There are those that preach the dogma “less is more,” but maybe sometimes more is less.
Inspired by Government regulation of soft drinks in New York and skateboard “bombing” in Los Angeles, frustrated Americans are taking to the streets to demand more government legislation and control to cover other areas of their personal life, such as sexual activity. They feel more is needed to guarantee fair and balanced laws to regulate some of the unfair practices that exist in the bedroom.
Women are having their voice heard loud and clear regarding Climax Inequality, a hot-button issue where they claim they are allowed to orgasm only 20% of the time whereas men are reaching their climax 99% of the time. Women want legislation passed that will require men work until their needs are satisfied, instead of just going to sleep after they have finished their business. If passed, the law would make it a misdemeanor for a man to leave a women “in need.”
Some men complain that they often don’t know that a woman hasn’t reached her special moment, because they just assumed all that screaming they did WAS the climax. Others reported that their women were satisfied just to have the opportunity to serve them and that all they needed was a little appreciation, like getting them some nice high heel boots or lingerie now and then. One man polled, Rian Mattis, who was carrying a sign for Westboro Baptist Church, claimed that, “it’s not a woman’s place to have enjoyment in intercourse, that was purely for the pleasure of man. A woman’s job is a subservient one that simply acts as a vessel of reproduction. Anything else is of the devil and they should be purged.”
And then there’s the N.A.A.U.P. (National Association for the Advancement of Ugly People) that have complained that they rarely get to pick up dates in bars or online sites due to stiff competition of attractive people. They claim that this is unfair and demand that the Government do something to level the playing field, like setting quotas, similar to fishing limits. Also built in to this legislation, they suggest that for every 9 people who an attractive person dates, they must offer one pity date to an ugly person.
Now, it’s not just sex that the people want regulated, they would also like the government to do more to control what they eat, how they dress, or what God they worship. Many have suggested that it would in fact be best if the government were more in control of all aspects of their personal life.
When interviewed, Mary Stein of Ft. Worth said, “These decisions can be really difficult. I spent 45 minutes alone this morning just deciding what to wear to work, and at least 15 minutes trying to choose what I should have for lunch. If the Government can tell me when I should have a transvaginal ultrasound, it can damn sure tell me whether I should have the chicken or pork, or if these pants do indeed make my butt look big.”
Kurt Thompson of Yorba Linda replied, “I think it’s best if I don’t have to think. I mean, it’s brilliant that New York officials recognized that soft drinks cause obesity and had the courage to stand up and do something against it. I mean, how else would people know when enough is enough? We just don’t have the resources and technology to know these things on our own.”
Still, there were those picketing on the other side of the street that feel the Government already controls too much of their personal lives and should be regulated, themselves. They believe that through education and common sense that they should be able to decide how much soda they can drink or whether they ride their skateboard standing straight up or crouching…
Either way, it’s proving to be an exciting debate in a revolutionary time.