Trading Rights for Rings: How Second-Order Beliefs about Marriageability Sustain Female Genital Cutting (FGC)

Female Genital Cutting (FGC) remains widespread in Egypt despite legal prohibition, international condemnation, and repeated religious statements rejecting the practice. Its persistence suggests that external regulations are insufficient when internalized social norms continue to govern behavior. In particular, many parents believe that FGC is necessary to protect their daughters’ future marriage prospects, acting not out of personal support for the practice but out of concern for what future husbands and their families are perceived to demand. Economic insecurity and low female labor force participation may further entrench these beliefs by increasing the centrality of marriage as a source of women’s social and economic security. This study examines how different normative framings and belief corrections affect support for FGC. We address two research questions: (1) which normative framing—medical, legal, or religious—is most effective in reducing support for FGC among men, and (2) Would correcting second-order beliefs about men’s marriage preferences influences parents’ attitudes and intended behaviors regarding the practice. By experimentally disentangling personal attitudes from beliefs about others’ expectations, the study provides causal evidence on how misperceptions about marriageability sustain harmful practices and identifies which normative interventions are most effective in weakening support for FGC.