home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


My rapist was being a total asshole. Well, I mean, he's not really my rapist, but he's still like, at large, so, you know...

Anyway, he was acting like such a tool. It's like, ok, fine, do your business or whatever down there, but seriously, is all that swearing really necessary? And could you maybe not break every one of my teeth? Like, leave something for the other rapists. Ugh. Whatever, I just closed my eyes and tried to enjoy it while it lasted...

Date Written: February 14, 2004
Author: qualcomm
Average Vote: 3.6667

02/24/2004 Will Disney (4): it's a strong opening sentence. and it's nice and short. i give it four stars!
02/24/2004 Texxx (2): Brevity is the soul of rape.
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: Perhaps the victim expects too much. She's probably comparing her rapist to her father. Of course he'll never measure up!
02/24/2004 Texxx: Wait a minute. Maybe this is the narration of a dude in prison. I mean, he's expecting other rapists.
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: Good point, Texxx! Of course the rapist being "at large" and the narrator's valley girl speak suggest otherwise, but these details may not be irrelevant enough to warrant your attention...
02/24/2004 Texxx: By 'at large,' he's most likely washing dishes, while the narrator is on laundry duty.
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: In this everchanging and complex world, it's comforting to have one fixed, immutable law to cling to: Texxx will always append his already unfunny jokes with even less funny explanations.
02/24/2004 scoop: Boss use of append there Matza. As for the short, I think it wouldve been funnier if her teeth weren't knocked out. That ruins my fantasty of this cute valley chick, like, filing her nails while this guy totally grunts and slobbers all over her. Still haven't decided what to rate it...
02/24/2004 Texxx: Matza, you're just in a pissy mood because you inadvertently awarded my short yesterday with 4 stars. Or this is your short. One or the other. Or both.
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: 4-starring you only bothered me a little ("Even a stopped clock is right twice a day") - though I wondered when you'd get around to publicly crowing about it. But no, it's the volume, frequency and terribleness of your recent commentary that's giving me grief. And this isn't my short.
02/24/2004 senator (4): I'm with scoop. It messed with my fantasy. But a great short nonetheless. 4 stars!
02/24/2004 Texxx: Volume, terribleness and frequency in that order? I thought my first comment was pretty funny.
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: The insincere question might come across as a fraction less inept if you'd actually correctly restated the order I gave...but no doubt you did it on purpose to see if I'd point it out, and told yourself that it would be a riot and a victory if I did. As for your initial comment, the short was brief, so the implied compliment makes no sense given the low rating. But you're right not to bother with the meaning, sense, accuracy, or quality of what you say, since, as always, your true goal remains getting attention and you know people will read your shorts and comments no matter what. Speaking of which, your recent claim to possess a Flaubertian attention to detail surpassed your recent attempt to portray yourself as a calmly distant observer as the most outlandishly self-delusional Texxx affectation since you tried to be pedantic about linguistic matters slightly less recently. You titan of cerebral ineptitude.
02/24/2004 Texxx: Attention? From whom? I'm just enjoying myself, at your expense, perhaps.
02/24/2004 Texxx: Come on, Matza. Your powers of perception should've enabled you to detect the sarcasm of my Flaubert reference. And since my sarcasm is always lacking in subtlety, as you like to say, it's all the more apparent, no?
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: "I'm just enjoying myself, at your expense, perhaps": Exactly - your enjoyment comes not not from writing something interesting or funny that gives anyone else pleasure. It comes from getting a response out of someone, even if it's contempt. You'll gladly bore/annoy the shit out of anyone and everyone at the site if you can get a response, as proven time and again.
Re "the sarcasm of my Flaubert reference". Once again, the proof is on public record. Here's the exchange -
Texxx: "You guys would crucify Flaubert."
Feldspar: you comparing your writing to his?
Texxx: That would be bold! No - not doing that. Just his attention to detail.
This is supposedly sarcastic? If so, it's so subtle it's undetectable. Then comes the cringingly unfunny attempt to distance yourself from the remark even you sense is presumptuous:
Texxx: On second thought, yes. This writing is 10 times better than Flaubert. Maybe 11 times.
You don't wear a dunce cap - you wear the dunce crown.
02/24/2004 anonymous: According to the latest issue of Esquire: Matza/Texxx feuds: OUT scoop/Mr. Pony feuds: IN
02/24/2004 Texxx: I'm glad you're able to pinpoint my enjoyment. I do like writing shorts. Honest. I think I'd enjoy myself even more if it weren't for your orneriness.
02/24/2004 anonymous: Texxx is too touchy and defensive. Matza is a self-righteous prick. Enough already.
02/24/2004 Dylan Danko: Hey does anyone else get a boner when Matza's in the room? Just asking.
02/24/2004 scoop: yup.
02/24/2004 Texxx: On occasion.
02/24/2004 Moe-Ron (4): Holy crap anon_user_a, you made me laugh very hard. I wish that were a short unto itself. I'd give it five stars. As for this one, Dylan, I give you four.
02/24/2004 anonymous: moe-ron, i'm not that contrary limey.
02/24/2004 Moe-Ron: are you sure?
02/24/2004 Benny Maniacs (4): Some glint of light in my cellar of a soul hopes this was written by Jimson.
02/24/2004 Benny Maniacs: Or Moe-Ron. Or any woman; Jon Matza or Ewan, perhaps.
02/24/2004 Dylan Danko: How dare you think me capable of such darkness Moe Ron!
02/24/2004 Joe Frankenstone: Ugh. I come back here after a few weeks just to see what's going on, and I'm already sickened. I really hate you, Jon Matza.
02/24/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: Nope. Not me. Sorry to disappoint you, BenM.
02/24/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: oops! I thought you were talking about Anon b's "self-righteous prick" remark.
02/24/2004 Mr. Pony: Hi, Joe! Welcome back!
02/24/2004 anonymous: I thought Feldspar was the self-righteous prick!
02/24/2004 Phony Millions: Heading towards controversy, but then you fools get all chummy again...Somebody draw some blood damn it!
02/24/2004 Jon Matza: I'm back from my rounds and all I can say is goodness gracious! I'm "out"? A "woman"? A "self-righteous prick"? I've sickened Frankenstone and he really hates me? You people are one gigantic plastic bottle of artifical vanilla extract. I need some better detractors. There's a whole language at your disposal, folks, and freedom of speech is protected under the law. Why not take advantage?
02/25/2004 Phony Millions: Touche! I always love Matza's hurt tone...
02/25/2004 scoop (4): God damn it, Feldy, you made this a tough one. I think if the "leave something for the other rapists" line had been an oblique reference to the vaginal shalacking she was taling this would've been a fiver, no doubt. But the teeth thing, aw man, it ruin'd it. Still, sweet lede, dude.
02/26/2004 annebot (3): God damnit, it's like a window into my very own life....
04/22/2004 Dylan Danko (4):
04/22/2004 Dylan Danko: And as Scoop said, sweet lede.
05/27/2004 TheBuyer: Everyone would be much happier if you put this on the postcard.
05/27/2004 Jon Matza: You're speaking for the authors now, buyer?
06/1/2004 TheBuyer: Everyone knows I don't count, Jon, sit down.
06/30/2004 Snack Bar (4): gave me a good, strong pulse and a chuckle.