I’ve always considered circumcision to be an abomination – male, or most especially so-called female circumcision[1] – since it’s a non-elective procedure to no beneficial end, or at least no end that I would accept from the rationalisations given me, viz: “God told us to do it“.

Someone at last has taken a Freakonomics/evolutionary approach to considering male circumcision and come up with a reason that is plausible, if still no less an abomination…

Male circumcision is a weapon in the sperm wars – sex – 05 June 2008 – New Scientist

Circumcision and other forms of male genital mutilation have always been a puzzle. The ritual mutilations can leave the man vulnerable to infection and even death. So why do some societies insist on such a risky ritual for their men?

There may be an evolutionary explanation, according to Christopher Wilson, of Cornell University in New York, US. It could function to reduce a young man’s potential to father a child with an older man’s wife, he says.

Sperm competition theory predicts that males will evolve ways to ensure that their sperm, and not another male’s, fertilises a female’s eggs. Genital mutilation, in this view, is just another way to win the sperm war.

…article continues; it is both eye-opening and eye-watering.

At least it’s not quite as bad as Lions killing the cubs of other males…

—
[1] to truly comprehend the horror of the latter, read this book.