Passive-Aggressive Cowardice As A Service


Now, you can show your foes your courageous trollishness with a few mouse-clicks over the internet:

This bag of gummy penises is a great way to tell your friends, family,
loved ones, or enemies to ‘EAT A BAG OF D**KS’. Sent anonymously
with a stock message, this product will get your point across in a
way that nobody will mistake.

I am puzzled what point this will get across? That my foes are weak and silly? That I have a creepy stalker? That someone hates me but doesn’t even have the skills to photoshop me into an image of a T-rex skullfucking me to death?

I think the only point that this would get across is that “you need better enemies because you appear to have the difficulty level set on ‘low’.”

Did you notice that the gummies aren’t even poisoned? What kind of courageous “fuck you” is a bunch of yummy carbs and a note?

For some reason I find it extra amusing that these guys are offering cowardly passive-aggression as a service (CPAAS) and they don’t have the guts to put the word “Dick” in their anonymized spam.

Comments

  1. says

    I don’t get the use of “cocksucker” and variants as an insult. If the implication is, as it seems to be, that the sucker is viewed as subservient to the suckee and is somehow denigrated by performing the act, then it speaks to a remarkably unhealthy view of oral sex in particular, and probably of all sexual acts.

  2. says

    And you can easily obtain gummi penises and other pecker candies. They aren’t anything new. Quite popular in Japan. Seems the only thing these people offer is to send the anonymous note. Don’t really see why you couldn’t do that yourself, it’s not as though return addresses are required, nor do they need to be truthful.

  3. says

    Caine@#1:
    If you really want to hurt someone, you’d be better off getting them sugar free Haribo gummy bears.

    Oh, yes!!! Aaaahaaahaaahaaa!!!

  4. says

    Caine@#3:
    Don’t really see why you couldn’t do that yourself, it’s not as though return addresses are required, nor do they need to be truthful.

    Maybe the idea is that they’ll offer a new service in a few years, where for $19 you can learn who paid $15 to send you $0.25 worth of gummi dicks.

  5. says

    Daz: Uffish, yet slightly frabjous@#2:
    it speaks to a remarkably unhealthy view of oral sex in particular, and probably of all sexual acts

    Agreed. I don’t see it as an insult at all! “… and damn good at it, too!” is pretty much the best response I can think of.

  6. Holms says

    Yeah, I’m pretty sure I’d happily eat that bag of dicks if they tasted nice. Thanks for the treat, person that hates me yet unaccountably sends me free snacks!

  7. Johnny Vector says

    If I got a bag of dicks to eat, all it would do is remind me of Louis CK’s routine whence cometh the phrase. And lo, I would smile.

  8. chigau (違う) says

    Does anyone actually examine each tiny candy before eating?
    I might select for flavour colour but not shape.

  9. says

    chigau@#10:
    Does anyone actually examine each tiny candy before eating?

    How else can we breed the perfect gummi wang? The weak perish! The strong survive!

  10. says

    I agree. Saying “Suck my cock!” just sounds incredibly rapey, and calling someone a “cocksucker” as though there was something wrong with the very idea of sucking a cock is rather questionable. It is wrong on too many levels. No doubt the sort of perrson who would use “cocksucker” as an insult is exactly the sort of person who would be most offended by this, but still it’s problematic when it also indirectly makes targets of already-vulnerable groups such as sex workers, gay men and trans women. And even straight cis women who happen to enjoy giving head, for that matter. I am Not Keen.

    Also, they missed a trick if they were not using the sugar-free variety of gummy sweets sweetened with Sorbitol or some similar substance. Expect to be summoned to the bathroom in short order, for a brief lecture on the adverse effects of excessive comsumption …..

  11. Reginald Selkirk says

    Now, you can show your foes…

    No no no, you have got it all wrong. The text is very clear that you would send such things to “friends”, “family” and “loved ones”, not just your enemies.

Leave a Reply