She may not be my favorite character, and she’s certainly arrogant enough for three, but that animatronic doll is way beyond the pale and a major invasion of her privacy, and he had no right creating it.
Or for sanity’s sake, instead of stripping a doll naked to check if it has rubber naughty bits, you could just open the mouth and check what it’s designed for that way
But, just in case, wear some rubber gloves and dispose of them in the medical waste bin immediately afterwards
There is a difference between ‘correct’ and ‘accurate’. You’re right, you don’t have to strip it to see if it’s made for the job, and thus is ‘anatomically correct’ (I mean you still do, just because the mouth is made for it doesn’t mean the rest is correct-but I digress), but you do have to strip it to see if it’s ‘anatomically accurate //to Princess//…
And if it is, then that is a much larger invasion of Princess’ privacy. And deserves punishment a lot harsher than mere head smack.
I don’t think making a replica of someone’s publicly shown looks is an invasion of privacy. Not in the US anyway. Otherwise, artists who draw street scenes would be criminals. While I agree that bringing the lookalike into the office is creepy and all, it is not, strictly speaking, illegal. Still not nice to do, and he should remove it.
Now if he somehow managed to accurately replicate anything *private* i.e. not publicly visible, THEN it is definitely an invasion of privacy.
Thorin, I find it intriguing the way readers seriously and earnestly engage with the societal sub-text in my silly parody of workplaces from my past. Or maybe I’m just thinking too much.
I suppose. I just get pissed about people flinging terms like “Invasion of Privacy” without actually knowing what it is and isn’t. much like many people flipping out yelling “You csan’t record me” when in public. Obviously not understanding anything substantive about First Amendment RIGHTS, not “Privileges'” as one recent electoral candidate kept claiming (erroneously, buy the way(
My other thought was “What if Princess in her slightly wilder youth made a deal with a “Real Doll” company to let them base their models off her figure?”
Some women consider that flattering – some just do it for money because they’re famous porn stars and it sells – and she’s just forgotten, but Motormouth found the company and bought one of the Princess models… at this point he’d just be guilty of the ‘crime’ of “being crass enough to bring his FauxGirl™ to work”.
Okay I think that punch was unnecessary.
If it IS a love doll then you’re right
She should have used a crowbar
And what if a gal where to bring in a lovedoll of a boy?
Then she’d need a punchin.
I’m not sexist, I’m an equal opportunity offender.
Alphaghoul, what are the circumstances that necessitate punching someone?
I was just noting that if their genders were reversed than punching would obviously be a big no.
She may not be my favorite character, and she’s certainly arrogant enough for three, but that animatronic doll is way beyond the pale and a major invasion of her privacy, and he had no right creating it.
Wait! It’s anamatronic? Like Chuck E. Cheese?
Well Princess, only way to make sure it isn’t anatomically accurate. Both you and the doll have to get naked and… *PUNCH*
Yeah, yeah, Okay, I deserved that one.
Tsk! Tsk! *Shakes Head* Harrumph, etc.
Or for sanity’s sake, instead of stripping a doll naked to check if it has rubber naughty bits, you could just open the mouth and check what it’s designed for that way
But, just in case, wear some rubber gloves and dispose of them in the medical waste bin immediately afterwards
There is a difference between ‘correct’ and ‘accurate’. You’re right, you don’t have to strip it to see if it’s made for the job, and thus is ‘anatomically correct’ (I mean you still do, just because the mouth is made for it doesn’t mean the rest is correct-but I digress), but you do have to strip it to see if it’s ‘anatomically accurate //to Princess//…
And if it is, then that is a much larger invasion of Princess’ privacy. And deserves punishment a lot harsher than mere head smack.
Hey Look! Princess touched one of the engineers!
VICTORY! His life is now complete?
More accurate to say that maybe his life is now finished?
I’ll see what I can do about that, Stephen.
I don’t think making a replica of someone’s publicly shown looks is an invasion of privacy. Not in the US anyway. Otherwise, artists who draw street scenes would be criminals. While I agree that bringing the lookalike into the office is creepy and all, it is not, strictly speaking, illegal. Still not nice to do, and he should remove it.
Now if he somehow managed to accurately replicate anything *private* i.e. not publicly visible, THEN it is definitely an invasion of privacy.
Thorin, I find it intriguing the way readers seriously and earnestly engage with the societal sub-text in my silly parody of workplaces from my past. Or maybe I’m just thinking too much.
I suppose. I just get pissed about people flinging terms like “Invasion of Privacy” without actually knowing what it is and isn’t. much like many people flipping out yelling “You csan’t record me” when in public. Obviously not understanding anything substantive about First Amendment RIGHTS, not “Privileges'” as one recent electoral candidate kept claiming (erroneously, buy the way(
My other thought was “What if Princess in her slightly wilder youth made a deal with a “Real Doll” company to let them base their models off her figure?”
Some women consider that flattering – some just do it for money because they’re famous porn stars and it sells – and she’s just forgotten, but Motormouth found the company and bought one of the Princess models… at this point he’d just be guilty of the ‘crime’ of “being crass enough to bring his FauxGirl™ to work”.
Hey, Barron made it worse. Who’d’a’thunk that he could do that.
Me. I’d’a’thunk.
Heh. 🙂
Aaaand they have to bring back the lawyer.
Damn, Marc, are you sure we have to bring her back?