Isn't it fun to mock people? There's something so satisfying in imagining that you are so incredibly intelligent, with your ponderously large brain, that the vast majority of the population is simply beneath you. And what better way to make yourself feel smarter than to mock others?
Often, the practice of mocking others involves pretending people are way dumber than they actually are. Let's say someone asks you a question that's a bit silly and uninformed--but in your head (because you'd never have the balls to say it out loud), you get all worked up over it as if it were the world's dumbest question; you make a disproportionately big deal about it, later retelling the story to your friends in such a way as to magnify the supposed stupidity of the person. For example, I once heard a guy say he needed some double-sided transparencies--a silly idea, considering transparencies are TRANSPARENT, and therefore can't be double-sided, because, well, side 1 would show through onto side 2. The silly part was how long it took to convince this guy that it wasn't possible to accomplish this. The guy just didn't get it. Now, I often cite that as an example of a dumb question, but the truth is, that guy probably wasn't really dumb, but just a little confused about the subject. That's a lot of what goes on in the world of mockery--you seize upon the tiniest infraction and exaggerate it to make a person seem way stupider than he probably really is, all in the name of feeling better about yourself for a few heady moments.
But what you really look for are those truly golden opportunities, those super satisfying moments when you find someone to mock who really deserves it, someone who does something really, incredibly dumb, no question about it. Sadly, those opportunities come along fairly rarely, so you're forced to mine the thousands of average, fairly intelligent interactions in your typical week and make do with what you have. Wouldn't you enjoy a good, solid mocking victim right about now? Someone who redefines the word "idiot?" You would? Great, then sit back, because I have a good one for you. This is going to make you feel so smart.
When I was 15, we took a test in one of my school classes in which were called upon to summon all of our knowledge of our own private parts and those of our neighbors. Our teacher provided each of us with a very artful rendering of a pee-pee and a woo-woo, and tasked us with labeling the various bits appropriately. Naturally, there was much snickering among us as the tests were handed out, and a good time was had by all. Well, all except one, for whom the jokes must have gone sailing right over her addled head.
Below you will find my test and hers. Mine is not so incredibly impressive--I scored a mere 87% on the female portion of the test, and a 93% on the male. (Baffling, since one would think I was a shoe-in to do better in identifying the parts I actually possessed in my very own undies--kind of like a cheat sheet in my bloomers.) But to be fair, I hadn't had much interaction with genitals up to that point--hardly any with my own, and certainly none with anyone else's. Still, I didn't do too badly, and was at least very thorough, as you can see from the detailed descriptions of the various and sundry parts, which I fastidiously scribbled on the back side of my test.
But here's where your mocking opportunity comes in. There was a girl in my class who I'll call Brenda. I don't remember how I came into possession of her test, but the moment I laid eyes on it, I knew it was comedy gold. I've kept it lo these many years, perfectly preserved and treasured as though it were the original first draft of our Constitution. I think if my house had caught fire at any point over the years, I would have risked life and limb to run back in and save this important document.
Here are Brenda's slightly misguided answers.
Notice she scored a paltry 12% on the female parts, and a shameful 0% on the male. In case your eyesight isn't so great, let me just point out that the top image, which is clearly the female part, has been labeled with a vas deferens, a penis (which she misspelled), and even a testicle. And the bottom image, which should be quickly noticed to be the male part because of the tell-tale PENIS hanging solemnly off of it, is labeled with two ovaries, a seminal vesicle (which she has renamed the feminine vesticle), a Fallopian tube which she appears to have tried to rename a Phillipino tube, and yes, a vagina. And the very object which should identify this drawing so obviously as a male part--the aforementioned penis--is, in fact, the very part that she labeled a vagina. Also chuckle-worthy is the presence of the urethra, which she renamed the urena, and the epididymis, which she renamed the epicenter.
And here's the back side of her sheet, left blank, as if she felt she had pretty much said it all on the front side of the test.
Now, let me clear up some questions you must surely have. No, this girl was not mentally challenged. She did not attend Special Ed classes and didn't appear to need them. She was strictly a C and D student throughout high school, but she wasn't in need of a spot on the short bus. She looked normal enough and spoke normally enough, although no one would have called her quick witted or loquacious. She was just your average kid--or so I thought until I was confounded with this mystifying test of hers.
Which begs the question: What the hell was in this girl's pants? I have to assume she had one of those hangy-downy things that she labeled a vagina.
I suppose I could ask my ex-boyfriend about it--who, a few years later, actually cheated on me with this sexually confused dimwit possessing ambiguous private parts. Which only goes to show, you don't necessarily have to know one single thing about the male or the female sex organs in order to make use of them in the back seat of a car.