I use the word "men" in regards to DNA, save for those few who come forward and say, I want to be known as a woman. I did not mention sexual preference
I know you didn't. I did.
... and I do not consider that to detract in any way from one's gender.
Neither do I, however it does affect one's attitudes to women, which was the point. To put it more clearly, the men that women supposedly want as sexual partners cannot be the source of any pressure to look like runway models, since said men (subset of the whole, of course) are known to not want women to look like that. Ergo, the source of the pressure must be looked for elsewhere.
If any woman is trying to look like a runway model because she thinks it will improve her chances of getting male sexual partners, she is mistaken (in the majority of cases, anyway).
You have FGM backwards. Women who perpetuate FGM do so because it is their cultural norm, because they want their daughters to be accepted, to be able to marry and have a future. If they have not had this done to them, their chances of a full life are curtailed in their communities. Do you not know that in at least one culture, women who have not been snipped are considered to be unclean, and the community/family will not eat food she has prepared? This was a few years ago, when it made CNN. Not a hundred years ago.
By your logic, there would be some intact queen bee at the top of the village hierarchy. This is not how it is.
Yes, I know all that. And it does not follow that there would be one "queen bee" anyway. It's just as likely that any society would have a group of higher ranking females, which come to think of it is what we tend to see in practice.
My logic isn't backwards, as far as I can tell. You seem to be overlooking the fact that not only do women promote such practices because it is culturally acceptable, but
they actually believe it's a good thing to do. In other words, they aren't just going along with it reluctantly. They are actively involved in supporting the practice.