Monday, April 1, 2013

Health department raids gay bathhouse for serving oversized soft drinks

"Drop the cups!" SWAT team moves in on sugary bathhouse violators

(Dissociated Press) New York City health inspectors, accompanied by a Special Weapons and Tactics Team, raided a gay bathhouse in Manhattan in the early morning hours today in response to allegations that the proprietors were serving 32-ounce sugary sodas.

"It's really disgusting", said Sergeant John Wilde of the 32nd Precinct, as he led this reporter through the semen- and feces-strewn establishment. "I mean, the sugary Cokes and Dr. Peppers and Cream Sodas were out in the open, on the floor, everywhere."

"The offenders don't seem to understand how dangerous this is" Sergeant Wilde lamented. "They even mix activities that are completely legal with extraordinarily dangerous practices."

"Could you be specific?", this reporter asked.

The sergeant grimaced. "They follow-up completely legal city-sanctioned acts of serial anonymous oral-anal sex with a sip from a 32-ounce sugary soft drink."

The sergeant sighed. "And they know the sugary beverages cause disease!".

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg held an imprompto press conference to discuss the raid.

Bloomberg, appearing at a ceremony at the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs entitled "Queer Cuisine: Celebrating Gay Corprophagia", lamented the soda-drinkers' blatant disregard for public health:

"The soft-drink lobby is shameless" sighed Bloomberg, standing beneath a "LGBT Political Action Committee" sign. "They peddle deadly health practices in the midst of an epidemic under the guise of "victimhood". Don't they know that people are dying from this behavior!"

The Mayor took questions from reporters about the behavior of the health code scoff-laws arrested in the bathhouse.

He said that the evidence-- incriminating debris-- was strewn across the bathhouse floor.

A reporter asked "did they use protection, at least?"

"No." the Mayor replied, shaking his head in disgust. "Not a single one was diet soda".

49 comments:

  1. Ugh this was just bad, even as a dumb caricature, please don't do it again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I disagree. It was funny and made a point.

      Ben

      Delete
    2. Actually, I thought it was quite funny and in good taste - in comparison to Egnor's usual Dissociated Press parodies. Not that it actually was funny or in good taste.

      Delete
    3. Bachfiend, that makes no sense. It's funny and in good taste in comparison to the others, but it was not funny and in good taste.

      How about this? It was funny because it shed light on the absurdity of banning large soda under the rationale that it's bad for your health, while giving the seal of approval to promiscuous anal sex. Soda is going to kill you!

      Ben

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. Ben,

      It was just minimally better than Egnor's usual standard.

      Delete
    6. Bachfiend, this is quite funny. You should get a sense of humor.

      The Torch

      Delete
    7. Sure, bachfiend should work on getting a working sense of humor -- but I'd rather he first work in getting a working sense of reason.

      Delete
  2. All this proves is that Egnor, like so many conservative Catholic old white males, is obsessed with gay sex. It seems like the poor guy is constantly imagining scenes of men having anal sex and eating each others shit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually I imagine men drinking big sodas...

      Delete
    2. I'm sure that he, like me, pines for the good old days when homosexuality was the love that dared not speak its name, as opposed to now, when it's the love that won't shut up.

      Please don't tell me that you're one of those buffoons who insists that homosexuality has nothing to do with actual sexuality? "Being gay" doesn't just mean whistling show tunes. It means taking it in the poop chute.

      Your weird obsession with child sex abuse in the church tells me that you are pretty obsessed with man-boy sex. Creepy.

      The Torch

      Delete
    3. Don’t worry Doctor, it’s OK to fantasize about what goes on in gay bath houses, nobody here will judge you for it. Just take it one step at a time big-boy, and know we’ll accept you no matter what.

      -KW

      Delete
    4. Adm. G Boggs, CINCLANT, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 10:47 AM

      Look, I don't care what people do on their own time. But I can truthfully say that I do not see the attraction in having sex in a sewer. And the constant hectoring about condoms makes it even worse. Why would I want to have sex in a way that required the wearing of surgical latex to prevent disease?

      De gustibus non est disputandum.

      Delete
    5. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 11:18 AM

      Torch, here's my read on Troi...

      The Dutch are among the softest and most cowardly among Europeans. Recall that the Netherlands folded like a cheap lawn chair in WW2 (I'm not sure they even waited 24 hrs to surrender). And they boasted one of the highest rates of collaboration with the Nazis.

      Right now, the Dutch are living in nearly full dhimmitude with their Islamic occupiers. This is not to disparage the few among them with courage (e.g. Theo Van Gogh), but as a whole...

      Accounting for Troi's venom and bigotry toward the Catholic Church admits no other explanation. He's allegedly a Jew (yes, I know... this is the internet). So the Catholic Church has done nothing to him. Why, he was even taken with commenting on the Pope's shoes. There's no objecive rhyme or reason, he just hates.

      But if it were truly about the Church's view on homosexuality (or child abuse), it's obvious that his local neighbors, Muslims, are not exactly gay-friendly; homosexuality is punishable by death and, according to some prominent imams, homosexuality is caused by Satan sticking his finger up your ass when you're born. The Catholic Church is positively gay-friendly in comparison (and is, in fact, gay-friendly for homosexually celibate gay men)

      But the Dutch are deathly afraid of their occupiers. In my opinion, Troi is just a 21st Century collaborator.

      Delete
    6. Admiral,

      Don't be so hard on the Dutch. They folded like a cheap lawn chair in World War Two because they were no match for the Wehrmacht war machine. That doesn't change my opinion of Dutchmen, which is generally positive. Other than Troy, I never met one I didn't like.

      They, like the other native populations of Western Europe, are slowly losing control of their country because they have stopped having kids while the "guest workers" pop them out like crazy. They don't know what to do about it. Any resistance to the Muslim takeover of their country will be deemed racist, and no one wants that.

      There is, however, some hope. Geert Wilders' party is now polling at number one. Despite some reservations I have about Wilders, there's no doubt that he's not a Dhimmi. He's been the face and the voice of the anti-Dhimmi movement for some time.

      http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/geert-wilders-party-now-polling-at-no-1/

      Here's a good article about neighboring Germany, where 80 percent of Turks are on the welfare rolls, and where the Turks are expected to become the majority by 2050.

      http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/80-of-turkish-muslim-settlers-in-germany-live-off-welfare/

      The Torch

      Delete
    7. Dutch people are very friendly and hospitable. Most just want to be liked, I think.

      But you're right about losing their country. I was walking around in downtown Rotterdam ten years ago and I don't think I saw a single Dutch person. It was really like being in the Middle East. I've heard that Rotterdam still has a majority Dutch population, but you could have fooled me. Maybe they just live in outlying residential districts.

      The clock is ticking for the Dutch. They're becoming a minority in their own country.

      Joey

      Delete
    8. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:31 PM

      Well, my exposure to the Dutch was during my tenure as an academic in the UK in the 80's. European governments had agreed to put American missiles on European soil. Dutch youth had only to hear my American accent in a bar, and they would launch into virulent anti-American public tirades. As if I had anything to do with foreign policy.

      But remember, as a contrast, the Danes were also crushed by the Wehrmacht. But they did not ship Jews to the incinerators by the boxcar-load. Instead, and a great personal risk, the Danes banded together and managed to spirit thousands of Jews into neutral Sweden.

      Demographically, however, Europe is history. One might say they've been self-aborted.

      Delete
    9. There may have been a Dutch person there somewhere. She was probably hiding in a headscarf for fear of being accused of immodesty.

      Joey

      Delete
    10. Joey,

      Do you have hard numbers suggesting that the Dutch are "becoming a minority in their own country?" Last time I checked, 80 percent of the Netherlands population were Dutch.

      Hoo

      Delete
    11. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 3:12 PM

      If the numerical minority can kick your ass and enjoys doing so just on principle or for fun, numbers obviously don't tell the whole story.

      Delete
    12. Moving goalposts, admiral?

      Hoo

      Delete
    13. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 6:20 PM

      What "goalposts"?

      Delete
    14. You seem to concede that the Dutch are not becoming a minority in their own country," but then you raise a different objection: they are not a minority, but the result is the same as if they were. To which I say: bullshit.

      Hoo

      Delete
    15. ... asserts the dishonest "liberal" who is obsessed with his disordered desire to be my boyfriend.

      Delete
    16. Don't flatter yourself. Better try your luck with old Admiral Chicken Hawk.

      Delete
  3. Hey, at least they did not use drone strikes like they did on the hot dog stands.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You, guys, have lost this culture war. Time to move on. Some Republicans understand that. You might one day, too.

    Hoo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hoo, you are making the same stupid point I have heard a thousand times. You think you are right because you are winning. Show me that you are winning because you are right.

      Joey

      Delete
    2. Joey,

      Both sides in this debate think they are right. Only one side wins, though, and it isn't yours.

      Slave owners, too, thought that they were morally right at one point.

      Cheers,

      Hoo

      Delete
    3. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:34 PM

      If it was a "war", I was a draft-dodger.

      Delete
    4. You didn't respond to my comment.

      Both sides of every debate think they're right. Is that supposed to pass for insightful commentary?

      Slave owners. That's cute. Actually, the slavery issue of today is abortion, and the Democratic Party is pro-choice, just as it was then.

      Joey

      Delete
    5. How does it feel to be sore losers, guys?

      Hoo

      Delete
    6. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM

      Slavery. Bullshit. Wat a moronic comparison.

      Is there any grievance machine these days who isn't trying to steal a seat on the civil rights train?

      Delete
    7. Slave owners did feel righteous, admiral, didn't they? As did those who insisted on the "equal but separate" solution.

      Hoo

      Delete
    8. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:41 PM

      I suppose bathhouses are the 21st Century Underground Railroad.

      Delete
    9. You'd have to ask that questions a hundred years from now, admiral. It's a wonder how time affects moral values. Those absolute moral values. LOL

      Hoo

      Delete
    10. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:54 PM

      Actually, the real wonder is how time does not affect moral values.

      Delete
    11. Right. It's still legal to marry off daughters at 13, isn't it? And adulterers are still stoned to death.

      Hoo

      Delete
    12. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 2:57 PM

      Only under Shar'ia Law.

      Delete
    13. Wasn't that in the Bible? Leviticus 20:10?

      Hoo

      Delete
    14. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 6:26 PM

      Oh, I see. You've confused morals and law. Very different beasts. Ask any lawyer, or, as a last resort, look them up in a dictionary.

      Delete
    15. I don't think so. It used to be moral to marry off daughters as young as 13. Such a thing would now be considered immoral. Amirite?

      Hoo

      Delete
    16. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 6:53 PM

      It "used to be" legal to marry young teens in the American west. It's not anymore. But the morality of marriage is independent of the legal age. Were Americans in the 18th century immoral, in your opinion?

      Also, in your opinion, are contemporary, devout Muslims immoral because their nations have different laws about marriage?

      Delete
    17. It wasn't just legal, admiral, it was moral. Not in the 18th century, but in the medieval times and earlier. Have the morals changes since then? I think so. You dont seem to.

      Hoo

      Delete
  5. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 6:36 PM

    By the way, Professor Hoo, did you know laws can be immoral?

    And moral behavior can be illegal.

    You're so smart.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 1, 2013 at 7:03 PM

    You know, the marriage age is an interesting question on its own merits. I just found a source that says:

    An age of consent statute first appeared in secular law in 1275 in England as part of the rape law. The statute, Westminster 1, made it a misdemeanor to "ravish" a "maiden within age," whether with or without her consent. The phrase "within age" was interpreted by jurist Sir Edward Coke as meaning the age of marriage, which at the time was 12 years of age.

    ReplyDelete
  7. That Disassociated Press really knows how to find the hard-hitting stories.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Re: the silly, foolish leftist triumphalism about the "culture wars" -- don't you fools understand that reality always wins. And reality is conservative.

    ReplyDelete