home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


"Oh, fuck baby, your ass looks so sweet," DePaolo purred. "I'm gonna blast your asshole. Blast it with my hot, off-white cum."

His wife frowned. What was up with that hackneyed line of dirty talk, he imagined her thinking, his cheeks turning hotter and redder than his you-know-what.

"Uh... yeah, blast it good, I will, and all under the auspices of our state and federal government." Well, her eyes seemed to say, that's an interesting tack.

"That's right, you horny bitch, our marital exertions are allowed, even encouraged by, duly elected officials representing a plurality of American citizens. Yeah, you nasty little slut, it's as though our neighbors and colleagues were looking on in approval as I push my poon-slathered didgeridoo up your shithole. You like that, you little exhibitionist slut? Mmmm, you like earning tax breaks by being my dirty little concubine? Nnnng, vouchers! Ohhhh, the distinguished gentleman from New Dork wishes to address the chamber... do we have a fucking quorum? All in favor of Joint Resolution 69 say yay... say yay, you sweet little whore... yay... yay.... YAY!"

Date Written: December 06, 2004
Author: qualcomm
Average Vote: 4.45833

12/13/2004 Streifenbeuteldachs (4): Enough suspense!! Did Joint Resolution 69 pass?
12/13/2004 The Rid: Are the neighbors and colleagues really looking on, is he making that up?
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow (5): Let's here it for civic duty!
12/13/2004 Will Disney: yay!
12/13/2004 Dylan Danko (5): Nnnng, vouchers!
12/13/2004 The Rid (5): For the title alone.
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: "Mmmm, you like earning tax breaks by being my dirty little concubine?" I never relized how sexy the IRS is?
12/13/2004 The Rid: "Joint Resolution 69." Heh.
12/13/2004 John Slocum: I'm not sure of this one. For example, graf 2 is confusing - I thought sentence 2 was her internal monologue. Maybe picky, but why write that the wife frowns followed immediately by his internal monologue. Not that it's a huge deal, just seems a little sloppy.
12/13/2004 anonymous: The wife frowns, setting off in the husband a self-doubting internal monologue about what she must be thinking. Nothing to it, brother.
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: The author chose to make this first person, and was therefore compelled to jump through its requisite hoops. It is a little awkward, but that's the price one pays for first person!
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: DePaolo
12/13/2004 anonymous: Oh, stop it. This is 3rd person, strong POV. I wrote that sentence, and the one similar to it in the third graf, to highlight the husband's insecurity; the wife isn't necessarily thinking those things, it's all in the husband's head. This, I felt, would make his floundering grasp at a ridiculous theme for dirty talk more compelling.
12/13/2004 Dylan Danko: Is she still a sweet little whore or do I have to deduct a star from your next short?
12/13/2004 qualcomm: She is a filthy little milt magnet.
12/13/2004 Dylan Danko: Fuck yeah, keep going!
12/13/2004 anonymous: Is your office door closed?
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: Oh yeah, stupid me, forgot to look at it again. Forgot it was limited 3rd, though limited 3rd requires the same hoop-jumping as 1st in terms of others' thoughts. But okay, okay, no need to get sore.
12/13/2004 John Slocum: Then why not separate the line about the wife frowning with the insecure internal mono. with a line space to make it easier to understand? Or do you enjoy making it difficult for your readers!?!?#$?
12/13/2004 hagit mizrachy (4): A new dork addressing a chamber... tee hee hee. What keeps the short a four is the troubling fact that DePaolo thinks that his wife would think off-white cum was hackneyed.
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: On this point, and regarding craft, why did you chose to have the imagined thoughts of the wife be pseudo-thought-quotes rather than summaries. By that I mean, why did you choose "His wife frowned. What was up with that hackneyed line of dirty talk, he imagined her thinking..." as opposed to something like "His wife frowned. She didn't seem to be buying his hackneyed line of dirty talk"? Any particular reason or just cuz?
12/13/2004 TheBuyer (5): (no comment, thank you)
12/13/2004 anonymous: Snow: I'm not exactly sure why I chose to write it that way, but I think my instinct was that it made his POV much stronger than the way you suggested. I may very well have written it like that simply because it was the first construction that occurred to me. I wrote this thing using the old ways, no editing and fast. Slocum: I apologize. And I also apologize for not finding a way to work 'pork barrel' or just 'pork' into the proceedings.
12/13/2004 John Slocum: Author, why did you put pork barrel and pork in quotes in your last comment?
12/13/2004 John Slocum: Also, pseudo rip-off of a Matza short, the one where the character scores the babe using dungeons and dragons speak, fucks her right on the bar stool.
12/13/2004 anonymous: I apologize.
12/13/2004 hagit mizrachy: Because, like me Slocumb, he's pareve.
12/13/2004 Dylan Danko: This is also a rip-off of The Office.
12/13/2004 Mr. Pony (4): It's also ever so slightly corked.
12/13/2004 Jon Matza: Slocum's point that it could be construed as ripping off my D&D short also occurred to me, but I liked it anyhow -- the municipal jargon was chum, esp "vouchers". I think "you-know-what" might've been an error though. Author: do you feel you deserve a four or a five?
Re 'yay' instead of 'aye': is this in honor of Disney?
12/13/2004 Ewan Snow: I thought "you-know-what" was Hotel Bar. Don't see why you thought it was Parkay.
12/13/2004 Dylan Danko: No, Matza, DePaolo is gay. Oh...wait...yes, it is in honor of Disney.
12/13/2004 anonymous: I believe this short deserves a four. I can't help being this fucking honourable, but yes: four.
12/13/2004 anonymous: However, "his you-know-what" is pilsner.
12/13/2004 John Slocum: what the fuck is "you-know-what"?
12/13/2004 Jon Matza (4): On behalf of Acme I commend you for your steadfast forthrightness, brother. My objection to 'you-know-what' is a) slight cuteness and b) it's euphemistic-ness contradicts DePaolo's filthiness throughout the rest of the monologue. Or is the joke that (unlike DePaolo) the narrator is a prude?
12/13/2004 Jon Matza: I mean 'its'
12/13/2004 anonymous: No, the joke was just what you said: why bother using a euphemism in a short that's otherwise filled with dirty words? It's one of those deliberately-breaking-voice jokes.
12/13/2004 TheBuyer: Hi John Slocum! I'm holding my "you-know-what" right now and I'm going to go select and then de-select a few donuts from the box in the corner.
12/13/2004 John Slocum: Oh, ooops. I actually re-read this dumb thing like 4 times looking for the words "you-know-what", didn't find them and thought it was some reference to something else everyone was making. I suspected it of being a penis, but was confused and disoriented. My inner monologue is so fascinating. Thanks, TheBuyer!
12/13/2004 TheBuyer: actually, I did the exact same thing. Cheers!
12/13/2004 scoop: Hey Slocum, are you sure about that whole not being retarded thing?
12/13/2004 Phony Millions (4):
12/14/2004 John Slocum (4): Scoop, maybe you were right. I don't know anymore.
'marital exertions'
12/14/2004 anonymous: Hey, what's up?
12/14/2004 John Slocum: 4 stars for writing this the 'old style' way, for the name 'DePaolo,' and for, of course, 'poon-slathered didgeridoo.'
12/14/2004 anonymous: Hey, Slocum, how's it going?
12/14/2004 Will Disney (5):
12/14/2004 John Slocum: Was that you, Disney, anonymously what's upping me last night?
12/14/2004 anonymous: nope
12/14/2004 anonymous: Hey Slocum, what's going on? How ya doing?
07/22/2005 Will Disney: I don't think it was me but it might have been. SO LONG AGO NOW!
07/24/2005 Benny Maniacs (4.5): I think we have a quorum.