Changes

The movement against [[female genital mutilation ]] started in the early 20th century in the form of local campaigns in places where the practice is prevalent, such as Kenya, Sudan and Egypt. Feminism took the cause during the 1970s. In 1975 the American social scientist Rose Oldfield Hayes became the first female academic to publish a detailed account of [[FGM]]. Her article in American Ethnologist called it "female genital mutilation," and brought it to wider academic attention.

The [https://www.thegirlgeneration.org/organisations/inter-african-committee-traditional-practices-affecting-health-women-and-children-iac Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children], founded after a seminar in Dakar, Senegal, in 1984, called for an end to the practice, as did the UN's World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in June 1993. The conference listed FGM as a form of violence against women, marking it as a human-rights violation, rather than a medical issue. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s African governments banned or restricted it.

Since [[intactivism ]] is prevalent mostly in countries where FGM is not prevalent, and since campaigns against FGM are led by recognized global organizations, intactivists have very limited action regarding FGM. Intactivists however remain attentive to ensure that FGM does not spread to their countries of influence.

When the [[American Academy of Pediatrics ]] in 2010 suggested that "pricking or incising the clitoral [[skin]]" was a harmless procedure that might satisfy parents, intactivist organizations and individuals were quick to respond in condemning the "policy statement on ritual genital cutting of female minors".

While the [[intactivist ]] movement at large recognizes all forms of female genital mutilation as harmful, some of the organizations leading the campaigns against FGM do not recognize any harm in male [[circumcision]]. In fact, Catherine Hankins, a circumcision promoter who works for the [[WHO|World Health Organization]], wrote: "it is therefore critical that messaging about male circumcision for [[HIV]] prevention not only clearly distinguishes it from FGM but also contributes to efforts to eradicate FGM".