Author: admin

Is the Literary Industry Racially Diverse?

Gabriela Castro 
July 2024

Did you know that 95% of fiction books published in the U.S. between 1950 and 2018 were written by white authors?^[7] Considering the fact that 10.5% of the U.S. population were minorities in 1950 and that percentage has only increased in the years since, this shows a historical underrepresentation of authors of color in literature.^[3][4]

Contemporary BIPOC Authors are Persistently Underrepresented

Needless to say, efforts to understand and address the racial disparity of authored works have been sluggish. Only two of the infamous Big Five publishing houses–which control over 80% of the publishing market–have just begun to show transparency in surveying the diversity of its authors.^[7] Penguin Random House–arguably the biggest literary publishing conglomerate–published a survey review which found that 23.5% of its authors who published between 2019 and 2021 were people of color.^[7] By comparison, in 2022 Hachette publishing disclosed its third annual report on diversity that 34% of book acquisitions were written by minority authors in 2021, an increase from 29% in 2020, and 22% in 2019.^[7] Considering the fact that racial minorities make up about 40% of the U.S. population, this shows a persistent underrepresentation of authors of color in literature despite recent efforts by these two literary publishing agencies to amplify and publish BIPOC writers.^[4]

Pervasiveness of Whiteness in Publishing

A review of the literary agencies demonstrates that this diversity issue isn’t limited to authors. According to Lee and Low, approximately 72.5% of publishing, review journal, and literary agency staff are white.^[5] While this report noted a moderate improvement from the 79% of publishing, review journal, and literary agency staff who identified as white in 2015, this data is misleading as minorities make up a 63.8% majority of literary interns but hold less than 30% of executive, editorial, sales, marketing, book reviewing, literary specialist, and literary agent positions.^[5] It is dubious to claim that diversity in publishing has truly improved if minorities are holding the majority of entry-level literary positions but are lacking in associate positions or higher.

Not only are writers of color historically and persistently marginalized in the literary industry, but this disenfranchisement is pervasive in the staffing of those involved in the publishing industry. To underscore this issue, the vast majority of literary employees are straight (68.7%), nondisabled (83.5%), and/or cis women (71.3%), highlighting the need for LGBT+, disabled, and gender nonbinary personnel in the literary industry.^[5] 

Representation in Literary Content

Among youth-centered literature, recently published books themselves have diversity on par with the population. In 2023, the Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC) found 40% of total books for children and teens have at least one BIPOC primary character (fiction) or human subject (nonfiction).^[8] This is also considering the fact that many published books may not include human characters or subjects since they are imaginative and intended for kids.^[8] In terms of content, the CCBC noted that 49% of the children and YA books had significant BIPOC content, an increase from 46% in 2022.^[8] 

The caveat to diversity in children’s and teen’s books is that it comes in the wake of scrutiny and pushback in the form of book bans.^[6] While it is important to be critical of media consumption, especially for the safety of children, the drastic extent of book censorship can create an overly sanitized and homogenized selection of literature for readers to choose from. 

These book bans can hinder critical thought from young readers by preventing children’s exposure to an identity they would not otherwise understand outside of verbal opinion. In other words, banning books on the basis of them being “too diverse” or controversial leaves children susceptible to others’ bias and unable to form opinions of their own. Denying access to books that address social issues such as racism, sexism, or discrimination leaves children and readers in general liable to internalize and perpetuate stereotypes they hear or witness elsewhere. This can be mitigated by reading books related with various social transgressions. Books that are related to real-life issues can give children examples of ways people interact with each other that are not positive, or healthy. Such books can be used as lessons for children to learn how to productively and prosocially interact with others. This is supported by the fact that reading fiction books fosters empathy.^[2] Giving children access to them the faculties and compassion to live inclusively with others. 

Additionally, readers from all backgrounds, but especially marginalized backgrounds, can benefit from being immersed in literature that focuses on characters both like and unlike themselves. Having more diverse authors allows room for more diverse experiences and creative stories. This way, young readers are exposed to literature written by authors who know from experience that they are not a monolith, but complex individuals with unique backgrounds, invaluable cultural backgrounds, worthy of being seen as they are and in places beyond their imagination.^[1] It is important to inspire future leaders and adults of tomorrow.

Conclusion

To summarize, the vast majority of books published in the US have historically been written by white authors.^[3][7] Not only have publishing agencies been reluctant to publish author demographics, but these disparities persist despite efforts by publishers to close such gaps.^[4][7] The majority of staff in the literary publishing industry are white, cisgender, women, straight, and non-disabled, with racial minorities being concentrated in entry-level positions.^[5] While we see a significant uptick in children’s books written by POC writers, these have equally been challenged by book bans in school districts across the country.^[6][8] These book bans prevent children from learning about social isues, dismantling social issues in their own day-to-day lives, and simply seeing themselves or their peers represented in the literature they consume.^[1][2] It is imperative to address obstacles to diversity in publishing because it is important for consumers and publishers of literature to see themselves in literary contexts and for people to practice the golden rule–-treating others how they would like to be treated.^[1][2] 

References

[1] Adichie, C. N. (2009, July). The Danger of a Single Story . TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?subtitle=en

[2] Bal, P. M., & Veltkamp, M. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation on the role of emotional transportation. PLoS ONE, 8(1), e55341. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055341

[3] Bureau of the Census. (1953). 1950 Census of the Population Advance Reports (Series PC-14 No. 13). U.S. Department of Commerce. https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1950/pc-14/pc-14-13.pdf

[4] Ghosh, I. (2020, December 28). Visualizing the U.S. Population by Race [News Site]. Visual Capitalist. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-u-s-population-by-race/

[5] Lee and Low Books. (2024, February 28). Where is the Diversity in Publishing? The 2023 Diversity Baseline Survey Results. Lee & Low Blog. https://blog.leeandlow.com/2024/02/28/2023diversitybaselinesurvey/

[6] Meehan, K., & Friedman, Ph.D. , J. (2023, April 20). Banned in the USA: State Laws Supercharge Book Suppression in Schools. PEN America. https://pen.org/report/banned-in-the-usa-state-laws-supercharge-book-suppression-in-schools/

[7] Reading Between the Lines: Race, Equity, and Book Publishing. (2022, October 21). PEN America. https://pen.org/report/race-equity-and-book-publishing/[8] Staff, S. L. J. (2024, April 4). BIPOC Representation in Children ’s Literatures Continues Its Slow Rise, According to CCBC’s Diversity Statistics. School Library Journal. https://www.slj.com/story/BIPOC-Representation-Childrens-Literatures-Continues-Its-Slow-rise-According-CCBC-Diversity-Statistics

Portrayal of Women in Netflix’s Bridgerton

In recent years, shows with female leads have grown popular, often aiming to showcase strong, powerful women. Essentially attempting to erase any femininity from shows, an example being Fate: The Winx Saga; a teen series adapted from a popular kids animation, Winx Club, which originally depicted strong women who embraced their femininity as guardians of their fairy world, whereas the live-action adaption took a different turn, scrapping most of its femininity and original message. On the other hand, shows like Bridgerton started to show women not only in all shapes and sizes but personalities as well. Whether they were more or less feminine, they still had their own strengths and weaknesses. 

With lead women like Daphne Bridgerton and Kate Sharma, it is clearly shown that both women are capable of being robust, while also embracing their femininity. Daphne, with her grace and determination, and Kate, with her boldness and intelligence, both highlight the multifaceted nature of female strength. 

This approach contrasts with shows such as Fate: The Winx Saga where the emphasis seems to have shifted from the colorful, vibrant representation of femininity which was found in the original series. “But by rejecting the aesthetic and vibe of its source material entirely for a pale imitation of other YA [Young Adult] properties, “Fate: The Winx Saga” might just end up slipping through the cracks^[2].”The live adaptation has been heavily criticized for its opposite representation, as shown by the review provided. It emphasizes a darker, more somber tone, which some argue: strips away what made the original show appealing to children. 

However, Bridgerton still highlights the rebellious nature of teens such as Eloise Bridgerton. Eloise, well known for her sharp wit and yearning for independence, challenges the societal expectations of the Regency era and its standards for women. She seeks intellectual fulfillment, often questioning the need for marriage; in her case, Eloise finds safety in her femininity after the fallout with Penelope. In other words, Bridgerton portrays that not all femininity is true to the person.  

Although Penelope Featherington is the same age and shares similar ideologies as Eloise, she uses her femininity to embrace her growth as a woman instead of wallowing in her mother’s tastes. Her ability to embrace her femininity on her own terms emphasizes her strength and resilience in the world of Regency London. 

Bridgerton contributes to a richer, more inclusive representation of women on screen, encouraging viewers to appreciate the many forms of female strength. This trend applies to shows like The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, featuring a woman thriving in a male-dominated field while staying true to her identity, and My Lady Jane, featuring strong female characters navigating romance and societal expectations with wit and resilience in a historical fantasy setting. Overall, Bridgerton successfully balances the portrayal of women by acknowledging their vulnerabilities and showcasing their growth and resilience throughout their stories. 

References

[1] Burgess, G., & Glynn, M. (Executive Producers). (2024). My Lady Jane [TV series]. Prime Video.

[2] Framke, C. (2021, January 22). Fate: The Winx Saga Review: Netflix’s Winx Club Adaptation Fizzles. Variety. Retrieved July 16, 2024, from https://variety.com/2021/tv/reviews/fate-the-winx-saga-netflix-review-1234889555/

[3] Palladino, D., Sherman-Palladino, A., Lawrence, S. R., Gilbert, D., & Shapiro, M. (Executive Producers). (2017). The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel [TV series]. Prime Video.

[4] Quinn, J. (2021). Bridgerton. Avon Books 

[5] Sampson, E. (Executive Producer). (2021). Fate: the Winx saga [TV series]. Netflix.

[6] Rhimes, S., & Dollard, S. (Executive Producers). (2020). Bridgerton [TV series]. Netflix.

[7] Straffi, I. (Executive Producer). (January 28, 2004). Winx Club [TV series]. Rainbow SpA.

The Fight for Girls’ Education Everywhere

Roma Bhavsar 
July 2024

Gender disparity in education 

Access to education is a basic human right that every woman should have access to. Despite clear evidence showing how important girls’ education is for progress and growth, differences between boys’ and girls’ education continue to exist and girls are still being denied their right to a quality education. There is still a lot of work to be done globally to achieve equal education for all despite the barriers that exist among countries and communities. While countries have pledged to provide education for every child, less than half of all countries worldwide have achieved gender equality in primary education. ^[1] 

According to UNICEF, globally over 129 million girls are not attending school. This translates to 32 million girls in primary school, 30 million in lower-secondary, and 67 million in upper secondary not receiving education. Girls in conflict-affected countries are over twice as likely to be out of school compared to those in peaceful countries. Only 49% of countries have gender parity in primary education. This number drops to 42% for lower-secondary and 24% for upper-secondary education. ^[1] Furthermore, as of 2024, Afghanistan is the only country where women and girls face restrictions on education. They are banned from education beyond primary school (sixth grade). It is reported that this ban impacts over one million girls in  Afghanistan. ^[2] 

Obstacles that exacerbate the education gap between girls and boys 

Various obstacles and barriers prevent girls from getting an education or a proper one, and these challenges differ from one country and community to another. Gender stereotypes that confine women to gender-normative family roles create significant barriers to girls getting a good education. Society often expects girls to take on domestic duties such as cooking and cleaning,  assuming they will rely on men financially. This stereotype also means boys’ education is often seen as more important because they’re expected to be the sole earners for the household. ^{[3, 4]} 

Laws and policies in many countries also hinder girls’ education rights. Even rules that seem fair often end up excluding girls because of socially adopted norms. For example, some laws allow child marriages or state that pregnant girls cannot attend school. This restricts girls’ freedom and keeps them from getting an education. Additionally, those who marry at a young age are more likely to drop out of school or complete fewer years of education. According to a 2017 report, more than 41,000 girls are married each day. To put this into perspective, ending child marriage could lead to attaining higher education, earning high wages, and can generate more than 500 billion in benefits each year. ^{[3, 4]} 

Furthermore, financial problems and poverty keep girls from going to school. Poor families often cannot pay for things like school fees or uniforms. Parents might also prioritize boys’ education,  thinking it will give them better jobs. When schools are far away from home, especially in rural areas, girls have an even harder time attending. They might have to do household chores like getting water or childcare, which can keep them out of school. ^{[3, 4]} 

Violence plays a big role in girls not completing their education. In countries affected by conflict, fragility, and violence, the education gap is much wider. Girls in these countries are 2.5  times more likely to be out of school than boys. At the secondary education level, girls are 90%  more likely to be out of school compared to those in more stable countries. In addition, data shows that girls face the risk of being sexually assaulted when just walking to school. What’s more troubling, pregnancies resulting from assault or violence compound this problem.  Unfortunately, pregnant girls often face stigma and discrimination causing many girls to drop out of school and not return. ^{[3, 4]} 

What does this all mean? 

Quality education is a necessity that fosters numerous benefits not just for girls but for their families and communities. As a society, we must invest in girls’ education because women help lift economies in addition to promoting gender equality and building healthier communities. ^[5] Denying girls and vulnerable groups’ education is a severe form of discrimination that limits an individual’s ability to succeed and build prosperity for entire countries. 

Malala Fund, Too Young to Wed, Mercy Beyond Borders, and WomenOne are just a few of countless nonprofit organizations, support programs, and charities that work to promote girls’  education, help low-income families cover schooling costs, and provide girls the tools they need to take control of their lives. 

We must use our voices to promote education and eliminate the continuing disparities that prevent universal access to education such as systemic inequalities, oppression, and discrimination. Education is vital for learning about the world we live in and every effort should be made to empower girls to write their own stories rather than having others write them for them.  

References 

[1] UNICEF. (2019). Girls’ education. UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/education/girls education 

[2] Afghanistan’s school year starts without more than 1 million girls barred from education by  Taliban. (2024, March 20). AP News. https://apnews.com/article/afghanistan-school-year-girl education-ban-df1a1d722353db006e1a2650a1e12c36. 

[3] TheirWorld. (2017, July 26). Why girls around the world are still denied an equal chance of  education. Theirworld. https://theirworld.org/news/why-girls-are-still-denied-equal-chance-of education/.  

[4] The World Bank. (2022). Girls’ Education. World Bank.  https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/girlseducation.

[5] Malala Fund. (2016). Girls’ education | Malala Fund. Malala.org. https://malala.org/girls education.

The Most Underrated Woman Scientist in Germany: The Legacy of Maria Goeppert Mayer

Unnati Shekhar
July 2024

Max Planck and Albert Einstein are two of the most prominent names in the pantheon of German great scientists. But Maria Goeppert Mayer is a name that ought to be far more well-known. Mayer was a theoretical physicist who won a Nobel Prize for her innovative work, yet women’s contributions to science are sometimes overlooked in favour of their male peers. Nonetheless, her contributions to the nuclear shell model have had a significant influence on our comprehension of nuclear physics and atomic structure.

On June 28, 1906, Maria Goeppert Mayer was born in Kattowitz, which was then a part of Germany (now Katowice, Poland). Her father was a pediatrics professor, so she grew up surrounded by academics and had a strong regard for learning early on. Maria’s early affinity for science and maths led her to study physics at the University of Göttingen, where she was taught by Nobel laureate Max Born to finish her Ph.D.

Goeppert Mayer had several challenges because of her gender, even though she was clearly talented and passionate. It was quite uncommon for women to have academic positions in the sciences at that time. She relocated to the US after marrying American scientist Joseph Mayer, but despite her credentials, she had trouble getting hired as a salaried scholar. She spent several years teaching part-time or as a volunteer at a number of universities, including Columbia and Johns Hopkins.

The most important contributions to physics were made by Goeppert Mayer while she was an unpaid employee at the University of Chicago. She created the nuclear shell model in 1948, which clarifies why specific nucleon counts—the protons and neutrons that make up an atomic nucleus—lead to especially stable configurations. The idea of “magic numbers,” or particular numbers of nucleons that form whole shells within the nucleus and contribute to atomic stability, was first proposed by this model. Her study was a significant advancement in the field of nuclear physics and offered a clear explanation for the patterns in nuclear stability that had been discovered.

At first, Goeppert Mayer’s theory was viewed with suspicion. The notion that nucleons may form shells akin to atoms’ electron shells was groundbreaking and contradicted accepted nuclear models. Nonetheless, the scientific world quickly came to accept her predictions due to their accuracy. She shared the 1963 Nobel Prize in Physics with J. Hans D. Jensen, who had created a comparable model on his own. She became the second woman, after Marie Curie, to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics as a result of this acknowledgment.

Even with her impressive accomplishments, Maria Goeppert Mayer’s impact is not widely recognized by the general public. There are multiple factors that contribute to this lack of clarity. Initially, her contributions to theoretical physics are groundbreaking, but they are intricate and not as easily understandable to the general public as the work of other scientists from the same time period. Also, the gender prejudices during that era frequently led to her successes being minimized or credited to her male peers. In addition, Goeppert Mayer had a humble and understated demeanor, and she did not actively pursue attention, opting instead to allow her research to shine on its own. This modesty, though commendable, also added to her lack of recognition in a field where promoting oneself can boost one’s reputation.

Recently, there has been an increasing effort to acknowledge the impact of women in the field of science, with Maria Goeppert Mayer’s narrative being emphasized more as a testament to determination and intelligence despite facing challenges. Her legacy proves that genuine scientific brilliance is not limited by gender and that women scientists’ contributions should be acknowledged equally.By exploring and honoring the achievements of trailblazers such as Maria Goeppert Mayer, we not only pay tribute to their legacy but also motivate upcoming scientists, regardless of gender, to follow their dreams with determination and perseverance.

The life and work of Maria Goeppert Mayer serve as a reminder that the journey to scientific breakthroughs is frequently difficult, yet it is these obstacles that enhance the significance of the achievements. She serves as a source of motivation, not only for females in the science field, but also for individuals willing to challenge the limits of human understanding.

References

Femmes scientifiques #13 – Maria Goeppert-Mayer. (2016, May 20). L’Esprit Sorcier. https://lespritsorcier.org/blogs-membres/femmes-scientifiques-13-maria-goeppert-mayer/

Maria Goeppert Mayer – Argonne’s Nobel Laureate | Argonne National Laboratory. (n.d.). Www.anl.gov. https://www.anl.gov/phy/maria-goeppert-mayer-argonnes-nobel-laureate

The Feminism Effect: How The Art Movement Underscores The Power of Women 

Yashaswini Repaka 
August 2024

Art speaks volumes. It can encompass many aspects of our daily lives, and urge us to understand how powerful our emotions are through variation. Like the power of a simple brush stroke, feminism throughout modern works encompasses the power of representation, power dynamics, and the identity of the female community. Advocating for the empowerment of women and marginalized groups, feminist art brings together a vibrant community and unites women in girlhood. The feminist movement has significantly shaped contemporary art and continues to impact the art field today, empowering women in every aspect of life.

Emerging in the late 1960’s and 70’s, the feminist art movement was a response to a predominantly male-centric art world. It sought to address issues of gender equality and challenge traditional notions of art. As once stated by female artist Suzanne Lacy, “…the goal of Feminist Art was to “influence cultural attitudes and transform stereotypes.”^[1] 

Examples of more renowned female artists include Judy Chicago and Miriam Schapiro, spotlighted in the following:

Inspired by the women’s movement and rebelling against the male-dominated scene of their art world, many renowned paintings such as the Dinner Party [1979] which Chicago described as “a reinterpretation of The Last Supper from the point of view of women, who, throughout history, have prepared the meals and set the table” [4]. The Dinner Party celebrated the forgotten achievements of women throughout history. The main focus of the piece is a table with symbolic places for thirty-nine “guests of honor.” Each place setting describes each woman’s achievement. Incorporating elements of a social event with the status and appearance of a banquet, Chicago elevates her guests to the role of heroes, a traditionally male characteristic.

Another renowned piece by Schapiro, DollHouse [1972], which was intended to be a statement on the lives of women and the fact that “there is more to be discovered beyond the female stereotype and opportunities for her to choose to be sexual or glamorous” [5]. The Dollhouse describes how a woman is portrayed on the outside, but if someone got to know them a little better, or “opened the doors of the house”, they would understand her hobbies and personality. Especially in the 20th century, many societal norms looked down upon women making their own choices. So, just like the shutters in the house, it is demonstrated that women have the ability to close or open parts of their lives to other individuals.

Gender equality, racial justice, LGBTQ rights, and other social justice movements often intersect with feminist art. Many artists use their work to shed light on these issues, using their platforms to advocate for change and amplify marginalized voices. For example, American Gothic by Grant Wood reflects concerns about rural life and the rigidity of gender roles[6]. Harlem by Langston Hughes delves into the experience of African Americans in the early 20th century, addressing themes of race and class[2]. Brokeback Mountain directed by Ang Lee portrays a complex and poignant exploration of homosexuality, along with themes of love, identity, and societal expectations [3]. 

All in all, feminism has played a crucial role in reshaping the art world, challenging traditional norms, and amplifying the voices of women artists. From the feminist art movement of the 1960s and 1970s to the present day, the influence of feminism on art continues to be profound. The feminist art movement has inspired gender, identity, and power dynamics, ultimately enriching and diversifying the artistic landscape. Through these powerful works of art, women across the world feel empowered by the rich intricacies and powerful, emotional advocacy. All it took was a paint jar and a burning passion to represent. 

References: 

[1]Feminist art movement overview. The Art Story. (n.d.-a).  https://www.theartstory.org/movement/feminist-art/

[2]Hughes, L. (n.d.). Harlem by Langston Hughes. Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46548/harlem 

[3]IMDb.com. (2006, January 13). Brokeback Mountain. IMDb. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0388795/ 

[4]Judy Chicago Art, bio, ideas. The Art Story. (n.d.-b). https://www.theartstory.org/artist/chicago-judy/ 

[5]Miriam Schapiro Art, bio, ideas. The Art Story. (n.d.-c). https://www.theartstory.org/artist/schapiro-miriam/ 

[6]The painting. American Gothic House Center. (n.d.). https://americangothichouse.org/american-gothic

Female Genital Mutilation: The Silent Crisis

More than 230 million women alive today have undergone Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) ^[4]. Deep-rooted in gender inequalities and misogynistic ideologies, the practice is a significant violation of women’s right to health, privacy, and physical integrity. It involves any and all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons ^[4].  It has no health benefit for the women involved, but rather a cause for severe bleeding and problems urinating. These complications can later develop into cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths ^[4]. These procedures are practiced in 92 countries, 51 of which have laws specifically prohibiting FGM ^[2]. 

FMG is split into four different classifications. Type 1 is the partial or total removal of the clitoral glans ^[4]. Type 2 is the partial or total removal of the clitoral glans as well as the labia minora ^[4]. Type 3 can also be known as infibulation. It is the narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. This seal is created by cutting and repositioning the labia minora, or labia majora, sometimes through stitching ^[4]. This can be done with or without removal of the clitoral hood and glans. The last classification is Type 4, which includes all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes like pricking, piercing and incising the genital area ^[4]. A procedure falling into any of these classifications can lead to debilitating health complications.

There are a variety of medical issues that can arise from FGM, ranging from immediate to long-term problems. The more invasive the FGM procedure, the more severe the repercussions. Some instantaneous ramifications include hemorrhaging, wound healing problems, shock, fever and in some cases, even death ^[4]. Longer-lasting consequences include increased risk of childbirth difficulties, psychological issues, keloid, urinary problems, menstruation problems etc ^[4]. These procedures are typically completed by healthcare providers, who know the dangerous aftermath of these procedures. So why do many of them continue to practice these procedures?

FGM takes place among indigenous and/or diaspora communities in numerous countries globally, typically performed on girls ages 0 to 15 ^[1]. Often in these communities, there is a cultural belief that FGM will ensure a girl’s proper upbringing, preserve family honor, and/or make a girl suitable for marriage ^[1]. This ultimately is centered around controlling the girl’s sexuality, and protecting her virginity to promote purity and marital fidelity. Individuals who belong to these communities are frequently faced with pressures from other community members, which can lead to coercion, perpetuating the practice further.

FGM has received opposition globally, with many organizations trying to bring an end to the invasive procedure. UNICEF and UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) have been working together since 2008, leading the world’s largest program to end FGM. The UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme on the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation, works with community members to raise awareness of FGM’s harms as well as works with governments for the development of policy against FGM ^[3]. For girls at risk and/or affected by FGM, UNICEF provides them with medical and psychological care. Since the establishment of the program, 13 countries have passed national legislation banning FGM ^[3]. More than 6 million girls and women have received prevention, protection, and treatment services related to FGM and 45 million people have made public declarations to abandon the practice ^[3].

FGM is a grevious threat to many girls and young women and its eradication is vital. By speaking up, enacting strong legal measures and raising awareness in communities, a future without this risk can become a reality.  Bringing an end to FGM is not just the ending of a destructive practice; it is the restoration of human rights.

References

[1] FBI. (2024, January 16). Female genital mutilation (FGM). FBI. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/civil-rights/international-human-rights-unit/female-genital-mutilation 

[2] FGM: A global picture. Equality Now. (2023, April 4).     https://equalitynow.org/fgm-a-global-picture/#:~:text=Of%20the%2092%20countries%20where,such%20as%20the%20criminal%20or 

[3] UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme on the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation. UNICEF. (2024, March 8). https://www.unicef.org/protection/unfpa-unicef-joint-programme-eliminating-fgm 

[4] What is female genital mutilation?. UNICEF. (n.d.). https://www.unicef.org/protection/female-genital-mutilation