RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In Sweden, the law treats female genital cutting (FGC) differently from male genital cutting (MGC). However, the comparability of the medical, ethical, and legal aspects of genital cutting of girls and boys are increasingly discussed by scholars, although little is known about how practicing communities view these aspects. This study aimed to explore attitudes towards comparison of genital cutting of girls and boys among Swedish Somalis, and to investigate factors associated with considering the two practices to be comparable. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional questionnaire with 648 Swedish Somali men and women from four Swedish cities, descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used for the analysis. RESULTS: Among the Swedish Somalis, 10% considered FGC and MGC to be comparable practices. A majority (98%) of the participants thought FGC could cause long-term health complications, but only 1% considered the physical health disadvantage of MGC would outweigh the physical health benefits. FGC was perceived to be a violation of children's rights by 60%, whereas this proportion for MGC was 3%. Individuals who had a dominant bridging social capital and those who expressed that performing FGC follows religion were more likely to think that FGC and MGC were comparable practices. CONCLUSIONS: The increased global attention and emphasis on the comparability of genital cutting of boys and girls was not reflected in this study among Swedish Somalis. Rather, attitudes reflected the common description of the two practices in global public health campaigns, portraying FGC as a harmful practice violating children's rights, while describing MGC as a public health measure. Social interactions and separation of FGC from religion could explain why FGC and MGC were not considered comparable.