I don't think the age of an article invalidates it's findings by default, but of course I'd expect new insights with the passage of time. I'm doubting myself a

I don't think the age of an article invalidates it's findings by default, but of course I'd expect new insights with the passage of time. I'm doubting myself as ever in light of your comment, but the fact that there are studies, with any credibility at all, with a conclusion contrary to your earlier point namely that it is "definitively proven to greatly reduce the chance of HIV transmission from females to males" shows that that's pushing it at the very least. And even if you're right, that doesn't excuse genital mutilation.