home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


Janet held the home pregnancy test strip in her smelly urine stream and prayed. If it came back pink, she'd be so happy. So very happy. If it could just be a girl. But no, that was counting chickens. First things first....

She rushed to the telephone and dialed Charles' office.

"Charles? Come home, honey! We have to celebrate! PINK! Yes, pink!"

25 minutes later, Charles burst through the front door, still wearing scrubs.

"Let me see that paper!" he said. Janet held it up proudly.

"No time to lose!" Charles cried.


The 3-month-old foetus slipped out of Janet's pussy almost too easily. Charles held its delicate head in the forceps, puckering his mouth appraisingly as he turned it left and right. A bubble of blood formed on the foetus' gill-slit.

"Let me see that little fucking baby!" Janet screamed in maternal ecstasy. "Is it a girl? Is it, Charles? Does it have a pussy?"

Charles adjusted his pince-nez and held the limp, froggish specimen up to the light.

"Well, since it's not really human at all, Janet, we can't really call it a pussy, now can we?"

He stuck his tongue out to lick the baby's proto-clit.

"Oh God, Charles, it makes my cunt so wet to end this little fucker's life and watch you lick its nonviable snatch. Fuck that foetus snatch, Charles! I want you to fuck that little bitch right in front of me!"

Charles placed the raw carcass down on the operating tray and took up a second pair of forceps. Grabbing one little flipper foot in each tong, he splayed what was basically the zygote's legs apart and shoved his beautiful plum bullet inside. It was all perfectly legal, and it felt really, really good on top of that. He looked down and admired how his daughter's tight-lidded, alien face formed a sort of figurehead to the prow of his massive frigate.

"Fuck my ass with that baby-condom, Charles, fuck it now!!"

Janet flipped over and stuck her gorgeous ass in the air, exposing her precious grocery maw. Charles took her hips in his hands and pushed his foetused cock against her quivering sphinc. The unborn child's head bent back between its own shoulder blades as Charles maneuvered his tumid engine inside Janet's tight asshole. The head popped off without a sound and tumbled across the floor like a baked crabapple.

It was more than either could bear. Charles creamed so hard the foetus' thorax ballooned out with his copious load and exploded. Janet felt his bloody goop ooze out of her ass as she jilled herself to completion.


They smoked cigarettes on the porch swing that evening and watched the meteor shower.

"I want to give you another baby," Janet cooed, nuzzling Charles' shoulder.

"It's not really a baby, honey, it's a foetus. And anyway, we really should quit smoking first."

Date Written: October 06, 2004
Author: qualcomm
Average Vote: 4.58333

10/12/2004 scoop (5): I almost cried I was so moved by this O. Henry-like tale of sacrifice and dedication.
10/12/2004 Dick Vomit: Dudes, this is the gnarls.
10/12/2004 Mr. Pony (5): Boy, that's epic! Some key developmental terminology errors stand out because of the pentultimate joke, but MAN. I was surprised by my reaction to this. Dear author, you are super-gross.
10/12/2004 qualcomm (5): "puckering his mouth appraisingly as he turned it left and right"
10/12/2004 TheBuyer (5): I really, really, hate these horrible people in this short; I'm sickened by them. Excellent job, author!
10/12/2004 Streifenbeuteldachs (5): My god I laughed so hard. As soon as I thought it couldn't get any further, further it went. "baby-condom". LOL.
10/12/2004 Dylan Danko (5): I think I've seen the face of evil.
10/12/2004 Will Disney: I think we've found our Sensitivity Award recipient for 2004.
10/12/2004 TheBuyer: it's like some kind of anti-abortion fever nightmare, I can't get this revolting thing out of my head.
10/12/2004 scoop: Ah, I don't think it went far enough, but I relaize the author is a little squeamish about certain things which would have really made this thing what it could have been.
10/12/2004 TheBuyer: what do you mean, offensive enough to be declared illegal and censored?
10/12/2004 Mr. Pony: I bet there are some Anti-Abortion web sites who would really appreciate a link to this story.
10/12/2004 Dylan Danko: Oh, Scoop!
10/12/2004 scoop: I bet there are are some pro-abortion websites who would appreciate a link to this short. Did I say pro-abortion"? Sorry I meant "pro-choice.," ;)
10/12/2004 TheBuyer: Also pro-lung/anti-cancer sites. This short could be a catchall psa for everything from gestation-arrest to AIDs awareness through pre-natal licking.
10/12/2004 Dick Vomit: This is still the total gnarls, dudes.
10/12/2004 Litcube (5): I can't not 5 this.
10/12/2004 Mr. Pony: Why not? I mean, why?
10/12/2004 Jon Matza (4): Sorry, boys...some balsa verbiage here but certain aesthetic objections leave me with no choice but to savagely cornhole your perfect score with my massive frigate.
10/12/2004 anonymous: Well I for one would like to hear (read: read) your objections!
10/12/2004 Jon Matza: ok...am at work but will try to formulate in the next 12 hrs
10/12/2004 The Rid (5): I ordered food before I read this and now I really, REALLY regret it.
10/12/2004 Benny Maniacs (5): I laughed through vomit and then kept on laughing because I was puking.
10/13/2004 Streifenbeuteldachs: In retrospect, and after re-reading, I should have dropped a star. It's simply trying too hard to shock.
10/13/2004 qualcomm: well, that was kind of the point. it was "trying too hard to shock". not that you shouldn't deduct a star for that anyway, but i just don't want folks to think ol' summer lerpa wasn't cogniscent.
10/13/2004 Litcube: Pony: Because OSS was very successful in accomplishing his goal.
10/13/2004 scoop: I think the whole "shocking for shocks sake" type argument is neutralized by the fact that this short is blunted with a playfully corny punchline -- a conspicuously harmless one at that. So let's not start with all that business.
10/13/2004 Streifenbeuteldachs: Well, it is without question shocking for shock's sake, but it does achieve its goal beautifully...
10/13/2004 Jon Matza: That's the thing--for me the 'trying too hard to shock' quality made it a bit N-R (tiresome). In the end I found it more unpleasant than shocking, though was amused by how gleefully and knowingly unpleasant. To me the unexpected language usages & shifts in tone and plot employed by Mr. Sausage in many of his other shorts--recent kofi annan one, for instance--are more shocking (and in a more interesting way). Now I admit to having "penned" calculatedly transgressive shorts myself, but would justify them as generally tempered somewhat by silliness, surrealism or some other angle than mere 'sick' subject matter (this short has such moments I admit, but not enough for me to consider it vanilla essence.) Also was a bit confused by ending...why would they worry about the effect of smoking on the baby? I mean I guess the joke is how utterly preposterous this is given what's preceded it...but--and I hope my raw honesty will not startle anyone--I found this contradiction to be jarring. On the other hand 'grocery maw' & the 'pince nez' gag were undeniably nutmeat.
10/13/2004 Mr. Pony: I read the smoking thing as a dry little joke between the couple. Despite the fact that the short was trying so hard to be transgressively unpleasant, it was, in fact, one of the most disgusting things I've ever read. I also thought the "author's" decidedly pro-life stance was funny. Reminded me of that anti-abortion jerkoff you see sometimes in Times Square, sitting behind a bizarrely red and white picnic-checkered tableclothed stand, with big laminated posters of aborted fetuses, essentially telling people that they shouldn't have abortions because it's gross. The short takes an already extreme argument to an extremer (and retardeder) conclusion. Intentional or not, this little political bit pushed it up to a five for me.
10/13/2004 qualcomm: yes, it was intentional, pony, and i thank you for your support.
10/13/2004 qualcomm: foetus
10/13/2004 Mr. Pony: Fetus. Furthermore, zygote.
10/13/2004 qualcomm: ftus
10/13/2004 TheBuyer: Democrat
10/13/2004 Jon Matza: RE smoking: ah, I see. And I agree the short succeeds at being disgusting, though as I said merely disgusting does not necessarily equal a triumph or interesting--'least not to (smugly pointing both thumbs towards self) THIS reader. Also, while I agree it comes across like a fevered pro-lifer fantasy I think calling the author's stance "decidedly pro-life" may be a bit presumptuous (i.e., saucy).
10/13/2004 qualcomm: no, pony said the "author" was pro-life
10/13/2004 scoop: Hey, TheBuyer, your going to make Pony's tummy grumble by that lucious display of tender tastee babee treats. It's almost lunch time and Pony loves eating aborted remnants. Sometimes he mixes them in a goulash, otehr times he just snacks on the little frog legs a la mode. It's his way of saying fuck you to the fetus.
10/13/2004 TheBuyer: Ooo try fondu, it's friggin amazing. Nothin says 'fuck you' like fondu.
10/13/2004 scoop: teencervicalmucus.com
10/13/2004 Ferucio P. Chhretan (5): Everything Scoop wrote about Pony's appetites is completely true.
10/13/2004 Jon Matza: OSS--that's what I meant. I don't think even the 'author' here is a clear cut pro-lifer. (If you disagree, it just means you don't fully understand what you wrote).
10/13/2004 qualcomm: whuzat? what'd i write?
10/13/2004 Jon Matza: i.e., your short
10/14/2004 qualcomm: you're right, matza, the 'author' isn't a clear-cut pro-lifer, because this short is far too complex to offer such easy answers. i think you gave this a four out of iconoclasm - you saw all those fives lined up, and decided that everyone had experienced it on a sophomoric, "Aw, dude, that's so SICK" level, and rewarded it reflexively. this rankled your chancre. in a vacuum, you'd have given this a five. search your heart, you know it to be true. thank you.
10/17/2004 Joseph Yurndt: This is beneath contempt.
10/19/2004 Jon Matza: Come on, I've given plenty of five to shorts that were universally fived. The truth is, I didn't actually enjoy it, the experience of reading it, all that much, with the exception of a few jokes as specified. So stop Yurndting me.
12/3/2004 qualcomm: oh my god! i'm so sorry, but we have a lot of pranksters on this site, and one of them must have gone in and changed what used to be my wholesome, pro-life short into this trash. i'm the only person of faith on this site, and the guys give me a hard time over it with jokes like this. here, this short i wrote is still untouched, and i think it represents my more mainstream tastes, crazyguy. (hey, do you watch 'golden girls'? i love that show!)
12/3/2004 CrazyGuy: Well, okay, qualcomm. I'll take your word for it. I'm sorry if I overreacted, but I really find this sort of material to be offensive. Would you say that there is a problem with people on acmeshorts.com changing appropriate material into inappropriate material without the original author's knowledge? If so, please speak out about it.
12/3/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum (1):
12/3/2004 qualcomm: you got a lot of nerve, sorghum
12/3/2004 qualcomm: i demand satisfaction
12/4/2004 John Slocum: ouch, Jimberg. Why?
12/4/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: Well, QC was angling for a reaction. That was my reaction.
12/4/2004 qualcomm: you just don't get it, do you, jimson?
12/4/2004 qualcomm: DO YOU??!
12/4/2004 qualcomm: no, seriously, i'd like to hear your reasons, so i can try to convince you you're wrong. (unless said reasons are some surprising slant that will alert me to the worthlessness of this material, a possibility i righteously and agnostically allow. holy shit, i'm fair.) what i mean is: craft.
12/4/2004 John Slocum: Jimberg, answer Qualcomm - THIS INSTANT!!
12/4/2004 qualcomm: yeah. the author of the most subversive short in the history of the world is, ironically, stepping out to support his local economy by purchasing a cup of coffee (the price for the beans of which were negotiated at fair-trade rates). when he comes back, he expects to see a comment regarding this piece, which is so packed with cultural baggage and portent, and has come to mean so much to so many people, that he will refer to it in the distant tone of someone who didn't even write it, since, in a way, he didn't; acme shorts did.
12/4/2004 anonymous: Sorry, qualcomm, but it's not very good.
12/4/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: I probably really low-balled this. I voted in the heat of the moment and my vote was, like, the flip side of the "Oh, Dude, this is so sick!" response cited below. It mostly seemed like a very well-wrought gimmick, but I just wasn't buying it. You shouldn't think about it too much, 'comm. I didn't. Besides, I still cry myself to sleep at night wishing I could write shorts as good as yours. Oh, the beauty....
12/4/2004 qualcomm: i will destroy you
12/4/2004 anonymous: Probably her vote was correct.
12/4/2004 anonymous: In fact, this one is overrated.
12/4/2004 Mr. Pony: "Correct," anon_user_a?
12/4/2004 scoop: Wouldn't the most subversive short on the site not have a giant flashing neon (or other inert gas) sign over it reading: "Most Subversive Short on the Site" and a Willy Loman-like pitchman twisting his hat and swearing up and down that its subversive, and a little Runyonesque paper boy with a cap slanted on hsi head barking "Extry, Extry, Subversive Short read all about it!" Wouldn't it not?
12/4/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: Sheesh. Really, QC?
12/4/2004 qualcomm: jimson: yes.
scoop: no.
12/4/2004 anonymous: qualcomm, this is not your best work.
12/4/2004 Jon Matza: Disney: please add a feature whereby authors and non-superuser guests (but definitely NOT superuser guests) can vote for "latest most subversive short". Next Tuesday ought to be just fine.
12/4/2004 anonymous: When writing this, qualcomm, I wish you had done better.
12/4/2004 anonymous: Agreed!
12/5/2004 anonymous: this anonylith is great! no one will know how small our penises are! High five!
12/5/2004 anonymous: Agreed! But also don't you think qualcomm could have done better?
03/7/2005 deliciousbrains (5): Til now, the Chuck Palahnuik (sp?) short story "Guts" held the top rank in my "Things I Wish I Could Unread" category. Here's your five fucking stars, you bastard.
07/11/2011 Jimson S. Sorghum: "It was perfectly legal. And it felt really, really good on top of that." "He looked down and admired how his daughter's face formed a sort of figurehead to the prow of his massive frigate."
07/11/2011 qualcomm: Okay, okay, Jimson, you've made your point: for those and many other lines, you punished me with one star.
07/11/2011 anonymous: serendipitous http://imgur.com/1H4mp
07/18/2011 scoop: I don't think much of this is perfectly legal the way the short claims.