UNICEF statistics show a sharp fall in Niger in the incidence of FGM in the past decade masking stark ethnic differences, with three percent of Arab women circumcised but nearly two-thirds of some other tribal groups.

“A law is not what will change a social norm. For it to be sustainable it has to come from the people, a decision made by the people, because they really believe in it,” Melching said.

26 thoughts on “Europe’s Helping Hand To Female Genital Mutilation”

  1. There is good news for women. Today it is possible to repair the clitoris.

    Today we have the chance to have the Dr Foldes, a French urologist and surgeon who had developed a technique to help victims of FMG get their clitoral sensation back. Further we have created Clitoraid dedicated to ending FGM once and for all and to raising funds to pay for the operations of as many women as possible. Clitoraid mission: to help a many FGM victims as possible regain their dignity and their sense of pleasure and in the process, help eliminate FMG.

    We are a non-profit organization, created by the International Raelian Movement and based in US. : :

    I invite you to discover who we are. The fact that it is now possible to repair, will activate the termination of this for all the girls to come.
    Talk around you so that the world is changing for women 🙂

  2. Some Europeans used to remove clitorises, thinking they were created by the devil. Women with large clitorises were sometimes killed as witches.

  3. i sont think there’s anything wrong with trimming the clit just like trimming the meet off the cock no one wants to walk around with a cock that looks like an elephant trunk as long as its done by a dr the cunt looks better all they so is trim the meet off a little whats the big fucking deal how come no one says anything when men get circumcised

  4. Joe,

    I think you used up all your nine lives in one paragraph.

    Do some decent research about your insane comments. Any removal of tissue around women’s genitals removes sources of pleasure. The majority of women’s sexual pleasure is derived from the clitorial area and all the outside area around the vagina. The only area inside the vagina that provides sexual pleasure is the G spot which is close to the opening. This is why the outside tissue engorges with blood and enlarges just like a penis. If you cut anything away, you are removing the ability to feel. Circumsizing a penis does not remove areas of pleasure. And, circumsizing a man is a commandment from God. That’s why “no one says anything” when men get circumsized. Even though some men are trying to say men should not be circumsized.

  5. And, Joe, did you think your crude method of expressing yourself would shock us? Grow up!

  6. Hey Amazonbaby,

    I don’t agree with genital mutilation of either sex, it is a barbaric practice. Barbarians mutilate themselves, you know, cuttings, piercings, ritual scarring, tattoos, etc.

    Further, if “god” actually exists, and he made the hairless ape called man – why in the hell did god make man with a prepuce and then order him to cut it off after his birth? Sounds kinda silly, doesn’t it?

    Who knows, maybe “god” is a vicious sadist who enjoys pain and the inflicting of it. Judging from the way this sick world is, I wouldn’t be the least surprised.

  7. Islam is a tool being used by the collectivist elite for subterfuge. What they don’t realize is that they cannot and will not control Islam. Radical Islam is a logical outgrowth of the political, socialogical, and economic population explosion in an area of the world that cannot sustain the such human numbers. Societies and people turn to religion for the relief function. However, this religion is in it’s radical form at type that spreads extreme violence and hatred. A growing middle class in the Arab, Persian, and Islamic world have little or no hope and even these people turn to a form of extremism that will distroy the West. Islam by itself is nomore evil than any other religion, but given the right (or wrong) circumstances, the future of the Western World is looking very dim. You can thank liberal collecivism, and global corperate interests for this! The eroding stucture of Europe and the west only shows how STUPID LIBERAL COLLECTIVISTS REALLY ARE!

  8. I just can`t believe how ignoranr and limited people there in this world. Religious curved in the sick brains to people brings with it such violence. Nobody has the right to cause this to another human being, and even animal. Please people, educate yourself and always tsearch the truth!!!

  9. The people (using the term loosely) behind FGM should undergo extreme circumcisions: make them sing soprano.

    Maybe if they treated their women better, the women would stick around and they wouldn’t have to cover them in burqas, stop having to escort them everywhere (because they’re not allowed to go anywhere with direct male relatives) and mutilating them. Oh, and allow them their own opinions and jobs. Complete control at all costs.

    But I guess narcissistic wife-beaters don’t think that way. Oops. I mean ‘true believers of the religion of peace who are destined for paradise’. I get confused because of the similarities. Please excuse me.

  10. @ Padraig’s Ghost

    I think those stupid liberal collectivists should be shipped to the middle east and africa.

    They’ll have plenty to do to make themselves feel good for being so progressive. The ones who survive, I mean.

    That way, they can do their “good deeds” which make them feel good and generally holier than us, and at the same time, they won’t drag us and Western countries down into a 3rd world hole…

  11. Amazonbaby, these are your words:
    “Circumsizing a penis does not remove areas of pleasure. And, circumsizing a man is a commandment from God.”
    1. You are wrong. Circumcision of baby boys removes the foreskin, rich in pleasure nerves. A circumcised man feels much less pleasure than a natural man.
    2. God’s commandments be damned. a real God would never command barbarism such as cutting baby private parts.

  12. J Edgar;
    I read your suggested article and as a adult when circumcised, I concur with contents of the article, that a loss of pleasure goes with that foreskin. Those who undergo the process when very young (and not a command of God) have no means of comparison having had no sexual experience.

  13. male circumcision actually has a lot of health benefits that noone has seemed to mention. female circumcision is strictly done to remove all pleasure from a women when they have sex based on the idea in a patriarcal society where men have all the power including the power of pleasure. i don’t believe that any specific part of the body should be commanded or condemned by religion. i think our body is our body and if a man wants to be circumsised i think that is his choice but you don’t hear many cases of men being traumatized by their parent’s decision to circumsise them right? now think of how traumatizing it is for a girl to be circumsised? it’s no use comparing the two because one is so much more brutal than the other. just thought i’d bring that up.

  14. Why are all you saying shit like this? Do you not understand anything about female circumcision?? It is not done for cosmetic reasons.. it is done against the woman’s will… and it is EXTREMELY painful for the woman for the rest of her life… I am a nurse.. I should know.. Grow up and have a heart for these people.

  15. If it gives pleasure to men then why not have the girls be closed tight.

  16. Iris, there are no health benefits in circumcising a male. If there are, name them.
    It turned out to be an urban legend that circumcised men are cleaner. In fact, the forskin actually protects the penis from direct exposure to diseases and enhances pleasure.

    The reason why there are not many complaints against male cicumcision is because it has been so enforced in Western cultures and religion that no one dares speak out against it. Boys do lose pleasurable sensations with the removal of forsekin, and I find it ridiculous when people used the failed logic of ‘if they never got to use it, they won’t miss it’. It is so selfish when a parent mutilates a child’s genitals because they don’t know any better and it is done for the sake of some belief.

    Circumcision is barbaric, both on men and women. It is a tradition but some traditions are meant to be forgotten.

  17. U.K.: Over 22,000 girls at risk of being taken abroad for female genital mutilation

    The politically correct article of faith included at the end of this report is that “there are no legitimate cultural or religious reasons.”

    By Western standards, there is indeed no legitimate reason. As for its prevalence in the Muslim world, authorities may find false reassurance in the notion that FGM is not spelled out as an obligation in the Qur’an. But Islam is not a sola scriptura faith. The practice of Islam also depends on traditions handed down in ahadith and biographies of Muhammad, and schools of jurisprudence. That, for example, is why Sunnis and Shi’ites can read the same Qur’an and differ on so much.

    With FGM, one finds that the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence holds FGM to be obligatory, with other schools also failing to condemn it “Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna [commendable according to the word or example of Muhammad, but not obligatory], while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.” – Umdat al-Salik e4.3.

    Muhammad himself did not condemn it: “A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.” – Sunan Abu Dawud 41.5251

    Therefore, as long as practitioners do not consider their version “severe,” or as long as they can imagine a way it could be worse, they have an excuse to continue mutilating girls. It should be clear that, wishful thinking aside, the practice does have something very much to do with Islam. “UK Girls At Risk of Mutilation Abroad,” by Jessica Elgot for the Independent, July 4:

    Thousands of British schoolgirls as young as eight face being taken abroad this summer to have their genitals mutilated and stitched up to preserve “purity”.
    A campaign by the Metropolitan Police and Foreign Office will suggest that more than 22,000 girls under the age of 15 risk being taken abroad by their family for “cutting”, based on data from The International Centre for Reproductive Health.
    Campaigners say the victims are being failed by a lack of awareness from teachers and neighbours.
    Girls may have their outer genitals removed and stitched up to preserve their virginity, with an opening as small as a matchstick head, meaning it can take up to 20 minutes to urinate.
    The World Health Organization recognizes four categories of FGM. What is described in the preceding paragraph is Type III of the four: excision and infibulation. This practice is common in Somalia. In Egypt and other areas, clitoridectomy — the severing or excision of the clitoris — is standard practice, as described in Umdat al-Salik, a Shafi’i jurisprudence manual certified as “reliable” by al-Azhar University in Cairo. As many as 130 million women worldwide have suffered one form or another of FGM.

    Female genital mutilation (FGM) is most common in Muslim areas, from North Africa to the Far East, although Koranic scholars have proclaimed it incompatible with Islam. Engaging or assisting in it carries a prison sentence of up to 14 years in the UK.
    There have been some recent rulings against FGM. Enforcement, and repudiating centuries-old Islamic traditions, is where the greater challenge lies.

    A specialist with the Metropolitan Police, Detective Sergeant Vicky Washington, said: “There are no legitimate cultural or religious reasons for FGM — it’s child abuse.”

  18. FGM should be prosecuted as a crime against humanity. Male circumcision does have health benefits like substantially lower rate of HIV transmission, which saves lives – a lot of lives. It’s not that simple, unfortunately.

  19. In response to the first comment, ‘possible to repair the clitoris’ I presume the author realizes ‘repair’ is only possible if something remains?

    An article I read by a French doctor who witnessed FGM in Somalia stated that after the hood was removed, the clitoris cut off, the area underneath was sliced open and the remainder of the organ pulled up and out and sliced off – FURTHER, either the mother or the cutter jammed her finger down into that hole to feel around and make sure absolutely NOTHING remained of it internally.

    I don’t think that can be repaired.

    In response to the comment from Moran/Aug 21, 2011/ about Male circumcision – you know what else saves lives? Not having unprotected sex, keeping HIV infected males from raping women (#1 cause of spread of AIDS in CONGO which is #5 country for aids percentage). Don’t share needles, don’t use prostitutes, don’t have unprotected male homosexual intercourse. The only people who receive a SUBSTANTIALLY lower rate of HIV transmission are the men who are circumcised, who do not participate in any multitude of HIV risk activities. Not ALL HIV TRANSMISSION and certainly it doesn’t lower the rate of transmission to women.

    Most men in the U.S. are circumcised, and it hasn’t slowed down the rate of transmission at all within the groups of risk behavior patterned individuals.

    Allowed immigration of infected African men should be stopped. In a single case alone in Poland an HIV infected African immigrant infected over 40 women, and any who wanted him to use a condom was condemned by him as ‘racist’. Give me a BREAK.

    I would like to see a comparison of boys/males who have died, suffered permanent disfigurement and/or mutilation from bad circumcisions to uncircumcised male HIV rate of men who don’t engage in chronic risky behavior.

    I say NO to circumcision for civilized humans.

Comments are closed.