I often wonder why some men strongly advocate for circumcision. I mean, if you are circumcised and happy about it, why would you go out of your way to advocate circumcising baby boys?

I understand why a circumcised man who is unhappy would advocate against circumcision. After all, he recognizes that a part of him was removed without his consent. If he is like me, he is unhappy that he has less than all the body parts he was born with. I think my sex organ is a pretty important part of my body. I would have preferred to keep it all. People that feel wronged often become advocates to stop what they perceive as an injustice. But, what is it with these other guys that preach incessantly about circumcision and advocate circumcising babies?

I came across this Aesop's Fable that seems to provide a reason. The parallel is uncanny, even though the fable is over 2500 years old. This fable may explain why some men so strongly advocate to circumcise the genitals of infant boys. There are several versions of the fable. Below are two.



The Fox Who had Lost his Tail

A Fox, caught in a trap, escaped with the loss of his brush. Henceforth feeling his life a burden from the shame and ridicule to which he was exposed, he schemed to bring all the other Foxes into a like condition with himself, that in the common loss he might the better conceal his own deprivation.

He assembled a good many Foxes, and publicly advised them to cut off their tails saying "they would not only look much better without them, but that they would get rid of the weight of the brush, which was a great inconvenience." One of them interrupting him said, "If you had not yourself lost your tail, my friend, you would not thus counsel us."

The Fox Without a Tail

It happened that a Fox caught its tail in a trap, and in struggling to release himself lost all of it but the stump. At first he was ashamed to show himself among his fellow foxes. But at last he determined to put a bolder face upon his misfortune, and summoned all the foxes to a general meeting to consider a proposal which he had to place before them.

When they had assembled together the Fox proposed that they should all do away with their tails. He pointed out how inconvenient a tail was when they were pursued by their enemies, the dogs; how much it was in the way when they desired to sit down and hold a friendly conversation with one another. He failed to see any advantage in carrying about such a useless encumbrance.

"That is all very well," said one of the older foxes; "but I do not think you would have recommended us to dispense with our chief ornament if you had not happened to lose it yourself."



Both versions of the fable above describe how someone who feels a loss advocates for others to also suffer the loss. Considering that the vast majority of men in the United States are circumcised, it is not a stretch to assume that those who strongly advocate circumcising others are themselves circumcised. By advocating circumcision, they, like the tailless fox, are trying to make everyone else just like them. I suppose that this is their way of validating their circumcision and denying that they lost anything by being circumcised.

With the current rate of routine infant circumcision falling in the United States, I am sure that these men are feeling particularly threatened. I hope that they soon realize the futility of their advocacy for routine infant circumcision and move on with their lives.