Peer-reviewed article
Commentary on From the War on Terror to the Moral Crusade Against Female Genital Mutilation.
Abbas SM, Shervinskie A, Clark CJ ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This is a commentary on an article about female genital mutilation and cutting (FGM/C), examining how state laws prohibiting the practice have emerged through the lens of femonationalism. The commentary argues that future legislation needs to be evidence-based and supported by coordinated efforts across multiple sectors to effectively prevent and respond to FGM/C. The author calls for more comprehensive legal protections for women and girls affected by or at risk of FGM/C.
Key points
- State laws prohibiting FGM/C have risen, but current legislation may have gaps in protection
- Future legislation must be evidence-based
- A multisectoral approach is needed for prevention and response
- Creating an enabling environment requires comprehensive protection for women and girls
Limitations
This is a commentary on another article rather than primary research or evaluation of an intervention. It does not provide specific data on FGM/C prevalence, outcomes of existing laws, or empirical evidence of what interventions work.
Abstract
This commentary reflects on Dina Bader's article From the War on Terror to the Moral Crusade Against Female Genital Mutilation, in which the author chronicles the rise in state laws prohibiting female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) through a lens of femonationalism. Expanding upon Bader's thought-provoking article, this commentary adds additional reflection on the content of current state legislation and the need for more comprehensive laws to protect women and girls. Future legislation must be evidence-based and must be accompanied by a multisectoral approach to prevention and response in order to create an enabling environment for the elimination of FGM/C.