Condom Found In Jelly, And Company Has Weak Excuse
It's Monday morning, you're in a grumpy mood and in your half-asleep state, you sling some bread into the toaster.
Mondays are hard, so you decide to treat yourself by spreading jelly on your toast — but then you find it, a limp, soggy condom resting on top of the suddenly not-so tempting contents.
Something like that happened to Troy Hawkins, who found the unwanted item in a pot of jelly bought from the British supermarket Co-Op.
I mean, it could be worse — you could be the girl who found an insect wriggling out of her pizza — but it's still a nasty surprise.
But the thing is, this story isn't entirely about a condom — it's also about the supermarket's weak excuse for how it got there.
Apparently, your eyes are deceiving you and it isn't a condom at all!
Let's back up for a second.
The drama started when Troy called out Co-Op on Facebook, posting the grim picture and writing,
What I find in a jar of your red currant jelly and you think a 20 pound vouchers is going to keep me quiet.
Troy is an inspiration. He speaks for those with no voice. He will not be silenced.
He also indicates the supermarket tried to buy his silence. FOR SHAME.
But what has really got people talking is the company's excuse, because it claimed it isn't a condom at all, and Troy's pants are well and truly on fire.
The company wrote,
After full analysis, we can assure you this was not a condom. On inspection of the jam supplied, the substance was found to be a solidified white foam. Foam is often created when boiling up fruit in a high sugar solution (such as jams and jellies). This foaming is usually controlled by an anti-foaming agent which is added to the product during manufacture. On this occasion it appears that the anti-foaming agent did not adequately control the foam.
Are there any foam experts (or condom experts, I guess) that can verify this?
The world needs to know in case we encounter more jelly-condom controversies.