Talk:Female genital mutilation laws by country

Complexity
Hi, I just wanted to pop in and say thanks for creating this. Also want to repeat what I mentioned about complexity. The legal/illegal binary can be misleading. For example, in the US it was banned only for minors. This meant that adult women could be reinfibulated. But elsewhere (e.g. UK and Sweden), consent for FGM cannot be given. Also note that the federal law in the US was deemed unconstitutional in 2018. 

When you say that it's illegal in the table, you should check the situation of adult women. Does this mean in, say, Sudan that they cannot now be reinfibulated after childbirth even if they want to be? These are difficult issues. SarahSV (talk) 00:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi SarahSV, thank you for expressing this appreciation. My initial reaction to your removal of the original list in the main FGM contained some annoyance, as I wished you had consulted me before deleting it, but I knew you meant it well and you had several legitimate points that I agreed with, so I took a positive and constructive approach. It wasn't until after your response that I checked out your userpage and was overwhelmed and a little humbled by the experience and expertise you actually already had in this and related fields on Wikipedia, including raising the main FGM article to featured status and launching the Gender Gap Task Force (I myself am a member of the WikiProject Gendergap on Dutch Wikipedia, perhaps I should join your task force as well?). It would be an honour to work with you. :)
 * On point, I wasn't aware of this age issue, how does that work? Could you give me a link to a source that explains that? And should we explain that and similar issues in the 'status' column or rather in the 'notes' column? I suppose the 'status' column only allows for a very short description and the notes may contain a longer explanation, just like we did in the Marital rape laws by country article (I suppose I could rename the column 'Criminalised' rather than 'Status' following its example). And yes, I had heard about the U.S. federal law being declared unconstitutional some time ago, I was planning on reviewing that issue later. My primary concern now is filling in general information about each country first and adding specifics later. I can't do everything at once though, one step at a time. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Updating the maps
The map must show Serbia and Montenegro in dark green because they have a specific criminal provision that explicitly criminalizes FGM (sources are in the article). The US state of Indiana must also be dark green (source: ). 2A02:2F0F:B10E:6700:257A:F567:5E06:6F32 (talk) 12:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Color of Legality
The use of red to represent legality and green to represent illegality clearly contrasts with pages like “Abortion laws by country” or the gay rights law articles, which portray legality as green and blue, and so on. The point is, this is a double standard, as colors such as red and black, typically considered “negative” colors, are used to denote illegality most of the time, while here they denote legality, hinting that Wikipedia itself may swing towards an issue, something that would violate NPOV. Please update the color scheme to match those of similar legality maps/graphs/keys. ¢onnallΣ$ 06:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ConnallES (talk • contribs)