A recent directive from the College of Policing, the official body responsible for training and standards for police in England and Wales, has ignited fierce debate by asserting that transgender men and women—with or without legal gender recognition—can also be victims of female genital mutilation (FGM). The guidance, issued in August as part of broader advice on honour-based abuse, states that these individuals face the same risk of FGM as cisgender women and girls. Critics argue that this framing dilutes focus from the primary victims of a practice overwhelmingly targeting young girls in specific cultural contexts.
Female genital mutilation involves the partial or total removal of external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. It is most commonly practiced in parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, particularly in Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia, where it is deeply rooted in traditions aiming to control female sexuality, ensure premarital chastity, and uphold notions of purity. The procedure, often performed without anesthesia using crude instruments like knives or razors, can lead to severe health complications including chronic pain, infections, infertility, childbirth complications, and psychological trauma. The World Health Organization classifies FGM as a violation of human rights, and it has been illegal in the UK since 1985, with strengthened legislation introduced in 2003 and 2015.
The College of Policing’s inclusion of transgender individuals in its FGM guidance reflects a growing institutional effort to recognize the experiences of gender-diverse people within hate crime and safeguarding frameworks. However, this move has been met with skepticism and outrage from some commentators and advocacy groups, who emphasize that FGM is a gender-specific form of violence rooted in patriarchal norms aimed directly at biological females. They argue that resources and attention should remain concentrated on protecting girls from communities where FGM is prevalent, noting that reported cases in the UK primarily involve minors from diaspora populations. Defenders of the guidance contend that it is intended to ensure police sensitivity to all potential victims and avoid excluding anyone who might be at risk, even if such cases are statistically rare.