Monday, February 13, 2006


Some close friends of ours just had a beautiful baby girl, so Geri and I drove out to meet their newest edition over the weekend. During the drive out, Geri’s 5-year-old (the H-man) initiated a very interesting discussion on breasts. In the question-and-answer session that followed, Geri carefully explained to the H-man that girls have boobs so they can feed their babies. The H-man was noticeably perplexed upon learning this interesting factoid, so Geri asked him, “Why did you THINK girls have boobs?”

“I don’t know,” he wondered aloud, “For decoration?” It is clear that the H-man is wise beyond his years.

“Well…” I chimed in with a laugh, “That’s not entirely untrue.” Geri could not disagree as we both admired his profound insight. Hard to fight the logic of a 5-year-old when there’s an entire cosmetic enhancement market thriving on the concept of decorative topography.

Given his new understanding of the biological purpose for breasts, the H-Man went on to make several brilliant observations, including: “So girls with big boobs don’t have babies, because if they did then they wouldn’t have the big boobs. They need babies,” he said, sure of himself. Or attention, we mumbled to each other. And then, of course, came the question that was sure to follow.

"Why do boys have boobs?"

Walking him through the mysteries of gender differentiation from Asexuality to Zygote would not have been a good use of time, so we defaulted to your standard blow-off-the-child-with-too-many-questions-phrase and offered only: "I don't know, dude. That's a good question."

In related news, a team of researchers studying the possible causes of homosexuality have identified one of the first signs a male child might be gay, illustrated in this photograph. Results of the study are not expected to be final for another 14-18 years.

No comments: