Zero tolerance
Up until about 1990, the main goal of international efforts against FGM/C was the reduction of health risks. Concerns about the human rights of girls and women increasingly replaced this earlier focus.
A strengthened human-rights approach, and moves towards eradication, led to the United Nations launching an annual International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation on 6 February 2012. The aim was to raise awareness of FGM/C and galvanise efforts to eradicate it by 2030. Zero tolerance sends an unequivocal message – that all types of FGM/C are unacceptable, and strategies which ban only the most harmful forms, but tolerate lesser forms, should not be supported.
This approach is not universally favoured. Some scholars and practitioners question its effectiveness and credibility, pointing to inconsistencies between FGM/C and elective cosmetic genital modification. Widespread condemnation of FGM/C is not mirrored by condemnation of cosmetic genital surgery. This inconsistency can be seen as Eurocentric, if not neocolonial.
Zero tolerance can be perceived as prescriptive, and is often directly linked to fundraising by NGOs and development agencies. A zero tolerance approach only recognises the elimination of all types of FGM/C as success, and does not regard harm reduction as a valid interim goal. Change often involves incremental steps, and takes time. But, with zero tolerance, communities are expected to move from practising FGM/C to total abandonment in one step. If a community abandons infibulation but continues with a lesser cut, this is not seen as a positive outcome under a zero-tolerance policy.