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.

The United Nations General Assembly included [[FGM ]] in resolution 48/104 in December 1993, the ''Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women''. In 2003 the UN began sponsoring an International Day of Zero Tolerance to Female Genital Mutilation every February 6.

In 2008 several United Nations bodies, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, published a joint statement recognizing [[FGM ]] as a human-rights violation.[191] In December 2012 the General Assembly passed resolution 67/146, calling for intensified efforts to eliminate it.

Most countries in the world have legislation prohibiting [[FGM]].

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 corrupt [[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".