« Movie Title Stills Collection | Home | The Kitten »

January 22, 2010

Skid Mark Brief Safe — Episode 2: HUGE price break


It was three years ago that my disgusting Episode 1 introduction of this singular product caused a wholesale reshuffling of my audience.

Many long-time readers were appalled that I would stoop this low; others applauded, and many people previously unknown to me became regular readers.

Anyhoo, there was so much Sturm und Drang associated with that post — especially after Boing Boing's Mark Frauenfelder picked it up  (I hope by the waistband) and broadcasted it virally to every nook and cranny of the wired world — I thought I'd learned a lesson, to wit: don't pander.

I guess I'm dumber than I thought 'cause here I am again with that same grossout item.

But wait — there's more.

I mean less — much less of your hard-earned money required to purchase a pair for a loved one for the upcoming St. Valentine's Day.

Yo, joe — this isn't what most people would call "romantic."


Anyway, originally $39.95, these nifty briefs are now knocked down to $7.95 — cheap at twice the price.

Sure, you could make you own —  but why would you?

And that's not all: They come with the bookofjoe Lifetime Guarantee™ — "If your stuff is taken from these briefs, I will cheerfully refund every penny you paid for them."

No — I won't reimburse you for what was stolen.


I mean, come on, enough already.

January 22, 2010 at 01:01 PM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Skid Mark Brief Safe — Episode 2: HUGE price break:


What the hell?! You'da thunk I would've learned to not do that by now. I guess I should go leave a comment about the poopy undies on the film title post: They're so affordable now, and actually wearable, too, I guess, so actual skidmarks would be undetectable!

Posted by: Flautist | Jan 22, 2010 2:00:00 PM

I've only made it up through 1969, and almost all of my favorites have been foreign film titles. That shocks me, for some reason. (But I do LOVE the title for Kubrick's "Lolita" - oooooooh.) Hitchcock's "The Lodger" and Lang's "Metropolis" (both 1927) probably first and second so far. Can't wait to finish. Whee!

Posted by: Flautist | Jan 22, 2010 1:21:07 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.