firstname.lastname@example.org (Erick Marvi Vermillion-salsbury) wrote: > >While in a Houston bar's restroom, my co-worker saw the following >scrawled on a condom machine: > >THIS GUM SUCKS > Which is traditionally followed (in someone else's handwriting) by the = response: YEAH, BUT IT LASTS FOR AGES or BUT IT MAKES REALLY BIG BUBBLES Actually, given that we now have gum flavoured with mint, fruit or even chocolate, it's an understandable mistake. Another traditional warning reads: MY DAD SAYS THESE THINGS DON'T WORK In Britain most machines carry the reassurance that the product is "Electronically tested to BS3704" (yes, there is a British Standard for condoms. Some people have too much free time.) This traditionally earns the response: SO WAS THE HINDENBERG Having exhausted the possibilities of coloured, flavoured, ribbed, scented and even striped condoms, manufacturers have started producing "novelty" condoms. These have numerous bumps and protuberences so that they resemble sea anemones. However they must violate BS3704 in some way, since they carry the message "Not to be used as a contaceptive". What on earth are you supposed to do with them then? I can only assume children's parties have more interesting balloons than they used to.
(From the "Rest" of RHF)