Sewing vs. Sex

So I had a stress test this morning to check out the ol’ ticker (everything seems to be fine, if you were worried/wondering — or in Tino’s Larry King voice, “Heart still beating.”).

Now, if you’ve never had a stress test, this usually involves getting hooked up to an EKG monitor and then walking/running on a treadmill for a while to make sure a little exercise doesn’t make your heart go wonky. Bonus, they shaved these funny little patches on my chest in order to attach the EKG leads, so I look like I got into a fight with a cosmetology school dropout or engaged in some sort of S&M play involving hot candle wax.

Anyway, my treadmill faced a wall that was covered with pamphlets and cartoons about getting enough exercise and maintaining a healthy weight — not a single mention of the health benefits of bacon, so I cry foul — but what caught my eye as I was trying to pretend that I’m in totally great shape and exercise, like, ALL the time, was this list of MET values for various activities.

A MET is the Metabolic Equivalent of Task, or a comparative measure of how much energy/oxygen your body requires to perform an activity — sitting down and watching TV is 1.0, sleeping is 0.9, walking ranges from 2.3-3.3 depending on speed, butchering an animal is 6.0, etc.

Now, I’m uncertain how current this list was, but two adjacent entries, since the list was alphabetical, caught my eye:

Sewing: 2.0
Sexual activity: 1.0-1.5

Which leads me to the question I now pose to you, gentle readers/listeners:

Am I doing this sex stuff totally wrong, or do I just not understand sewing?

Judson, UnPR contributor and Siamese asshole

Addendum from Chris, on sabbatical: “And where does Tino’s Sewing vaginas shut hobby fall on that range, because it seems like a combination of the two. 3.5?”