Agreed. When they have the chance

> Are you talking about autocratic regimes propped up by western powers for short-sighted self-serving geopolitical reasons?

While propped up regimes are often undemocratic, the anti-secularism (which is different from simply "religious aligned" - like most republicans, as an example) and other factors do not come from it.

Though I agree auspice is a bad word to describe it, as governments are indifferent rather than supportive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafia_family_murders

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41193899

https://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-abuse-and-ne...

If we want to stop female genital mutilation in Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somalia (where the women under discussion are migrating from), it seems to me – though I am certainly not an expert on the region – that the way forward is to stop flooding them with small arms, work on improving the local economy and its connections to the outside world, work on improving the political and economic power of local women, not turn a blind eye to ethnic violence, stop uncritically supporting the awful Saudi monarchy, work to empower respected people in the region to speak out against such practices, put pressure on local governments and courts to change their laws and enforcement, and so on.

Trying to impose cultural changes on people by external force is historically not a productive method.

Correct, but tolerating cultural practices incompatible with modern societies is causing local populations to feel frustrated (not to mention the imposition of guilt onto them).

Criticizing one practice does not mean other practices are acceptable. So yes, domestic violence is a cause of concern. But nice whataboutism.