\n<\/p>\n
It\u2019s little known and discussed but more than 500,000 women and girls are survivors or at risk of female genital mutilation\/cutting (FGM\/C) in the United States. I am one of them. This problem, so often considered to exist only in faraway places, happens right here at home too\u2013and many have fought hard to make that known and curtail it. When the Trump Administration made a mockery of the hard-fought\u00a02020 STOP FGM\/C Act<\/a>\u00a0by issuing an\u00a0Executive Order<\/a>\u00a0that falsely conflates FGM\/C with gender-affirming care and restricts access to life-saving gender-affirming care for young people, it made me boil. The order describes gender-affirming care as \u201cmutilation\u201d and \u201cmaiming\u201d and a \u201chorrifying tragedy.\u201d In doing so, it puts thousands of vulnerable children at risk\u2014survivors of FGM\/C and trans youth alike\u2014and pits them against each other.\u00a0<\/p>\n Let me make it perfectly clear:\u00a0FGM\/C and gender-affirming care are not equivalen<\/a>t. Not only do I know because I am a survivor, but I also\u00a0cofounded an organization<\/a>\u00a0that has supported hundreds of FGM\/C survivors over the years.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the difference: FGM\/C involves removing part or all of a girl or woman\u2019s healthy female sex organs and surrounding tissue for non-medical reasons and often results in negative health consequences, difficulties during childbirth, lifelong psychological and emotional trauma\u2014and in some cases, even death. It\u2019s considered a human rights violation and an extreme form of violence against women.<\/p>\n Gender-affirming care, on the other hand, is a medically necessary form of care that includes a diverse array of interventions to align one\u2019s identity with their sexual characteristics. This care is only provided with the consent of the individual, and\u00a0research\u00a0<\/a>has also shown that these treatments lead to decreased rates of depression, improvement in psychosocial functioning, and minimal long-term side effects.\u00a0<\/p>\n FGM\/C violates an individual\u2019s bodily autonomy while gender-affirming care preserves it.<\/p>\n But Trump\u2019s Executive Order conflates the two and directs the Department of Justice to use the STOP FGMC Act to coordinate law enforcement to take actions against parents and caregivers who would seek to support their trans youth and help them obtain this vital care.\u00a0In early February, in response, attorney generals from\u00a016 states\u00a0<\/a>released a joint statement to uplift that FGM\/C is not the same as gender-affirming care.<\/p>\n \u201cDespite what the Trump Administration has suggested, there is no connection between \u2018female genital mutilation\u2019 and gender-affirming care, and no federal law makes gender-affirming care unlawful. President Trump cannot change that by Executive Order.\u201d<\/p>\n In issuing this executive order, not only are trans youth put at risk, but the Trump administration has also ignored the voices of hundreds of anti-FGM\/C advocates, like myself, who for years have begged the United States government to recognize that FGM\/C is an inherent part of American culture and comes in many different forms.\u00a0<\/p>\n Last\u00a0October,\u00a0nearly forty women<\/a>\u00a0sued an OBGYN at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles for performing the \u201chusband stitch,\u201d a medically unnecessary postpartum suture, that was identified as FGM\/C by the plaintiffs. Like other forms of FGM\/C, the \u201chusband stitch\u201d is typically performed to increase men\u2019s sexual pleasure. Since October,\u00a0107 more plaintiffs<\/a>\u00a0have joined the lawsuit.\u00a0<\/p>\n Besides the LA cases, in the last few years, a\u00a0Detroit\u00a0<\/a>Emergency Room physician was charged with performing FGM\/C on dozens of minor females, some of whom had been brought across state lines to have FGM\/C carried out. Additionally,\u00a0a Texas woman<\/a>\u00a0was charged with taking a girl out of the country to have FGM\/C performed. In\u00a0Kentucky<\/a>, allegations of FGM\/C were brought against a couple who were charged with having tortured a young girl. Back in 2006, a man in\u00a0Georgia<\/a>\u00a0was\u00a0sentenced to 10 years in prison for conducting FGM\/C on his 2-year-old daughter.\u00a0If we go even further back, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, medical professionals performed FGM\/C as a treatment for\u00a0various perceived psychological conditions<\/a>, including hysteria, \u201clesbianism,\u201d and excessive masturbation. Renee Bergstrom, a white, midwestern, church-going woman,\u00a0has courageously written about her experience\u00a0undergoing FGM\/C as a child<\/a>\u00a0to prevent masturbation.<\/p>\n Advocacy by survivors over the years has resulted in some progress being made to end this human rights violation. Dozens of\u00a0petitions\u00a0<\/a>by survivor\u00a0advocates\u00a0<\/a>have allowed FGM\/C to be recognized as an official form of gender-based violence in the U.S. and as a result survivors have begun to receive the support and care they need. More than 41 states have state laws against FGM\/C; FGM\/C was included in the\u00a02022 reauthorizations of the Violence Against Women Act<\/a>; and resources have been created to address FGM\/C across the country. And of course, there\u2019s the landmark passage and existence of the bipartisan\u00a0STOP FGM\/C Act.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n Today, we can say that FGM\/C occurs in the United States. It has for centuries, and it takes many different forms.\u00a0<\/p>\n But what clearly distinguishes FGM\/C from gender-affirming care is that FGM\/C is driven\u00a0by misguided attitudes about women\u2019s sexuality, health, and societal roles. It\u2019s motivated by gendered stereotypes about the need for women to be chaste and pure, misconceptions about the female anatomy, a tendency to pathologize women\u2019s sexual desires, and a patriarchal system that prioritizes male sexual pleasure and control over women\u2019s health and bodily autonomy.\u00a0<\/p>\n Gender-affirming care, on the other hand, requires patient consent and, in the case of a minor, consent and assent from the parent or legal guardian and the patient after\u00a0a long period of reflection<\/a>\u00a0and consultation with health providers.<\/p>\n As a survivor of FGM\/C, and a professional advocate who has come across hundreds of FGM\/C cases in the United States, I know the truth: gender-affirming care is not \u201cmutilation\u201d or \u201cmaiming.\u201d To claim that it is, to conflate the two practices, is an insult to survivors like me and a clear attempt to deny vulnerable trans youth the care they need. It\u2019s also counterproductive, jeopardizing the last decade of progress that FGM\/C advocates have made and putting at risk the lives of thousands of children. Those children need support and protection to be able to live healthy and safe lives\u2014not to be made pawns in a political game designed to hurt other vulnerable kids.<\/p>\n