Buy your own damn condoms, you ungrateful little brats. And I love this part especially: “These condoms are too small for my enormous manhood, that’s why I’ve had to bareback it. It’s all your fault that I’m a disease-ridden slut.”
“If people get what they don’t want, they are just going to trash them,” said T. Squalls, 30, who attends the University of the District of Columbia. “So why not spend a few extra dollars and get what people want?”
Hey, T., why don’t you spend a few extra dollars and buy your own, jackass? This guy’s three years my junior and yet he’s still kicking around a university. Reminds me of every character Eric Stoltz has played since Say Anything. It’s so much easier to get laid when the girls are trashed all the time anyway. Imagine if he had to date actual adult women? (Assuming there are any.)
Also mentioned in the article is the fact that brand recognition plays into these complaints, which is just sad. I’m thinking that these idiots in D.C. are taking a page out of Frank Reynolds’ playbook, and filling their wallets with Magnum condoms and wads of hundreds. I’m sure that will work.
Good luck, losers.
Pingback: The horror of free condoms « politics / basketball / education / fiction
Pingback: Advice to DC women: Never trust anybody over 30 who expects the government to buy his condoms. « Mcnorman's Weblog
Steyn quoted you on The Corner at National Review. Didn’t know if you’d seen it. http://corner.nationalreview.com/
Ben’s Chili Bowl, crime novelist George Pelecanos, and a higher rate of AIDS than sub-Saharan Africa are all points of local pride:)
Bob Barker had it right all along–just spay and neuter them. Using the low-bid vendor, of course. And if they really botch the surgery, that will take care of the disease control aspect as well.
I’ve also read that Certified Angus beef is of better quality than other brands. Maybe NY and DC should start serving that instead of whatever they’re serving now. The cost might eliminate a few six-figure Bureaucrat positions, but that would be fine with me. Maybe schools should go all-organic. Oops. The cost for that would eliminate some more Bureaucrats from their seats where they have to show up once or twice a month to collect their $300K per year.
What I would really like is for my tax dollars to reinforce quality teachers who actually, demonstrably help their students to become successful. [Hello!? The notion of tenure was to promote diversity of thought, not to insure your comfort just for showing up for however many years - now tenure, at the university level is used to weed out people who have contrary views]. My girlfriend chastises me for my resentment of funding public education through taxes because, she says, I reap a “public good.” I get that. I’m investing in the future even though I have no kids and probably won’t have. I digress. My point is, I’m PAYING FOR SOMETHING and have no influence. If I’m paying, I want some influence. If you’re a teacher? Produce! Inspire!
How can you not want to? I want my students to go places and thrive so bad I can taste it. I discuss this with them. They are SO glad that I care what happens to them (after they’ve paid all this money to my university). I ask them, “where do you want to go? What do you want to do? How can I help you get there?” I’m tired of teachers and professors simply showing up and teaching class and going home. I’m sick to death of it. I would LOVE to see a world where professors are evaluated in terms of where their students go and end up. Don’t you think that teachers might have a more vested interest in their students if that aspect were even part of the calculation of their success?
–just some thoughts, obviously a very complex issue…
“High school students and college-age adults have been complaining to District officials that the free condoms the city has been offering are not of good enough quality and are too small and that getting them from school nurses is “just like asking grandma or auntie.” ”
Every single so-called point of their complaint is fatuous — and the consistent use will not go up when the new, more expensive one are being handed out.
“Also mentioned in the article is the fact that brand recognition plays into these complaints, …”
However, while actual usage rates (i.e. there will be no increase in “safer sex”) will remain unchanged, the manufacturer and creator-of-brand-consciousness will enjoy a more healthy bottom line.
Exactly which head are they putting it on?
They don’t want to talk to the nurse? Yes, that makes it a lot harder to take a lot to sell them on the street. The name brands are easier to sell, too.