New social distancing advice from NYC health department: If you're going to have sex, consider doing it through a wall

Via Josh Barro, I don’t have a take on this per se. I just wanted to write a headline about having sex through a wall.

Let me assure you, having grown up in New York, that most apartments there don’t come equipped with strategically positioned holes. Some of the run-down ones might have them, but that’s from rats gnawing through the drywall.

You wouldn’t want to stick anything in those holes.

We give de Blasio a hard time for being a terrible failure at containing COVID-19 and a terrible failure at preventing riots and, really, just being a terrible failure generally. But what if it’s because he’s been distracted, thinking up novel ways for New Yorkers to get it on without infecting each other with a deadly plague?

What if this is his legacy?

They could have stopped at “sexual positions.” No one’s such a stickler about social distancing that they’re going to insist on, say, standing on either side of a doorway with their partner with the door mostly closed between them and trying to complete the deed that way.

Although, logistically, that would be impressive. And it’s somewhat more dignified than the obvious alternative, which is to get a six-foot-long sheet of cardboard, cut a hole, and try to make that work.

In all seriousness (well, semi-seriousness), I take it that the city’s advice is geared mainly at gentlemen who frequent certain public restrooms where the thin stall partitions might facilitate such activity more easily than a g-ddamned wall would. Consider that the average thickness of a dwelling’s inner wall is 4.5 inches; a certain number of additional inches in length would logically be required in order to maintain, uh, congress throughout the act while it’s performed. Not a problem for me, I hasten to add, but for the average dude? Gonna be a stretch. You’re better off climbing into an empty refrigerator box and trying to make that work.

Here’s another bit from the NYC guidelines in case you’re planning an orgy, as all New Yorkers routinely do:

Group sex — with a consistent partner? Seems unlikely. And you’re going to need to sanitize more than those hands afterwards, my man.

The health department also recommends masks during sex, which brings me to the part where I try to redeem this idiotic post. There’s a new study out today from the UK modeling how much widespread mask-wearing (in everyday life, not during sex) might help to hold down the spread of COVID-19. Answer: A lot.

The R value measures the average number of people that one infected person will pass the disease on to. An R value above 1 can lead to exponential growth.

The study found that if people wear masks whenever they are in public it is twice as effective at reducing the R value than if masks are only worn after symptoms appear.

In all scenarios the study looked at, routine face mask use by 50% or more of the population reduced COVID-19 spread to an R of less than 1.0, flattening future disease waves and allowing for less stringent lockdowns.

The sooner we all start wearing masks, the sooner we can all go back to having sex without advice from Bill de Blasio on how to make your own glory hole.

Exit question: Wasn’t this idiot cheering on the massively massive protests against police brutality just a week ago?