Molloy, in her interview with ShelfAwareness, shares that she was very aware of the sensitivities that accompany any exploration of Melching’s story and FGC. She didn’t want to portray Melching as some “Great White Hope” because that’s not what she was—Melching did not come to Africa and single-handedly change anything. Rather, it was the collaboration, rooted in understanding, between Melching and the Senegalese people that made Tostan, and the eventual anti-FGC movement, work.
Furthermore, Molloy was cognizant of Western feelings on FGC—she admits that in the past, she felt anger and disgust towards anyone involved in it. But she also realized that in order to tell the story of the Senegalese women (some cutters turned activists), she had to look past Western preconceptions. Molloy relates that FGC was not borne from men’s desires to curb women’s sexual promiscuity. Rather, “The truth is that the tradition is one that is perpetuated by women themselves, and women do it in order to create a better future for their daughters. Because choosing to not cut one's daughter would be setting her up for a future of social isolation, it is in many way's a mother's greatest act of love. So regardless of the feelings we might bring to this issue, sensitivity to this reality must be part of any discussion about FGC, and certainly in any efforts to bring an end to the practice.”