Quote :

"Care of: http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/14/at-the-university-of-new-hampshire-students-throw-the-stress-of-final-exams-to-the-dogs/?hpt=hp_c2 "To help reduce exam stress, the university (of New Hampshire) brings dogs into its Dimond Library to interact with the students." and "She says that the dogs are great with the students and provide a study break for them, a chance to ‘let go’ and forget about the pressures of exams for a few minutes." "

I'd have thought:

(1) this would constitute cruelty to animals by subjecting them (the dogs) to high levels of human student stress.

(2) surely free p**n produces the same effect at no cost to the government (i.e. the taxpayer)? [Disclaimer: statement not to be construed as advocating this option]

12/14/2011 2:33:49 PM

12/14/2011 2:34:47 PM

How did this get overlooked?



Though, it would take a strong individual to advocate free peen to relax students, and I feel like that may only be effective for ~50% of the student body involved.

12/29/2011 7:02:38 PM

i read it as free poon

12/29/2011 7:12:47 PM

Perhaps the ambiguity exists intentionally as an open suggestion that appeals to all genders, whether they prefer peen or poon.

12/29/2011 7:15:04 PM

I don't think that free pain would produce the same effect, but maybe GreatGazoo is a masochist.

I'm not here to judge.

12/29/2011 7:20:56 PM

Free **** ****

12/29/2011 10:00:14 PM