Magazine Article	Articles Archive

"Give me $1000 and I won't break your shop windows." A protection-racket sells services no one would ever freely buy. But those who've long shelled out dough under the threat of something worse feel understandable resentment if upstart rivals get away without paying a cent.

Does that scenario explain why ancient Egyptians, Jews, Muslims -- along with some quarter of preindustrial cultures -- practice male circumcision? So contends a new study by Cornell researcher Christopher G. Wilson, who crunched data from some 185 societies around the world to tease out why a notable minority choose to cut off the foreskin -- or take knives to male genitalia in ways even more extreme.

View our poll archive

Grappling jism

Writing in Evolution and Human Behavior, Wilson found a strong correlation between male circumcision and polygyny -- men having multiple wives. The link, Wilson contends, is sperm competition. Circumcision removes somewhere between 20 to 51 percent of a penis's skin and sensitive mucus-membrane, and shaves some eight millimeters off an erection's length. A penis so deprived, Wilson surmises, will afford its owner less pleasure. But more than that, he argues, cut cocks come up slightly short at serving their main biological function -- fertilizing wombs.

One clue, Wilson contends, is that circumcision permanently exposes the glans, making for penises like those of our more monogamous primate cousins. A male of these mated-for-life species doesn't have to worry about shooting deeper than a rival into a promiscuous female, or using his penis to scoop out an earlier copulator's semen while thrusting to the orgasm that will deposit some of his own.

From the standpoint of reproductive efficiency, circumcision may impair all males (though Wilson's evidence is speculative). But in a polygynous society a cut cock hurts lower-status guys more. Where wives can be had in plural, patriarchs are likely to have large, well-established harems. That leaves less privileged or younger males without access to females. By insisting on male genital cutting, these patriarchs have a better chance of keeping sex-deprived up-starts from producing offspring.

How so? Wilson grants that circumcision impairs elite men, too. For instance, a cut cock's glans isn't as sensitive, possibly leading to longer lead times to orgasm (possibly pleasing men's partners in the process). But patriarchs will enjoy unfettered sexual access to their wives, making that an obstacle easy for them to, ahem, overcome. That's less the case for would-be adulterers hoping to squeeze in a furtive quickie.

Brotherhoodless

Yet even if circumcision follows from competition from among males, Wilson suggests, it also feeds male solidarity -- like the tattoos a motorcycle gang demands of new members, or the paddlings that fraternity brothers administer to pledges.

"Only truly committed individuals are prepared to pay the costs, which can be recouped through the increased willingness of group members to trust and cooperate with the signaler," Wilson argues. "Older men are certainly well placed to offer access to resources, status, and socially sanctioned reproductive opportunities in exchange for a signal of sexual compliance."

Even if the data is hazy on circumcision and penile inefficiency, there's no doubting the reduced reproductive "threat" of males who undergo more serious slicings and dicings. Subincision, customary among some Polynesians, splits the shaft to the urethra, leaving piss and semen to dribble out the penis's base. Among the Sidama, Beja, and Khoisan peoples in Africa, a warrior's initiation traditionally involved removing a testicle.

The sacrifice might be worth it. "Once young men gain wives of their own," says Wilson, "they will be favored to protect their paternity in turn by offering similar benefits to the next generation contingent upon the same costly signal."

And could thwarting the sexual potency of whippersnappers help keep the peace? Wilson's data also shows circumcision correlated with less extramarital hetero sex going on in general. Across cultures, around a quarter of all murders relate to sexual jealousy and doubts over paternity. Are men who are not killing each other over getting cuckolded prone to make love together instead? Besides abetting male solidarity, circumcision's connection to reduced extra-marital hetero-sex may leave excess male eroticism sloshing around that finds other, perhaps same-sex outlets.

Pubic spectacle

Wilson's thesis explains not only the relation between polygyny and circumcision, but the low status that attends the uncut in societies that make a big deal out of the procedure.

Among the Sub-Saharan Bantu, "any uncircumcised youth is a laughing stock" may even be considered a "source of evil," Wilson notes quoting the anthropological source literature. Among the Dogon of Mali, "In a ritual game, men 'rush upon the uncircumcised whom they rightly or wrongly suspect of having stolen the fruits of the sa tree.'" But once circumcised, Dogon youths can learn the name of their future wives and get married.

Wilson says his scenario can account for another feature of male circumcision. From Jerusalem to Jakarta, the ritual is almost always a public affair, with the circumciser chosen from outside the family. Since cutting risks impairment even while it buys status, there's always a temptation to cheat -- to cut corners by cutting less, or pretend that the foreskin tax has been paid when the goods in question are still in pocket.

For Wilson, circumcision isn't just a signal that you play by the book. A cut cock is kin to a peacock's plumes or a moose's antlers -- an ornament imposing an added burden on survival and reproduction. Overcoming the challenge makes success the more impressive. Long-enduring shopkeepers in mafia-ridden neighborhoods could relate.

Author Profile:  Bill Andriette
Bill Andriette is features editor of The Guide
Email:	theguide@guidemag.com