Click here to download the fit kit in PDF format

Believe it or not, using a condom that is not suited for your penis increases the possibilities of breakage and slippage, which in turn increases the possibility of sexually transmitted infections or unwanted pregnancies. Even while they know this—as have been discovered in various studies—the FDA doesn’t allow for condoms that are longer, shorter, thinner or thicker than the average. That’s bad—not to mention effing annoying.

In Europe, however, men will be able to print out this measuring tool, and order exactly the size they need. Maybe someone will bring these condoms to Australia. For now, however, all you can do is print and play.

And yes, I measured it. [Theyfit—Thanks Debby]

The company will use solid gold to create the device, with 40 diamonds and rubies encrusted all across its surface. Hopefully, not in contact with the skin. The order will arrive in October in an armoured car, despite it being prohibited to own sexual devices in Saudi Arabia. Happily, this is classified as a “medically certified device” in the US. Sadly, having it made of gold and precious stones won’t help his pee-pee grow any longer. [Digital Journal]

How does it work? It’s essentially a mouth guard—you know, like the ones boxers use—that you use while performing oral sex. On a male.

It retails for $US28 and contains a pack of strawberry flavoured lubrication. Not sure whether or not the lube goes on the inside as well as the outside of the Blowguard, but you can use it how you like. It’s a seriously good idea, as any guy who’s been accidentally teethed can attest to. Not sure how it feels on the giver. Probably not that much worse than having a penis in the mouth.

Fleshbot (NSFW) will have a review of it soon. [Blowguard (NSFW)]

First we need to be clear on what this is for. The EQM measures your maximum erectile quality, so to properly test it, you’ll have to make sure you’re at maximum erectness. Then, press the EQM to the tip as hard as your junk will allow without bending, then see how you score on a scale of 500 grams to 2000 grams (higher is better). It’s called “axial rigidity“, and it’s the type of rigidity that’s “needed for penetration.”

To be honest, Jesus and I don’t need this, seeing as we’re both under the age of 45. Since today is my birthday, I figured I would try it again to make sure that aging one more year hasn’t deteriorated my pantsing ability. It hasn’t (yet).

It is, however, a good way to learn what the difference between a 6 on the meter and a 10 on the meter is, just for personal reference. In case you have to do cock pushups, perhaps. I scored an 8, 9 and 10, but got a 6 once—from being distracted by a phone call or an IM or something (I forget).

But for men over a certain age, the EQM is a pretty good way for you to know how erect you can get. At $US79, it’s not cheap, especially when factoring in the doctors’ visit you’ll need afterwards if you want to actually do something to improve your erectile quality. But if you’re monitoring your status because of your blood pressure or if you’re on some medication, this could save yourself the time of going to the doctor and having him measure your penis for you.

The EQM is probably nothing more than a novelty for a good majority of Giz readers, but I can very well see it being extremely useful for a certain population. The great news is mine still works! Happy birthday to me! [Fast Size]

Of course it is! Because we all know that the key for a man’s happiness is a penis as big as a bottle of wine with veins like lizards’ tails. And here’s a system that will get you that, according to the manufacturers. Really! It works! Ask Benny! And you can always use it as a real slingshot to hunt rabbits in the countryside. Get yours own for US$69 (what else) on eBay. Hopefully unused or with every pubic hair removed. [eBay]

More Wrongmodos

USA Today: USA Today’s Ed Baig summarises with this verdict: “Given the compromises, I don’t expect anyone to use Air as their only computer. But it is a yummy machine for people who spend a lot of time travelling.” Going more in depth, he lauds the Air’s thinness, and revels at the little things like the magnetic latch and the backlit LED display. The worst part? He got more than an hour less than Apple’s rated battery life.

Baig also notes that this is the weakest Core 2 Duo in the entire Mac lineup, which means you won’t be using this for video editing. He knocks points off for the sacrifices, such as the internal optical drive, the scant 80GB hard disk space, the one USB port, lack of FireWire, and the average battery life. Apple rated this at 5 hours, but he only got three hours and 40 minutes just surfing the web, using Remote Disc and writing. It only lasted two hours and 40 minutes when watching a movie. Verdict: Not for everyone (mostly travellers), and definitely not a main computer. [USA Today]

Newsweek: Steven Levy at Newsweek compares the Macbook Air’s thinness to the circumcision ritual, noting that they sliced off just enough to make it super thin. Thin enough for him to spend a good third of his review saying how thin it is, and how it’s so great on a lap, on a Starbucks’ table, on a conference table, and on an airplane seatback tray. He then decries the obvious lack of features we’ve been talking about since we heard about the Air: lack of user-replaceable battery, the one USB port, no optical drive, blah blah blah.

It essentially read like Levy was reviewing off the spec sheet, and doesn’t have many tales of his first-hand experience with such topics as how snappy the sluggish processor is or how convenient (or inconvenient) using the Remote Disc is (he does note that you have to lower your Firewall to its lowest setting to allow easier configuration). Verdict: Not much of one, but what he does have agrees with Baig: it’s thin and even though Apple’s removed much of its innards, “the things that Apple left on were the ingredients for a quality computer.” Also, he spends much of the review talking in a roundabout way about penises, so it’s worth a read just for that. [Newsweek]