Women's car insurance to cost same as a drunk, blindfolded monkey's

WOMEN are to pay the same for car insurance as a shit-faced monkey with a bag on its head.

The European Court of Justice has ruled that car insurance premiums should not be subject to discrimination based on species, sobriety or blindfolds, even when it is a stunningly good idea.

But motoring organisations have questioned the decision claiming state-of-the-art computer modelling predicted a higher degree of accident risk if a vehicle is being driven by a colobus monkey who has discovered cars and vodka jelly on the same day and would love to drive at 90mph through a school playground.

A spokesman for the AA said: “There is a popular but completely unwarranted image of women driving while applying make-up, chatting on the phone or steering with their feet while reading one of those magazines that used to be a lovely tree.

“Whereas it does seem fairly obvious that pissed-up monkeys shouldn’t be driving cars.”

He added: “The fact is most women are very careful drivers, apart from my wife, who’s an utter fucking maniac.”

The ruling will mean a 50% increase in premiums for women, a move which insurance companies said would unfairly punish consumers and force them to make more money.

The case was brought by Stevenage motorist Brian Aviva, who claimed his wife should get exactly the same fantastic deal as he does.

Mr Aviva’s lawyer said: “My client and his wife are delighted that their disposable income will now drop by around £200 a year.”

Wayne Hayes, a 17 year-old capuchin monkey from Hatfield, said: “The only difference between me and my female friends is that they seem to have no interest in ramming into a minibus full of children.

“And I don’t see why I should be penalised just because I’m a monkey who wants to see how fast my car goes when it’s upside down.”

Sign up now to get
The Daily Mash
free Headlines email – every weekday

Christian foster couple forced to accept God's will

FUNDAMENTALIST Christians in Derby have been forced to accept that God does not want them to be foster parents.

As the High Court ruled that children should not be raised in the 14th century, theologians admitted the decision, like the countless cruel and violent deaths over the course of human history, must be part of God’s plan.

God had previously made Derby County Council turn down Owen and Eunice Johns’ fostering application because they refused to tell a child that homosexuality must also be part of God’s plan.

But last night the couple insisted they will appeal claiming God has finally made his second mistake, the first being the creation of gay people.

Mr Johns said: “My entire life has been based on the belief that God is perfect and that everything happens for a reason except gayness.

“I now realise he’s only 92% perfect and could probably learn a thing or two from the European Court of Human Rights.”

The couple’s lawyer, Martin Bishop, said: “We believe this decision was the result of an administrative error in heaven and that God has inadvertently given a child to the Sir Elton Johns.

“I’m sure the mistake happened at a lower level, possibly Jesus, nevertheless the liability rests with God as his departmental line manager.”

He added: “It’s the sort of mix-up that happens a million times a day in large bureaucracies. Indeed, Mr Johns believes this is the reason he has never been able to land a record deal.”