One couple's choice about whether or not to circumcise their baby boy made an appearance in The Atlantic this week, and while it's a truly balanced piece, there was one weird moment. Only one? Yes. While this is one of the most divisive parenting topics ever, Shawnee Barton demonstrated all the thoughtfulness that goes into making a lifelong (sometimes) decision for your brand new baby. Except for that one thing.
While the author does say most people decide whether or not to circumcise based on whether or not the father is circumcised, there was much (way too much) emphasis on one sexual act. Specifically, the blow job.
Barton explains that half of her social circle went circ based on the idea that their sons would be able to get more oral sex if they did. I'm wondering what's up with her social circle. After all, I have put zero thought into my own son's ability to "procure oral sex" as she puts it, and I think I would be hard pressed to run into anyone else who made that the deciding factor when choosing to cut or not to cut. Really? 50% of your BFFs were all, "Well, we thought about leaving him intact, but you know, the blowies."
Even though I'm not spending a lot of time thinking about my son's future sex life, I can tell you this: He should be able to procure any kind of sex on the merits of many other attributes that are actually visible at the time of trying to procure said sex. I don't see dudes whipping it out in public for inspection before getting some oral action. I'm not sure why that would ever, ever, ever be a consideration. Ever.