Cracked guy Tim Cameron produced a song called "Scientology is...nice!" The video for the song is a picture montage, based partly on the photoshop contributions of Cracked forum members. I am a member, and one of my contributions, which I like to call cock-shadow, made it onto the video. It was also used to produce the banner under the song title. You can find a bunch of gay scientology photoshops here.
Here is to hoping that Tim and Cracked don't face legal action.
Here is the youtube video:
*Update
Here is a Yakety sax compilation of all the photoshop submissions for the video, most of which did not get picked, for lack of space. I am 'Glenn' in the video.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
9 Fatwa We Can Get Behind, for Cracked.com
It is kind of weird that my first post on SBF is about something that I wrote for another website. As I used to say during my time working in a leper colony, tough titties. I wrote an article for Cracked.com called 9 Islamic Fatwa We Can Get Behind.
The premise behind the article is that for all the negative attention Islam receives in the Western media, there are some interesting things going on there. It is Cracked.com, of course, so I tried to make in humorous. In my mind though, the joke is really about what American society would consider cool as opposed to making fun of Muslims.
For your amusement, here is an item that was cut out of the final article, for some reason:
THOU SHOULD KNOWEST Masturbation is not preferred
http://www.islamtoday.net/english/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=628&main_cat_id=33
The fatwa
Sheikh Salman al-Oadah says, “(…) [M]asturbation is something that is not preferred. In case of a dire need, it becomes lawful, but resorting to it excessively can result in serious problems.” Tell us about it. Most people consider chaffing to be at most a minor irritant, but we have to side with the Sheikh on this one.
Why it should apply to us
Masturbation is more problematic than one might think as working up the courage to talk to girls requires a powerful motivator: horniness. According to the guys back in the lab, lack of horniness is the number one cause of abstinence. We will concede that watching porn and masturbating all day might seem like a good idea or at least a seductive one, but it won’t help you get laid, especially if all you do is stay at home organizing your lubricant bottles by flavor and viscosity.
More generally, it cuts down your productivity, which could be costing you success and money, two things that are strongly correlated with access to mommy parts. Thus, let us prevent legions of innocents from degenerating into pasty-skinned perverts by adopting the fatwa. Masturbation should be a last resort, and not the impromptu vacation resort that will cost you your job if you ever get caught.
The premise behind the article is that for all the negative attention Islam receives in the Western media, there are some interesting things going on there. It is Cracked.com, of course, so I tried to make in humorous. In my mind though, the joke is really about what American society would consider cool as opposed to making fun of Muslims.
For your amusement, here is an item that was cut out of the final article, for some reason:
THOU SHOULD KNOWEST Masturbation is not preferred
http://www.islamtoday.net/english/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=628&main_cat_id=33
The fatwa
Sheikh Salman al-Oadah says, “(…) [M]asturbation is something that is not preferred. In case of a dire need, it becomes lawful, but resorting to it excessively can result in serious problems.” Tell us about it. Most people consider chaffing to be at most a minor irritant, but we have to side with the Sheikh on this one.
Why it should apply to us
Masturbation is more problematic than one might think as working up the courage to talk to girls requires a powerful motivator: horniness. According to the guys back in the lab, lack of horniness is the number one cause of abstinence. We will concede that watching porn and masturbating all day might seem like a good idea or at least a seductive one, but it won’t help you get laid, especially if all you do is stay at home organizing your lubricant bottles by flavor and viscosity.
More generally, it cuts down your productivity, which could be costing you success and money, two things that are strongly correlated with access to mommy parts. Thus, let us prevent legions of innocents from degenerating into pasty-skinned perverts by adopting the fatwa. Masturbation should be a last resort, and not the impromptu vacation resort that will cost you your job if you ever get caught.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Rejected Bumper Stickers, by Glenn
This blog is quickly becoming the place where my poor attempts at humour come to die. Cracked had another photoshop contest. This week, the premise was "Regrettable Bumper Stickers", so bumper stickers that seemed like a good idea at some point, but later turned out to be bad.
Regrettable and self-incriminating:
Irony people...
I'm sorry:
Regrettable and self-incriminating:
Irony people...
I'm sorry:
Friday, February 15, 2008
Children's Books Gone Bad, Glenn's Photoshop Entries
The comedy website Cracked.com has started doing a weekly photoshop contest. The people on the Cracked forums are pretty creative, so the contests always yield hilarious entries. The latest contest theme was "inappropriate children's books". I made several submissions, and a couple got selected as runners-up (i.e. no money for me). Those entries belong to Cracked now.
Here are the book covers submitted by me that did not make the cut, for lack of quality or offensiveness reasons (be warned). If you want to see them full-sized, along with the other entries, click here.
Friday, February 8, 2008
8 No-Fuss Computer Pranks at the Office
Do your friends and/or colleagues at work annoy you sometimes? Ever wish that you could annoy them back and maybe amuse yourself at the same time? You are in luck.
In this article, I will give you a few ideas for pranks, and explain how to pull them off. Most of these can be accomplished in under a few minutes, and they work best if the person that you are pranking isn't very handy with computers (obviously).
Enjoy.
*Disclaimer* These steps are for Windows XP. It should work with other Windows versions but it might change the wording slightly. I am too lazy to verify each version.
Description: You create a folder with an embarrassing name on the desktop and the user is unable to delete the folder. You'll understand once I explain it to you. When you are done, you sit back and watch your co-worker sweat it out.
Step by Step (oo, baby!):
Prank 2: Hidding Desktop Icons
Step by Step (Gonna get to you, gurl!):
Step by Step (we can have lots of fun):
Prank 4 & 5: Mouse trouble!
Step by Step (There's so much we can do):
Prank 6: That's not my homepage!!
Step by Step (It's just you and me):
Prank 7: Hello? Hello? Can you hear me now?
Prank 8: Mah keyboard is messed up!
In this article, I will give you a few ideas for pranks, and explain how to pull them off. Most of these can be accomplished in under a few minutes, and they work best if the person that you are pranking isn't very handy with computers (obviously).
Enjoy.
*Disclaimer* These steps are for Windows XP. It should work with other Windows versions but it might change the wording slightly. I am too lazy to verify each version.
Prank 1: The Undeletable Embarrassing Folder
Description: You create a folder with an embarrassing name on the desktop and the user is unable to delete the folder. You'll understand once I explain it to you. When you are done, you sit back and watch your co-worker sweat it out.
1. Minimize all currently opened applications so that you can only see the user's desktop.
2. Create a new folder and name it something embarassing. Ex: Gay Porn, My Nude Photos, Granny Sex etc Place it somewhere on the desktop where it stands out (i.e. so that it is not surrounded by other folders).
3. Move the cursor to the bottom right of the screen so that it is no longer visible.
4. Press the "Prnt Scrn" button on the keyboard to take a screenshot
5. Click Start - Run - Type "mspaint" and press enter.
6. Press Ctrl+V to paste the screenshot into MS Paint.
7. Save the file anywhere but on the desktop.
8. Click on File - Set As Background (Centered). Close MSPaint
Prank 2: Hidding Desktop Icons
Description: This prank simply hides all desktop icons. It is very easy to do and works best on those that are not computer savvy.
Step by Step (Gonna get to you, gurl!):
1. Right click on the desktop where there isn't an icon.
2. Expand the Arrange Icons By menu
3. Remove the checkmark from Show Desktop Icons. To bring them back you can simply follow the same steps as above but add the checkmark on Show Desktop Icons instead of removing it.
Prank 3: Scrolling text screensaver.
Description: Windows has a screensaver that can scroll text across the screen. You can use this text for embarassing messages while the person is away from their computer for lunch etc. This one is especially good because they will be mortified by the fact they were unable to do anything about it for such a long time.
Step by Step (we can have lots of fun):
1. Right click on the desktop, click on properties.
2. Click the Screensaver tab, click the screensaver dropdown menu and select Marquee.
3. Click on settings. Here you can change the text, background color, speed, font size/color etc.
4. Set the screensaver Wait: time to 10 minutes at least. The reason for this is if you put it to less than 10 minutes the person might just be idled at their computer for 10 minutes and see the screensaver. The point is for others to read it after he or she has left.
Prank 4 & 5: Mouse trouble!
Description: A couple of things you can do to make people think their mouse no longer works, depending on the type of mouse involved.
A) Optical mouse (the one with the red light under it)
A) Optical mouse (the one with the red light under it)
Step by Step (There's so much we can do):
1. Place a piece of tape over the red light located under the mouse. The mouse will no longer work until he removes the tape. Sticky/Post-it notes work as well just make sure they are not wider than the mouse.
B) Ball Mouse?!
1. You can remove the ball from the mouse by twisting off the bottom of the mouse. This does not work as well because the prankee may detect the change in weight. Luckily, some people are stupid enough to fall for this. Good luck.
Prank 6: That's not my homepage!!
Description: Set the default Internet Explorer homepage to an embarassing website.
Step by Step (It's just you and me):
1. Open up Internet Explorer (close the 50 thousand pop-ups and spyware windows).
2. Click on Tools - Internet Options.
3. In the Homepage window type in whichever webpage you want to appear when they open IE. So http://www.barbie.com/, goatse, http://www.rotten.com/ etc.
4. Close IE
Prank 7: Hello? Hello? Can you hear me now?
*note* This may or may not work depending on the phone setups. If you work for a large enough company, you might have digital phonelines that involve communication with a central hub. In this is the case, then the prank will work. I basically found this out accidently when pulling this prank on a friend once. Sorry Mike! I suggest doing this one on people you don't like.
Description: Unplug someone's phone causing it to not work and need to be reconfigured, which can be a lengthy process in large companies. You should really hate the person that you do this to.
Step by Step (Huh):
1. Unplug the person's phone from the phone jack usually located on the floor. It could be a small box or plugged into your beautiful cubicle wall.
1. Unplug the person's phone from the phone jack usually located on the floor. It could be a small box or plugged into your beautiful cubicle wall.
2. Apparently, if the phone is unplugged long enough it will fail an echo test that is performedon phones now and then to see if they are still there. If the phone is not connected, it will get removed from the system. To fix the problem, you co-worker would have to call whoever is in charge of phones and have them re-enable it. Depending on the size of the business, this could take a few hours or 8 years!
Prank 8: Mah keyboard is messed up!
Description: Switching around certain keys on the keyboard. This works well on people that look at their keyboard while typing. For everyone else, the trick may never be noticed.
Step by Step:
1. Get a prying type object. A pen will do.
1. Get a prying type object. A pen will do.
2. I suggest switching the following keys I-O , N-M and perhaps even E-R. In my experience most people do not realize right away that the keys are switched when doing those keys.
3. Put the prying object under a key on the keyboard and pop it out. Don't worry they are meant to be able to be removed for cleaning purposes.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Treatise On the Character of Good Boobies, by Glenn
Some excerpts from my postings on a thread related to boobs on the Cracked forums. Me and these other guys were trying, quite unsuccessfully, to sound like Victorian/WWI era intellectuals while debating the merits of 'good' breasts.
*Update: the thread was deleted by mods at Cracked for some reason. That is unfortunate, because I managed to work in the words 'abstruse' and 'obstruse' into a comeback in response to a moderator that implied we (or I) was stupid. I invited said mod to consider whether we were being 'abstruse' in our conversation (making him/her stupid) or whether we were being 'obstruse' (making us stupid). The joke being that I used a word (obstruse) that is so obscure that it is only found in the unabridged version of the websters dictionary. The meta-joke being on me, in that only I would find such a thing funny; everyone else would consider me a pretentious ass.
I am including a few select posts, and leaving out many others, including some good ones (they are good to me at least).
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
I personally am all for boobs. They're soft, they're fun to play with, they feed babies. But I want to know what you all think. I expect this to be nothing but sophisticated (with pipes and leather furniture, etc...). Now, your thoughts please.
*puffs on pipe*
...
The sexual appeal of other parts of the body (be them of a woman or a gay surfer holding a control for a Craftmatic adjustable bed) is not what is in question here. The topic is "Boobs: The Quest for Truth," not "Boobs and Other Body Features: A Compare and Contrast."
Pip pip!
Glenn, PhD, ODB
All this presupposes that boobs have an absolute value that is independent of [their] standing in relation to other body parts. Even if we take this to be axiomatic, and I think that we must, is it not true that a pair of boobs is best, at least subjectively, when lubricated and pressed around your cock and subsequently festooned with your seminal discharge? Thus, the intrinsic value of boobs has been shown to be relative. Also, women's beach volleyball.
H.P. Loveboat, esquire
Glenn, I think it most scientific so assume that we are dealing with a hotness ratio of a woman's boobs to the rest of her body. This way her other features don't matter, but rather the relative hotness her boobs ad as compared to the rest of her. This way, if we have a smoking hot girl (the type with long silky hair, and a round smooth ass, and a kind of raspy sexy voice) but her boobs are small and it makes you feel that (though she is perfectly hot) she could be hotter with boobs, you would then be in the pro-boob camp. This same criteria would apply for a hideous girl (with a turtle shaped body, flabby arms, and a bowl cut) who has no boobs. If you find that you would be slightly less repulsed if she had larger boobs, then you would still fall with in the pro-boob camp.
The question was never about if a girl could be hot without boobs. The question is whether or not boobs contribute to the overall hotness of an individual.
*shifts in his leather chair causing it to squeak obnoxiously*
Glenn, PhD, ODB
Ah, but dear Loveboat, *puff, puff*, we should be careful not to equate size with beauty, nor plastic with au naturel. Verily, more than a mouthful may be a waste, if that mouthful is properly proportioned, of sound shape, and of acceptable skin-to-nipple ratio. And plastic, ah, plastic be the root of many unsightly stretch marks. Surely, we the boob boosters can all agree that large natural breasts are god's greatest gift to mankind. To walk a mile on those in your bare feet is like a hike through god's own garden.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
This is true! Where then can we draw the line? At what point can we look at a girl and think, "I could never fuck her, her boobs are too big"? If their big and overly soft than we risk being swallowed up in them, and if their big and perking we risk being bounced into the upper atmosphere as a reaction to one of our enthusiastic pelvic thrusts. I agree wholeheartedly that a girl with boobs that are not large, but are well shaped is more attractive than a girl will breasts that are large but curve in unnatural ways. But even this is to admit some superiority to having "good" boobs. The question becomes, what determines "good" in regards to these much celebrated swollen glands. Should it be left up to the individual, or can an objective standard be found?
*takes a long drag on his pipe*
*sustains severe mouth burns*
Glenn, PhD, ODB
Yes. *puff, puff* Quite. *puff, longer puff, still longer puff, coughing fit*
This brings us to the age old question that has confounded utilitarians for centuries, doesn't it? What constitutes 'good' or the greatest good, especially for society? Are boobs better when they are attached to a woman who willingly shows them off (i.e. by wearing a low cut top; being a stripper; doing nude scenes in legitimate movies; receiving baby batter in amateur porn)? Or are they most good when they are seen only by a lucky few, who then procreate, hopefully multiplying the beautiful boobs genes? Would walking around topless all the time somehow degrade the sacred feminine? Somehow diminish the power of the sacred erection? Would a multitude of beautiful boobs drag down productivity, and encourage invasion by peoples without such good boob fortune? I have raised a number of questions for which I have no answers.
As to the question of evaluating the boobs themselves, I would appeal to no higher authority than that of democracy, the principle that representative government has appropriated and deformed, like so many plastic surgeons: Ratemyrack.com
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate:
"Feature" Sparkler Chick (musings from perv's row)
Ouch.
Doesn't that hurt?
I mean the sparklers-
Inserted in your nipple,
For my amusement.
From perv's row,
I see them glow, and wonder--
Shouldn't breast-powered lightning be followed by thunder?
Or at least the clap of your massive sweater cows.
What gives?
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
The questions of utilitarian boobery are useless if we cannot even agree on what a good boob is. And that raises even further questions. Can you have a good boob (singular) or are boobs codependent? I personally would be turned off by a girl with just one perky d-cup. In fact, I would be turned off by a girl with a c-cup on one side and a b-cup on the other. such a discrepancy in boob size would be unattractive.
I find this all very terrifying, for if I can not measure boobs qualitatively, I fear I cannot prove that I actually like them. Are men that arbitrary that they can find pleasure in two sacks of flesh for no other reason than the fact that we don't have them? What a horrible thought.
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate
The unbalanced boob problem has plagued by mind for decades. Symmetry, indeed, has its place in this debate. However, what is to be done with the three-boobed woman in Total Recall? The exceptional proves the rule, I once overheard some transient prostitute say in passing, and so it should be here.
As to the question of quality, let us define good boobatude in the most quantitative way possible: by the volume of blood it redirects to the penis of the viewer. Let's start testing now, shall we. Ladies, let's see them.
Gentlemen, to science!
H.P. Loveboat
I just realized that this topic is so damn appropriate to be occurring on Fat Tuesday. I didn't actually intend that.
So, come on ladies. Let's just pretend we just gave you a whole bunch of beads and start showing us those ta-tas...uh...for science, like Glenn said.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
Ah yes, Colsen has a point ole chaps. A beautiful tit can be found to set one's teeth on edge upon entry into the mouth. A bitter boob is hardly a boob at all, in my book.
The right honourable Gizzardgulpe
Continueing along the tangent involving asymmetry in the boobular fronts: I actually have never seen such asymmetry in size, though I have concerning nipple placement (ie: Tila Nguyen). Is it safe for one to assume that asymmetry in nipple placement that causes arousal is perhaps significant if the situation arose that asymmetrical breastical size were involved? Would I be an exception if I enjoyed asymmetry? Or can asymmetry be part of the collective and seemingly subjective preference concerning delightful ta-tas?
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate
Insofar as the asymmetry does not interfere with the higher purposes to which boobs may be put-- I speak here of book-ending cocks and faces, among other earthly delights-- it should not be held against a well-formed pair, though the pair, in sooth, should be held against as many things as possible.
As for taste, salty should be preferred, in my considered opinion, for it is natural and could replace vital electrolytes that are inevitably lost during coitus. That said, various methods of garnishing boobatas, including whipped cream and 'crystal' are all acceptable, to me at least.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
"Salty is the sign that your woman is sweating, which means she is engaged in your activities." --T. S. Eliot
But what of the constitution of the nipples themselves? I speak not of the firmness of the boob as a whole, but of the perkiness of their pink circular summits. We have all, I'm sure, experienced a girl suffering from Droopy Egg Syndrome, in which the nipple skin is well formed but is not reinforced by whatever wonderful substance lay inside the boob. The result of DES is a hollow, sagging nipple crowning an otherwise perfect tit.
Glenn, partly in response to a sarcastic remark
Actually, if you are going to tell your special lady that you love her tits and be convincing about it, it is important, nay vital, that you be armed with the powerful analytical tools that we are developing right here in this very thread.
Back to business. Nipples, as you all know, are vitally important. They should constitute well under 50% of the total surface of the boobs. We have all seen the dreaded nipple-boobs. In a pinch, they will do, but pepperoni tits are disqualified from any conversation about the 'best' boobs. Droopage is an unfortunate consequence of the passage of time, to be lamented.
Let me emphasize that we speak of what makes great boobs great, lest our analysis be perceived as harsh by some. ALL boobs are beautiful, and I, for one, would be happy to offer an appraisal, free of charge, regardless of size, shape, droopage, or rank odor.
Glenn, in response to the claim that beauty is in the eye of the boob holder:
Not on your life man! I, for one, have been working on a formal description that I find quite capital!
At first, I considered a number of possible mathematical descriptions of the perfect breast. Among others, I tried a convolution of the Gaussian and exponential probability distributions. As you can see, the results were less than perfect:
Of course, when you are holding a hammer everything looks like a nail, so I was blinded to an obvious truth: a simple parabola would do the trick nicely:
For those of you who will not be checking out the original thread, here is a representative sample of the posts that I left out:
Ryan, Poet Laureate and PWOT moderator
Boobs boobs boobs boobs boobs,
Boobs boobs boobs boobs boobs--boobs boobs!
Mmmpf mmpf mmmmmmmpf mmpf mpf.
*Update: the thread was deleted by mods at Cracked for some reason. That is unfortunate, because I managed to work in the words 'abstruse' and 'obstruse' into a comeback in response to a moderator that implied we (or I) was stupid. I invited said mod to consider whether we were being 'abstruse' in our conversation (making him/her stupid) or whether we were being 'obstruse' (making us stupid). The joke being that I used a word (obstruse) that is so obscure that it is only found in the unabridged version of the websters dictionary. The meta-joke being on me, in that only I would find such a thing funny; everyone else would consider me a pretentious ass.
I am including a few select posts, and leaving out many others, including some good ones (they are good to me at least).
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
I personally am all for boobs. They're soft, they're fun to play with, they feed babies. But I want to know what you all think. I expect this to be nothing but sophisticated (with pipes and leather furniture, etc...). Now, your thoughts please.
*puffs on pipe*
...
The sexual appeal of other parts of the body (be them of a woman or a gay surfer holding a control for a Craftmatic adjustable bed) is not what is in question here. The topic is "Boobs: The Quest for Truth," not "Boobs and Other Body Features: A Compare and Contrast."
Pip pip!
Glenn, PhD, ODB
All this presupposes that boobs have an absolute value that is independent of [their] standing in relation to other body parts. Even if we take this to be axiomatic, and I think that we must, is it not true that a pair of boobs is best, at least subjectively, when lubricated and pressed around your cock and subsequently festooned with your seminal discharge? Thus, the intrinsic value of boobs has been shown to be relative. Also, women's beach volleyball.
H.P. Loveboat, esquire
Glenn, I think it most scientific so assume that we are dealing with a hotness ratio of a woman's boobs to the rest of her body. This way her other features don't matter, but rather the relative hotness her boobs ad as compared to the rest of her. This way, if we have a smoking hot girl (the type with long silky hair, and a round smooth ass, and a kind of raspy sexy voice) but her boobs are small and it makes you feel that (though she is perfectly hot) she could be hotter with boobs, you would then be in the pro-boob camp. This same criteria would apply for a hideous girl (with a turtle shaped body, flabby arms, and a bowl cut) who has no boobs. If you find that you would be slightly less repulsed if she had larger boobs, then you would still fall with in the pro-boob camp.
The question was never about if a girl could be hot without boobs. The question is whether or not boobs contribute to the overall hotness of an individual.
*shifts in his leather chair causing it to squeak obnoxiously*
Glenn, PhD, ODB
Ah, but dear Loveboat, *puff, puff*, we should be careful not to equate size with beauty, nor plastic with au naturel. Verily, more than a mouthful may be a waste, if that mouthful is properly proportioned, of sound shape, and of acceptable skin-to-nipple ratio. And plastic, ah, plastic be the root of many unsightly stretch marks. Surely, we the boob boosters can all agree that large natural breasts are god's greatest gift to mankind. To walk a mile on those in your bare feet is like a hike through god's own garden.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
This is true! Where then can we draw the line? At what point can we look at a girl and think, "I could never fuck her, her boobs are too big"? If their big and overly soft than we risk being swallowed up in them, and if their big and perking we risk being bounced into the upper atmosphere as a reaction to one of our enthusiastic pelvic thrusts. I agree wholeheartedly that a girl with boobs that are not large, but are well shaped is more attractive than a girl will breasts that are large but curve in unnatural ways. But even this is to admit some superiority to having "good" boobs. The question becomes, what determines "good" in regards to these much celebrated swollen glands. Should it be left up to the individual, or can an objective standard be found?
*takes a long drag on his pipe*
*sustains severe mouth burns*
Glenn, PhD, ODB
Yes. *puff, puff* Quite. *puff, longer puff, still longer puff, coughing fit*
This brings us to the age old question that has confounded utilitarians for centuries, doesn't it? What constitutes 'good' or the greatest good, especially for society? Are boobs better when they are attached to a woman who willingly shows them off (i.e. by wearing a low cut top; being a stripper; doing nude scenes in legitimate movies; receiving baby batter in amateur porn)? Or are they most good when they are seen only by a lucky few, who then procreate, hopefully multiplying the beautiful boobs genes? Would walking around topless all the time somehow degrade the sacred feminine? Somehow diminish the power of the sacred erection? Would a multitude of beautiful boobs drag down productivity, and encourage invasion by peoples without such good boob fortune? I have raised a number of questions for which I have no answers.
As to the question of evaluating the boobs themselves, I would appeal to no higher authority than that of democracy, the principle that representative government has appropriated and deformed, like so many plastic surgeons: Ratemyrack.com
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate:
"Feature" Sparkler Chick (musings from perv's row)
Ouch.
Doesn't that hurt?
I mean the sparklers-
Inserted in your nipple,
For my amusement.
From perv's row,
I see them glow, and wonder--
Shouldn't breast-powered lightning be followed by thunder?
Or at least the clap of your massive sweater cows.
What gives?
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
The questions of utilitarian boobery are useless if we cannot even agree on what a good boob is. And that raises even further questions. Can you have a good boob (singular) or are boobs codependent? I personally would be turned off by a girl with just one perky d-cup. In fact, I would be turned off by a girl with a c-cup on one side and a b-cup on the other. such a discrepancy in boob size would be unattractive.
I find this all very terrifying, for if I can not measure boobs qualitatively, I fear I cannot prove that I actually like them. Are men that arbitrary that they can find pleasure in two sacks of flesh for no other reason than the fact that we don't have them? What a horrible thought.
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate
The unbalanced boob problem has plagued by mind for decades. Symmetry, indeed, has its place in this debate. However, what is to be done with the three-boobed woman in Total Recall? The exceptional proves the rule, I once overheard some transient prostitute say in passing, and so it should be here.
As to the question of quality, let us define good boobatude in the most quantitative way possible: by the volume of blood it redirects to the penis of the viewer. Let's start testing now, shall we. Ladies, let's see them.
Gentlemen, to science!
H.P. Loveboat
I just realized that this topic is so damn appropriate to be occurring on Fat Tuesday. I didn't actually intend that.
So, come on ladies. Let's just pretend we just gave you a whole bunch of beads and start showing us those ta-tas...uh...for science, like Glenn said.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
Ah yes, Colsen has a point ole chaps. A beautiful tit can be found to set one's teeth on edge upon entry into the mouth. A bitter boob is hardly a boob at all, in my book.
The right honourable Gizzardgulpe
Continueing along the tangent involving asymmetry in the boobular fronts: I actually have never seen such asymmetry in size, though I have concerning nipple placement (ie: Tila Nguyen). Is it safe for one to assume that asymmetry in nipple placement that causes arousal is perhaps significant if the situation arose that asymmetrical breastical size were involved? Would I be an exception if I enjoyed asymmetry? Or can asymmetry be part of the collective and seemingly subjective preference concerning delightful ta-tas?
Glenn, PhD, ODB, Poet Laureate
Insofar as the asymmetry does not interfere with the higher purposes to which boobs may be put-- I speak here of book-ending cocks and faces, among other earthly delights-- it should not be held against a well-formed pair, though the pair, in sooth, should be held against as many things as possible.
As for taste, salty should be preferred, in my considered opinion, for it is natural and could replace vital electrolytes that are inevitably lost during coitus. That said, various methods of garnishing boobatas, including whipped cream and 'crystal' are all acceptable, to me at least.
H.P. Loveboat, Esquire
"Salty is the sign that your woman is sweating, which means she is engaged in your activities." --T. S. Eliot
But what of the constitution of the nipples themselves? I speak not of the firmness of the boob as a whole, but of the perkiness of their pink circular summits. We have all, I'm sure, experienced a girl suffering from Droopy Egg Syndrome, in which the nipple skin is well formed but is not reinforced by whatever wonderful substance lay inside the boob. The result of DES is a hollow, sagging nipple crowning an otherwise perfect tit.
Glenn, partly in response to a sarcastic remark
Actually, if you are going to tell your special lady that you love her tits and be convincing about it, it is important, nay vital, that you be armed with the powerful analytical tools that we are developing right here in this very thread.
Back to business. Nipples, as you all know, are vitally important. They should constitute well under 50% of the total surface of the boobs. We have all seen the dreaded nipple-boobs. In a pinch, they will do, but pepperoni tits are disqualified from any conversation about the 'best' boobs. Droopage is an unfortunate consequence of the passage of time, to be lamented.
Let me emphasize that we speak of what makes great boobs great, lest our analysis be perceived as harsh by some. ALL boobs are beautiful, and I, for one, would be happy to offer an appraisal, free of charge, regardless of size, shape, droopage, or rank odor.
Glenn, in response to the claim that beauty is in the eye of the boob holder:
Not on your life man! I, for one, have been working on a formal description that I find quite capital!
At first, I considered a number of possible mathematical descriptions of the perfect breast. Among others, I tried a convolution of the Gaussian and exponential probability distributions. As you can see, the results were less than perfect:
Of course, when you are holding a hammer everything looks like a nail, so I was blinded to an obvious truth: a simple parabola would do the trick nicely:
For those of you who will not be checking out the original thread, here is a representative sample of the posts that I left out:
Ryan, Poet Laureate and PWOT moderator
Boobs boobs boobs boobs boobs,
Boobs boobs boobs boobs boobs--boobs boobs!
Mmmpf mmpf mmmmmmmpf mmpf mpf.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Kimmel vs Damon
As somebody that doesn't watch late night TV anymore, I was surprised and amused to find out about the feud that has been going on between Matt Damon and Jimmy Kimmel. This just improves my opinion of Damon, which was already pretty high to begin with. I have taken the trouble of documenting this developing story. Enjoy.
Guillermo, from Kimmel's show, blows off Matt Damon:
Guillermo, from Kimmel's show, replaces Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity:
Kimmel has no time for Matt Damon:
Finally, if you need another reason to avoid dating Sarah Silverman, here it is:
I love the happiness on Silverman's face right at the beginning. Also, I had no idea that a white boy like Damon could dance like that. Sweet.
Guillermo, from Kimmel's show, blows off Matt Damon:
Guillermo, from Kimmel's show, replaces Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity:
Kimmel has no time for Matt Damon:
Finally, if you need another reason to avoid dating Sarah Silverman, here it is:
I love the happiness on Silverman's face right at the beginning. Also, I had no idea that a white boy like Damon could dance like that. Sweet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
