....can’t stand to listen to the music of either Justin Timberlake or Tim McGraw, but think that they’re both pretty good actors?
....will only wear Levi’s jeans?
....reacts to hearing a "Bahsten" accent in the same manner as I would hearing fingernails dragged across a chalkboard?
....has ever prayed for God to help Notre Dame win a football game, then felt guilty about praying for such a thing, and then brought it up in confession only to have the priest say "Don’t worry about it - I was too."?
....would happily pay $5 a gallon for gas if it meant that the US could tell Saudi Arabia to go to hell?
....doesn’t hate women’s basketball with a white-hot burning passion of a thousand suns (as does – it seems – every other male sports fan on the planet)?
....will wear Nike shoes, but refuses to buy any of their apparel?
....thinks that an interesting "reality" show would be to have Donald Trump, Diddy (or whatever he calls himself these days), Janice Dickenson, and Jim Rome live in a modest apartment for a year and call it World’s Biggest Megalomaniac?
....thinks that the Olympics should drop tennis, soccer, and any other sport that doesn’t consider an Olympic gold medal the pinnacle of achievement in that sport?
....wishes that the whole "athletic-shorts-below-the-knee" style would go away forever? (mid- to lower-thigh is long enough, thank you)
....thinks that, if my wife thinks "Rosemary Guadalupe" is a desirable name should we ever have a daughter, that it would be OK to name a son "Eusebius Polycrates"?
....thinks that, while I am a huge fan of John Wayne and director John Ford, The Searchers is not only not the Best Western Ever but not even one of Ford’s or Wayne’s Top 5?
....thinks that Raging Bull, far from deserving the awed reverence it receives in film aficionado circles, is a self-indulgent, practically unwatchable movie?
....every time upon leaving the bathroom, thinks to himself "It’s a good thing mirrors exist, otherwise I might forget how unbelievably handsome I truly am."?
....wonders, aside from being incredibly good-looking, how on earth my wife puts up with me, let alone why she married me in the first place?
....thinks that the following rationalization for opposing abstinence-only sex-ed:
It’s unrealistic to think that teenagers won’t be having sex. We need to show them how to use condoms.
is insulting to the intelligence of a) anyone who has ever had sex and b) anyone who hasn’t? First of all, I’m supposed to believe that said teenagers cannot possibly restrain themselves from having sex. Given that premise, which of the two scenarios below is more likely?
In the midst of passion, when the hormone train is chugging faster and faster, when those teenage impulses are racing as the young man gazes upon the naked flesh and forbidden pleasures of young nubile womanhood,
a) they're going to stop..........pull out a condom..........remove it from its wrapper..........patiently put it on the male....................then resume sexual activity
or
b) initiate and complete the sexual act, with both knowing that they’ve skipped the condom thing but are unable/unwilling/too caught up in the moment to break away from the passion until it’s too late.
Anyone who has ever had sex knows the answer to that question. Those that haven’t can probably guess.
Second of all, anyone in 21st century modern Western culture who does not know how to put on a condom is such an imbecilic, paste-eating moron that they should not be having sex in the first place. So, please, sex-ed enthusiasts, stop using "We need to show teenagers how to use condoms" as an excuse to encourage sexual activity among teenagers. You’re full of crap.
Feel free to add your own "Am I The Only One Who..." question in the comments.
