Introduction
This chapter challenges prevailing narratives around genital cutting in Kenya by examining the complex interplay between male circumcision and female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C).
1 Boys’ circumcisions and girls’ excisions are intricately linked to the construction of boundaries around indigenous morality, identity, and sexuality, framed within broader aims of social and sexual reproduction. It examines long-standing and contentious debates about the safety of male circumcision in Kenya, which began with missionary doctors and government medical officers in the 1920s. It contrasts these early concerns with traditional circumcision practices undertaken during initiation ceremonies – practices now subject to unprecedented state oversight and intervention. Having followed these debates since my first visit to Kenya in 1991, later formalised through periods of ethnographic fieldwork, I argue that what appears to be a recent state intervention in the regulation of male circumcision has deep colonial roots. This history runs parallel to efforts to regulate FGM/C, reflecting broader attempts to bring traditional practices under state control.
Using the case study of Juliano Kanyonyo, a 15-year-old Kenyan boy who died in 2018 following a traditional circumcision, the chapter analyses an emerging national debate on the safety, violence, and cultural ambiguities surrounding male circumcision, particularly as it becomes increasingly medicalised. The death of Kanyonyo triggered not only public outcry but also led to legislative reform, culminating in the 2020 Health (Amendment) Act, which mandates state-regulated circumcision under some form of medical supervision. While the Act represents, for some, the triumph of the medicalisation of circumcision in Kenya – initially driven by colonial medical missionaries and, more recently, by global health initiatives like the Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision (VMMC) programme for HIV prevention – it also raises serious questions about the potential for this legislation to disempower those it purportedly seeks to protect.
This tragedy provoked the anger of grieving mothers, particularly from central Kenya (Kandara), who sought the political support of female Members of Parliament (MPs) such as Sabina Chege and Alice Wahome – both of whom are mothers – to advocate for stricter regulations. Their activism is situated within a broader historical context of colonial interventions in the intimate, generative processes of initiation. The 2020 Act, which redefined the state’s legitimate reach into what are still largely considered private and cultural matters, is the culmination of a century-long history that began in the mission schools and government borstals of colonial Kenya (Haron
et al. 2024; Ocobock 2017).
2 Colonial-era controversies over the banning of female genital cutting have been extensively studied (e.g. Adima 2020; Anderson 2018; Boulanger 2008; Hetherington 1998; Murray 1976; Pedersen 1991; Robertson 1996; Thomas 1996, 1998, 2003). However, critical scholarship on male circumcision during the colonial period remains surprisingly sparse (Haron et al. 2024; Ocobock 2017). British and American missionaries in colonial Kenya promoted circumcision performed by medically-trained hospital orderlies as the preferred alternative (Beck 1970; Iliffe 1998).The chapter explores how these developments intersect with global health policies, including recommendations from the WHO, which reflect a broader trend of state intervention in what were once private cultural matters. The analysis further highlights how legislative frameworks governing male circumcision are inextricably linked to Kenya’s historical engagement with FGM/C, particularly following the passage of the 2011 Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act (hereafter the anti-FGM Act). Together, these laws reveal tensions between current health standards, cultural practices, and global governance, contributing to new contentions about state control over initiation rituals. Additionally, it also calls attention to the rising challenge that human rights, such as the right to bodily integrity, pose to long-standing cultural practices in Kenya.
The chapter engages with recent scholarship that calls for ethical consistency in examining male circumcision and FGM/C (Androus 2013; Earp 2015; Earp and Johnsdotter 2021). By juxtaposing these practices, it argues for a more nuanced and ethically consistent framework that interrogates the double standards in the regulation and condemnation of these rites. These discussions are shaped by a critical decolonial lens, examining how colonial histories and global health institutions continue to influence Kenya’s approach to genital cutting practices.
In this context, the advocacy of mothers and female MPs for tighter regulation for male circumcision represents a pivotal moment in the broader conversation on bodily integrity, cultural identity, and state authority. By situating male circumcision within Kenya’s legislative history, this chapter foregrounds the interconnectedness of global health policies, local cultural traditions, and gender politics, foreshadowing a deeper engagement with the ethical dilemmas and power dynamics at play in Kenya’s dynamic regulatory landscape.