Does section 290 of the California Civil Code require a person to register as a sex offender who engages in oral sex with a minor?

the crimebut because it was regarded as unnatural and perverted and was associated with homosexuals. To treat the distinction in section 290 as reflecting a contemporary judgment about the need to register those who engage in oral copulation with minors, but not those who engage in sexual intercourse, would be to indulge in the kind of highly fictitional justification we abjured in Brown v. Merlo, supra, 8 Cal.3d at page 866, footnote 7, 106 Cal.Rptr. 388, 506 P.2d 212.