Acme Drug Testing inc.
Inter office memo. Subject: The hiring of penis
inspectors.
Wilma Carpenter: Human Resource Director
As instructed, I have finished a preliminary investigation
of the possible pitfalls of our stringent new drug testing procedures. Because the Whizzinator company has greatly improved
their product, which has lead to a greater use of it's product. We were forced to abandon the open door policy while testees
are providing a urine sample. To one which has an inspector of the same sex actually in the room, monitoring all activity.
However because the Whizzinator co. has improved the realism of their product.{Please see link for realistic verification
http://www.whizzinator.com/whiz2.htm}. We were forced to go to a more hands on approach, by our quality control inspectors. Where as this change in policy
has decreased the number of Vitiligo claims by African Americans. It has brought about several new problems.
Chief among them is the response of our testees to
our official penis authentication procedure. The inspectors gripping of the penis between their thumb and index finger, with
a toggle right, toggle left, toggle up, toggle down. Then a firmer grip and a hearty yank, yank. Seems to cause very strong
male reactions. Some violent. Even though the inspector is visually heterosexual and is performing a non sexual procedure.
It would appear that something other than a females touch can cause a strong erection in your average male.
Which brings us to the decrease accuracy of the your
average male while passing urine through their erect penis. Males aim with their penises has always been suspect. You would
think, a large mouth cup just a few cm. from their penis, would provide an adequate enough target. However cleanup cost have
skyrocketed. I find the ability of an aroused male to hit the broad side of a barn to be suspect at this point. Which brings
me to a quote by Elaine, "I don't see how you guys live with those things.".
Due to our large number of high school testees and
the current climate of sexual molestation lawsuits. We could not risk putting adults in the same room with the adolescents.
So we went with the buddy system for all persons under 18. The proper procedure for penis authentication was demonstrated
for them, using our anatomically correct male model dummy. Once the doors were closed, this lead to the occasional but not
unexpected, "You enjoyed that. What are you. Are you some kind of..................". Of course the f'ing 'f word' and the
f'ing 'q word' were thrown about with a few punches to boot. You would think at the high school level they could use the word
homosexual. What we were not prepared for was the occasional, "Don't stop! For the love of god, don't stop!" What transpired
on those occasions is unknown, but has been highly speculated on by most associates at the testing site. These scenarios caused
us to seek better inspections methods.
Which lead us to remote video inspections. We had
the testees stand in front of a video camera. Pants and underwear pulled downed to fully expose the genital area. The depositing
of the sample was fully monitored. However through an Internet surfing accident. One of our fellow female associates, stumbled
upon the web site "PenisPeeCup.com". Where she claims to have noticed a formally viewed penis. It appears our video signal
was being hijacked and large numbers of people were paying 95 cents a min. to view a live feed. According to the web master,
he did not know who actually setup the account. But that the basketball season testing period, was a huge success for the
account owners. Unless the board is looking for [or responsible for], hidden revenue streams? We are going to have
to work out the human touch aspect of our testing program.
Which brings me to our last problem. After running
this ad:
'Acme Drug Testing co.
Seeking Heterosexual
male pairs for
Penis inspections. Please be serious.
No females or Homosexuals need apply.'
Our lawyers informed me earlier this week that
the ad could be in violation of EEOC rules. After explaining the nature of penis inspections, he agreed that the 'no females'
could stand. However the homosexual thing would be a problem. I informed him that due to the lack of heterosexual response,
we are taking whoever we can get. Any suggestions from the board would be greatly appreciated. I will await your response
before reimplementing any of the above actions.
As for the female inspection report. At this point,
all I can say is the problems inherent with this procedure makes me state. "I wish women had one of those things"
Wilma Carpenter: Human Resource Director
By B. Bell
