X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Blogs Coffee House

The campaign against FGM must ignore intersectionality

25 February 2014

5:58 PM

25 February 2014

5:58 PM

Two terms have been bouncing around a lot recently: FGM and intersectionality. Julie Burchill dealt with the latter in the Spectator last week, and triggered an angry reaction, proving that hell hath no fury like a transgender person scorned. For those not accustomed with the term, it’s a nebulous sociological concept that, put simply, suggests race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and class must all be factored into social commentary. It’s increasingly being used to suggest that you can only discuss and campaign on issues that you have direct experience of. The phrase ‘check your privilege’ neatly sums it up. Pick a topic, any topic, and in the intersectionalist’s eyes, you cannot discuss it without paying due regard to your background.

So let’s talk summer holidays. I am a white, middle-class girl, and when I was young, I spent much of my summer pretending I was a mermaid on a beach in Cornwall. But for a number of young British girls, predominantly with African and Middle Eastern roots, their holiday experience will have been very different. Their summer may have included a ‘cutting season’ – during which they were either taken out of the country to have their genitals sliced up, or they had some dodgy ‘doctor’ do it here. It’s carried out during the long holidays so there’s enough time for the wounds to heal before school starts again. The details are horrible, but suffice to say a more medieval attitude to femininity would be difficult to conjure up.

[Alt-Text]


The first prosecution for female genital mutilation in the UK is expected to take place within a few weeks. Given that more than 24,000 British girls are at risk and more than 66,000 women are living with the consequences of it, it’s hardly a triumph for our legal system, but it’s a step forward at least. The nature of FGM makes it a hugely personal matter, meaning it’s very hard to keep tabs on. Aside from a girl stepping forward to say ‘I was cut’, it’s difficult to tell who is a victim. A loophole in British law also makes it tricky to prosecute FGM when it has been done outside of the UK. Despite FGM being illegal in Britain for 29 years, no one has yet been prosecuted.

In the British press, the Guardian has run the most forceful campaign against FGM. This is of course laudable. But the left’s obsession with intersectionality has put this topic on a sticky wicket. Can British women who have no direct experience of FGM protest against it, without looking culturally snooty? When I, as a white, middle-class woman, stand up to say that this custom, predominantly practiced by African or Middle Eastern people, is wrong, I risk coming across as culturally elitist. I see that.

But this is what needs to be done, and we can’t afford to let FGM become a subject defined by left-wing jargon. There will be people all around Britain who have read about this barbaric practice, and believe we must adopt a tougher stance – but they may be put off saying so because they feel it’s not their place. Regardless of whether you have experience of it, this is not the place for feminist cant. The more we talk about it, and criticize the people who perpetrate it, the more likely it is to be eradicated. And that may mean upsetting certain ethnic minorities.

Let me check my privilege: as a white, middle-class girl, I was lucky enough not to have been cut up with a rusty razor or a shard of glass. If this piece seems bigoted, so be it. That’s a risk I’m happy to take on this particular issue, because anyone in Britain should feel able to discuss this, campaign against this, protest against this. We need the girls it doesn’t affect to feel able to support the girls it does. After all, the girls it does affect aren’t all that likely to want to talk about it. When it comes to the issue of FGM, the campaign should transcend political and cultural beliefs. Mutilating young girls is not something Britain should tolerate.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close