Wednesday, August 25, 2004
I have to confess something that feels wrong - even though it probably shouldn't in this age of political correctness. This morning I saw a totally hot guy. He had fabulous hair, a very sweet face and first class bulge. He was also obviously slightly intellectually handicapped. Given half a chance, I would have jumped on him. The only off-putting thing was that he had a cold and a very dubious looking handkerchief.
What is you opinion? Should I introduce myself if I see him again?
Cheers for the letter. I wouldn't worry too much about it, I think it's quite normal to check out those less fortunate than yourself. I myself make it a personal habit to scope the bulge of 'tards in wheelchairs. I mean, you have the height advantage, and their little 'tard legs are often splayed at that perfect angle for maximum bulge displayage. And some of those mofos are hung. But how mentally handicapped are we talking here? Do you only assume he is disabled by the fact that he uses a handkerchief? Or was there droolage and he emited little moans of pleasure for no reason as he stumbled along? I think that if you see him again, you should definitely approach him. Retards are always really eager to please; they'd do anything if they thought they were going to get a new friend out of it. I reckon they'd give excellent head too: nice and wet. And if he still has his cold... well! Fluidpalooza. But that is just the sex side. There are other bonuses too, such as the golden ticket that is the disabled parking permit. Go for it!
Let me know how you go,
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
I am writing to you in your capacity as men's underwear expert. My capacity is as second in charge of the Queensland Police Criminal Profiling Division (Gold Coast sub-Branch).
In the "Australian" newspaper, there is a feature story about 23 year old convicted parent-murderer Sef Gonzales. In the story, it mentions the existence of a "soft-focus photograph of him sporting a bare torso and Calvin Klein underwear. This is supposed to be Gonzales as third runner-up in the babyface division of the 1999 Calvin Klein Asia".
The article goes on to say that this is a lie.
My question to you arises because, having closely perused the said photo, I do not believe that the underpants the young murderer is wearing in it are actually Calvin Kleins at all. If you look at the photo yourself, you can see that the underpants appear to be of the "scrunched-up fabric around the elastic band at-the-top" variety. (Sorry that I can't be more technical here; I only know this variety because they're the ones that my wife always buys for me from the 99-cent bargain bin at the Logan City Big W).
Anyway, I'm hoping for your insights on what sort of criminal would fake his own photo in a Calvin Klein underwear competition, and while not even wearing real Calvin Kleins, to boot?
Your answer here will be of immense future assistance to the force, because if we can build-up an "underwear profile" of would-be parent murderers, most of these crimes could be preventable.
Queensland Police Criminal Profiling Division (Gold Coast sub-Branch)
I don't think you need my help at all! I can tell you are an expert at the delicate art (and sport) of Waistband Brand Spot 'n' Judge. Clearly you are a homosexual in the highest order, and I must congratulate you on bringing the issues of Our People to the police community. Well done for getting this far in the police force, and I look forward to your banner waving at next year's Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras on the police float (handy, as then you wont need to change for the after-party. Uniforms are hot!).
Props to your wife as well, she must be a top-notch hag.
As for your technical question, when you say "scrunched-up fabric around the elastic band at-the-top variety" of underwear, I think you mean "cheap-ass underwear". Why someone would take those photos and be proud enough of them to enter them in some lame Boat Person version of Search for a Supermodel (I bet Matthew Kopp's ears are burning right now) is beyond me.
As for his mental state, clearly he must be delusional. Calvin Klein underwear hasn't been cool for like, forty years. It's hardly an exciting luxury brand, so imitating it is more than a little bathetic.
It's weird that some people still think this sort of underwear is cool. I mean, my dad wears CK underwear. If I pull down your pants to find CK I immediately associate you with my father. Well, not totally I guess, as I'll still fuck you... but still. Enough! Same goes for 2(x)ist, the most common, ugly, boring, uninspired underwear on the homo-market (sorry ladies, but like boxer-briefs, if you man wears 'em, he takes it rectally). Be more creative, plebs!
So really, can if he thinks wearing Calvin Klein will make him more desirable he is clearly insane. Add this to the fact that his actual underwear is cheap and probably made out of satin, can you blame him for murdering his parents?
Wednesday, April 14, 2004
Are most Aussie guys cut or uncut?
Dear Penis Fan,
You know, in my experience, only like, three guys I've been with have been circumcised. Oh, four. Five. But that fifth one was Jewish (and American!), so I guess it doesn't really count, what with him being all son-of-Abraham-y and stuff.
Coming from an all boy highschool, some people had a lot of pent up sexual frustration going on. Even if you don't add the thick undercurrent of homoeroticism that often wafted around the campus (I won't even bring up Pervy McSportsTeacher who had a hardon for yours truly, the wank-offs behind the rowing shed, and the butt-fucking shenanigans that went on nightly in the boarding house), people liked to talk dick a lot. In fact, I think there was like, an unofficial poll going around about who was cut and who was uncut.
Unsurprisingly, as by this stage I was a master at the casual perv and could spot a naked penis at one hundred paces, it was revealed that most in my age group were uncut. I always thought it was a bit harsh, because those who said they were circumcised were ridiculed, and it's not like they had anything to do with it.
We only had one Jewish guy in my year, so he got a free pass. But then he didn't, because he was a bit of a dick and everyone hated him. On a side note, what's the deal with that hat thing? He never wore it to school, and I always wanted to ask. Actually, I think that looks like a circumcised penis, is that the connection? Anyway.
Of course, that is only for our age. I generally go by the rule "older people = circumcised" based on seeing my father and my uncles and my grandfather. Yes, I have had the misfortune of seeing all of them naked. That theory doesn't really stand up though, as I shagged a 38 year old guy once, and he had a really nice, uncircumcised dick.
Of course, I don't really care. I mean, I know a lot of people who are all for one or the other. Like it makes any difference. A penis is a penis, in my book, and when you get to the stage of peeling down the underwear, finding what form the penis du jour is in is all part of the fun. That expectation is generally more fun than the actual sex. So keep things interesting! Chop away! Hopefully as our population ages and dies, circumcision will not be just for the Jews.
(Of course, if I ever have a son, I won't be circumcising him. Gross.)
Thanks for writing!