So we have at last some serious public concern about that horror which we now rightly call FGM – female genital mutilation. Too often it has gone under the name of "female circumcision", which makes it sound as innocuous as what's done to baby boys, but its actual purpose has been stated as "the control of women's libido".

The only even slightly consoling thing I've ever read on the subject was an item in this magazine about the things which can, in good circumstances, go some way towards repairing the outrageous damage, though how efficacious this restoration can be is not certain.

But how can it be stopped? It really should not be regarded as a women's issue only, though the bizarre aspect of it is that it's other women, "cutters", who actually do the deed. Maybe the men have to be brought into the argument to get the whole notion abandoned. (Here's one radical suggestion, not necessarily mine: that for every baby girl who suffers FGM, the law should demand the castration of a senior member of the family concerned. I realise that this is not very likely to gain public approval).

It may be, paradoxically, that only by involving men's desires can it be stopped; only if it is seen to make a girl less attractive to potential husbands will the mothers, ever anxious to marry off their daughters, refuse to let it happen. So men – over to you.

What do you think? Have you say below