What in the World: Unholy dough-sacs

There you are at the bakery, perusing those delicious dough rings that call to you like stroke-inducing sirens through the sneeze-resistant glass. They are beautiful, catching the light just so. You imagine slow dancing with them out to your car, carefully sneaking them past jealous receptionists at work and bursting into a loathsome and boring meeting, winning the admiration of your co-workers as you deliver this bounty. With awe and mumbled words about a diet that can wait for another day, everyone claims their prize, walking away with a cruller, pink-frosted or custard-filled, daintily balanced in their hand. You look down and realize there is only one left, a shifty-looking bugger. You frog-march this little doughy-boi back to your desk and take a big ol’ bite of that deep-fried goodness, but lo! What is this liquid red fecality dripping forth onto your lap? A jelly doughnut? Had these not been discontinued after the Depression? This filling of thinly disguised rats’ guts has ruined your day, and I do not blame you a bit. Jelly-filled doughnuts are a threat to every box of their brethren, obscene and not suited to the 21st century.

The first issue with the JFD (jelly-filled doughnut) is — by dint of its unassuming construction — that it is a threat to any box of two dozen doughnuts. In an effort to avoid such a horrific fate as choosing a JFD, doughnut-choosers — they of the trembling fingers — will avoid any filled doughnut. This leads to the exclusion from being first-chosen for all of the perfectly acceptable perishings, custards and creams. Time and again these upright and righteous citizens of doughnut-dom must face discrimination because of their shape-association with the JFD. To support non-discrimination against these filled fellows and fillies, the chance of a JFD must be removed not just from one box of miscellaneous doughnuts, but from all boxes so that the specter of a JFD need not haunt the thoughts of the pickers and push them towards shape-discrimination.

Second is the obscene and dangerous nature of the JFD. Red, gelatinous filling with all of that artificial coloring is an ever-present menace to your pair of pants or favorite skirt. It is common for an unsuspecting doughnut enthusiast — after taking a mouthful of JFD — to spew it forth in an attempt to rid their body of the toxin that is the JFD. Unfortunately, for both the onlooker and the consumer, shrapnel from this egregious exhalation will have spattered the visage and clothing of anyone within five meters. Business owners or university presidents should be aware of the threat one JFD poses to a high-stakes meeting or fund-raising event. Research from the Harvard University School of Economics and Doughnut Distribution indicates a JFD event can negatively impact profits or enrollment by as much as 63%. Whether in industry or personal life, I pray you realize what these pestilential pods of putridity can do to your life and loved ones.

But perhaps you are thinking, “Could there not be an upside to JFDs? Perhaps as weapons of mass destruction or for underlayment on county highways?” No, I think the danger is too great. But let me steel-man your argument: the JFD’s most applicable use is for discovering madness and a proclivity for totalitarianism. For example: Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet, Mao and Woodrow Wilson all enjoyed JFDs on a daily basis. Need I say more? If you were to observe someone in public consuming a JFD voluntarily I would urge you to contact the FBI as this person needs to be evaluated immediately. The interview will assuredly find this individual has an affinity for gulags. But should we use JFDs as a despot-detector? No, the risk is too great that JFDs would be used to fuel the next dictator, not discover him or her.

However, we in the United States are allowed great liberty in deciding how we live and what we choose to consume. To avoid being called a nanny-state advocate I will humbly suggest we place JFDs in the same “sin tax” group as alcohol and cigarettes. By taxing these so-called doughnuts at an increased rate we accomplish two things: first, we empty the pocketbooks of the JFD-dependent and, second, we prevent JFD inclusion into assorted boxes of doughnuts due to their increased cost. We have then prevented the greatest dangers JFDs present, as any with an inclination for domination will be bankrupt and the meeting room will no longer be damaged by destructive doughnut detritus. Thank you for reading, and I can be reached at abell@lawrence.edu with any comments, questions or concerns over libel.