Applying Anthropology to Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

ABSTRACT In this article, we review how anthropologies from various subdisciplines, from social to evolutionary anthropology, are contributing to our understanding of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). We focus on four key questions: What are the origins of FGM/C? What functions and meanings are linked to FGM/C? How does FGM/C persist and/or change? And how can anthropology inform policy and practice? We identify how anthropological research has challenged generalizations about FGM/C, showing how FGM/C practices and meanings vary between and within groups and can change, disappear, and reemerge, and that these practices are closely interlinked with other practices and institutions. Anthropologists have also shown that FGM/C is held in place by a range of factors and that social contacts can have significant influence on people's attitudes and behaviors. Finally, we highlight how anthropologists have also shown how anti‐FGM/C efforts can have unforeseen harmful consequences and have critically interrogated the international response to FGM/C, including the ethnocentrism in what is construed as harmful genital cutting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Anthropologist
Published
2026-01-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.70051
Primary Topic
Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Applying Anthropology to Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

Mhairi A. Gibson, Hannelore Van Bavel
American Anthropologist
Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
article

Applying Anthropology to Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

Mhairi A. Gibson, Hannelore Van Bavel
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT In this article, we review how anthropologies from various subdisciplines, from social to evolutionary anthropology, are contributing to our understanding of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). We focus on four key questions: What are the origins of FGM/C? What functions and meanings are linked to FGM/C? How does FGM/C persist and/or change? And how can anthropology inform policy and practice? We identify how anthropological research has challenged generalizations about FGM/C, showing how FGM/C practices and meanings vary between and within groups and can change, disappear, and reemerge, and that these practices are closely interlinked with other practices and institutions. Anthropologists have also shown that FGM/C is held in place by a range of factors and that social contacts can have significant influence on people's attitudes and behaviors. Finally, we highlight how anthropologists have also shown how anti‐FGM/C efforts can have unforeseen harmful consequences and have critically interrogated the international response to FGM/C, including the ethnocentrism in what is construed as harmful genital cutting.

American AnthropologistVol. 128(1)
University of Bristol (GB)
University of Bristol
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.